The outcome is written. The next practice is not.

The problem

A learning outcome that never names the next attempt stays a slogan.

Catalogues list modules. They rarely show which capability is next, or which practice makes it observable. Curriculum Graph maps a goal into capabilities and prerequisites. Each node can open a Story Quest, AI Case Lab, Socratic AI Interview, or Study Session.

Programme Leaders decide keep, change, or stop. This page is the pathway problem: an outcome with an attached attempt. The graph is not the student record. The attempt is practice evidence. It is not certified competence.

Fit check

Who this pathway serves — and who should walk away.

If your only success metric is “students finished the module,” stop here. Completion is cheap. An attempt against a named capability is not.

• Programme leaders & faculty

  Own a handbook outcome that currently has no attached practice—and need learners to attempt a visible next action before the assessment window.

• Curriculum & quality leads

  Want capabilities, prerequisites, and practice modes mapped in one place faculty can inspect—without replacing the catalogue or SIS.

• Wrong buyer jobs

  LMS/SIS replacement, a second catalogue, employer screening scores, credential wallets as the primary deliverable, or automatic competence certificates.

What you get

A bounded pathway pilot that leaves inspectable practice evidence.

• One Curriculum Graph goal

  Tied to the programme outcome you already write in the handbook—not every node in the catalogue on day one.

• One mode per runnable node

  Story Quests, AI Case Lab, Socratic AI Interviews, or Study Sessions—only for nodes you are willing to run this term.

• Attempts faculty can open

  Selected practice trails—including gaps—so reviewers can see what the learner tried against the named capability.

• Keep / change / stop

  A readout after 14–21 days. No pressure to expand the graph before you have seen the sittings and judged reviewer load.

How it works

Name the capability. Attach one practice. Inspect the attempt.

• 1 · Pick the outcome

  Choose one programme goal you already write in the handbook. Write the success question you will answer at readout—usually whether attempts show behaviour your current artefacts miss under that outcome.

• 2 · Map the graph

  Break the goal into capabilities and prerequisites the learner can see. Keep scope to the path you will actually run this term; leave the rest of the catalogue alone until a keep decision.

• 3 · Attach practice

  For each runnable node, attach one mode you are willing to facilitate: Story Quest, AI Case Lab, Socratic AI Interview, or Study Session. One mode per node beats a decorative multi-mode tour.

• 4 · Run and review

  Learners attempt the attached practice. Faculty sample-open trails between appointments—look for attempt, follow-up or revision, named gap—then keep, retune the map, or stop.

What the pathway uses

A map plus practice. Not a second catalogue.

Spine: Curriculum Graph → practice mode → inspectable attempt.

Faculty still own the grade and the meaning of the record. The graph organises the next action; it does not certify competence.

Claim boundary: Practice evidence against a named capability—not an official student record, not a placement prediction, not an LMS replacement.

• Curriculum Graph

  Goals, capabilities, prerequisites, and the next practice action learners can see.

• Story Quests / AI Case Lab

  Attach a constrained choice—or an institutional case environment—when the node requires a decision under incomplete information.

• Socratic AI Interviews

  When the node requires a defence, not only a choice—answer first, then adaptive follow-up.

• Study Sessions

  Concept reps when the prerequisite is retrieval before the harder rehearsal node.

What it leaves

A visible next action, and an attempt against it.

• Pathway

  Capabilities and prerequisites the learner can see, tied to one handbook outcome.

• Attempt

  The practice attached to the node they ran—choice, defence, case sitting, or study trail.

• Limit

  Not a replacement catalogue. Not certified competence. Not a hire/no-hire or placement stamp.

• A map for practice. Not the official student record.

  Curriculum Graph organises practice. It does not replace the institution's SIS, LMS, or assessment framework, and it does not certify competence. Humans interpret attempts—including gaps.

Evidence rule

What counts in a capability-pathway pilot — and what does not.

• Counts

  One named outcome; stated conditions; attempt → feedback → revision where the mode supports it; gaps marked honestly; faculty interpretation of the trail between appointments.

• Does not count

  Completion %, time-on-platform, or “AI confidence” as competence; polishing pasted answers; claims that two weeks verify programme-wide readiness.

• Out of scope

  LMS/SIS replacement, campus-wide graph rollout on day one, employer screening as the product, credential wallets as the primary deliverable, invented board-slide percentages.

• Stack fit

  Many pilots start with named accounts—no campus-wide SSO required to see whether sittings work. Bring IT when you need SAML/OIDC or LTI.

Continue

See the graph product, who owns keep-or-stop, and the pilot offer.

• Focused pilot

  Primary CTA—one outcome × one cohort × one reviewer.

• Curriculum Graph

  Goals to capabilities and next practice.

• Programme Leaders

  Who decides whether the pathway stays.

• ProfilEd methodology

  Practice, challenge, revision, and human review.

Next step

Bring one outcome that currently has no attached attempt.

Plan a focused pilot