Syllabi for today's college classes.

Abstract

Faculty know that it is important to write syllabi for the courses that they teach; however, the content of these syllabi can vary from instructor to instructor. This article describes the results of a survey given to 129 undergraduate education students that asked them to rate the importance of 15 potential components of syllabi and the occurrence of these elements in their course syllabi. The results, implications, and recommendations are presented.

Introduction and Background

Parkes and Harris (2002) analyzed more than two hundred course syllabi from eleven colleges in a single university and studied the professional literature on the topic. Based upon their research, they listed a number of important components that should be included in a syllabus: instructor contact information, course objectives and content, grading policies, textbook information, attendance and late assignment policies, and descriptions of assessment policies. Others have described similar components (Diamond, 1998; Dominowski, 2002; Grunert, 1997). The literature, however, is from a faculty/instructor perspective rather than from a student perspective. Determining what students believe are important components would contribute valuable information to faculty for syllabi construction. In addition, comparing what students consider as important elements to what they have actually experienced in their classes would provide information that can be used in faculty development programs. The purpose of this descriptive study was to determine what students believe are important components of a syllabus and to compare their beliefs to what they have experienced in university courses.

Literature Review

A syllabus serves as a compass that guides faculty and students alike. A well-designed syllabus provides students with information about the goals and objectives of the course, what the course will cover, what work is expected of them, intended learning outcomes, and how performance will be evaluated. It can also contain other important information such as how late work will be handled and the behavior expected of students in the classroom. By distributing a written explanation of course procedures, faculty can minimize student misunderstandings about expectations for the class (Davis, 1993; Dominiowski, 2002; Royse, 2001). In addition, syllabi can keep faculty on track throughout the semester and help to ensure that the course does not stall at any one point (Royse, 2001).

Changes in the college environment in recent years present additional issues to be addressed via syllabi. Academic dishonesty is viewed as being on the rise, and many institutions are struggling with the issues of cheating and plagiarism (Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2001). Large numbers of students in the classroom can foster a sense of irresponsibility in students (Carbone, 1999). Another phenomenon is the increasing amount of negative and disruptive behavior of students in the classroom (Richardson, 1999; Young, 2003). Distance delivery courses and the use of on-line discussion groups make it possible for disrespectful student comments to be made without ever having to see the individual to whom the remarks are directed (Collison, et al, 2000; Johnson, 2003). One attempt to deal with these issues could be to explicitly state behavior expectations in the class syllabus. While Parks and Harris (2002) state that "any behaviors or policies that could affect a student's grade should be addressed in some way" (p.56), they view these behaviors as elements such as attendance, consequences of missing classes, missing exams, dropping classes, etc. rather than items such as showing respect for other students and fully participating in class. Social expectations as well as academic requirements may need to become standard elements of a syllabus.

Method

This study involved a survey of 15 syllabus components, gleaned from both the professional literature and the teaching experience of the researchers. The survey was piloted with a class of graduate students and revised based upon their comments. The final list of syllabus components included 1) grading policy, 2) attendance policy, 3) objectives of course, 4) course content, 5) required text/reading materials, 6) assignments, 7) assessment procedures (how assignments will be graded), 8) citation style for papers, 9) late assignment policy, 10) incomplete coursework/assignment policy, 11) make-up exam/work policy, 12) instructor contact information, 13) academic dishonesty/cheating/plagiarism, 14) behavior expectations (respectful, full participation, etc.), and 15) accommodation of disabilities.

The researchers distributed the survey to four undergraduate education classes at a western land-grant institution of 12,000 students. A total of 129 students (100% of those in attendance on that day) completed the survey: 67 seniors, 56 juniors, 2 sophomores, and 4 graduate students. Students rated the importance of each element and the extent that each has been included in their course syllabi. The survey consisted of two four-point Likert scales. To state their opinion of the importance of each syllabus component, students chose among 1 = not important, 2 = somewhat important, 3 = important, and 4 = very important. To report the occurrence of each element in their course syllabi, students rated each item as either 1 = has not been included, 2 = sometimes included, 3 = usually included, or 4 = always included. Data was calculated based on the percentage of students choosing each response.

Results and Discussion

Survey responses reflected the concerns of both students and instructors: data revealed what students believe should be in a syllabus and what instructors actually address in syllabi. The results are discussed by clustering the syllabus components that are high priority to students (rated by 67% -90% as "very important"), moderate priority (rated by 50%-61% of students as "very important"), and low priority (rated by 16% -41% of students as "very important"). Student preferences are then compared to what they have experienced in their courses.

