| Course | NURS 6321 Curriculum Development, Assessment, and Evaluation |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 1 |
| Paper type | Discussion post with two peer replies |
| Length | About 600 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Discussion post, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 6321 Week 1
Week 1 Discussion: Initial Post
A Curriculum Is What You Leave Out and the Order You Insist On
The prompt invites us to describe a curriculum by its topics. I want to decline that framing. A list of topics is an inventory; a curriculum is a set of decisions about order and omission, and those decisions determine what a learner can do at the end.
Here is a comparison that holds content constant. Two versions of a four-week pharmacology unit for second-year nursing students cover the same topics: heart failure pathophysiology, loop diuretics, potassium balance and dose calculation. Version A teaches calculation in week 1, then the drug, then potassium, then heart failure. Version B starts with heart failure in week 1, introduces furosemide as the answer to a congested patient in week 2, adds potassium as the problem the answer creates in week 3, and teaches calculation in week 4 using the doses the students already know why they are giving. A student finishing Version A can calculate a furosemide dose correctly. A student finishing Version B can calculate it, and can also say why the dose is being held when the morning potassium is 3.1 mmol/L.
The difference is sequence, and it is a deliberate choice. Posner and Strike (1976) sorted sequencing principles into kinds, including sequences based on how concepts relate to one another and sequences based on how the knowledge will be used, and Version B follows the second kind. It also respects a limit on novice learners: working memory is small, and problem solving that forces a novice to hold many unconnected elements at once leaves little capacity for learning the underlying structure (Sweller, 1988). Wiggins and McTighe (2005) made the same point from the other direction, arguing that design should start from the performance expected at the end and work backward to the content and its order. Omission follows from the same logic. Neither version teaches the thiazides in these four weeks, and Version B's designer made that choice explicitly to keep the unit on one clinical story.
So my question for the thread: name one thing your program leaves out on purpose, and tell us what that omission buys.
Reply to Jessica
Jessica, you argued that your program's medical-surgical course could simply be resequenced around patient problems, as in my Version B. I agree with the direction, but you did not mention a constraint that would shape it: your state board and your accreditor both review the curriculum against required content, and many programs map each course to the national competency expectations for baccalaureate nursing. A resequenced course still has to show where each required competency is taught and assessed. That does not stop the change, but it means the resequencing needs a new curriculum map before it goes to the faculty vote, or the review will read it as content that has gone missing.
Reply to Tyler
Tyler, your example of leaving pediatric content out of your hospital's orientation because new graduates rotate to pediatrics only after a year is exactly the kind of omission I meant, and it is well reasoned. I would add one cost you did not mention. Adult units in community hospitals still admit 16- and 17-year-olds, and weight-based dosing errors are one of the risks that follow when staff rarely calculate by weight. The omission might buy more time for deterioration recognition, which matters to every patient, but I would keep a single short weight-based dosing check in orientation so the omission does not leave a gap that shows up on the first night an adolescent is admitted.
References
Posner, G. J., & Strike, K. A. (1976). A categorization scheme for principles of sequencing content. Review of Educational Research, 46(4), 665-690. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543046004665
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Reading the NURS 6321 Week 1 instructions
The opening NURS 6321 thread invites a definition of curriculum and a stance on what makes one work. Take a position, show it with an example and use a course concept rather than naming it. Faculty grade whether a position exists and whether concepts do work in the argument. Cite curriculum texts in APA 7. The post can stay practical; a short example often shows theory better than a long definition. The two outlines can be composite. Initial posts in this course usually carry at least one citation. A strong post shows one cut and one ordering decision and explains each. Keep the main post focused on one claim and one example, and save secondary points for the replies, where they can answer a classmate directly.
Inside the NURS 6321 Week 1 example
The post is compact and argues from a single comparison. Its first line refuses the definition the prompt invites, saying a topic list is an inventory and a curriculum is a set of decisions about order and omission. Two outlines then appear in condensed form, both covering identical content for a pharmacology unit, one teaching calculation before pathophysiology and the other reversing it. The writer states what a learner leaving each version could actually do, which is the whole argument in two sentences. A source on curriculum design supports the claim about sequence. The post ends by asking classmates to name one topic their own program deliberately excludes and what that exclusion buys. Two replies follow, each taking up a different half of the claim.
Where the marks sit in the NURS 6321 Week 1 rubric
Opening threads here are graded on whether a position exists and whether course concepts are used rather than referenced, and the example wins both by putting sequence to work on an artifact instead of describing a model. Replies carry their own row, and in most classrooms it rewards extension: the response that adds an accreditation constraint the original post ignored earns where the response that admires it does not. Marks drain toward posts that define curriculum, list its components and stop, because a definition is not a claim. Long quotations from the assigned reading cost more than they return at this length. Posting after the window closes is scored on timing alone wherever a section grades participation dates.
NURS 6321 Week 1 help: mistakes that cost marks
First curriculum posts score low when they list topics a course should cover. Make a claim about decisions instead. A second weakness is naming backward design without applying it. Show the end outcome and work back. Writers also skip omission. Say what you would leave out and why. Avoid treating more content as better. In replies, ask what a classmate's outline would cut. A pair of outlines side by side, one listed and one sequenced, makes the argument visible in seconds. Close with the outcome your sequence protects. Cite the source of the backward design idea where you first use it.
Get a NURS 6321 Week 1 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 1 thread prompt with your rubric and, if you have one, the program you teach or study in. A post comes back arguing a position on that wording, with both replies drafted separately so they can be aimed at whoever is actually in your thread. There is no charge for the first one and it returns inside 24-48 hours.
More NURS 6321 papers and MSN samples
- NURS 6321 Week 2: Needs assessment
- NURS 6321 Week 3: Learning objectives
- NURS 6321 Week 4: Curriculum map
- NURS 6321 Week 5: Lesson plan
- NURS 6321 Week 6: Assessment blueprint
- NURS 6321 Week 7: Rubric draft
- NURS 6321 Week 8: Discussion post
- NURS 6321 Week 9: Evaluation plan
- NURS 6321 Week 10: Curriculum design
- NURS 6321 Week 11: Peer critique
- NURS 6331 Week 1: Discussion post
- NURS 6241 Week 1: Discussion Post
- NURS 6341 Week 1: Discussion post
- NURS 6231 Week 1: Discussion Post
NURS 6321 Week 1 questions, answered
How theoretical should the first post be?
Theory earns its place when something concrete is standing next to it. A post naming three curriculum models and comparing them reads as reading notes, while a post using one idea to explain a difference between two orderings reads as analysis. The example spends about a fifth of its length on the concept and the rest on the comparison, which is a proportion that travels well through the term.
Are the two outlines from a real program?
They are constructed for the comparison, deliberately stripped to a handful of lines each so the sequencing difference is the only thing visible. Course documents from the school where you teach or study belong to that institution, and nothing of the kind is asked for here. Describe the subject and the level, and the outlines in your sample are built to match without touching anything from your setting.
Do initial posts in this course need citations?
Nearly always at least one, and most rubrics in this area name currency as well. What matters more than the count is placement, since a reference dropped at the end of a paragraph proves reading happened while a reference sitting on the exact claim it supports proves the reading was used. The example carries one source and puts it on the sentence about sequence.
Where can I find a free NURS 6321 Week 1 sample paper?
This page shows the order-and-omission post, with the claim, the two outlines, backward design and replies to Jessica and Tyler.
What makes a curriculum more than a topic list in NURS 6321 Week 1?
Decisions about order and omission, which decide what a learner can do at the end, rather than an inventory of subjects.