In the Spring Semester of 2004, a gap analysis team at Arizona State University analyzed the impact of a significantly funded curriculum development program targeted at improving the abilities of interns and fresh graduates to develop embedded systems. To assist in this endeavor, the team identified three criteria for characterizing gaps between a desired and actual curriculum. In the past, the curriculum development program had been introducing new courses (targeting Curriculum Gap) in an attempt to update curriculum. However, due to program constraints, students were essentially unaffected by the curriculum changes (a Program Gap). It was determined that Course Gaps were the least problematic gaps to address in the short term and had a high impact on interns and graduates of the programs. This paper describes the set of criteria that we have developed for classifying different kinds of gaps and the process used in both gathering data and assessing a program to affect curriculum improvement. Specifically, we demonstrate that curriculum change requires a disciplined and systematic methodology that goes beyond simply adding new courses. Finally, we describe our experiences in applying gap classification and the impact of the gap analysis upon the curriculum program.