Mapping digital and BIM-related content across four undergraduate architecture curricula in Türkiye: a comparative document analysis

Introduction Official curriculum documents differ in how they identify digital and building information modeling (BIM) content, curricular reach, and relations. We examine which cross-program claims are supported by public evidence for the 2025–2026 declared curricula of four undergraduate architecture programs in Türkiye, without assessing teaching or learning. Methods A comparative document analysis coded official plans, course descriptions, program and studio records, elective catalogues, and schedules using locked rules for content, evidence basis, reach, position, and linkage. The analysis retained 56 evidence units and 17 sequence configurations. Sensitivity analyses contrasted common plan-title evidence with richer case-specific sources. Blind atomic comparisons covered C2 and C3 only; sequence linkage and confidence remained exploratory despite blind coding of all configurations. Results Four configurations emerged: title-level digital visibility under limited descriptions (C1); compulsory digital representation with an optional BIM extension (C2); governance-documented digital content with catalogue-based computational/fabrication opportunities (C3); and title/target-period offering visibility under limited detail (C4). No plan contained a BIM-explicit title. C2 descriptions documented optional BIM modeling, documentation, and coordination; C3 records identified governance and a formal CAD–studio prerequisite unavailable from plan titles. Unequal coverage precluded comparisons of curricular breadth. Documented ordering and prerequisites did not demonstrate digital skill progression. Discussion This non-ordinal analysis shows how documentation constrains comparisons: titles obscure supported functions, whereas unstratified richer evidence can recast elective opportunities as compulsory provision. Keeping source, reach, and relational claims distinct prevents treating documentary visibility as teaching practice, learning outcomes, or program quality.