---
name: he-curriculum-library-builder
description: "Create or maintain a university curriculum evidence library: ingest approved course and subject records, reconcile evidence, map outcomes and assessments to applicable frameworks, and identify gaps. Defaults to La Trobe; use other skills for standalone LMS authoring or formal accreditation reports."
metadata:
  short-description: Build and map a curriculum evidence library
---

# Curriculum library builder

*Author: Cam Anderson (hello@camanderson.au). Licensed CC BY 4.0.*

Maintain a plain CSV/Markdown evidence library between the approved curriculum record and delivered learning. Assume La Trobe University unless told otherwise. Staff own curriculum decisions, mapping approval and release. New content and mappings are drafts.

## Find the scope and evidence

Read workspace instructions and discover the selected library from the user's folder; never assume a personal path or a preinstalled runtime. For a new program or material context gaps, use `he-program-intake` when available. Otherwise inventory permitted evidence, explain the next items to gather and ask targeted questions about the award, subjects, structures, applicable bodies/standards and requested output. Read `_registers/program-context.md` and open evidence requests when present. Do not repeat a completed intake for routine work.

Confirm professional accreditation from evidence, including the possibility of multiple bodies or confirmed none. Unknown applicability stays unknown. Register exact framework owners, versions, effective dates and transition arrangements before interpreting coverage. Do not preload a discipline's standards or an assumed qualification level.

Subject-code first numeric digits may provisionally guide seniority, with higher digits suggesting more senior study. Record that as an inference. Approved course records determine year in the structure, membership, cohorts, periods and prerequisites. Outcomes and assessment demands determine mapping depth; code digits alone do not establish it.

## Preserve authority and privacy

Courseloop and the matching approved Handbook records govern approved curriculum facts. Preserve codes, titles, CLO/SILO wording, assessment requirements, weightings and hurdles verbatim. Approved guides add detail within their scope; delivered content and working proposals do not rewrite approved facts. If approved sources conflict, retain both and raise a decision for the responsible role. Never overwrite approved content or silently pick a competing value.

Before extraction, registration or archive, establish that each copy is permitted curriculum evidence. Keep student identifiers, grades, submissions and identifying feedback outside the library; do not process actual student work. Keep staff identities out of library files and metadata, using roles/placeholders. Require LMS exports without users/logs/grades/submissions. If unsuitable, stop that intake and request a permitted copy. Archive only the screened copy with safe filenames and truthful redaction limitations.

## Create only the needed library structure

For a new library, use [references/library-files.md](references/library-files.md) as the portable file contract. Create blank registers and course scaffolding only within the user's requested location; populate official codes and facts only from evidence. For an existing library, preserve its schemas, IDs, methods, approvals and history. Do not copy a whole live library as a starter. This skill contains no navigator, institutional templates or executable task engine.

## Ingest and reconcile

1. Identify the permitted source's real authority, date/version, scope and availability. Register a stable source ID and safe metadata before extracting curriculum facts.
2. Add source-linked course/subject profiles and corresponding element rows. Keep exact approved values; summarise delivery detail with precise locators.
3. Reconcile repeated assessments using the same canonical subject assessment ID. Compare title, type, weighting, hurdle, timing and SILOs across records. Differences become issues, not duplicate source-specific tasks or silent replacements.
4. Record missing subjects, unknown identities and proposed equivalences as unresolved issues. A nearby code or similar title is not evidence of identity or a formal prerequisite.
5. Retain the permitted copy, update the source record and log what changed. Source registration, a hash or a filename does not prove approval, implementation or fitness for an offering.

## Map from the finest evidence

Prefer rubric criteria, assessment requirements, activities, modules and then outcomes. Each link needs a registered source ID, exact locator, relation, rationale, confidence and draft/approved state. Use the actual approved structure selected for the task. Mapping to a standard does not cover each child criterion automatically.

- `teaches`: substantive explanation or instruction is visible.
- `practises`: learners rehearse with feedback; formative self-checks belong here.
- `assesses`: an assessment or rubric requires demonstration. Teaching alone cannot establish assessed coverage.
- `aligns_to`: an evidenced relationship between outcomes or an applicable framework.
- `evidences`: a document supports a program/governance requirement.

Keep direct assessment evidence, inferred assessment-to-SILO-to-framework chains and teaching evidence separate. A chain remains inferred even when its component links are approved; every component must be approved before describing its mapping state as approved. Confidence (`stated`, `inferred`, `confirmed`) is distinct from approval (`draft`, `approved`, `retired`). Staff confirmation must identify the role, decision, date and bound rows; agents do not approve their own inference.

Foundation/developing/advanced describe demonstrated learning demand, from guided introductory work to integrated application and independent complex judgement. Use outcomes, task/rubric requirements and supervision, with provisional seniority only as context. When evidence conflicts, use the lower defensible level and mark the inference. Do not manufacture monotonic progression or treat mapping as demonstrated learner achievement.

## Review, validation and outputs

Use an existing runtime only after inspecting its methods and supported commands. Where an Approval inbox exists, source bundles must bind exact rows and locators; changed rows need new review. Never hand-edit a navigator's private store or promote approval to make coverage improve.

Rebuild generated views with the discovered library tools after data changes, and resolve validation errors attributable to the change. If there is no runtime, check CSV shape, IDs, references, source locations, profile/index agreement and duplicate links with available tools; report that no automated view engine is bundled. Do not hand-edit generated views or claim checks that were not run.

Coverage reports describe recorded evidence, with selected structure, denominator, draft/approved lanes and unavailable sources visible. Offering readiness also needs reviewed evidence for the exact subject/module and period, or explicitly reviewed reuse validity. A saved output, issuance label or registered source alone is insufficient. Proposed exclusions remain proposals until evidence and the responsible role's scope-specific review support them.

For documents with an existing institutional template workflow, use it and preserve the authorised original layout. If templates or tooling are missing, request them and provide only an explicitly scoped content draft; do not invent a form or imply a supported task engine exists. Use `he-accreditation-docs` for formal reporting and `he-lms-module-builder` for learning packages when available.

Append a dated change record. Report source IDs, layers changed, validation performed, unresolved decisions and the next useful evidence batch. If claiming that a gap is resolved, retain a proposal with exact scope, evidence, artefact version/digest and closure test for independent `he-auditor` review. Implementation checks in this context remain advisory; staff approve closure through the supported governance process.