High Priority Syllabus Components for Students

The item that students most want to see in a syllabus is how to contact the instructor. Instructor Contact Information was rated by 900 of students as "very important," followed by Assignments (78%), Required Text/Reading Materials (71%), Assessment Procedures (67%), and Grading Scale (67%). Student reports of course syllabi items occurring in their classes reflect that instructors agree that contact information and required texts are critical elements of a syllabus. Survey results reveal that 88% of students find Instructor Contact Information, and 92% report Required Texts "usually" or "always" included in syllabi. Grading Scale is found "usually" or "always" included by 80% of students. These three items seem to be fairly standard components of syllabi. However, only 75% of students "usually" or "always" find information about course assignments, in spite of the fact that this item ranks #2 in overall importance to students. As few as 47% of students report that syllabi "usually" or "always" explain assessment procedures (how assignments will be graded), which is ranked 4th in importance by students. These percentages indicate that some of the information most important to students is not included in all syllabi.

Moderate Priority Syllabus Components for Students

The next four items were rated by 50% -61% of students to be "very important" parts of a syllabus: Course Content (61%), Attendance Policy (60%), Objectives of the Course (58%), and Late Assignment Policy (50%). Most students (81% -87%) reported these elements to be "usually or "always" included, except for the late assignment policy. Course Content, Attendance Policy, and Objectives of the Course seem to be standard items in most syllabi, even though they are considered "very important" by only a slight majority of students. Late Assignment Policy, however, is not as evident in syllabi. Only 59% of students identified late assignment procedures as "usually" or "always" included. Although only half of students rated this item as a major concern, in light of Carbone's (1999) findings on the increasing irresponsibility of students, it seems that late assignment information is an element that needs to be added to more syllabi.

Low Priority Syllabus Components for Students

Syllabus components least important to students are items that fewer than half of students rated as "very important." These items include Citation Style for Papers (41%), Incomplete Work Policy (40%), Make-Up Policy (34%), Accommodation of Disabilities (30%), Academic Dishonesty Policy (26%), and In-Class Behavior Expectations (16%). In general, instructors do not often include these items in syllabi. The percentage of students who reported "usually" or "always" finding these elements was relatively small: Citation Style--26%, Incomplete Work Policy--48%, Make-Up Work Policy--43%, Accommodation of Disabilities--13%, Academic Dishonesty--42%, and In-Class Behavior Expectations--20%.

Although these last six items are not highly valued by students as crucial information, the researchers believe, because of recent discussions in the professional literature, that some of the items should be addressed in syllabi. Disrespectful comments in on-line classes (Collison, et al., 2000; Johnson, 2003), the need for establishing learning communities in on-line courses (Johnson, 2003), academic dishonesty (Whifley and Keith-Spiegel, 2001), disruptive behavior in the classroom (Richardson, 1999; Young, 2003), and irresponsibility in students (Carbone, 1999) are issues of higher education courses that have an increasing impact on the learning environment. The fact that syllabi discussing incomplete coursework, make-up work, and academic dishonesty are "usually" or "always" found by 48%, 43%, and 42% of students respectively, indicates that some instructors are already addressing these issues. Could it be that other instructors are not mentioning these on purpose, believing that to acknowledge the possibility of late assignments is to invite that behavior? Ignoring a situation will not make it go away. Increased incidents of irresponsible behavior and academic dishonesty indicate that more syllabi should address these issues.

Citation Style for Papers (APA, MLA, etc.) is considered a "very important" component of syllabi by 41% of students. This information is "usually" or "always" found in syllabi, however, by only 26% of students. Instructors may be assuming that students know the preferred writing style when they don't. Or, possibly, instructors are not assigning research papers, and, therefore, have no need of stating a preferred style. This requirement may vary from discipline to discipline. However, there is an increased emphasis in many institutions for undergraduates to conduct original research. Proper referencing of the literature is a noted aspect of this work. In addition, with the importance of lifelong learning in our society today and many students later taking graduate courses, learning how to cite the literature can be important preparation for this work.

Accommodation of Disabilities, reported "usually included" in syllabi by only 13% of students, is another area neglected by instructors. Perhaps a low incidence of student disabilities causes instructors to ignore this issue. Although considered a relatively low priority by students, Accommodation of Disabilities is a syllabus component that models appreciation of diversity and should be included. Behavior Expectations is, for students, the least important component of a syllabus. Only 16% of students found this item to be "very important." It is found "usually" or "always" in syllabi by only 20% of students. In light of the increased number of on-line courses and large class sizes in on-campus courses, however, perhaps this is another item that needs to be discussed in more syllabi in order to establish expectations for on-line civility among students as well as a sense of decorum in large campus courses.

