Required Syllabus Elements

In all endeavors, Simpson College expects its students to adhere to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity.  In keeping with the College’s mission to develop the student’s critical intellectual skills, while fostering personal integrity and moral responsibility, each student is expected to abide by the Simpson College rules for academic integrity.  Academic dishonesty includes (but is not limited to) any form of cheating, plagiarism, unauthorized collaboration, unauthorized use of artificial intelligence (AI), fraud (e.g., falsifying documents, forging signatures, altering records.), misreporting any absence as college-sponsored or college-sanctioned, submitting a paper written in whole or in part by someone else, or submitting a paper that was previously submitted in whole or in substantial part for another class without prior permission.  If the student has any questions about whether any action would constitute academic dishonesty, it is imperative that they consult the instructor before taking the action.

For further guidance on these rules and their sanctions, please see the college catalog (Academic Policies, section 10. Academic Actions).

I truly want everyone in this class to feel supported and have the opportunity to succeed. If you have a physical, sensory, learning, or psychological disability — or if something temporary arises, like an injury or illness — you may be entitled to accommodations that can help remove barriers to learning. I want to make sure you have access to that support.

If you don’t already have accommodations in place, you can begin the process by contacting the Student Accessibility Office. They’ll guide you through the steps, which typically include submitting documentation and meeting with staff to determine what accommodations are appropriate. You can reach them at sas@simpson.edu or stop by Dunn 103. You can also schedule a meeting with Karen Lynch, Director of Student Accessibility Services via Symplicity (accessible through OneLogin). More information is available in the academic catalog or online at https://bit.ly/SCaccessibility.

Once your accommodations are approved, you’ll receive an official letter from the Director of Student Accessibility Services that outlines the support you’re entitled to, but it will not include any details about why you need them. You are never required to share personal or medical information with me. If you choose to share your letter with me (and I hope you will!), I’ll do everything I can to ensure your accommodations are implemented with care and respect.

Please don’t hesitate to reach out if you have questions or need support. I’m here for you.

All instructors are expected to include an AI policy in their syllabus. Every course should include a brief, published statement explaining:

1. Whether and how students may use genAI in the course
2. The pedagogical purpose of any substantial genAI use by instructors that shapes student learning
3. Whether and how the instructor may use genAI for evaluation and feedback
4. Whether and how the instructor and their department may use student work for program assessment and review

This statement should reflect the norms and needs of the discipline and the specific course and may be published on the course syllabus, addenda, or other course policy documents.

The sample statements below were written collaboratively with generative AI and are designed to help you draft your own AI policy. Although your policy should address each of the four areas listed above, sample policies regarding student use are not included here. Note that the policy you adopt in one area does not need to align with or influence your policy in another — each area can be addressed independently. Samples are therefore provided for each area separately. Please review your final policy carefully to confirm that it covers all four domains.

Student Use of AI

For Writing

No Generative AI

In this course, the process of struggling with ideas, finding words, and revising your own prose is itself the learning. Writing is not just a product; it is how we discover and develop what we think. Using AI to generate or refine text bypasses the intellectual work this course is designed to build. Therefore, the use of generative AI tools — including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, and the AI writing and paraphrasing features of Grammarly — is not permitted in this course for any purpose, including brainstorming, drafting, editing, or research assistance. Standard word processing features such as spell check and basic autocorrect are fine. When in doubt about whether a tool qualifies as generative AI, ask before using it. Submitting work produced with generative AI assistance, in whole or in part, will be treated as a violation of Simpson’s academic integrity policy.

AI for Editing and Polish Only

In professional and academic writing, it is common practice to have an editor review your work for clarity and correctness — without compromising your authorship of the ideas. This policy treats AI editing tools in a similar role: you generate all the ideas, arguments, and content; AI may help you present them more clearly and correctly. The thinking must be yours; AI may help with the telling.

You may use AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, or Grammarly’s advanced features) to review and improve the clarity, grammar, style, and flow of writing that you have already drafted — but only after you have developed your own argument and written your own text. AI may not be used to generate ideas, arguments, evidence, source summaries, or any substantive content, even as a starting point that you later revise.

Disclosure requirement: If you use AI for editing or polishing, you must include a brief note at the end of your submission identifying the tool(s) used. Example: “I used Claude to review the grammar and sentence-level clarity of this paper. All ideas, arguments, and content are my own.” Use of AI to generate ideas or content, or failure to disclose AI editing assistance, will be treated as a violation of Simpson’s academic integrity policy.

AI for Ideation and Research, Not Writing

AI can help you explore a topic, surface questions you hadn’t considered, and orient yourself to a new area of inquiry. This course allows that kind of use. However, the writing — the arguments, the analysis, the prose — must be yours. The goal is for AI to help you think better, not to think for you.

You may use AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or Copilot) during the early stages of your writing process, including brainstorming topics, generating questions to investigate, exploring multiple perspectives on an issue, and identifying potential sources to pursue. You may not use AI to generate any text that appears in your submitted work — including submitted outlines, drafts, or final papers — or to summarize sources in place of reading them yourself.

Disclosure requirement: Any use of AI during the ideation or research phase must be disclosed at the end of your submission. Briefly describe which tool(s) you used and how. Example: “I used ChatGPT to generate a list of possible arguments on this topic, which I then evaluated and selected from independently.” Undisclosed AI use or use of AI to generate submitted text will be treated as a violation of Simpson’s academic integrity policy.

