Course Mapping1
Course mapping is an essential assessment tool that, ideally, should be completed between
the setting of objectives and the development of measures; in our particular situation,
especially since WEAVE did not have course mapping installed when we began entering our
assessment plans, we are completing our maps out of order; that actually can work in our
favor, particularly for programs that came short of meeting their objectives, because having
the knowledge of last year's results may cause faculty to draw important conclusions from
their course maps that they might not have drawn previously—which brings up the point
that any program faculty who have not been apprised of last year's results need to be so
informed right away.
A course map visually represents a program's process of moving students to the point
where they are able to meet the established learning-outcome objectives. The process
involves identifying where in the curriculum each of the objectives is introduced, developed
and mastered—reflecting the “big picture” for each academic program.
The map visually and substantively reveals any student-learning gaps in the program that
could cause difficulty in meeting the program's measurement targets for its studentlearning outcomes/objectives. Maps also can reveal when an objective is getting "overkill"
in the program. Hence, curriculum alignment thorough course mapping often drives
curricular revision even before assessment data are collected and evaluated.
The program relies upon required courses to secure its desired program outcomes—which
should focus only on those major, overriding outcomes/objectives essential for all
graduates of the program, without consideration of any electives students might
take. Only—and all—required courses for a program (whether housed in or outside of the
department) should be included in course mapping. So the starting point for course
mapping is to gather faculty syllabi currently used in required courses for each program, as
well as the master syllabi for all required courses.
For instance, the journalism/public relations program requires technical-writing courses for
skill development in professional writing and graphics software. So course mapping include
required technical-writing courses to indicate where students are expected to learn some of
the skills needed to meet objectives related to technology use and portfolio development.
Likewise, any required courses that are cross-listed and housed in another department
should be included on the course map. For instance, if COMS/MKTG 312 (taught by
Communication Studies) is required for a Marketing program, it needs to be included in the
course map for that program.
Also, if the program requires extra-curricular events/participation of all majors, separate
1
Also known by terms such as “curriculum alignment” or “assessment audit”.
from required courses, that information also should be included on the program's course
map. Activities included within a required course would not fall into this category, since
they already are included in mapping of that course. But if the program requires something
in addition to required courses, fulfilled/submitted separate from any course, then that
requirement should be mapped (i.e., end-of-program portfolio, an exit exam, attendance at
professional conferences, etc., if not completed as part of a required course).
Example
Course mapping need not be complicated. It simply involves developing a master chart for
each degree that indicates which objectives are being met, to what extent, and how often.
This practice identifies whether an objective is “introduced”, “developed” and/or
“mastered” within a given course; you might find it helpful also to record on your chart any
classroom-based assessment measures used to demonstrate that claim. Such alignment
analysis allows the faculty to determine more easily whether the overall curriculum is
cohesive and provides for systematic development of desired student-learning outcomes.
Sample Course Mapping Chart
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3
Required
Course/Activity
101
I
152
I
201
D
220
D
310
D
238
M
410
480 (capstone)
M
M
Conference
M
Presentation
I=Introduced, D=Developed, M=Mastered
Objective 4
Objective 5
I
I
D
D
I
D
M
D/M
M
M
M
M
M
Adapted from Mary Allen’s Assessing Academic Programs in Higher Education (Jossey-Bass, 2004).
This course map indicates that Objectives 1 and 5 are well cultivated in this academic
program, that Objective 3 is minimally nurtured, that Objective 2 is orphaned after the
developmental level, and that Objective 4 expects student mastery in an area that is neither
introduced nor developed prior to the capstone course. This information helps the
program’s faculty identify needed changes in master syllabi and related faculty syllabi.
On a related note, especially for master syllabi that have not been reviewed recently, the
course-mapping process frequently results in updating/upgrading of departmental master
syllabi and/or individual faculty syllabi that may have omitted critical introduction,
development, and/or mastery material essential for specific required courses.