University of Isfahan New Educational Approaches 2423-6780 20 1 2025 05 22 Theory to Practice, Implementing Curriculum Co-Creation (A Case Study of 10 Universities Worldwide) Theory to Practice, Implementing Curriculum Co-Creation (A Case Study of 10 Universities Worldwide) 77 104 29620 10.22108/nea.2025.142620.2075 FA Raheleh Tavakoli Yaraki PhD. Student, Department of Educational Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. Mahboobe Arefi Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. Esmaeil Jafari Associate Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. , Mohammad KHademi Koleh Lou Assistant Professor, Technology Studies Research Institute, Tehran, Iran. Journal Article 2024 09 24 Nowadays, educational systems worldwide face numerous challenges, and to achieve their key objectives, they utilize diverse and innovative strategies tailored to academic needs. One such strategy is curriculum co-creation in higher education, which involves the active participation of students as key stakeholders, alongside faculty, in designing content, course structures, and overall academic program development. Accordingly, this research investigates curriculum co-creation at the universities of Melbourne, Edinburgh, British Columbia, Sydney, Queensland, Hong Kong Polytechnic, Glasgow, Helsinki, Queen Mary London, and Cape Town. The rationale behind this selection is thoroughly explained in the sampling section of the article. This research, using a qualitative approach and case study method, describes, evaluates, and comprehend various aspects of curriculum co-creation in real-world settings. For data analysis, the study employed MAXQDA software, deriving 203 open codes and 6 main categories, including curriculum co-creation, interdisciplinary learning, technological learning, practical and industry-based learning, challenges of co-creation, and outcomes and benefits of co-creation, along with 18 subcategories. According to the findings of this research, curriculum co-creation, through active participation of students and stakeholders such as faculty, industry, and the community, leads to improved learning experiences and academic outcomes in universities with innovative and collaborative approaches. Collaborative workshops, continuous feedback, and advanced technology play a crucial role in facilitating this process. However, challenges such as the time-consuming nature of the processes and power dynamics between students and faculty exist. Keywords: Higher Education, University Co-Creation Experience, Case Study, and Curriculum Co-Creation. Introduction In recent decades, the role of universities in promoting high-quality, inclusive, and equitable education has been increasingly emphasized (Torrico et al., 2019). Higher education curriculum planning experts believe that the relationship between professors and students should move towards mutual collaboration and joint reflection in the design and revision of curricula (Bovill, 2013). This perspective aligns with the emergence of the concept of "curriculum co-creation" within the framework of contemporary developments in higher education—a model in which learning is not unilateral but rather a participatory process based on the active interaction between students and professors (Cook-Sather, 2014). This new paradigm, as a departure from traditional hierarchical curriculum design models, moves toward a democratic and participatory approach with the ultimate goal of transforming students from mere "consumers" into "co-creators of knowledge" in the learning process. Empirical evidence from studies such as Davis et al. (2024) in research projects, Dooley et al. (2019) in peer assessment, and Ahmad & Hindman (2020) in examining structural barriers indicates that co-creation not only enhances technical skills and problem-solving abilities but also faces challenges such as faculty resistance to shifting traditional roles. In the context of Iran, although studies such as Taherpour et al. (2021) have explored the relationship between communicative beliefs and co-creation, and Moqtadaei & Jamshidian (2020) have examined the link between co-creation and social capital, applied research in the field of higher education remains limited. The primary aim of this study is to analyze the operationalized models of curriculum co-creation in selected universities by addressing the question: "How have leading universities implemented the experience of curriculum co-creation?" Research Method This qualitative study was conducted using a case study approach and an applied objective. The main stages of the research included: selecting the concept of curriculum co-creation, defining the theoretical framework based on existing foundations, and collecting data through purposive sampling from 10 prestigious universities (Edinburgh, Glasgow, Helsinki, Queen Mary London, Melbourne, Sydney, Queensland, Hong Kong Polytechnic, Cape Town, and British Columbia) based on the following criteria: established experience in implementing curriculum co-creation, geographical diversity (Europe, Australia, Asia, Africa, and America), and top rankings in QS and THE ranking systems. Qualitative data analysis was performed using MAXQDA2020, including open coding (203 initial codes), categorization into 6 main themes and 18 subthemes. Findings The categories and subcategories extracted from the 203 codes are presented in Table 1: Table 1Identified Main Categories and Subcategories Main Category Subcategories Source (University) Co-creation in Curriculum Student participation in curriculum design Melbourne, Helsinki, Queen Mary University of London, Sydney, British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Cape Town Co-creation of evaluation criteria British Columbia, Edinburgh Participatory workshops for curriculum design Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Cape Town Continuous feedback Queensland, Edinburgh Students' sense of ownership and responsibility Queensland, Edinburgh Strengthening the sense of community and collaboration between professor and student Edinburgh Participation of various stakeholders (students, professors, and society) Cape Town Interdisciplinary Learning Interdisciplinary collaboration in case study projects British Columbia Development of interdisciplinary skills Hong Kong Polytechnic University, British Columbia Identifying global trends and their impact on the curriculum Hong Kong Polytechnic University Technology and Advanced Learning Use of advanced technology in curriculum development Hong Kong