Topics Map > Lumen Courses

Course Proposal Help

An overview of all questions on the Lumen Course Proposal form.

   


Top of the Form


Proposal Contact Information

Whomever starts the course proposal will automatically be listed as the proposal contact. If another person should be the primary contact, this can be changed.

The person who submits the proposal typically is responsible for questions and facilitating the course through governance as they receive workflow emails (if rolled out of workflow). See the policy on Course Proposal Review for more information.

Type of Approval (Workflow Set-Up)

  • Governance Approval Needed (default)
  • Administrative (admin use only; used for technical issues within the system)
  • Obsolete Course Process (admin use only; see the Obsolete Course Process documentation)
  • Obsolete Course Waiver (admin use only; see the Obsolete Course Process documentation)

The purpose of this proposal is to remove your subject from a cross-listed course.

This allows a subject to remove themselves as an active partner of a course. If this answer is switched to "yes", no other changes can be made to the course. If changes are made prior to answering "yes", the course proposal must be shredded so the only change is the de-cross-listing.

Background

Originally used in paper timetables to show interdisciplinary relevance, cross-listing was adopted into the Student Information System (SIS) in the late 1990s. While useful, it adds complexity to scheduling and data systems.

Ownership and Challenges

All listed subjects are equal owners of a cross-listed course. However, over time, some subjects may lose active involvement—lacking an up-to-date syllabus or input on course content. Historically, removing a subject required a full course proposal, which was often a barrier.

De-Crosslisting (Removing a Subject)

To simplify subject removal, a “short form” process is available:

  • Only cross-listing information is required—no syllabus or course changes.
  • Use when a subject no longer wants to be listed but the course will continue under other subjects.
  • If course edits are needed, a full proposal is required by one of the remaining subjects.
  • If no subject wishes to retain the course, it must be discontinued (any listed subject may initiate this).

Things to Consider Before Cross-Listing

  • Cross-listing is not resource-neutral - it adds administrative workload and complexity.
  • Only pursue cross-listing if there’s a strong, relevant connection between subjects.
  • Confirm the course number is available in all subjects before submitting. Proposals that don’t follow the course number use policy will be rejected.

Select "Yes"

Notes, limitations, and reminders

  • The approval process follows the same workflow as a standard course proposal.
  • You can only propose to remove your own subject from a cross-listing; you cannot propose to remove another subject.
  • You cannot add subjects to a course by this process.
  • No other changes can be made via the Lumen Courses proposal form utilizing this expedited process (if changes are made before answering the de-cross-listing, the proposal will not advance to the University Curriculum Committee using the “short form”).
    • If changes were already made, but you would like to use the "short form" for de-crosslisting, you must either undo your changes, or ask for the proposal to be shredded and start over. To request a course proposal to be shredded, email lumen@provost.wisc.edu.
  • This process may not be utilized to re-arrange the order the cross-listed subjects listed.
  • Proposals to de-crosslist are consent agenda items for the University Curriculum Committee
  1. Click the “Edit Course” button.
    Click edit green button

  2. Answer “Yes” to the question, “The purpose of this proposal is to remove your subject from a cross-listed course.”
    Displays the question on the form with the drop down of No or Yes.

  3. Select the term for which the changes take place. Removal of a cross-list follow the same deadlines as a full course change proposal.
    Shows the term selection field.

  4. Remove the subject(s) being de-cross-listed.
    1. If the subject being removed is listed in the Subject field, you will need to revise, selecting a subject from the “Select subjects that will be crosslisted” field. Additionally, you must remove that subject from the field “Select subjects that will be cross-listed.”
        Displays the first subject in the cross-list
        Shows the swapped subject and removal of a cross-list
      the final result of the previous imaged changes

    2. If there is only one other subject cross-listed, the answer to the question “Is this course cross-listed” should be changed to “No.”
      Shows the course with having a total of two subjects cross-listed
      Shows the bubble that specifies the course is not cross-listed
      The final version of saying the course is not cross-listed.

    3. If the course being removed is listed in the “Select subjects that will be cross-listed field”, click “(Remove…)” after the subject being de-crosslisted.
      Shows multiple cross-listings
      Removes one cross-listed subject
      Final look removing a single subject from the cross-list

  5. Answer the rational for the changes question.
  6. Add/remove subjects outside of unit that should be aware of this change (optional).
  7. Submit to workflow.

Select "No"

No further action is needed. Course flows through workflow.

Course ID

Only appears for course change and deactivation proposals, this is the primary course identifier in the Student Information System (SIS). SIS assigns a course id once created. This cannot ever change. The Course ID is assigned once bridged into SIS (on new proposals only).

Notes

This field lists exam equivalencies (AP, IB, etc.). Administrative use only.

Basic Catalog Information

 

First available term (effective date):

Courses may be created, changed, or discontinued/deactivated at three different times throughout the academic year to coincide with the start of a term (fall, spring, summer). Consult the University Curriculum Committee meeting calendar to see available terms for course proposals (dependent on the Schedule of Classes publications). If the proposer has selected an effective term and the deadline has passed for that term, the proposal will be updated administratively for the effective term that is the first available at that point in time.

Form help

An overview of the types of course proposals available, the terms when those proposals may be effective, and considerations on timing.
Type of Proposal Information about which term to select. Considerations for timing
New courses
  • Always select the soonest term available, even if that's not the term when the course will be offered.
  • New courses can be future effective dated, but cannot be used in curriculum (listed in Guide, added to DARS/GSTS) until the course is active in SIS.
  • Being built in SIS as soon as possible after approval allows seamless scheduling.
  • What impact is there on the Schedule of Classes?
  • When can this course be added to Guide (if listed in curriculum)?
Course changes
  • Select the term the change is to take effect.
  • Subject and/or catalog number changes must take effect in a fall term to allow for updating program curriculum.
  • If the changes have a significant impact on program curriculum, select a fall term.
  • Does this change need to be in effect for the start of a cohort? Which term do those students start?
  • When will this course be scheduled?
  • Do these changes need to be implemented mid-year?
  • If a change proposed occurs far in the future, consult with DAPIR or indicate in the rationale why this is the desired term.
Course deactivations/discontinuations
  • Always select the current term.
  • If the term you want to deactivate the course is in the future, hold off on submitting the proposal until the course can be deactivated. These proposals cannot be processed until the term they are to be turned off.
  • If students are currently enrolled, the course cannot be deactivated.
  • When can the course be removed from the curriculum (when does this show up in Guide)?
  • Deactivations can be future dated, but they will not be processed until the term selected in the proposal. DAPIR will verify the last term for the course to be active with school/college academic planners.

Should this course have the graduate attribute?

Features available on the course proposal form based on whether the course has the graduate attribute.
Radio button Restrictions
No
  • Course number is restricted to 1-699.
  • Course designations/attributes section of the form is available.
Yes (will open an additional question)

You must articulate the audience:

  • undergraduate and graduate 
    • Course number restricted to 300-699.
    • Course designations/attributes section of the form is available.
    • Learning outcomes will require a distinct attribute for graduate students.
  • graduate/professional only
    • Course number restricted to 300-999.
    • Course designations/attributes section is not available.
    • On courses numbered 300-699, the requisite must limit the audience to graduate/professional students only.

The course requisites must align with the intended audience of the course.

For more information, see the Policy on Course Attribute for Graduate Level.

Sample Syllabus help

  • Include the Graduate Attribute as an attribute/designation on the sample syllabus.
  • If the course is numbered 700+, it is not necessary to include the attribute on the sample syllabus (all courses in this number range have the attribute).

Subject

Identify the subject that owns the course. Anyone can propose a course in any subject listing, but all proposals must be approved by the department that owns the subject listing and the school or college that owns that department.

Form help

  • This field determines the workflow steps and should not be edited while the proposal is in workflow.
  • There can only be one subject listed here. Any cross-list partners must be listed in the correct field.

Sample Syllabus help

  • The subject should use the "subject short description", which can be found in the Academic Structure Tableau Dataviz. The subject short description should always be in all capital letters. Format as "[subject short description] [space] [catalog number]". Include all cross-listed subjects. For example, "MATH 101" or "BOTANY/BIOLOGY/ZOOLOGY 151".
  • All subject, if cross-listed, must be included on the sample syllabus.

Course Subject Listings Policy

Course Subject Listings

Policy Number

UW-1027

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters by which course subject listings are established, renamed, reorganized, and/or discontinued. The purpose of this policy is to ensure disciplinary and curricular consistency across the university’s Course Subject Listings.

Policy

Each course subject listing is associated with an academic unit that is responsible for the subject listing.

A proposal to establish, rename, restructure, and/or discontinue a course subject listing must be reviewed and approved by the University Curriculum Committee (UCC) and subsequently presented to the University Academic Planning Council (UAPC) for consent.

Establishing a Course Subject Listing

A proposal for a new course subject listing must be submitted via Lumen Structures. The proposal must identify the academic unit for the course subject listing and must include the following:

  • How/why the proposed course subject listing is necessary to support course enrollment by students.
  • A list of the courses anticipated to be included in the new course subject listing.
  • Most courses are to be uniquely offered under the new course subject listing. Some cross-listed courses can be included when applicable. An explanation as to how the courses to be included in the course subject listing represent a distinct group of courses not duplicated in an existing course subject listing.
  • Evidence that the academic unit is stable with a long-term academic and resource foundation.
  • Evidence of faculty and staff expertise, continuity, and availability required to maintain a course subject listing.
    • This includes identification of a curricular representative who is trained and responsible for maintaining the course subject listing and coordinating/managing the following:
      • Course details (e.g., requisites) and the schedule of classes, and
      • Course information for the Course Search and Enroll app,
      • Communication to students and advisors, and
      • Course enrollment, and/or
      • Classroom scheduling.
  • Evidence that department faculty will be involved in course instruction.

If the proposed course subject listing overlaps with established course subject listings, e.g., a related field of study or similar curricular content, a similar name, etc., the proposal must be reviewed by the academic division and academic unit associated with the existing listing(s), and documentation of comment, support, or concurrence must be included in the proposal.

Renaming, Reorganizing, or Discontinuing a Course Subject Listing

A proposal to rename, reorganize, or discontinue a course subject listing must be submitted via Lumen Structures. If approved, the proposal will become effective in a future summer term. The proposal must include the following:

  • The rationale for the action, including the impact on students.
  • A timeline for the action, including in which summer term it will become effective.
  • Details on any fiscal considerations and/or impacts on faculty and staff resources.
  • Evidence of consultation with units with overlapping interests (see above).
  • Necessary approvals from the academic division and academic unit.

