Course Proposal Help: Course Content Information

Course proposal sample syllabus requirements, course learning outcomes, credit hour policy, and regular and substantive interaction help for Lumen Courses.

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
  4. 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:
sample syllabus, course learning outcomes, syllabus, credit hour policy, course learning outcomes, clos, regular and substantive student-instructor interaction, rsi 
Doc ID:
78280
Owned by:
Abbie W. in Lumen and Guide
Created:
2017-11-15
Updated:
2025-08-19
Sites:
Lumen and Guide