Polytechnic University Online and face-to-face learning Hong Kong Polytechnic University Practical and Industry-Based Learning Open case study projects British Columbia Problem-based learning Queensland Challenges of Co-creation Time-consuming participation process British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Hong Kong Polytechnic University Balancing the power dynamic between students and professors Glasgow, Edinburgh Results and Benefits of Co-creation Improving the learning experience and academic results British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Cape Town Development of critical and teamwork skills British Columbia, Glasgow, Edinburgh Curriculum co-creation includes student participation in curriculum design, defining assessment criteria, and conducting collaborative workshops. Universities such as Melbourne, Helsinki, Queen Mary London, Sydney, British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, and Hong Kong Polytechnic have successfully developed effective models in this regard. Interdisciplinary learning refers to collaboration and coordination among different disciplines in research projects and the development of multidimensional skills. Hong Kong Polytechnic University has been a leading role in developing interdisciplinary skills and examining global impacts. The use of advanced technologies in curriculum development and the integration of online and in-person learning are highly significant at Hong Kong Polytechnic University today. Despite its many benefits, curriculum co-creation faces challenges such as the time-consuming nature of the participatory process, balancing power dynamics between students and professors, and the need for careful management. Results and benefits of curriculum co-creation include enhancing learning experiences and academic outcomes. Universities such as British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic, and Cape Town have successfully fostered critical thinking and teamwork skills among students in this field. Discussion and Conclusion Nowadays, leading universities are striving to align educational processes with the broader institutional goals by adopting innovative strategies such as curriculum co-creation. Bovill (2013) defines this concept as active student participation in designing course content, structuring programs, and shaping educational experiences. Successful examples of this approach are universities such as Melbourne, Helsinki, and Queen Mary London, which enhance students’ sense of ownership and responsibility through collaborative workshops and continuous feedback collection. Despite its significant advantages, including the development of critical thinking and teamwork skills, curriculum co-creation also faces challenges such as the time-consuming nature of participatory processes and the delicate balance of power between professors and students. Findings from this study align with research conducted by Navorka (2023), Tsui et al. (2024), and Ryan & Tilbury (2013), which emphasize the central role of student and stakeholder engagement in co-creation. Additionally, studies by Latoka & Stark (2009) and Nasr et al. (2007) underscore the necessity of extensive stakeholder participation in curriculum planning. Despite its implementation complexities, curriculum co-creation acts as a bridge between academic education and society's evolving needs. This approach not only enhances the quality of learning but also strengthens engagement and increases student satisfaction, marking a crucial step toward a more participatory higher education system. Nowadays, educational systems worldwide face numerous challenges, and to achieve their key objectives, they utilize diverse and innovative strategies tailored to academic needs. One such strategy is curriculum co-creation in higher education, which involves the active participation of students as key stakeholders, alongside faculty, in designing content, course structures, and overall academic program development. Accordingly, this research investigates curriculum co-creation at the universities of Melbourne, Edinburgh, British Columbia, Sydney, Queensland, Hong Kong Polytechnic, Glasgow, Helsinki, Queen Mary London, and Cape Town. The rationale behind this selection is thoroughly explained in the sampling section of the article. This research, using a qualitative approach and case study method, describes, evaluates, and comprehend various aspects of curriculum co-creation in real-world settings. For data analysis, the study employed MAXQDA software, deriving 203 open codes and 6 main categories, including curriculum co-creation, interdisciplinary learning, technological learning, practical and industry-based learning, challenges of co-creation, and outcomes and benefits of co-creation, along with 18 subcategories. According to the findings of this research, curriculum co-creation, through active participation of students and stakeholders such as faculty, industry, and the community, leads to improved learning experiences and academic outcomes in universities with innovative and collaborative approaches. Collaborative workshops, continuous feedback, and advanced technology play a crucial role in facilitating this process. However, challenges such as the time-consuming nature of the processes and power dynamics between students and faculty exist. Keywords: Higher Education, University Co-Creation Experience, Case Study, and Curriculum Co-Creation. Introduction In recent decades, the role of universities in promoting high-quality, inclusive, and equitable education has been increasingly emphasized (Torrico et al., 2019). Higher education curriculum planning experts believe that the relationship between professors and students should move towards mutual collaboration and joint reflection in the design and revision of curricula (Bovill, 2013). This perspective aligns with the emergence of the concept of "curriculum co-creation" within the framework of contemporary developments in higher education—a model in which learning is not unilateral but rather a participatory process based on the active interaction between students and professors (Cook-Sather, 2014). This new paradigm, as a departure from traditional hierarchical curriculum design models, moves toward a democratic and participatory approach with the ultimate goal of transforming students from mere "consumers" into "co-creators of knowledge" in the learning process. Empirical evidence from studies such as Davis et al. (2024) in research projects, Dooley et al. (2019) in