Cross-Listed Courses

A cross-listed course is shared by multiple course subject listings. There is no requirement that a course be cross-listed, even when it meets the criteria for cross-listing. Cross-listing is generally reserved for courses that are taught with an inter-or multi-disciplinary framework and that appropriately belong in multiple subject listings. There may be occasions when cross-listing courses serve the broader goals of departments/programs, and since the responsibility for managing their Course Subject listings rests on these units, they bear responsibility for determining the proper use of cross-listing.

The following conditions are expected to be met for cross-listed courses:

  1. All course information related to the cross-listed courses must be identical, including course number, title, credits , requisites, and attributes.
  2. Cross-listed courses are owned equally by each cross-listed subject. One subject is not a “primary” owner.
  3. Faculty associated with a department owning the Course Subject Listing in the cross-listing teach the course.
  4. Any of the departments participating in the cross-listing has the potential to offer the course independently.
  5. The subject matter must be appropriate and relevant to fields represented by the participating departments.

Connections between programs and interests must be sufficient for cross-listing courses across subject listings. The cross-listing of courses increases the complexity of scheduling classes and adds to staff workload. This must be taken into consideration prior to the submission of a proposal for cross-listing.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

10-20-2005
Source: View policy UW-1027 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Course number

Course catalog numbers do not have consistent meaning across the university. The department owning the subject may have numerical conventions based on audience, subject matter, or difficulty.

Examples: CHEM utilizes courses in 600-699 range for graduate-level courses, whereas ENGL uses different ranges to associate regions/types of literature.

Form help

  • The course number must be between 1 and 999.
  • If a course number is not available, the software will display an error message.

Error messages

  • If the course number is currently in use.
  • If the course has been deactivated but had enrollment in the past 8 years (inclusive of transfer or study abroad).
  • If the course number does not align with the response to the graduate attribute question.

Policy on Course Numbers

Course Numbers

Policy Number

UW-1064

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters for use of course numbers to ensure consistency across the university.

Policy

Course numbers:

  • Reflect the level of the course;
  • Assist advisors and students in course planning, selection, and registration;
  • Appear in the Guide;
  • Appear on student transcripts;
  • Factor into degree audits;
  • Are used in reports.

It is imperative academic units follow the course numbering rubric to ensure consistency across the university.

  1. Ranges
    1. Course numbers below 100 do not carry degree credit.
    2. Courses numbered 100-299 may be taken for credit only by undergraduates.
    3. Courses numbered 300-699 may be taken for credit by undergraduate and graduate or professional students.
    4. Courses numbered 700-999 are open only to graduate and professional students.
  2. Specific Course Numbers
    1. Directed/Independent Study
      1. Course numbers ending in 98 or 99 (e.g., 198 or 699) are reserved for individual instruction (i.e., directed study, independent study) and are not to be used for group instruction.
      2. Courses ending in 98 (e.g., 198 or 698) are offered on a credit/no credit basis.
      3. Courses ending in 99 are graded on the A-F grade scale.
  3. Thesis
    1. Course numbers 681 and 682 are reserved for the two-semester undergraduate honors thesis sequence.
      1. Upon completion of the first course in the sequence, a placeholder grade is entered indicating whether the student is making appropriate progress. At the completion of the second course, an appropriate grade (A-F) is entered for the second course in the sequence, which automatically updates the first course in the sequence.
    2. Course numbers 691 and 692 are reserved for the two-semester undergraduate (non-honors) thesis sequence.
      1. Upon completion of the first course in the sequence, a placeholder grade is entered indicating whether the student is making appropriate progress. At the completion of the second course, an appropriate grade (A-F) is entered for the second course in the sequence, which automatically updates the first course in the sequence.
    3. Course number 680 is reserved for the one-semester honors thesis.
    4. Course number 690 is reserved for the one-semester (non-honors) thesis.
    5. Courses numbered 790, 890, 990 are generally used for thesis and dissertation writing.
      1. A grade of P (Progress) is entered each semester indicating whether the student is making appropriate progress until the faculty member assigns a grade of S (Satisfactory) or U (Unsatisfactory) and all previously assigned P grades will convert to the S or U. Read the policy UW-1235 Progress (P) Grades.
  4. Reuse of a Course Number
    1. A course number may be reused, provided the previous course with that subject/number combination is inactive and there has been no enrollment in the course for at least eight years.
    2. If the course that previously used the number remains active but has not had any student enrollment (including transfer credit or study abroad equivalency credit) for at least eight years, a course deactivation proposal must be submitted via Lumen Courses prior to starting a new course proposal that uses the same course number.
    3. The Guide displays active courses for each subject, and when each course was last taught. Inactive courses do not appear.
    4. The Lumen Course Proposal Form will only allow eligible course numbers to be entered and saved on a course proposal.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

04-13-1962
Source: View policy UW-1064 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Is this course cross-listed? 

Consider carefully whether it is necessary to cross-list a course. Please recognize that there are very few "good" reasons for cross-listing courses.

Cross-listing is a vestige of a time when the class schedule (aka Timetable) and catalog were paper only and it was more difficult for students to search and find courses. Today, students use Google and other search tools to locate what they are looking for using key words found in the title and description.

Cross-listing does not give a subject/department "credit" in the budget allocation or other campus reporting systems.

Approval of cross-listing

  • Each department owning a subject on a cross-listed course must review and take action on all course proposals.
  • Each school or college with a department owning a subject on a cross-listed course must review and take action on all course proposals.
  • Each of these steps may cause extreme delay on course approval and implementation.

Form help

All cross-list partners:

  • must have the selected course number available for use
  • are considered equal partners in owning and maintaining the course (When a class is offered in a given term a "primary" is designated for scheduling and enrollment management purposes, this is distinct from the overall responsibility for the course which is shared equally.)

Academic Planning Help

The maintenance of cross-listed courses can be time-consuming, complex, and error-prone: cross-listing is not “resource-neutral.” The cross-listing of courses increases the complexity of scheduling classes and will add to staff workload. This should be taken into consideration when proposals for cross-listing are considered. Tangential or insubstantial connections between programs and interests is not sufficient for cross-listing courses across subject listings.

  • Before submitting the proposal, check with all cross-listed subjects to determine that the course number is available in all subjects. Lumen Courses will not allow a course that does not meet the course number use policy to be utilized.

If a cross-listed subject is being removed:

  • This can be done with a “short form” where the only questions required relate to the cross-listing state of the course. No other changes may be made with a short form. See the How to De-cross-list your Subject from a Course KB.
  • If other changes are needed to the course, one of the retaining subjects must complete the Lumen Courses proposal and provide a sample syllabus.
  • If none of the subject owners will retain the course, discontinue the course. Any partner in the cross-listing can initiate the course discontinuation proposal.

Policy

See the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (cross-listing).

Course Subject Listings

Course Subject Listings

Policy Number

UW-1027

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters by which course subject listings are established, renamed, reorganized, and/or discontinued. The purpose of this policy is to ensure disciplinary and curricular consistency across the university’s Course Subject Listings.

Policy

Each course subject listing is associated with an academic unit that is responsible for the subject listing.

A proposal to establish, rename, restructure, and/or discontinue a course subject listing must be reviewed and approved by the University Curriculum Committee (UCC) and subsequently presented to the University Academic Planning Council (UAPC) for consent.

Establishing a Course Subject Listing

A proposal for a new course subject listing must be submitted via Lumen Structures. The proposal must identify the academic unit for the course subject listing and must include the following:

  • How/why the proposed course subject listing is necessary to support course enrollment by students.
  • A list of the courses anticipated to be included in the new course subject listing.
  • Most courses are to be uniquely offered under the new course subject listing. Some cross-listed courses can be included when applicable. An explanation as to how the courses to be included in the course subject listing represent a distinct group of courses not duplicated in an existing course subject listing.
  • Evidence that the academic unit is stable with a long-term academic and resource foundation.
  • Evidence of faculty and staff expertise, continuity, and availability required to maintain a course subject listing.
    • This includes identification of a curricular representative who is trained and responsible for maintaining the course subject listing and coordinating/managing the following:
      • Course details (e.g., requisites) and the schedule of classes, and
      • Course information for the Course Search and Enroll app,
      • Communication to students and advisors, and
      • Course enrollment, and/or
      • Classroom scheduling.
  • Evidence that department faculty will be involved in course instruction.

If the proposed course subject listing overlaps with established course subject listings, e.g., a related field of study or similar curricular content, a similar name, etc., the proposal must be reviewed by the academic division and academic unit associated with the existing listing(s), and documentation of comment, support, or concurrence must be included in the proposal.

Renaming, Reorganizing, or Discontinuing a Course Subject Listing

A proposal to rename, reorganize, or discontinue a course subject listing must be submitted via Lumen Structures. If approved, the proposal will become effective in a future summer term. The proposal must include the following:

  • The rationale for the action, including the impact on students.
  • A timeline for the action, including in which summer term it will become effective.
  • Details on any fiscal considerations and/or impacts on faculty and staff resources.
  • Evidence of consultation with units with overlapping interests (see above).
  • Necessary approvals from the academic division and academic unit.

Cross-Listed Courses

A cross-listed course is shared by multiple course subject listings. There is no requirement that a course be cross-listed, even when it meets the criteria for cross-listing. Cross-listing is generally reserved for courses that are taught with an inter-or multi-disciplinary framework and that appropriately belong in multiple subject listings. There may be occasions when cross-listing courses serve the broader goals of departments/programs, and since the responsibility for managing their Course Subject listings rests on these units, they bear responsibility for determining the proper use of cross-listing.

The following conditions are expected to be met for cross-listed courses:

  1. All course information related to the cross-listed courses must be identical, including course number, title, credits , requisites, and attributes.
  2. Cross-listed courses are owned equally by each cross-listed subject. One subject is not a “primary” owner.
  3. Faculty associated with a department owning the Course Subject Listing in the cross-listing teach the course.
  4. Any of the departments participating in the cross-listing has the potential to offer the course independently.
  5. The subject matter must be appropriate and relevant to fields represented by the participating departments.

