Curriculum Review

GATE: Confirm the brief and receive the existing curriculum before proceeding.

Phase 2: Audit

Analyze the existing curriculum across five dimensions.

Audit Framework

## 1. Content Relevance Audit
- Which topics are still current and accurate?
- Which examples or case studies are outdated?
- What industry changes require updated content?
- Score: [1-10]

## 2. Gap Analysis
- What essential topics are missing?
- Where do students need more depth?
- What prerequisites are assumed but not taught?
- Score: [1-10]

## 3. Engagement Assessment
- Where are the longest stretches without interaction?
- Which modules lack exercises or application?
- Where is the content dense without variety?
- Score: [1-10]

## 4. Structure and Flow
- Does the sequence build logically?
- Are there difficulty spikes that could cause drops?
- Is the pacing consistent across modules?
- Score: [1-10]

## 5. Outcome Alignment
- Does each module connect to the stated course outcome?
- Are there modules that do not serve the final goal?
- Is the final outcome achievable given what is taught?
- Score: [1-10]

GATE: Present the audit findings and wait for the user to prioritize improvements.

Phase 3: Recommend

Create a prioritized improvement plan.

Improvement Categories

Critical (do now):

• Factually incorrect or outdated content
• Missing foundational topics that cause confusion later
• Modules with zero interaction or application

Important (do soon):

• Outdated examples that weaken credibility
• Engagement dead zones longer than 15 minutes without interaction
• Pacing issues causing difficulty spikes

Nice to have (do later):

• Additional examples or case studies
• Supplementary resources
• Visual or format upgrades

Recommendation Format

For each recommendation:

## Recommendation: [Title]
**Priority:** Critical / Important / Nice to have
**Current state:** [What exists now]
**Problem:** [Why it needs to change]
**Recommended change:** [Specific action]
**Estimated effort:** [Low / Medium / High]
**Impact on completion:** [Low / Medium / High]

Phase 4: Polish

1. Updated Curriculum Map

Provide a revised outline showing all changes:

• Marked additions (new content)
• Marked removals (cut content)
• Marked revisions (updated content)
• New module order if restructured

2. Implementation Roadmap

## Phase 1 (This week): Critical fixes
- [ ] [Specific action]

## Phase 2 (This month): Important improvements
- [ ] [Specific action]

## Phase 3 (This quarter): Enhancements
- [ ] [Specific action]

3. Ongoing Review Schedule

Recommend a quarterly content freshness check:

• Review examples and data for accuracy
• Check completion rate trends per module
• Survey recent graduates for feedback
• Update one module per quarter minimum

Example 1: Outdated Marketing Course Review

Audit finding: 40% of examples reference platforms or features that no longer exist.
Recommendation: Replace 12 case studies with current examples. Priority: Critical.
Estimated effort: Medium (8-10 hours of content updates).

Example 2: Low-Completion Coding Bootcamp

Audit finding: Module 4 has a 60% drop-off rate. Content jumps from basic to advanced with no bridge.
Recommendation: Add an intermediate exercise module between 3 and 4. Priority: Critical.
Estimated effort: High (new module creation, 15-20 hours).

Anti-Patterns

• Reviewing without data — gut feelings are not a curriculum review. Use completion rates, feedback, and drop-off data wherever available.
• Adding without cutting — if you add 3 modules, consider removing or merging 2. Course bloat kills completion.
• Surface-level updates — changing screenshots while ignoring structural problems wastes time.
• Ignoring the audience shift — a course built for beginners in 2020 may now attract intermediates. Adjust depth accordingly.
• Recommending a full rebuild — the goal is improvement, not replacement. Focus on highest-impact changes first.

Recovery

• No curriculum document provided: Ask the user to list module titles and one-sentence descriptions for each. Work from that outline.
• No completion data: Estimate engagement risk based on module length, interactivity, and content type. Flag modules over 20 minutes with no exercises.
• User wants to add everything: Force-rank recommendations by impact. Limit Phase 1 to the top 3 critical fixes.
• Course is beyond repair: If more than 70% of content needs replacement, recommend building a new course using the working 30% as a foundation rather than patching the old one.