Mapped against the AACN 2021 Essentials, a composite BSN program's fifteen courses reveal three gaps and one redundancy in NU524 Unit 2, each tied to a specific course and semester. Searches like "nu 524 unit 2 assignment example", "nu524 unit 2 sample" and "nu524 unit 2 example" land here.
Taught and Never Tested: A Curriculum Map of Eight Program Outcomes Across Fifteen Courses and the 2021 Essentials
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU524: Curriculum Development Process, Assessment, and Evaluation Strategies
Unit 2 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The program, its courses and all codes are composite; the Essentials and mapping method cited are published.
Method
Codes were assigned from each course's syllabus outcomes and graded assignments, not from what faculty said they covered. An outcome was coded I where a course first presents it with some practice, R where a later course builds on it with increasing complexity, and A where a graded assignment is scored against it. Two committee members coded every course independently and reconciled differences; they disagreed on [14] of [120] cells, most often between R and A where an assignment touched an outcome without scoring it; those cells were coded R unless a rubric row named the outcome. Curriculum mapping of this kind is meant to make the curriculum's structure visible to faculty and students and to expose gaps and overlaps (Harden, 2001).
The Grid, Summarized by Outcome
Courses run across four semesters, S1 to S4, fifteen courses in all. Each row lists where the outcome appears.
1. Outcome 1, clinical judgment (Essentials Domain 1 and the featured concept of clinical judgment): I in S1 fundamentals; R in S2 adult health I, S2 pharmacology, S3 adult health II, S3 maternal-child, S3 mental health; A in S3 adult health II simulation and S4 capstone.
2. Outcome 2, person-centered care (Domain 2): I S1; R S2, S3; A S2 health assessment, S4 capstone.
3. Outcome 3, population health (Domain 3): I S1 introduction to professional nursing; R none; A S4 population health.
4. Outcome 4, evidence-based practice (Domain 4): I S2 research; R S3 adult health II; A S4 capstone.
5. Outcome 5, quality and safety (Domain 5): I S1; R across S2 to S4; A S3 adult health II, S4 leadership.
6. Outcome 6, interprofessional partnership (Domain 6): I S1; R S3 clinical courses; A none.
7. Outcome 7, informatics (Domain 8): I S1 introduction to professional nursing; R none; A none.
8. Outcome 8, professionalism and leadership (Domains 9 and 10): I S1; R S2, S3; A S4 leadership.
A second table, summarized here, checks the Essentials' featured concepts, such as clinical judgment, diversity, equity and inclusion, ethics, evidence-based practice, health policy and social determinants of health, across the same courses (American Association of Colleges of Nursing, 2021). Social determinants of health appear in two courses and are assessed in one; health policy appears only in the leadership course.
Findings by Kind
Outcomes never assessed. Informatics is introduced once, in the first semester, and never reinforced or assessed; interprofessional partnership is reinforced in clinical courses but never scored. Both would appear on a program report as covered, because they appear in syllabi, while no graded work tells the program whether students achieve them.
Outcomes introduced and abandoned. Population health is introduced in the first semester and not seen again until the final-semester population health course assesses it, three semesters later, with nothing between.
Content repeated without progression. Medication safety appears in [six] courses, but the assignments in S2 pharmacology and S3 adult health II ask for the same five-rights checklist at the same level. Repetition without increasing complexity uses time without building competence. By the third semester, medication safety assignments should ask students to analyze an error or near miss and propose a system change, not to list the five rights again.
Domains confined to a single course. Health policy lives entirely in the leadership course, so a student who struggles there has no other chance to develop or demonstrate it.
What the Map Suggests
Three priorities follow, in order. First, informatics: it has no reinforcement and no assessment, and the Essentials treat informatics and healthcare technologies as a domain in its own right. Second, interprofessional partnership: an assessment exists in principle in clinical evaluations but is not scored separately; adding a criterion to the clinical evaluation tool could close the gap at low cost. Third, population health: a reinforcement point in the S3 maternal-child or mental health course would connect the first-semester introduction with the final assessment.