Connections between programs and interests must be sufficient for cross-listing courses across subject listings. The cross-listing of courses increases the complexity of scheduling classes and adds to staff workload. This must be taken into consideration prior to the submission of a proposal for cross-listing.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

10-20-2005
Source: View policy UW-1027 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Course title

This is the title that is used in Course Guide, Guide, Canvas and other campus systems and publications where space is not an issue. Titles should be unique in most situations. Exceptions would include independent/directed study and other similar courses where the title simply describes the basic activity of the course (ex. Research and Thesis, Directed Study etc.). There should be an obvious relationship between the Course title and the Transcript title.
  • This field has a character limit of 100. This is the limitation in the Student Information System (SIS); Lumen Courses enforces that limit.
  • Write out acronyms where possible.
  • Titles must be in English.
Table 1. Course Titles
Catalog Number Course Title
1 Cooperative Education
680 Senior Honors Thesis
681 Senior Honors Thesis
682 Senior Honors Thesis
690 Senior Thesis
691 Senior Thesis
692 Senior Thesis
790 Master's Research and Thesis
990 Research or Research and Thesis
x99 or x98 Directed or Independent Study

Policy

See the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (Course Titles).

Transcript title

This is the title that appears on the student transcript. There should be an obvious relationship between the Transcript title and the Course title.
  • This field has a character limit of 30. This is the limitation in the Student Information System (SIS); Lumen Courses enforces that limit.
  • Use as many characters as possible.
  • Titles must be in English.

Policy

See the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (Course Titles).

Course description

Form help

This field has a character limit of 1000. The description should briefly and succinctly describe the content, purpose or primary skills developed in the course that will be common across all offerings of the course regardless of instructor.

The description is public facing and should be written in a way that anyone can understand what content is covered in the course (stakeholders, students, transfer evaluation, etc.).

Guidelines

 

When crafting the description, follow these rules:

  • There is a 1000-character limit on the length of the description enforced in Lumen Courses.
  • Complete sentences are not necessary.
  • Courses are, by default, taught in English. If a course is taught in any language other than English and does not have the Foreign Language Attribute (FL1-5) may include "Taught in [language]."
  • Do not include how the course will be taught, or the order in which content may be presented as this can change by term and instructor. This kind of information must be entered in Instructor Provided Content in the Student Information System when setting up the course in the Schedule of Classes.
  • Do not say "This course will...", "Students will...", "We will..." or similar language in the course description.
  • Descriptions must be in English.

Note, in limited situations:

  • When using “Consent of Instructor,” information related to the enrollment of students in the course may be included as the last sentence in the course description. This must be enforced by the instructor admitting the students.
  • If the course is available to graduate or professional students and the requisite is "graduate/professional standing," a sentence at the end of the description may include required background knowledge, where the requisite cannot be enforced because the coursework occurred as an undergraduate student (not all graduate students completed their undergraduate degree at UW-Madison). This must be formatted as: "Knowledge of (topic) required [such as (subject + catalog number)]." This may not include graduate-level courses, as that would fall under requisites.
 

Policy

For more information, see the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (Descriptions).

Requisites

Requisites are the required academic preparation necessary to be successful in the course, are set at the catalog-level, and are true for all sections of a course. They are consistent, in that they remain the same every term until they are revised by course proposal, reviewed, and approved through governance. The department(s) proposing/offering the course determine the academic preparedness and are the experts expected to articulate that preparedness in the requisite. Requisites must comply with the rules for building requisites.

Enrollment management

Section-level requirements can be turned on and off and is the method to manage course enrollment. For example, if you want to provide priority access to students in a specific major, the section-level ensures that students in declared in a program can enroll before others; if there is additional room and you want to open the enrollment to anyone, you can remove the section-level requirement enforcing the declaration of a program.

Form Help

  • Requisites are limited to 254 characters (maximum characters allowed in SIS); Lumen Courses enforces that limitation.
  • For course changes, this field automatically populates with the existing SIS requisite (requirement group). Any changes show as red/green markup (red = removed; green = new).
  • New courses must build requisites from scratch; see the KB and list of standard requisites for help.

Academic Planning Help

Governance Approval

Requisites are an element reviewed and approved at the subject level (department chair, FP&P 5.31), as the content experts are expected to know and articulate the appropriate level of preparation for a course. See the policy on Course Proposal Review Process - Purpose, Standards and Responsibilities for more information on subject/department responsibilities.

Requisites are important to enforce

Institutional research (Tableau viz, requires login and VPN) has shown that students who enroll in courses without the necessary preparation have higher rates of D, F and drop than students who are appropriately prepared. Enforcing requisites is a way to ensure that students are only enrolling in courses that they are prepared for. For students to make smart decisions about their education, they need clear, consistent information.

  • D/F/DR rates are higher for students who don't have the course prerequisite; targeted minority students and first generation in college students are more likely to enroll in a course without having the necessary requisites.
  • Overall, 8% of undergraduate course outcomes are D/F/Drop, this represents a large number of seats that do not result in students making progress toward degree.

Rules when building requisites

  1. Include all UW-Madison courses that may provide the academic preparation needed for the course. Include all equivalents and all cross-listings. Courses must be formatted utilizing the appropriate subject short description + catalog number (ex: MATH 221).
    1. If a specific GPA/grade is required in a course, include significant data to support that student needs that grade to succeed.
  2. Include placement exams. Advanced Placement and other third-party test scores are automatically configured if the course they equate to is used in the requisite.
  3. Include completion of general education.
  4. Include limitations on enrollment if there is significant overlap with another course (i.e., students may not enroll if they have credit for a different, highly similar course).
  5. Managing enrollment must be done at the section level.
  6. Consider the audience for the course (i.e.: class standing- junior standing, graduate/professional, etc. Students declared in a plan or subplan).
  7. If requisites are unenforceable in SIS, utilize ‘Consent of Instructor’.

See more on how to build requisites.

Additional Resource

List of Standard Requisites (academic standing, student groups, transfer equivalencies, and placement exams)

Grading basis

This determines what options are available to the course instructor when entering final grades.

Form Help

Courses numbered 681 or 691 - Contact lumen@provost.wisc.edu about the creation of or changes to courses with these numbers. There is an additional, small administrative step that is needed.

Academic Planning Help

Grading Basis Options

An overview of the available grading basis options and when they should be used.
Grading Basis Explanation
A-F Grading The most frequently used and includes the Pass/Fail (S/U) grading option where appropriate (A-F scale, Pass/Fail student option).
Credit/No credit CR/N grading is applicable only if the entire course is to be graded on this basis; individual sections within a course may not have CR/N grading if other sections are to be graded on a letter basis. This is not the same grading as Pass/Fail. Does not factor into GPA.
Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory (S/U) Traditionally available for graduate/professional audiences. Utilized when the mastery of the course is less gradient than A-F (i.e. internships where the student successfully showed up enough; when mastery of content is a line in the sand of yes vs no).
DVM S/M/U Available only on courses in the MED SC-V subject in the new Doctor of Veterinary Medicine curriculum. Includes Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory. No other subjects are permitted to use this grading basis.
School of Veterinary Medicine graded option Available only for School of Veterinary Medicine courses
First in 2 course sequence (Administrative only) Utilized for courses such as 681/682 or 691/692 where both courses are tied together. Limited use.

Additional grading information in Guide

Policy

See the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (Grading Basis).

Faculty Legislation II-103: Grading System policy

 

Faculty Legislation II-103: Grading System

Policy Number

UW-860

Responsible Office

Office of the Secretary of the Faculty

Type

University Policy

Policy

The resolution below was approved by the Faculty Senate at its meeting of 15 January 1973. Section 1 of the grading policy was adopted by the Faculty Senate at its meeting of 5 May 1980, to be effective in the first semester of the 1980-81 academic year.

The present grading system (A-F) will be retained with the following exceptions:

  1. Undergraduate students may repeat any course once without special permission of the dean, with all grades (A through F) and their associated gradepoints included in the gradepoint average, but with credits counted only once for any other purpose.
  2. The academic rationale for certain courses may most appropriately be served by grading the entire course outside the usual grading system. The grades for these specially approved courses shall be CR for credit and N for no credit. These grades will carry no grade points. Approval for such courses shall be obtained through the appropriate divisional executive committee. The divisional committee is to take into account the possible effects of such action on other departments and majors. All approvals must be obtained prior to the publishing of the Timetable for the initial semester in which the course is to be offered. Subsequent offerings of the course do not require further authorization. All future Timetables and all subsequent catalogs must indicate the special grading rules in effect for such courses. The CR/N courses are independent of the student-option pass/fail system.
  3. Intermediate grades of AB and BC shall be added between A and B and between B and C, respectively.
  4. For courses taken under the pass-fail option, the grade of S shall be recorded by the registrar in place of instructors’ grades of A, AB, B, BC, or C.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

UW–Madison Faculty Senate Minutes – 15 January 1977 (For access to document see policy contact above) 

UW–Madison Faculty Senate Minutes – 5 May 1980 (For access to document see policy contact above) 

Approval Authority

Secretary of the Faculty

Policy Manager

Secretary of the Faculty

Contact

Secretary of the Faculty -- Heather Daniels, sof@secfac.wisc.edu, (608) 265-4562

Effective Date

05-05-1980
Source: View policy UW-860 in the UW-Madison Policy Library  

Policy on the Use of Pass/Fail Grading for Undergraduates

 

Use of the Pass/Fail Grading Option for Undergraduates

Policy Number

UW-1012

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters for use of the pass/fail grading option for degree-seeking undergraduate students.

Policy

  1. Pass/Fail Grading Option

    This policy only applies to degree-seeking students during their undergraduate careers. It only applies to courses that use the default A-F grading scale and that allow students to choose to take a course on a pass/fail basis.

    Instructors are not formally notified when a student elects to take a course on the pass/fail grade basis. At the end of the course, the instructor will enter the final letter grade earned by the student on their grade roster, and the Office of the Registrar will convert the letter grade for a pass/fail student accordingly. A passing grade of S (Satisfactory) will be recorded when a letter grade of A through C is earned and a failing grade of U (Unsatisfactory) will be recorded when a letter grade of D or F is earned. In addition to the S or U grade, the student transcript includes the symbol # for courses taken on a pass/fail basis.

    S (Satisfactory) and U (Unsatisfactory) grades are not used in computing the student’s grade-point average, but the grade of U may impact Satisfactory Academic Progress.

  2. Student Eligibility

    Students must be in good academic standing with their school/college to be eligible for the pass/fail grading option.

    Undergraduates may elect to take one non-required course on a pass/fail basis each fall and spring semester and/or each summer term for a maximum of 16 credits total during their undergraduate careers.

    The schools/colleges and/or departments may exclude certain courses from the pass/fail grading option and may impose additional restrictions on eligibility. Students are encouraged to consult with an advisor before requesting the pass/fail grading option to fully understand the implications.

  3. Course Eligibility

    Required courses cannot be taken on a pass/fail basis. Ultimately students are responsible for ensuring courses taken with the pass/fail grading basis are considered free electives in their degree programs. Students are strongly encouraged to consult with an academic advisor before taking a course on a pass/fail grading basis. Required courses that are mistakenly taken on the pass/fail grading basis will not count for non-elective requirements even if they would normally count toward such requirements.

  4. School or College Responsibilities

    Each school or college is responsible for clearly communicating the definitions of “good academic standing” and “free elective” to their students.

    The office responsible for academic policy exceptions in each school or college is authorized to make exceptions to the pass/fail grading policy.

    For study abroad programs operated by the College of Engineering, courses taken abroad toward an engineering major will be posted as pass/fail. This occurs automatically and is not a student option; this practice is not covered or impacted by this policy.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

01-29-2015
Source: View policy UW-1012 in the UW-Madison Policy Library  

Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory Grades (S/U) - Graduate Students

 

Graduate School: Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory (S/U) Grades

Policy Number

UW-1231

Responsible Office

Graduate School

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters for use of Satisfactory (S) and Unsatisfactory (U) grades for graduate students.

Policy

The use of letter grades (A through F) is encouraged and recommended whenever assessment of performance permits. In certain advanced topics, seminar, and research courses, where lack of examinations and other performance criteria make letter grades inapplicable, the use of Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory grades is permissible.

For all courses listed as research, the only permissible final grades are Satisfactory (S), Unsatisfactory (U).  Though an Incomplete (I) grade may be assigned, a final grade must be submitted during the following term. If a P grade is assigned, it will remain until the instructor assigns a grade of S or U; all previously assigned P grades are to revert to an S or U upon assignment of the final grade in most cases. These courses will not count in the student’s graduate grade-point average (GPA).

In courses  structured to offer the Satisfactory (S)/Unsatisfactory (U) grading option, a grade of S represents a corresponding letter grade of B or better while a grade of U represents a corresponding letter grade of BC or lower S and U grades are not used in computing  the student’s grade-point average GPA (GPA), but the grade of U may impact the student’s satisfactory progress. S/U grades in courses taken for graduate credit satisfy the Graduate School’s minimum graduate residence, degree, minor, and coursework (50%) credit requirements as well as the minimum or maximum credits required for enrollment each term. Unsatisfactory grades do not satisfy any Graduate School’s minimum credit requirements.  

Tuition is assessed for S/U courses.

Approval Authority

Dean of the Graduate School

Policy Manager

Director, Academic Services, Graduate School

Contact

Director, Academic Services, Graduate School -- Kipp Cox, ervin.cox@wisc.edu, (608) 262-2433
Source: View policy UW-1231 in the UW-Madison Policy Library  

Pass/Fail Courses - Graduate Students

 

Graduate School: Pass/Fail Grading Option

Policy Number

UW-1215

Responsible Office

Graduate School

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters for use of the pass/fail grading option for graduate students.

Policy

Pass/fail courses do not satisfy any Graduate School credit, coursework, or degree requirements, and do not fulfill minimum or maximum credits each term. Tuition is charged for pass/fail courses. For these reasons, very few graduate students choose the pass/fail option.

Pass/Fail Grading Option


This policy only applies to students during their graduate careers. It only applies to courses that use the default A-F grading scale and that allow students to choose to take a course on a pass/fail basis.

Instructors are not formally notified when a student elects to take a course on the pass/fail grade basis. At the end of the course, the instructor will enter the final letter grade earned by the student on their grade roster, and the Office of the Registrar will convert the letter grade for a pass/fail student accordingly. A passing grade of S (Satisfactory) will be recorded when a letter grade of A through C is earned and a failing grade of U (Unsatisfactory) will be recorded when a letter grade of D or F is earned. In addition to the S or U grade, the student transcript includes the symbol # for courses taken on a pass/fail basis. S and U grades are not used in computing the student’s grade-point average (GPA), but the grade of U may impact the student’s satisfactory progress.

Student Eligibility and Requirements


The following applies to graduate students who elect the pass/fail option: 

  • Seminars, independent study, and research may not be taken pass/fail. 
  • The pass/fail option is different from the S/U (Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory) grading option.
  • A student must be enrolled in a course to request the pass/fail grade option in My UW Student Center. The deadline to request the pass/fail grade option is available on the Office of the Registrar’s Dates and Deadlines site. Late requests will not be considered.
  • Pass/fail courses do not satisfy any Graduate School credit, coursework, or degree requirements, nor do they fulfill minimum credits required for enrollment each term. 
  • The enrollment system does count all credits in determining maximum credit load. A Credit Overload Request is required if a student’s total credit load exceeds the maximum limit per term, including courses taken on the pass/fail grading option .
  • Tuition is assessed for pass/fail courses.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Dean of the Graduate School

Policy Manager

Director, Academic Services, Graduate School

Contact

Associate Director of Admissions -- Katie Bourassa, katie.bourassa@wisc.edu, (608) 262-2433
Source: View policy UW-1215 in the UW-Madison Policy Library  

Course Numbers

 

Course Numbers

Policy Number

UW-1064

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines the parameters for use of course numbers to ensure consistency across the university.

Policy

Course numbers:

  • Reflect the level of the course;
  • Assist advisors and students in course planning, selection, and registration;
  • Appear in the Guide;
  • Appear on student transcripts;
  • Factor into degree audits;
  • Are used in reports.

It is imperative academic units follow the course numbering rubric to ensure consistency across the university.

  1. Ranges
    1. Course numbers below 100 do not carry degree credit.
    2. Courses numbered 100-299 may be taken for credit only by undergraduates.
    3. Courses numbered 300-699 may be taken for credit by undergraduate and graduate or professional students.
    4. Courses numbered 700-999 are open only to graduate and professional students.
  2. Specific Course Numbers
    1. Directed/Independent Study
      1. Course numbers ending in 98 or 99 (e.g., 198 or 699) are reserved for individual instruction (i.e., directed study, independent study) and are not to be used for group instruction.
      2. Courses ending in 98 (e.g., 198 or 698) are offered on a credit/no credit basis.
      3. Courses ending in 99 are graded on the A-F grade scale.
  3. Thesis
    1. Course numbers 681 and 682 are reserved for the two-semester undergraduate honors thesis sequence.
      1. Upon completion of the first course in the sequence, a placeholder grade is entered indicating whether the student is making appropriate progress. At the completion of the second course, an appropriate grade (A-F) is entered for the second course in the sequence, which automatically updates the first course in the sequence.
    2. Course numbers 691 and 692 are reserved for the two-semester undergraduate (non-honors) thesis sequence.
      1. Upon completion of the first course in the sequence, a placeholder grade is entered indicating whether the student is making appropriate progress. At the completion of the second course, an appropriate grade (A-F) is entered for the second course in the sequence, which automatically updates the first course in the sequence.
    3. Course number 680 is reserved for the one-semester honors thesis.
    4. Course number 690 is reserved for the one-semester (non-honors) thesis.
    5. Courses numbered 790, 890, 990 are generally used for thesis and dissertation writing.
      1. A grade of P (Progress) is entered each semester indicating whether the student is making appropriate progress until the faculty member assigns a grade of S (Satisfactory) or U (Unsatisfactory) and all previously assigned P grades will convert to the S or U. Read the policy UW-1235 Progress (P) Grades.
  4. Reuse of a Course Number
    1. A course number may be reused, provided the previous course with that subject/number combination is inactive and there has been no enrollment in the course for at least eight years.
    2. If the course that previously used the number remains active but has not had any student enrollment (including transfer credit or study abroad equivalency credit) for at least eight years, a course deactivation proposal must be submitted via Lumen Courses prior to starting a new course proposal that uses the same course number.
    3. The Guide displays active courses for each subject, and when each course was last taught. Inactive courses do not appear.
    4. The Lumen Course Proposal Form will only allow eligible course numbers to be entered and saved on a course proposal.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

04-13-1962
Source: View policy UW-1064 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Undergraduate and Special (NonDegree) Student Lapsed Incomplete Grades

Undergraduate and Special (NonDegree) Student Lapsed Incomplete Grades

Policy Number

UW-1094

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy defines parameters for use of Incomplete grades for students enrolled in the undergraduate and university special student careers, and consequences of same.

Policy

  1. Eligibility

    1. A grade of Incomplete may be assigned to an undergraduate or university special student who, because of illness or another unusual and substantiated cause beyond their control, is unable to complete the coursework.
    2. To be eligible for an Incomplete grade, the student must:
      1. Be earning a passing grade to-date in the course, and
      2. Have a limited amount of work to complete by the end of the term.
  2. Completing Coursework

    1. The student must initiate the request for a grade of Incomplete with the instructor before the end of the term.
    2. The instructor and student must agree on the coursework to be completed and establish a plan for the work to be submitted by the student. The instructor-assigned grade change must be entered in the student information system and updated on the student record prior to the following deadlines:
      1. Incomplete grades assigned in spring or summer term must be updated on the student record by the Friday of the eighth week of the following fall term.
      2. Incomplete grades assigned in fall term must be updated on the student record by the Friday of the eighth week of the following spring term.
  3. Consequences for Not Completing Coursework

    1. If the Incomplete grade is not changed to a final grade by the deadline, the Incomplete grade will be changed (lapsed) to a grade of F or N (for Credit/No Credit courses).
    2. If the outstanding work is unable to be completed by the deadline due to additional extenuating circumstances, the instructor may extend the time the student has to complete the outstanding work by submitting a request to change the Incomplete grade to a grade of Extended Incomplete (EI).
      1. The Extended Incomplete grade must be accompanied by a new deadline date which should typically be no later than the last day of instruction for that term.
      2. If the Extended Incomplete grade is not changed to a final grade by the deadline specified by the instructor, the grade will be changed (lapsed) to a grade of F or N (for Credit/No Credit courses).
    3. A graduating student with an Incomplete grade must complete all coursework before their degree can be awarded. The completion of coursework after the intended term of graduation means that a student will be awarded their degree at the next official conferral date.
  4. Implementation Plan

    Prior to fall 2025, each academic division addressed the assignment of incomplete grades for undergraduate and university special students differently. To implement this policy:

    1. All I and IN grades assigned to undergraduate and special students in fall 2025 and thereafter will be lapsed to F or N on the Friday of the eighth week of the next fall or spring term, regardless of the student's enrollment status in future terms.
    2. All I and IN grades assigned to undergraduate and special students in all schools/colleges in spring and/or summer 2025 will be lapsed to F or N unless they are changed by:
      1. The end of the fourth (4th) week of classes of the fall 2025 term (for College of Letters & Sciences students);
      2. The last day of class of the fall 2025 term (for non-College of Letters & Sciences students).
    3. All undergraduate or university special students assigned an I or IN grade in or prior to Summer 2025 and do not continue their enrollment at UW-Madison will have their I/IN grades:
      1. Lapsed to F or N unless they are changed by the Friday of the eighth week of the term the student returns to enrolled status as an undergraduate or university special student; or,
      2. Changed to PI - Permanent Incomplete five years after their last term of enrollment.

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

08-26-2025
Source: View policy UW-1094 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Component Type

Form help

  • If the course is exclusively online, select only a single component (usually lecture).
  • Where possible on course changes, select a grading basis that has the type written out (Lecture and Discussion vs DIS-LEC). The first listed component is the primary component for scheduling and is where the grading is associated. 
  • If you need multiple scheduling patterns, select the appropriate type of component(s).

Guidelines

Component types are used for scheduling and reporting purposes, they are not intended to describe the instructional methods of the course.

Overview of the types of components and the expected learning/teaching format.
Component Type Expected learning format
Lecture (LEC) the most typically used component, covers most group instruction
Seminars (SEM) generally these are small discussion oriented courses
Field Studies (FLD) takes place in a work setting
Discussion (DIS) attached to a lecture where the discussion is a subset of the lecture enrollment
Laboratory (LAB) hands-on learning
Independent study (IND) one-on-one instruction, no group instruction

Course Components that may be used in combination:

  • Lecture/Discussion
  • Lecture/Laboratory
  • Lecture/Discussion/Laboratory
  • Lecture/Laboratory/Field Studies
  • Laboratory/Discussion
  • Lecture/Field Studies

A course with a single meeting pattern (ex. MWF 8:50 - 9:40) would likely be either LEC, SEM or LAB etc. depending on the size and purpose. A course where a student needs to enroll in 2 components (ex. MWF 8:50 - 9:40 and one of several 1x/week sessions) would likely be LEC/DIS or LEC/LAB etc.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must include information about all components listed in the proposal.

Credits

Enter the total number of credits for the course. UW-Madison's credit hour policy must be observed by all for-credit courses every term offered, including summer. Credits for UW-Madison courses are expressed in whole numbers.

Form help

Variable credit courses should be entered as #-# (ex. 3-4). Do not use spaces.

Syllabus

  • The sample syllabus provided must reflect the maximum credit offering. For clarity it is fine to include all credit offerings.
  • For variable credit courses, academic units must ensure that the additional credit(s) will not have an adverse effect on pedagogy and evaluation for students enrolled for the lower number of credits. For example, moving all discussion and enrichment to the additional credit(s) is not acceptable; every effort should be made to grade the work of students taking the lower number of credits in the context of their requirements, not those of the students taking the additional credit(s).

Academic Planning Help

Consistent Course Information

  • All aspects (title, number, description, designations, attributes, learning outcomes, etc.) of the course proposal apply to all offerings of the course regardless of how many credits are associated with a specific offering.
  • All offerings of the course must comply with course numbering policy and have activities and learning outcomes that are appropriate to the course. (i.e., course number must correspond to the level of the course).

Course Learning Outcomes Requirements

  • The course learning outcomes entered on the course proposal form are the ones that apply to all offerings of the course and additional outcomes may be included in the syllabus for the higher credit offerings.

Policy

See the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (Variable Credits).

Is this a topics course?

All versions of a topics course with the same subject/course number combination must have a common set of learning outcomes. Additional learning outcomes may be added on a topic by topic basis at the section-level.

Academic Planning Help

A new course does not need to be taught as a topics course prior to being proposed and approved with a permanent course number. If a topic title will be a regular offering in the curriculum, it must be created as a new course.

Guidelines for Reviewing Topics Courses

The decision to offer particular topics should be part of the regular process for establishing the department/program schedule of courses and should involve conversation with, and planning by, the department faculty members.

On an annual basis, each school or college will be provided with a list of topics courses that were offered through subject listings in their departments showing the number of times each topic has been offered. It is the responsibility of the school or college and their departments to review this list and determine whether there are courses being offered as a topic that should be proposed as a stand-alone course with a permanent number. It is recommended that a limit of being offered three (3) times within a 5-year period should be considered the standard.

Policy

For more information, see the Policy on Course Proposal Elements (Topics Courses).

Repeatable

Most commonly used on topics, independent studies, or practicum courses. If a course is repeatable but is not a topics, independent study, or practicum, articulate in the rationale why a student should get credit for the same course more than once (i.e. how is the course different between offerings to where the student has a different experience).

Form help

  • Select yes if the student can complete a course multiple times for credit (topics courses, practicums, independent study, etc.).
  • The default is No.

Total completions

If a course is repeatable, define the number of times the course may be completed for credit. A student completing a course for a grade of D or greater receives credit.

Form help

  • If a student could earn credit in a course for an unlimited number of times, enter 99.
  • If there are a limited number of times a student could earn credit in a course, enter the maximum number of times the course could be repeated.

Multiple enrollments

Most commonly used with topics courses where each section represents a separate topic/learning experience.

Form help

  • Select yes if a student could enroll in the course multiple times in a single term.
  • The default is No.

Does this course need a scheduled two-hour final exam for fall and spring offerings?

This field only displays on new courses proposals where the catalog number is lower than 698. It is used by the Office of the Registrar and is not governance approved course information. It can be changed at a later date by contacting the Office of the Registrar.

 

Course Designations

 

Type of honors designation (if any)

Form help

  • A value should be selected ONLY if each and every time the course is offered it will have the selected honors designation (uncommon)
  • If selecting a value from the drop-down, an additional field will appear and you must articulate why the course should have this designation.

Guidelines

If the course will have an honors designation at the catalog level (on every section each and every time the course is offered) there are three options. If a value is selected the proposer will need to enter a brief rationale for having the designation. The sample syllabus should also reflect and support the selection of an honors designation.

Available Honors designations at the catalog level:

  • Honors Only Courses (This is administrative only. Contact DAPIR if you would like to use this value.)
  • Accelerated Honors
  • Honors Optional

Section-level honors

It is also possible to add honors using a "section level" designation where the designation is applied to a specific offering of the course in a given semester. Oversight is the responsibility of the school/college honors program and is added each semester in the process of developing the Schedule of Classes.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect the designation.

Honors Course Designations Policy

Honors Course Designations

Policy Number

UW-1070

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to set criteria for the development and use of honors course designations at UW-Madison.

Policy

The following honors designations are available for use in the course catalog and at the class section level

Honors Only Courses

Symbols/Designations: H, HON

Characteristics:

  • Reserved for undergraduate students declared in an honors program.
  • Small courses (usually 20 students or fewer) or special discussion sections, facilitated by a faculty member and attached to a larger class.
  • Taught by a faculty member who is an expert in the subject matter of the course.
  • Designed to challenge students to actively participate; hence, the course content is often shaped by student questions and interests.
  • Interactive discussion and learning rather than passive experiences (e.g., listening and note-taking).
  • The enrollment system automatically assigns honors to students who successfully complete the course.
Accelerated Honors

Symbols/Designations: !, HOP

Characteristics:

  • Open to both honors and non-honors students.
  • Accelerated courses that award honors credit in recognition of the amount and rigor of material covered in the course within the context of the undergraduate curriculum.
  • Often designed to combine two semesters of material into one semester and therefore taken as part of a well-balanced schedule and in consultation with an academic advisor.
  • The enrollment system automatically assigns honors to students who successfully complete the course.
Honors Optional

Symbols/Designations: %, HIA

Characteristics:

  • Open to both honors and non-honors students. Regular courses with an optional honors component available to undergraduate students.
  • The optional honors component of work is designed to facilitate in-depth, student-driven learning and enrich the student’s experience. Examples include an individual or non-traditional project, paper, or problem set, creative writing, media project, or a performance/presentation.
  • It is extremely rare for the honors optional designation to be applied to a course at the catalog level. This type of honors course is dependent on the instructor of the class section and as such is not applicable to every course offering.

In all cases, to count toward honors requirements, students must earn a grade of B or higher in a course that carries one of these honors designations.

Approval of Accelerated Honors and Honors-Only course designations at the catalog level is part of the course proposal process.

If these honors course designations are to be applied at the section level to a specific offering of the course in each semester, oversight is the responsibility of the school/college honors program and is added each semester in the process of developing the Schedule of Classes.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143
Source: View policy UW-1070 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Breadth attribute (if any) 

If a course has a breadth attribute, it is always applied at the catalog level (on every section each and every time the course is offered).

Form help

If a value is selected from the drop-down, an additional field will appear and you must enter a brief rationale for requesting the attribute.

Guidelines

The criteria for each breadth attribute.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect and support the selection of the attribute.

Should this course be considered for LAS (Liberal Arts and Science) credit?

Form help

  • For subjects in L&S (cross-listed or listed in the subject field) this field defaults to yes.
  • All subjects outside of L&S must changes the answer to yes.

Guidance

The criteria for the Liberal Arts and Science (LAS) attribute.

Select a level

Only displays if the answer to "Should this course be considered for LAS credit?" is yes. A separate field will open and you must provide a brief rational for the level attribute that is selected.

Form help

You must select a level when selecting LAS credit.

Guidance

The criteria for the level attribute.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect and support the selection of the attribute and level.

General Education: QR-A, QR-B, Comm A or Comm B (if any).

All general education attributes/designations are applicable at the catalog level, except Communications B, which can be assigned by section-level.

Form help

  • Select the appropriate values from the drop-down. An additional field will open and you must articulate how the course meets the selected general education attribute/designation.

Guidelines

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect and support the selection of the attribute.

Should this course be considered for the Ethnic Studies General Education attribute?

Ethnic Studies is a University General Education requirements and may be available on a course that also has a Quantitative Reasoning or Communications attribute.

Guidelines

The criteria for the ethnic studies attribute.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect and support the selection of the attribute.

If this is a foreign language course, indicate the level. 

This attribute is used to help undergraduate students identify the hundreds of courses offered that focus on learning to speak, understand, read and write a language other than English. 

Form help

  • If a foreign language level is selected the proposer will be asked to provide a brief rationale.
  • the course requisites must align with the foreign language level selected.

Guidelines

For more information, see the Policy on the Course Attribute for Foreign Language.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect the attribute and level.

Should this course have the workplace course attribute?  

This attribute helps undergraduate students identify courses that take the theories and concepts learned in the classroom and apply them in professional settings. This is not applicable to courses that are graduate or professional students only (courses 700+ and/or with an audience of only graduate and professional students).

For more information, see the Policy on the Course Attribute for Workplace Experience.

Syllabus

The sample syllabus must reflect the attribute.

 

Rationale for the Course

 

This section of the form is used to provide information about the purpose of the course and the role it will play in the curriculum. None of the information entered here is part of the catalog entry for the course. Each of the questions is intended to help proposal reviewers understand how the course will be used and why it is needed.

Why is this course being proposed?

In responding to this question, be sure to answer the following:

  1. What gap in the curriculum is this course fulfilling?
  2. What is the purpose of the course?
  3. What degree and/or major requirement(s) will this fulfill?

Provide the rationale on why the course and/or changes are needed. Is this a developing space and/or is the curriculum being revised? A robust rationale helps courses progress through governance review, considering the university has over 9,000 courses already on the books. Include how it fits within the curriculum; whether it's a requirement or optional.

FYI

Indicating a specific degree/major etc. will not automatically add it to the requirements. A separate program proposal must be submitted for this to be considered part of the documented curriculum.

What is the estimated enrollment for the course?

Provide a realistic number of enrollment expected in a given term. Understanding the intended size of the course it helpful in understanding how the course will be taught, the role it will play in the curriculum, and overall demand for the subject matter.

How many qualified instructors in the primary unit will be able to teach the course?

Provide a realistic number of instructors that can teach the course. If the course is niche, provide some information in the rationale on how the course can be sustained. If there is an insufficient number of regular faculty and instructional academic staff who are qualified to teach this course, it is unlikely that the course will be taught regularly. If there are less than three instructors, provide some additional information on how this will be regularly taught within the existing course array.

Related policy: Minimum Qualifications for Instructional Staff

Minimum Qualifications for Instructional Staff

Policy Number

UW-1010

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This policy establishes a university-wide standard for the appointment of instructional staff in courses taught for academic credit at UW–Madison, and as such complies with the Higher Learning Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation.

Policy

  1. Individuals who teach courses offered for UW-Madison credit must have instructional appointments consistent with that role during the term of instruction.
  2. The qualifications of instructional staff are evaluated primarily on the basis of earned degrees in a field or subject area relevant to the courses taught, obtained from academic institutions that are accredited by regional higher education associations and/or professional accrediting organizations, or the equivalent quality of university or college in countries outside the U.S.
  3. All instructional staff must have a terminal degree, or a degree at least one level higher than the degree for which the course is taught, i.e., a master’s degree or greater is required of instructional staff to teach a course that counts toward the bachelor’s degree and a Ph.D. or terminal degree is required for a course that counts towards a master’s or higher level degree. There are cases where the norm in the discipline otherwise includes instructional staff with specialized degrees, e.g., J.D. holders teaching Ph.D. students in law, or an M.F.A. holder teaching Ph.D. students in the arts; or when the accreditation standards of the profession require otherwise.
  4. Instructional staff teaching in graduate programs must hold a terminal degree determined by the faculty to be appropriate to the discipline and must have a record of research, scholarship, or achievement appropriate for the graduate program.
  5. In some cases, instructional staff who do not possess the academic credentials described above can be appointed to teach courses if they hold at least a bachelor’s degree and are determined by the hiring authority to be otherwise qualified, e.g., significant contributions in the field, substantial experience. Permission to employ instructors in this category is the purview of the academic unit and is subject to approval of the school or college in which the course(s) is taught.
    1. Academic units, in consultation with the school/college, must define the minimum threshold of experience for alternative qualification, and establish alternative processes for documenting alternative qualifications, evaluating, and supervising these instructors.
    2. Other factors that may be considered relevant to being “otherwise qualified” may include, but are not limited to:
      1. Substantial graduate-level academic coursework and/or methodological training in the discipline.
      2. Related research experience in the industry and/or the private sector.
      3. Practical experience in the art, business, legal, or political sector.
      4. Relevant clinical experience.
      5. Demonstrated competence or fluency in a language other than English and demonstrated ability to teach that language.

The university expects academic units and the schools/colleges to rarely use this provision. The decision to hire an instructor under this provision must be made with the best interests of the students and the university in mind and must preserve the integrity of the educational experience at UW-Madison.

External References

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

03-17-2016
Source: View policy UW-1010 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Address the relationship of the course to other UW-Madison courses, including the duplication of content, both inside and outside the primary unit.

Provide information on how this course relates to other courses in or outside of the subject. There can be overlap on subject matter (ex. data science, machine learning, analytics) and it is helpful for governance bodies to understand how a topic may meet specific needs of a subject/program. All courses should have some relationship with other courses within their subject and/or within program curriculum. If a course will be a requisite, or uses other courses in the requisite, provide a short overview of the connection.

Utilize Course Search and Enroll using key words, review of courses in related subject listings, etc. to make sure that the same or very similar course does not already exist. If there is a significantly similar course, justify why there should be more than one.

What subjects (if any) might be interested in this course? 

List any/all subjects that have an interest in the course either by overlap, interest to students outside the department, and/or general FYI.

All subjects listed prior to submitting the proposal to workflow will receive a notification of this course proposal. Subjects listed in this field do not have approval authority but may enter a comment with questions or concerns, which the subject(s) must address throughout the workflow process. Proposers will not receive an email notification when comments are added to a proposal.

Subject owners must consult with other areas that offer similar or overlapping courses.

 

Course Content Information

 

Course Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes are a governed element in the course proposal and must be entered for every proposal. Any revisions to the learning outcomes requires a course proposal.

  • Learning outcomes display in Guide exactly as entered in Lumen Courses
  • Specific punctuation is not required (capitalization/periods)

Formatting requirements

  1. 400 characters or less per learning outcome (limitation due to software capabilities)
  2. Must be in English
  3. No special characters (accents, umlauts, ampersands, etc.). It is fine to use special characters etc. in the syllabus document.
  4. No formatting (bullets, dashes, paragraphs, etc.)
  5. Don’t include “Students will …” this assumed/implied.

Expectations

  • Course learning outcomes at the catalog level are an integral part of the course and all outcomes must be a part of all offerings of the course (regardless of modality, term, instructor, section, credits, etc.).
  • Learning outcomes are required for all course proposals, in support of our HLC Criteria for Accreditation. According to the UW-Madison Institutional Assessment Plan, “All courses offered at UW-Madison must have course syllabi with course objectives and student learning goals clearly articulated.”

Guidelines

  • Course learning outcomes state what students are expected to know or be able to do upon completion of a course.
  • Learning outcomes are approved by school/college and university governance and cannot change without formal approval from the school/college and University Curriculum Committee.
  • If a course is part of the requirements for a particular degree/major or certificate, one or more of the learning outcomes may relate to the program learning outcomes.

Learning outcomes must:

  • be clear, observable, and measurable
  • reflect how students will be assessed through activities such as participation, assignments, exams, etc.
  • typically relate to one or more program learning outcomes
  • meet the formatting requirements (above).

In courses where graduate/professional  and undergraduate students enroll, there must be at least one learning outcome distinct for graduate/professional students

Help for learning outcomes

Syllabus

  • Goals and assessment can be explained in relation to the learning experiences in the syllabus.
  • The established course learning outcomes must be included on the syllabus each time offered.
  • The syllabus may always include more learning outcomes, but if they are supposed to apply to all sections they must be listed in Lumen Courses.

UW-Madison Course Learning Outcomes Policy

Student Learning Assessment (Academic Programs and Courses)

Policy Number

UW-1028

Responsible Office

Office of the Provost

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

This institution-wide assessment plan provides a framework for student learning assessment at UW–Madison. To ensure the quality of our students’ experience, we engage in ongoing, systematic, and integrated efforts to better understand and improve learning. This is what we mean by student learning assessment. Others may refer to this concept as evidenced-based learning. In any case, student learning assessment is the ongoing process of 1) defining clear, measurable learning goals, 2) ensuring that students engage in sufficient learning experiences to achieve these goals, 3) gathering evidence to determine how well student learning matches our expectations, and 4) using the results to validate or improve learning.

Policy

  • Overview and Guiding Principles of Student Learning Assessment

    UW–Madison adopts the philosophy that assessment of learning should be an integrated, ongoing component of academic life and the student experience. Student learning takes place both within and outside of the classroom, and UW–Madison promotes assessment of student learning across students’ educational experiences. To this effect, UW–Madison considers the following guiding principles of assessment:

    • Many of the regular activities of academic life are evaluative; when approached from a systematic perspective, they are forms of assessment.
    • Student learning assessment supplements and supports (rather than replaces) curricular, departmental, and other types of ongoing review for program evaluation and improvement.
    • Student learning assessment informs decision-making across several levels: institutional, school/college, division, department/program and course-level, and is especially informative at the course and program level where the learning experience is most immediate.
    • Student learning assessment is ongoing, periodic and iterative; it is used both as a procedure for promoting and maintaining program excellence as well as for answering new questions about students’ educational experiences as those questions arise.
    • Academic student learning assessment activities are faculty driven, and are primarily organized at the program (major, degree, certificate, course) level.
    • Collaboration between academic departments and co-curricular programs is strongly encouraged to identify and align opportunities for assessing student learning across the students’ educational experience.
  • Framework for Student Learning Assessment

    At UW–Madison, the Wisconsin Experience serves as an overarching framework across all academic and co-curricular programs for what is expected during a student’s tenure Through the Wisconsin Experience and guided by a set of learning goals referred to as the Essential Learning Outcomes(ELOs),1 UW–Madison seeks to develop in students the ability to engage in the world, to be creative problem solvers, to integrate empirical analysis and passion, to seek out and create new knowledge and technologies, and to adapt to new situations. The nature of these opportunities and how they are offered—through the integration of student-centered in-class and out-of-class learning experiences which are characterized by active and engaged learning—exemplifies the Wisconsin Experience and what is expected of UW–Madison graduates. (See Table 1. UW–Madison Essential Learning Outcomes.)

    Table 1. UW–Madison Essential Learning Outcomes
    • Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World
    • Intellectual and Practical Skills
    • Personal and Social Responsibility
    • Integrative Learning
  • Guidance and Oversight

    Faculty, academic departments, and schools/colleges are responsible for developing and implementing the curricula. As such, schools/colleges have appointed committees (such as academic planning and curricular committees) who regularly meet to review the curriculum and consider the results of assessment activities when developing suggestions for program improvement. Establishing departmental and co-curricular assessment plans helps to streamline this process and ensures an evidence-based approach to program quality.

    The Office of the Provost, the University Council on Academic Affairs and Assessment (UCAAA)2, and the deans’ offices of the schools and colleges are jointly responsible for student learning assessment. Together these units collaborate to provide oversight and support for assessment activities.

    The Office of the Provost maintains a Student Learning Assessment website intended for those at UW–Madison who lead or engage in assessment activities. The site serves as a resource for individuals to access information on activities around and best practices within the assessment of student learning. The Office of the Provost also provides professional development workshops and consultation to schools and colleges and other units to ensure student learning assessment is supported and an integral component of academic and co-curricular planning.

  • Conducting Student Learning Assessment

    Conducting ongoing and systematic evaluation of student learning is an integral component of high-quality academic and co-curricular programs. At UW–Madison, student learning assessment considers what students are expected to learn, where in the curriculum these learning experiences are provided, how it is known that students are learning, and how and when evidence of learning is utilized to validate or make improvements to programs.

    As such, every academic program is expected to have active assessment plans in place, conduct at least one assessment activity each year and report annually to the Office of the Provost, including plans for improvement.

    Specifically, assessment plans should specify at least 3-5 learning goals, identify assessment strategies to determine how students are meeting these learning expectations. Assessment reports include a review and summary of the findings. A Basic Assessment Plan for academic programs is intended as a guide for program faculty and staff who are developing their assessment plans.

    Program faculty and staff are required to utilize at least some direct measures of student learning (embedded questioning, capstone assignments evaluated with rubrics, standardized testing, portfolio reviews, etc.). They may also make use of indirect methods (surveying graduating students, alumni, and employers, etc.) of assessment to document whether or not students meet the stated learning goals. Indirect methods are often seen as easier to use but they must be complemented by direct methods.

  • Institutional Assessment

    The assessment of student learning goals at the program level also informs institution-level assessment activities. The Office of the Provost, the Vice Provost for Teaching and Learning, and the Office of Academic Planning and Institutional Research coordinate institution-level activities, including administration of the National Survey of Student Engagement and the Post-Graduation Plan Survey, and other institution-level assessment efforts in accordance with UW System and Board of Regent policies and accreditation standards set forth by the Higher Learning Commission. Institutional efforts also include ongoing and systematic documentation of the Wisconsin Experience and the Essential Learning Outcomes.

  • Assessment of General Education Program

    UW-Madison’s General Education assessment reflects a further institution-level assessment of student learning. The general education program was created to ensure that every baccalaureate student at UW–Madison acquires the foundation of an undergraduate education which includes elements for living a productive life, being citizens of the world, appreciating aesthetic values, and engaging in lifelong learning in a changing world.

    UW–Madison’s General Education includes four foundational domains for undergraduate education:

    • Breadth Communication
    • Ethnic Studies
    • Quantitative Reasoning

    These foundational domains provide for breadth across the humanities and arts, social studies, and natural sciences; competence in communication, critical thinking, and analytical skills appropriate for a university-educated person; and investigation of the issues inherent to living in a culturally diverse society. Importantly, UW-Madison’s General Education program aligns with the Wisconsin Experience and Essential Learning Outcomes framework, especially as it relates to providing students with foundational intellectual and practical skills.

    The University General Education Committee (UGEC) oversees the campus-wide undergraduate general education program, management of its requirements and assessment of the general education student learning outcomes, and reports to shared governance through the University Academic Planning Council.

  • Graduate-Level Student Learning Goals

    The Graduate School and the Graduate Faculty Executive Committee (GFEC) exercise the authority of the graduate faculty with respect to establishing, reviewing, and modifying graduate degree programs, named options, doctoral minors, graduate/professional certificates, and capstone certificates. As part of its duties, GFEC, in collaboration with the Graduate School leadership, engages in strategic planning discussions. Such discussions include the articulation of broad graduate student learning goals that may be modified and extended by academic programs. In Fall 2014 the Graduate School and the Graduate Executive Committee adopted a set of graduate-level learning goals appropriate to distinguish a graduate education from the undergraduate experience. Assessment of student learning at the graduate level is, ultimately, articulated and carried out in the individual academic programs (UW-Madison Graduate Learning Goals, Appendix B).

  • Requirements for Student Learning Assessment

    Program-Level Assessment

    UW–Madison offers a wide range of academic programs at various levels (including bachelor’s, master’s, certificate, professional, and doctoral levels) and within many different areas of specialty. Each degree program is expected to articulate and adopt student learning goals, identify where in the curriculum the learning takes place, and develop assessment plans that align with these learning goals. Further, each academic program is expected to engage in at least one assessment activity each year, report findings, and develop improvement plans as needed. Priority should be given to activities based on direct measures of student learning. (See the UW-Madison 2015-17 Timeline for Program-level Assessment, App. C).

    Table 2. Academic Program Requirements for Student Learning Assessment

    All academic programs (major/degree/co-curricular) will:

    • Articulate student learning goals.
    • Specify where in the curriculum learning takes place.
    • Develop an assessment plan to evaluate whether or not students are meeting expectations of learning.
    • Engage in at least one assessment activity per year; that is, at least one of a program's student learning goals will be evaluated each year. At least some activities must be based in direct measures of learning.
    • Review the results of the annual student learning assessment and utilize findings to inform curricular and co-curricular planning and consider ways that academic programs can more effectively help students learn.

    Program faculty/staff are required to document assessment activity and annually report to the Office of the Provost.

    Co-Curricular Assessment

    Co-curricular life plays an important role in the student experience at UW–Madison. Students engage in activities that highlight, integrate, and enhance formal academic learning. As such, assessment planning also includes the identification of the range of co-curricular educational experiences through which students demonstrate learning. Thus, co-curricular units and programs set priorities including learning goals, assess these goals, and report on progress annually.

    In addition, academic departments are encouraged to collaborate with co-curricular programs to identify instances in which students demonstrate learning related to the articulated program-level learning goals. Assessment activities designed around these out-of-classroom experiences are included in the program’s annual assessment report. For example, student leadership activities, student governance work, or volunteer opportunities in which students meet intended learning expectations often support academic learning goals.

    Course-Level Assessment

    Faculty are responsible for guiding and monitoring student learning throughout the academic program beginning at the course level. When designing new courses or planning current offerings, faculty establish course goals and course-level student learning outcomes which advance some aspect of the academic program outcomes. All courses offered at UW–Madison must have course syllabi with course objectives and student learning goals clearly articulated. Information about the UW–Madison course approval process can be found on the Academic Planning and Institutional Research website.

    Courses are the unit in which most students directly experience academic programs and are the building blocks of much of the academic experience. In addition to an expectation for academic programs to have learning goals, for-credit courses are also expected to have learning goals. Faculty are required to articulate in their syllabus what they expect students to learn (to know or be able to do) from the course. The learning goals for courses should align with and accumulate to a full set of learning goals for the academic program.

  • Academic Planning and Review

    UW–Madison has a long history of conducting regular reviews of academic programs as outlined in the UW–Madison Academic Program Review Guidelines. Academic programs must be reviewed at least once every 10 years under University Academic Planning Council (UAPC) policy and Board of Regents policy. All new academic programs must be reviewed five years after implementation. The purpose of program review is to examine strengths and challenges, to celebrate accomplishments, and to reflect on, and plan for, the future. Program review is a platform for exploring ways to maintain and enhance the academic quality of a range of academic activities. This review should be a natural outcome of an ongoing, program-level assessment process. A plan for assessing student learning and the student experience is required as part of the new program proposal and is expected to be implemented with the initiation of the program. Program review is to be student-focused and, through regular assessment activities, report on issues related to student learning and the student experience. More information about the program review process can be found on the Academic Planning and Institutional Research website.

UW-Madison Selected Resources for Assessment


1 ELOs were developed from several national surveys done by the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) with employers, faculty, staff and alumni, asking the question, “What qualities and skills do you want in college graduates?”

2 The UCAAA, made up largely of school/college associate deans, meets periodically each academic year to discuss issues related to academic planning, programs, and policies including accreditation, assessment, curricular development, reporting strategies, and other emerging educational trends.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

External References

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Teaching and Learning

Contact

Senior Assessment Coordinator -- Regina Lowery, regina.lowery@wisc.edu, (608) 890-2973

Effective Date

01-30-2015
Source: View policy UW-1028 in the UW-Madison Policy Library  

Guidelines, Roles, and Responsibilities

After the initial implementation of Lumen Programs, Student Learning Assessment (SLA) and Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research (DAPIR) offices received feedback that the learning outcomes process was confusing. SLA and DAPIR created a roles and responsibilities document for Lumen Courses. The Clarification of Guidelines and Roles for Learning Outcomes in Lumen Courses (pdf) document explains the basic principles for learning outcomes in Lumen Courses and the role of SLA and DAPIR.

Credit Hour Policy

Form help

All for-credit courses must meet the UW-Madison policy on the Credit Hour. This is a federal requirement.

  • All course proposals must select that they meet the credit hour.
  • Course proposals may not be submitted without checking this box.

Sample Syllabus help

The credit hour explanation should be written in a way that is easy for students to understand. Specify how often the course meets (including different course components, if applicable) and how much time should be spent outside of the class meeting times. Another way of writing this would be to articulate how many total hours are spent on the course. Course proposal reviewers confirm that the credit hour meets the policy definition and that the work in the syllabus supports the articulated credit hour rationale.

https://ctlm.wisc.edu/syllabus/#succeed

Policy Procedures

Accountability and Federal Compliance

As part of the Higher Learning Commission federal compliance review, reviewers request syllabi from a sample of courses of their choosing to audit compliance, including checking that the credit-hour requirements are explained to students and that there is fidelity of the credit-hour standard across instructors and modes of instruction. This review is often part of evidence collecting for the criterion that instructional standards are maintained “wherever and however” instruction is offered.

The expectation is that when a course is scheduled, the weeks of instruction will equal or exceed the number of credits the course is offered for.

Summer Term 

Students are limited to course enrollment equal to one credit per week of session with the exception of the eight-week general session. That session allows for nine credits over the eight-week period. The enrollment system does not allow students to enroll for more credits than their credit limit. In addition to the session credit limit, undergraduate students will be allowed to enroll in a maximum of 12 credits across the duration of the summer term.

Policy on the Credit Hour

The Credit Hour

Policy Number

UW-1011

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

The U.S. Department of Education requires an institution participating in Title IV (federal financial aid) to define a credit hour. Compliance is subject to external review by the delegated authority of the Higher Learning Commission, the university's regional accrediting agency.

Policy

  1. Application of the Policy

    Course proposals must include sufficient information to aid in the determination of a course’s credit hour value which is established at the time a course is approved through governance and finalized by the University Curriculum Committee. The credit hour designation is maintained across all course offerings and is communicated to students in the course syllabus or equivalent documentation, along with learning outcomes and/or objectives.

    As courses are delivered, departments and their instructors are expected to maintain the appropriate learning activities for students for the determined number of credit hours. All credit-bearing courses at UW–Madison have an instructor of record who meets the minimum qualification standards, who takes responsibility for the learning experience, and who assesses the academic engagement of students, as appropriate for the course format and mode of delivery.

    The 45-hour-per-credit standard conforms to the standard Carnegie unit of the federal definition that sets a credit hour as a course that meets weekly for a 50-minute period over a 15-week semester and expects two hours of student work outside of the classroom for every in-class hour.

    All courses are required to have stated learning outcomes or objectives. The learning outcomes are a feature of the course and are approved when the course is approved. Learning outcomes serve as a basis to determine if the amount of learning is consistent across different formats and modes of instruction. In relation to the credit-hour policy, a statement of what students will learn is necessary if credit is based on a demonstration by the student of learning equivalent to that established as the expected product of a period of study corresponding to a time-based credit-hour assignment.

    The credit-hour standard for the course, and the way that the credit-hour standard is achieved, are communicated to students as part of the course syllabus or equivalent documentation.

    Departments continue to be responsible for the consistent application of the credit hour, credit-hour policy, and for ensuring that a stated credit-hour standard is maintained as courses and instructors and mode of instruction or course formats change.

    All credit-bearing courses are to be scheduled in accordance with UW-Madison’s academic calendar and session dates calendar. The definition of a credit hour accommodates course offerings across fall and spring semesters, summer term and all sessions, and across all formats and modes of instruction including in-person, online, and hybrid. The credit hour policy provides flexibility to serve the university as methods of instruction continue to evolve.

  2. Regular and Substantive Student-Instructor Interaction

    1. For purposes of this policy, regular and substantive interaction involves engaging students in teaching, learning, and assessment, consistent with the content under discussion, and it also includes at least two of the following, regardless of modality:

      1. Providing direct instruction;
      2. Assessing or providing feedback on a student's coursework;
      3. Providing information or responding to questions about the content of a course or competency;
      4. Facilitating a group discussion regarding the content of a course or competency; or
      5. Other instructional activities approved by the institution's or program's accrediting agency.
    2. UW-Madison ensures regular interaction between a student and an instructor or instructors by, prior to the student's completion of a course or competency:

      1. Providing the opportunity for substantive interactions with the student on a predictable and scheduled basis commensurate with the length of time and the amount of content in the course or competency; and
      2. Monitoring the student's academic engagement and success and ensuring that an instructor is responsible for promptly and proactively engaging in substantive interaction with the student when needed on the basis of such monitoring, or upon request by the student.

    The requirement for regular and substantive student-instructor interaction sets a quality standard for UW–Madison instruction and recognizes the centrality of faculty and other qualified instructors in the student learning experience. The requirement for regular and substantive student-instructor interaction is mandated across all course formats and modes of instruction.

    A traditionally formatted three-credit course will typically include three 50-minute class meetings of instructors and students weekly over the 15-week semester. In a blended or flipped course format, substantive interaction may take the form of instructor-guided problem solving or discussion formats. In online/distance courses, the instructor must use technology and progressive disclosure of content to establish regular and substantive interaction. Independent/directed study, research, studio and performing art, internships, clinical placements, other workplace experiences, and other experiential learning must have distinctive levels of regular and substantive instructor interaction consistent with higher education standards.

  3. Exclusions

    UW-Madison must be authorized by the Higher Learning Commission and/or the U.S. Department of Education to offer all instructional programs. UW-Madison does not offer certain modalities or programs such as correspondence courses, and competency-based or subscription-based programs.

Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

External References

Approval Authority

Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Policy Manager

Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Contact

Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143

Effective Date

06-15-2017
Source: View policy UW-1011 in the UW-Madison Policy Library

Regular and Substantive Student-Instructor Interaction

Form help

All for-credit courses must have regular and substantive student-instructor interaction. This is a federal requirement.

  • All course proposals must select that they meet the credit hour.
  • Course proposals may not be submitted without checking this box.

Sample Syllabus help

Asynchronous delivery notes

  • Allows for more flexibility for students enrolled across time zones and with a range of quality of internet access. 
  • An asynchronous course section will have asynchronous exams, which can be completed within a certain time-frame, or synchronous exams if accommodations are made for any student who is unable to attend synchronous exam times. 
  • Asynchronous activities may include video lectures, readings, assignments and group discussions or collaborative tasks.
  • In sections delivered in an asynchronous format it is especially important that instructors adhere to the expectations of the credit hour policy for regular and substantive interaction.

Sample Syllabus

Form Help

All new course and course change proposals require a sample syllabus that meets the university's syllabus requirements. A checklist of required items is included on the form to help proposers verify that they have included all required elements. Sample syllabi that do not include all required elements will not be reviewed by the University Curriculum Committee until all elements are included.

  • Uploaded files may be in the .pdf or .docx file format.
  • Proposals cannot be submitted to workflow without an attached syllabus.

Sample Syllabus Help

Sample syllabi must include the following elements that align with university policies and guidelines (listed in each section above). Additional syllabus direction included below for University Curriculum Committee review. It's recommended to align the course proposal sample syllabus with the syllabus template resources from the Center for Teaching, Learning & Mentoring (CTLM). 

  1. Institution Name
    • Syllabus can be placed on UW-Madison letterhead, or if letterhead is not used, be sure "University of Wisconsin-Madison" is at the top of the document.
  2. Subject and Catalog Number
  3. Course Title
  4. Number of Credits
    • If the course is variable credit, the sample syllabus must demonstrate the maximum number of credits.
  5. Course designations and attributes (if applicable)
  6. Course Description
  7. Requisites
  8. Instructional Mode
    • The instructional mode is not approved by the University Curriculum Committee. For the sample syllabus, include one of the available options for instructional modes (in-person/face-to-face, online, hybrid). The syllabus should reflect the meeting patterns associated with the listed instructional mode.
  9. Learning Outcomes
    • Learning Outcomes must match between the syllabus and the Lumen Courses form.
    • Additional learning outcomes may be included in the sample syllabus (usually for topics courses).
  10. Details on How Course Credit Hours are Met
  11. Components (discussion and/or labs)
    • Provide specific information related to all component listed in the course proposal form. 
  12. Required Textbook, Software, and Other Course Materials
    • List any required materials such as text books, open educational resources, and eTexts. Include any required course or eText fees, and articulate required software tools even if they are available as part of UW-Madison licensing.
  13. Indication of time devoted to individual topics via academic activities 
    • To provide this necessary detail, it is recommended that a calendar/grid be created that shows the topics covered in the course with time/interaction details provided relative to items.
    • This demonstrates how the course meets the Federal credit hour, i.e. what are students doing outside of class to meet the minimum required hours for the credit of the course.
  14. Representative List of Readings
    • If there isn't a textbook, list the articles and/or journals required for the semester.
  15. Homework and Other Assignments
    • Provide rules and expectations concerning homework.
    • If there is a textbook, list the readings by week.
  16. Exams, Quizzes, Papers, and Other Major Graded Work
  17. Grading
    • Grading details should be provided, reflect the grading option selected on the course proposal, and include considerations such as: 
      1. How the course is graded (assignments, papers, exams, etc.) and the relative weights of assessments.
      2. Linkage between weights and letter scores (i.e., how the letter grades of A, AB, etc., will be assigned to final grade calculations).  All final grades that may be assigned in the course must be represented.
      3. If some of the valid letter grades will not be used by the instructor (e.g., AB or BC), this should be noted on the syllabus.) 
      4. Whether the final grades are curved or not, including the standards upon which a curve is set, if applicable. 
      5. Whether attendance and/or participation is part of the grading. When a significant percentage (i.e., more than 10%) of the grade is tied to participation, attendance, and/or discussion, how this percentage is assessed must be clearly defined. For assistance, refer to these samples. The intention of the participation/attendance policy is to be student focused and provide students with clear information on how they are being evaluated in an area that is often highly subjective and not thoroughly explained.
      6. For courses that enroll both undergraduate and graduate students, provide separate grading requirements for graduate students.

Organization of content in alignment with CTLM's syllabus template resources

Course Information

  • Course Subject, Number and Title
  • Credits
  • Credit Hour Explanation
  • Course Description
  • Requisites
  • Course Designations/Attributes

Learning Outcomes

Meeting and Instructor Information

  • Discussion and/or Lab Section Information
  • Instructional Modality

Overview

Not required for the course proposal sample syllabus

Materials

  • Required Textbook(s), Software and Other Materials:

Coursework and Grading

  • Assignments/Exams/Other Graded Work
  • Grading

Schedule

Academic Policies and Statements

Not required for the course proposal sample syllabus

Policy on the Course Proposal Sample Syllabus Requirements

Course Proposal Sample Syllabus Requirements

Policy Number

UW-1065

Responsible Office

Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

Type

University Policy

Rationale/​Purpose

The U.S. Department of Education, the Higher Learning Commission, and UW-Madison recognize a course syllabus is required for each course offering. This policy specifies what is and is not required in a course proposal sample syllabus.

Policy

  1. A course syllabus is required when a course proposal is submitted.
  2. Some information that is specific to a course offering, such as instructor name, location, etc. is not required, although it is recommended this information be included when known.
  3. The following items are required:
  • Institution name
  • Subject and catalog number
  • Course title
  • Number of credits
  • Course designations and attributes, if any
  • Course description
  • Requisites
  • Instructional mode
  • Learning outcomes
  • How credit hours are met by the course
  • Components, if applicable (e.g., discussions, laboratories, field studies)
  • The required textbook, software, and other course materials
  • Indication of time devoted to individual topics via academic activities
  • A representative list of readings
  • Homework and other assignments
  • Exams, quizzes, papers, and other major graded work
  • Grading
  • Special accrediting bodies may have additional or different syllabus requirements.
  • Related UW–Madison Documents, Web Pages, or Other Resources

    Approval Authority

    Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

    Policy Manager

    Vice Provost for Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research

    Contact

    Associate Director, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research -- Michelle Young, MEYOUNG@WISC.EDU, (608) 262-2143
    Source: View policy UW-1065 in the UW-Madison Policy Library
     


    Keywords:
    course proposal help 
    Doc ID:
    78720
    Owned by:
    Abbie W. in Lumen and Guide
    Created:
    2017-12-13
    Updated:
    2025-08-18
    Sites:
    Lumen and Guide