This paper examines how engineering education scholars have employed quantitative metrics to analyze curricula. This work is situated within curricular analytics, an approach that employs network analysis to measure "curricular complexity" and its associations with outcomes, including retention and program quality. Since the introduction of this framework, researchers have proposed additional metrics to capture different dimensions of complexity. However, no effort has been made to consolidate these metrics in a single resource that highlights the suite of analytical options available to the community. To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review, beginning with foundational articles on curricular analytics and purposefully sampling papers that cited these works. Our guiding research question was: What metrics do researchers use to quantify the complexity of curricula? Of the 174 papers identified, 65 met our inclusion criteria after duplicates were removed. Through these studies, we identified 23 unique metrics, which we classified into structural and instructional complexity across three levels of analysis. We aim for this catalog of metrics to serve as a reference for the basics of curricular analytic metrics and as a practical tool to support curriculum design and optimization.

1. Backenköhler, M., Scherzinger, F., Singla, A., & Wolf, V. (2018). Data-driven approach towards a personalized curriculum (EasyChair Preprints). EasyChair. https://doi.org/10.29007/29gh

2. Basavaraj, P. Utilizing institutional data for curriculum enhancement to improve student success in undergraduate computing programs. University of Central Florida (Thesis). 2020. https://purls.library.ucf.edu/go/DP0023055

3. Davis, G. M., AbuHashem, A. A., Lang, D., & Stevens, M. L. (2020). Identifying preparatory courses that predict student success in quantitative subjects. Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale, 337-340. https://doi.org/10.1145/3386527.3406742

4. DeRocchis, A. M., Boucheron, L. E., Garcia, M., & Stochaj, S. J. (2021). Curricular complexity of student schedules compared to a canonical degree roadmap. 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637443

5. De Silva, L. M. H., Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., Chounta, I. A., & Pishtari, G. (2024). Curriculum analytics in higher education institutions: A systematic literature review. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 37, 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09410-8

6. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

7. Grote, D. M., Knight, D. B., Lee, W. C., & Watford, B. A. (2021). Navigating the curricular maze: Examining the complexities of articulated pathways for transfer students in engineering. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45(11), 779-801. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2020.1798303

8. Heileman, G., Hickman, M., Slim, A., & Abdallah, C. (2017). Characterizing the complexity of curricular patterns in engineering programs. 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 28029. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--28029

9. Heileman, G. L., Abdallah, C. T., Slim, A., & Hickman, M. (2018). Curricular analytics: A framework for quantifying the impact of curricular reforms and pedagogical innovations. arXiv. Retrieved Mar. 3, 2026, from http://arxiv.org/abs/1811.09676

10. Heileman, G. L., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Minimizing curricular complexity through backwards design. 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 47779. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--47779

11. Hilliger, I., Aguirre, C., Miranda, C., Celis, S., & Pérez-Sanagustín, M. (2020). Design of a curriculum analytics tool to support continuous improvement processes in higher education. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge, 181-186. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375489

12. Hilliger, I., Aguirre, C., Miranda, C., Celis, S., & Pérez-Sanagustín, M. (2022). Lessons learned from designing a curriculum analytics tool for improving student learning and program quality. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 34(3), 633-657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-022-09315-4

13. Li, X. V., Rosson, M. B., & Hellar, B. (2023). A synthetic literature review on analytics to support curriculum improvement in higher education. EDULEARN23 Proceedings, 2130-2143. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2023.0640

14. Loge, E. (2022). A quantitative assessment and comparison of the undergraduate curriculum prerequisite structures for the universities in the Minnesota State System with particular emphasis on mathematics courses. Minnesota State University, Mankato. Retrieved Mar. 3, 2026, from https://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/etds/1208/

15. Molontay, R., Horvath, N., Bergmann, J., Szekrenyes, D., & Szabo, M. (2020). Characterizing curriculum prerequisite networks by a student flow approach. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(3), 491-501. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2020.2981331

16. Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

17. Nash, J., Boucheron, L. E., & Stochaj, S. J. (2021). A correlative analysis of course grades as related to curricular prerequisite structure and inter-class topic dependencies. 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637401

18. Padhye, S., Reeping, D., & Rashedi, N. (2024). Analyzing trends in curricular complexity and extracting common curricular design patterns. 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 46580. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--46580

19. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., Stewart, L. A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A. C., Welch, V. A., Whiting, P., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

20. Reeping, D., & Grote, D. (2021). Rethinking the curricular complexity framework for transfer students. 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings, 37680. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--37680

21. Reeping, D., Grote, D. M., & Knight, D. B. (2021). Effects of large-scale programmatic change on electrical and computer engineering transfer student pathways. IEEE Transactions on Education, 64(2), 117-123. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2020.3015090

22. Reeping, D., & Grote, D. (2022). Characterizing the curricular complexity faced by transfer students: 2+2, vertical transfers, and curricular change. 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, 41462. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--41462

23. Reeping, D. (2026). CurricularComplexity: Toolkit for analyzing curricular complexity (Version 1.0.1). Retrieved Mar. 3, 2026, from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/CurricularComplexity/index.html

24. Reeping, D., Rashedi, N., Setser, E., Padhye, S., Banerjee, A., Hodge, E., & Smith, L. (2026). CurricularComplexityData: Data for Exploring Curricular Complexity (Version 0.1.0). https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/CurricularComplexityData/index.html

25. Slim, A. Curricular analytics in higher education. The University of New Mexico (Thesis). 2016.

26. Slim, A., Kozlick, J., Heileman, G. L., & Abdallah, C. T. (2014). The complexity of university curricula according to course cruciality. 2014 Eighth International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems, 242-248. https://doi.org/10.1109/CISIS.2014.34

27. Starkey, K. (2021). STEM Passport Program Literature Review. Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. Retrieved Mar. 3, 2026, from https://www.wiche.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/STEM-Passport-Program-Literature-Review-v1.pdf

28. Thompson-Arjona, W. Curricular optimization: Solving for the optimal student success pathway. University of Kentucky (Thesis). 2019. https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2019.147

29. Waller, D. Organizational factors and engineering student persistence. Purdue University (Thesis). 2022. https://doi.org/10.25394/PGS.21606342.v1

30. Wigdahl, J., Heileman, G. L., Slim, A., & Abdallah, C. T. (2014). Curricular efficiency: What role does it play in student success? ASEE. Retrieved Mar. 3, 2026, from https://peer.asee.org/curricular-efficiency-what-role-does-it-play-in-student-success

31. Zulkifli, F. (2019). Systematic research on predictive models on students' academic performance in higher education. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2S3), 357-363. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.B1061.0782S319