In a previous post I wrote an introduction to ADC programs. In that post, I mentioned two aspects which were often points of contention with traditional faculty: format and the use of adjuncts. There is another aspect of ADC programs which also can be a point of contention with traditional faculty and that is the curriculum. Because these programs are only solvent or profitable when using a high percentage of adjuncts, the piece which makes ADC programs actually work is the curriculum. In a traditional classroom, the curriculum is developed by the teaching faculty, which in a majority of cases, is a full-time professor at some level. In the ADC classrooms, taught by a majority of adjuncts, that model won’t work. Adjuncts typically do not have the requisite skills in most cases to develop a curriculum which would meet appropriate academic standards, nor match the programmatic learning outcomes set by the University. They also don’t have the time as teaching is something they do in addition to their full-time job. This is where the importance of a set curriculum comes into play. Almost all ADC programs use fixed curriculum developed by subject matter experts who are also usually full-time faculty. This way the University can have confidence that when a student completes a course that certain basics have been covered and specific learning outcomes addressed.

The preparation and maintenance of the curriculum is a large undertaking which requires employees dedicated to the effort. Processes have to be developed regarding how the curriculum is reviewed for necessary updates to stay accurate and relevant, as well as for developing new pieces of curriculum. In the ideal situation, those who develop the curriculum have a solid understanding of adult pedagogy and are not simply cutting and pasting curriculum used for the traditional classroom into the format used in the ADC classroom. This is no small consideration as adults who are returning back to school bring with them a different set of experiences, skills, and preparedness for learning than the 18-year-old just out of high school. Institutions which don’t take these considerations into account soon discover that their adult students struggle to meet the expectations of the course. Sadly, more often than not the blame is directed at the adult student being underprepared or not able to do college level work when the real problem is the curriculum and how it was prepared.

I have written in A Guidebook for Curriculum Development and Assessment about how to write curriculum for the ADC classroom and how to assess the curriculum used in the ADC classroom to see if it will work with adult students. The bottom line to this post is that an understanding of the importance of the curriculum to ADC programs cannot be overestimated and is often the cause, even when not recognized, of failure of students and the program in general. Mediocre curriculum which doesn’t take into account adult learning theory usually results in mediocre program performance.