AI as a Writing Partner

Working productively with AI as a writing partner is a skill that will matter in most careers. But effective human-AI collaboration is not the same as having AI write for you — it is an iterative process in which you do the intellectual work, use AI to challenge and extend your thinking, evaluate what it offers, and make your own decisions about what to keep, revise, or discard. In this course, you are always the author and the one responsible for every claim and argument. AI is a thinking partner, not a ghostwriter. For more information about human-AI collaboration in writing, see p. 9 of https://studentguidetoai.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Student-Guide-to-AI-2025.pdf.

You may use AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or Copilot) iteratively throughout the writing process, provided that you remain the author and director of your work at every stage. This means: you develop your own argument and write your own drafts first, then use AI to push your thinking further. Appropriate uses include:

• Asking AI to critique your argument, then evaluating whether the critique is valid and revising accordingly
• Submitting your draft thesis and asking AI to generate counterarguments you should address
• Asking AI to suggest how a passage could be reorganized, then deciding whether to accept, modify, or reject that suggestion in your own words
• Asking AI to identify gaps or logical weaknesses in your reasoning, then addressing them yourself

AI may not be used to write passages you submit as your own, generate the ideas or structure of your argument from scratch, or substitute for reading assigned sources.

Disclosure requirement: When you use AI in your work for this course, your submission should include a brief process reflection documenting the role of both your own thinking and AI at each stage of your work. Effective reflections do more than list the tools you used — they describe the intellectual work you brought to the process: what you had already figured out, drafted, or decided before turning to AI; what you asked AI to do and why; and how you evaluated and revised the AI’s output before it became part of your work. This reflection is an opportunity to demonstrate that AI served as a collaborator in a process driven by your own thinking, rather than a replacement for it. It is also practice for something you will encounter beyond this course: the expectation that professionals who use AI can clearly account for what they contributed and what the AI did.

There is no penalty for extensive AI use, provided it is fully disclosed and your own thinking is evident throughout. Failure to disclose AI use will be treated as a violation of Simpson’s academic integrity policy.

AI for Reading and/or Studying

No AI for Reading or Studying

You are strongly discouraged from using AI as a reading or study tool. This means you should not use AI to summarize, paraphrase, or explain course readings, lecture content, or any other course material, and you should not use AI-generated study guides, flashcards, or practice questions in place of your own preparation. This restriction is not arbitrary — it reflects something important about how learning works. Understanding develops through the effort of grappling with difficult material directly: following an argument you find hard to follow, sitting with confusion long enough to work through it, and building your own mental map of a subject. AI that does that cognitive work for you does not accelerate your learning; it bypasses it. The goal of studying in this course is not to arrive at the right answer efficiently — it is to build the kind of understanding that will still be there when the course is over.

AI for Retrieval Practice Encouraged

You are strongly encouraged to use AI as a tutor or study partner in this course, particularly for retrieval practice — one of the most effective study strategies supported by learning research. Retrieval practice means actively recalling information from memory rather than passively re-reading your notes, and AI can serve as an on-demand study partner for this purpose. One tool designed specifically for this is AITutorPro, which generates practice questions from your course materials. You can also use Claude or ChatGPT for retrieval practice by giving them a prompt like this: “I am studying [topic]. Please quiz me by asking me one question at a time, waiting for my answer before asking the next question, and giving me feedback on whether my answer is correct or complete.” The key is to answer from memory before you look anything up — the effort of retrieval, even when you get things wrong, is what builds lasting understanding. Using AI to generate a summary and then reading the summary is not retrieval practice; it is a more passive form of review that research consistently shows to be less effective.

AI for Targeted Comprehension

You may use AI to help you work through specific portions of a reading that you find confusing — for example, to clarify a difficult passage, define an unfamiliar term in context, or understand how one part of an argument connects to another. What AI should not do is read an article for you by producing a summary of the whole thing. Summarizing an entire reading removes the cognitive work that makes reading productive: the effort of following an argument, noticing where it is unclear, and deciding what matters. A useful rule of thumb is this: read first, then use AI to address specific points of confusion. Prompts like “I read this passage and I’m not sure what the author means by X — can you help me understand it?” are appropriate uses; prompts like “Summarize this article for me” are not. If you are uncertain whether a particular use crosses that line, ask me.

Course Materials

If you do not use AI when you create your course materials, you could say:

I do not use genAI to create course materials in any substantial way.

If you do use AI, consider starting with an overall statement describing how you use AI such as the one below. This provides both reassurance to students that you are not just turning over your teaching responsibilities to an AI and models ethical AI use.

I collaborate with genAI to create some course materials. Collaboration means the AI does not simply produce finished materials; rather, I guide the process with specific prompts, assess the output against my professional standards, and make all final decisions about what you receive.

Be sure to provide descriptions of the types of course materials you develop with AI and their pedagogical purpose. You may use or adapt any of these statements:

1. Assignment Instructions — I use generative AI as a drafting partner when writing assignment instructions with a specific goal: every assignment will tell you not just what to do but why you are doing it and how your work will be evaluated. AI helps me stress-test my instructions by surfacing places where directions might be unclear, criteria for success are left unstated, or the relevance of a task isn’t obvious. The result is that each assignment will include a plain-language explanation of the task, why it matters for your learning in this course and beyond, and what I will be looking for when I evaluate your work.
2. Reading Guides — I use generative AI to produce structured reading guides that preview key arguments, define discipline-specific terms, and flag passages likely to generate confusion or debate. The pedagogical purpose is to lower the barrier to difficult texts without removing the challenge of reading them: rather than summarizing what a source says, the guides orient you to what to pay attention to and why it matters for the course. I review all guides against the actual readings before distributing them, and I revise language that oversimplifies or misrepresents an author’s position.
3. Interactive Lectures — I use generative AI to help design lectures structured around your engagement rather than my delivery alone. