Loyola University Maryland was founded as an institution for higher learning in 1852. Loyola emphasizes academic excellence, the importance of the liberal arts, and the education of the whole person.

Ryan Servant, Academic Affairs Technical Lead at Loyola Maryland, shared the significance of IntelliBoard for augmenting the learning directives at Loyola:

Our institution uses IntelliBoard for a variety of applications. We use it to primarily for the participation of our instructors and learners, use it to supplement strategic decision making, and to better understand the level of engagement both faculty and students have with academic resources.

Typically, [the reporting] process is initiated by academic departments, schools and individual faculty members. If [program leaders] want to know how many students participated in specific courses as part of certain academic programs, we can procure data that is relevant to that inquiry. For example, leadership from the College of Arts and Sciences might want to discover to what extent faculty and students actively participate in course activities, or our business school might like to know to what degree online discussion activities are regularly engaged with within a set of accounting courses.

In some occasions, [IntelliBoard data] provides a data set that can assist with the development at the course catalog. If Deans and department chairs are able to recognize a correlation between engagement level and the method of course delivery, it can aid in the decision process of determining what type of course delivery method delivers the best results for student success. Program administrators can recognize what courses produced a higher level of student engagement, whether it be a hybrid, online, synchronous or asynchronous delivery, and crafts course delivery decisions based off quantitative data. [IntelliBoard reporting] provides Deans, Associate Deans and department chairs a diverse set of qualitative and quantitative data that allows them to make strategic decisions regarding course offerings.

At the individual course level, instructors and/or department chairs are able to interpret the relative level of learner engagement by examining course completion data and learner progress. Our administrators are able to supplement those reports with macro-level data which helps our faculty determine which resources or pedagogical approaches are being leveraged to the greatest degree. Once academic leadership possesses both macro and micro-level data, they can analyze that data and make decisions based on the qualitative and quantitative engagement level of both individual faculty member or individual students. For example, if there is a recognized correlation between the amount of time [students engage] in a particular course and higher on average GPA’s, departments may choose to codify the approach that leads to higher engagement.

By looking at IntelliBoard data, we have been able to more substantively understand student engagement and how students are engaging in their coursework. It helps our academic leadership answer strategic questions about academic offerings.