Implications and Recommendations

This study addresses both the importance of various components of a syllabus as reported by university students and the occurrence of these same components in actual course syllabi. The survey of college students reveals that improvements in syllabi are needed. Although there is a match, in some cases, between items valued by students and those present in most syllabi, there are a number of components that the data indicate should be included more often. Information about course assignments and assessment procedures is considered very important by a majority of students, yet is reported not to be always present in syllabi. Recent increases in irresponsible behavior by students also indicate that instructors need to more clearly describe consequences for late assignments, incomplete coursework, make-up work, academic dishonesty, and undesirable behavior. The value of establishing a learning community for distance-delivered courses creates a need for syllabi guidelines of quantity and quality participation in on-line discussions. The next step is to determine how best to alert instructors to make needed syllabus improvement. With a culture of independent and autonomous expert faculty in higher education, this can be expected to be a challenge. Methods to promote discussion resulting in faculty recognizing changes that would be beneficial, rather than faculty being told to make changes, are most likely to be successful. Recommendations for ways to promote discussion and change include the following:

1. Faculty should bring their syllabi to department meetings and/or faculty development workshops and share them with other faculty. Open analyses and discussions of syllabi may result in individuals learning about additional components and subsequently adding them to their own courses. A faculty member most knowledgeable about the topic should facilitate the discussion to ensure that all important items are presented and considered.

2. During these discussions or workshops, expert faculty or department chairs can, without establishing a standard syllabus template, distribute a list of items that can be included in syllabi. The rationale for including items should also be discussed.

3. New faculty orientations should include sessions on the important aspects of a syllabus. Given the limited preparation of most faculty in the actual practice of pedagogy, individuals new to their jobs cannot be expected to know what it is important to include. Experienced faculty can serve as important mentors in these sessions.

4. Workshops should be provided for doctoral students who plan to teach at the college level on how to teach their content. Components of a syllabus and the rationale for them should be a significant part of these workshops.

5. While common sense dictates that faculty development workshops should be conducted at a time when many faculty can be present, this can be a challenging task. Mid-day or Friday afternoon sessions have been successful at some institutions. Multiple sessions at multiple times may be necessary.

6. Formal and informal reviews of teaching by colleagues should include a review of the important components of course syllabi in addition to reviewing them for discipline content. Elements of a syllabus could be easily included in promotion and tenure standards as best practice.

Syllabus construction is a time-consuming and sometimes tedious project. A thorough and well-written syllabus, however, enables a course to provide a satisfying experience for both students and instructors. Clear guidelines keep confusion and controversy to a minimum. In listening to student needs and reviewing the professional literature, it is evident that several components need to be added to syllabi in order to achieve an optimum learning environment in today's college courses. The process of reviewing syllabi and discussing classroom issues can result in valuable professional development for faculty and a renewed joy in teaching.

References

Carbone, E. (1999). Students behaving badly in large classes. In S. Richardson (Ed.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning: Promoting Civility--A Teaching Challenge, 77, 35-43.

Collison, G.; Elbaum, B.; Haavind, S.; & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning. Madison, WI: Atwood, Publishing.

Davis, B. (1993). Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Diamond, R. (1998). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: A practical guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dominowski, R. (2002). Teaching undergraduates. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Grunert. J. (1997). The course syllabus: A learning-centered approach. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Co.

Johnson, J. (2003). Distance Education: The complete guide to design, delivery and improvement. New York: Teachers College Press.

Parkes, J. & Harris, M. (2002). The purposes of a syllabus. College Teaching, 50 (2), 55-61.

Richardson, S. (1999). Editor's Notes. In S. Richardson (Ed.) New Directions for Teaching and Learning: Promoting Civility--A Teaching Challenge, 77, (pp.1). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Royse, D. (2001). Teaching tips for college and university instructors. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon

Whitley, B. and Keith-Spiegel, P. (2001). Academic integrity as an institutional issue. Ethics and Behavior, 11(3), 325-342.

Young, J. (2003). Sssshhh. We're taking notes here. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49 (48), A29.

Joyce Herbeck, Montana State University 

Marilyn Lockhart, Montana. State University

Herbeck, Ed.D., is an assistant professor of curriculum and instruction, and Lockhart, Ed.D., is an assistant professor of adult and higher education in the Department of Education.