peer assessment, and Ahmad & Hindman (2020) in examining structural barriers indicates that co-creation not only enhances technical skills and problem-solving abilities but also faces challenges such as faculty resistance to shifting traditional roles. In the context of Iran, although studies such as Taherpour et al. (2021) have explored the relationship between communicative beliefs and co-creation, and Moqtadaei & Jamshidian (2020) have examined the link between co-creation and social capital, applied research in the field of higher education remains limited. The primary aim of this study is to analyze the operationalized models of curriculum co-creation in selected universities by addressing the question: "How have leading universities implemented the experience of curriculum co-creation?" Research Method This qualitative study was conducted using a case study approach and an applied objective. The main stages of the research included: selecting the concept of curriculum co-creation, defining the theoretical framework based on existing foundations, and collecting data through purposive sampling from 10 prestigious universities (Edinburgh, Glasgow, Helsinki, Queen Mary London, Melbourne, Sydney, Queensland, Hong Kong Polytechnic, Cape Town, and British Columbia) based on the following criteria: established experience in implementing curriculum co-creation, geographical diversity (Europe, Australia, Asia, Africa, and America), and top rankings in QS and THE ranking systems. Qualitative data analysis was performed using MAXQDA2020, including open coding (203 initial codes), categorization into 6 main themes and 18 subthemes. Findings The categories and subcategories extracted from the 203 codes are presented in Table 1: Table 1Identified Main Categories and Subcategories Main Category Subcategories Source (University) Co-creation in Curriculum Student participation in curriculum design Melbourne, Helsinki, Queen Mary University of London, Sydney, British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Cape Town Co-creation of evaluation criteria British Columbia, Edinburgh Participatory workshops for curriculum design Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Cape Town Continuous feedback Queensland, Edinburgh Students' sense of ownership and responsibility Queensland, Edinburgh Strengthening the sense of community and collaboration between professor and student Edinburgh Participation of various stakeholders (students, professors, and society) Cape Town Interdisciplinary Learning Interdisciplinary collaboration in case study projects British Columbia Development of interdisciplinary skills Hong Kong Polytechnic University, British Columbia Identifying global trends and their impact on the curriculum Hong Kong Polytechnic University Technology and Advanced Learning Use of advanced technology in curriculum development Hong Kong Polytechnic University Online and face-to-face learning Hong Kong Polytechnic University Practical and Industry-Based Learning Open case study projects British Columbia Problem-based learning Queensland Challenges of Co-creation Time-consuming participation process British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Hong Kong Polytechnic University Balancing the power dynamic between students and professors Glasgow, Edinburgh Results and Benefits of Co-creation Improving the learning experience and academic results British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Cape Town Development of critical and teamwork skills British Columbia, Glasgow, Edinburgh Curriculum co-creation includes student participation in curriculum design, defining assessment criteria, and conducting collaborative workshops. Universities such as Melbourne, Helsinki, Queen Mary London, Sydney, British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, and Hong Kong Polytechnic have successfully developed effective models in this regard. Interdisciplinary learning refers to collaboration and coordination among different disciplines in research projects and the development of multidimensional skills. Hong Kong Polytechnic University has been a leading role in developing interdisciplinary skills and examining global impacts. The use of advanced technologies in curriculum development and the integration of online and in-person learning are highly significant at Hong Kong Polytechnic University today. Despite its many benefits, curriculum co-creation faces challenges such as the time-consuming nature of the participatory process, balancing power dynamics between students and professors, and the need for careful management. Results and benefits of curriculum co-creation include enhancing learning experiences and academic outcomes. Universities such as British Columbia, Glasgow, Queensland, Edinburgh, Hong Kong Polytechnic, and Cape Town have successfully fostered critical thinking and teamwork skills among students in this field. Discussion and Conclusion Nowadays, leading universities are striving to align educational processes with the broader institutional goals by adopting innovative strategies such as curriculum co-creation. Bovill (2013) defines this concept as active student participation in designing course content, structuring programs, and shaping educational experiences. Successful examples of this approach are universities such as Melbourne, Helsinki, and Queen Mary London, which enhance students’ sense of ownership and responsibility through collaborative workshops and continuous feedback collection. Despite its significant advantages, including the development of critical thinking and teamwork skills, curriculum co-creation also faces challenges such as the time-consuming nature of participatory processes and the delicate balance of power between professors and students. Findings from this study align with research conducted by Navorka (2023), Tsui et al. (2024), and Ryan & Tilbury (2013), which emphasize the central role of student and stakeholder engagement in co-creation. Additionally, studies by Latoka & Stark (2009) and Nasr et al. (2007) underscore the necessity of extensive stakeholder participation in curriculum planning. Despite its implementation complexities, curriculum co-creation acts as a bridge between academic education and society's evolving needs. This approach not only enhances the quality of learning but also strengthens engagement and increases student satisfaction, marking a crucial step toward a more participatory higher education system.

https://nea.ui.ac.ir/article_29620_b7972118d532d4a534edda921b305252.pdf