The Curriculum Innovation Canvas: A Design Thinking Framework for the Engaged Educational Entrepreneur
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrating literature on entrepreneurial business models and community-based experiential learning, we propose a new framework to advance the practice of curriculum innovation. Grounded in principles of design thinking, the curriculum innovation canvas provides a human-centered, collaborative, and holistic platform for instructors, curriculum developers, and administrators to engage in innovation and implementation of experiential courses or programs—particularly those that involve community or organizational partnerships. The canvas promotes a creative and fluid approach to curriculum development. It prompts the consideration of the value propositions offered to various stakeholders (students, community partners, faculty peers, etc.) as well as how to involve stakeholders in the development and implementation process toward mutually beneficial outcomes in a complex and challenging environment. Evidence from an extensive prototyping process indicates that it can effectively assist instructors, administrators, students, and community partners in a variety of contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it