Skip to main content

Background Image for Header:

eCampus Goals Tool Report

Aggregated Course Coverage Data 

The Goals tool could give a semester-by-semester report on: how many sections were covering a particular learning outcome, so a kind of real-time curriculum map that could help adjust the static master map. This would give a pretty clear indication of what outcomes were being assessed and if that was in line with the assessment plan, curriculum map, or other assessment planning document. 

Number of Sections Covered by Different Learning Outcomes
Among the 4 learning outcomes, 1 has the greatest amount of sections covered (3 in this case). Coming in second is 4 with two sections and then 2 and 3 having covered one.

It could also show where (at what course level) those learning outcomes were being covered. Like the first graph, this would function as a real-time curriculum map that could help address the lack of coverage at a point in the curriculum. 

Course Levels for Learning Outcomes
Learning outcome 1 and 2 are being covered at course levels 200. Outcome 3 is being covered at course level 100. Learning outcomes 4 is being covered at course levels 600 and course levels2 700.

This particular chart could be adjusted to account for just about any assessment type an instructor cared to identify within their course and the bounds of eCampus possibilities. It would serve as the third coverage piece and give a program a good look into how the instructors are actually performing these aligned assessments as well as give it the information needed to modify or expand the aligned assessment types. 

Aggregated Course Performance Data 

A lot of this data would need to be broken down finer, by course level and probably by assessment type, which could be done. Because this was a pilot, I’m treating all the data as though it could be aggregated without filters; it will be even richer within the full context of an actual program. 

eCampus allows programs to set target performance thresholds around a goal that could be then increased over the course of a program to support progression towards mastery of a proficiency. This chart would demonstrate the mean at a particular course level and in a particular assessment type versus that threshold. 

Threshold Versus Mean Course Performance in Each Learning Outcome. 
Learning outcome 1 has a threshold of 70 and a mean of 79.9. Two has a threshold of 75 and a mean of 61.3; three has a threshold of 80 and a mean of 86.2; and four has the highest with a threshold of 85 and a mean of 96.5.

This is an expansion of the first chart which shows the raw percent of students who, at a particular course level, exceeded the threshold, the adjusted percentage to reflect only those students who submitted the assessments, and then the n of each particular sample. 


Percentages Greater Than Threshold
The percentages greater than the thresholds are steadily inclining towards the 4th learning outcome, dipping slightly at #2. The N greater than threshold starts off at 96%, drops to 6%, goes back up to 82% and then down again to 8%.