The committee should not try to fill every empty cell. A good map has empty cells where an outcome does not belong. The question for each gap is whether its absence leaves an outcome unassessed or unsupported, not whether the grid looks complete. The map will be recoded each year from the current syllabi, so that changes made in response to it can be seen in the next version rather than assumed.
How Faculty Responded
The map was presented to the full faculty before the committee drew conclusions, and the discussion added context the codes could not. The informatics gap surprised most faculty, several of whom said they "use the record in clinical every day." That is true, and it is the point: students use the electronic record constantly, but no assignment asks them to analyze data from it, evaluate a clinical decision support alert or reflect on documentation, which is what the outcome describes. Faculty teaching the clinical courses also explained the missing interprofessional assessment: interprofessional behaviors are observed and discussed, but the clinical evaluation tool folds them into a general communication criterion. Both explanations strengthened the findings rather than softening them, because each showed that the gap was structural, not a matter of faculty effort.
Using the Map With Students
A curriculum map is usually treated as an internal document, but it can also be shared with students. A simplified version, showing where each outcome is introduced, built on and assessed, would help students see why a first-semester informatics lesson matters for their capstone, and would give them a reason to keep what they learn. The committee recommends publishing the revised map in the student handbook once the gaps below are addressed, so that the map students see is one the program is willing to be held to.
Limits
Coding from syllabi and assignments captures the planned curriculum, not what happens in every classroom. Two coders improve reliability but do not remove judgment. And the map says nothing about the quality of assessments; an A in a cell shows that an outcome is scored, not that the scoring is sound, and nursing education texts on evaluation stress that an assessment must be valid for the outcome it claims to measure (Oermann & Gaberson, 2019), which is the subject of the course's later units.
References
American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2021). The essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing education.
Harden, R. M. (2001). AMEE Guide No. 21: Curriculum mapping: A tool for transparent and authentic teaching and learning. Medical Teacher, 23(2), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120036547
Oermann, M. H., & Gaberson, K. B. (2019). Evaluation and testing in nursing education (6th ed.). Springer Publishing.
How this NU524 Unit 2 example is structured
Method comes before the grid, in a half page explaining how codes were assigned: from each course's syllabus outcomes and graded assignments, not from what faculty said they covered, and checked by two committee members independently. The grid follows, then the concepts table. Findings are organized by kind rather than by domain: outcomes never assessed, outcomes introduced and abandoned, content repeated without progression, and domains confined to a single course. Each finding names the course, the semester and the evidence, such as the participation grade standing in for any population health assessment. The Essentials are described accurately, as ten domains, eight featured concepts and Level 1 sub-competencies for entry-level professional nursing education, and the map uses Level 1 only. Risk then orders the gaps, and the top one is handed to later redesign work.
Get an NU524 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Maps begin with the program's own outcomes and course list, so share both if available, or describe the program so a composite can be built around it. Include the Unit 2 instructions and rubric. There is no fee for a first sample, which is delivered within 24-48h and codes each cell from graded work, as this map does. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
NU524 Unit 2 questions, answered
Which version of the AACN Essentials does the map use?
The 2021 Essentials, which replaced the separate baccalaureate, master's and DNP documents with ten domains and two levels of sub-competencies. This map uses Level 1, the entry-level set, because the program is pre-licensure. Programs in transition sometimes map to both versions, and a prompt may ask for that comparison.
What do I, R and A mean on the grid?
Introduced, reinforced and assessed. Here, an A requires a graded assignment that measures the outcome, not simply coverage in lecture. Some programs use other schemes, such as introduced, developed and demonstrated. Whichever codes appear, the map defines them before the grid so a reader knows what each cell claims.
Should the map recommend fixes?
Briefly. This one ranks its gaps by risk and names the one that later redesign work should take up first, population health. Detailed fixes belong to a course design or revision proposal. A map that lists findings with no priority leaves the reader unsure where to start, which weakens its usefulness to a committee.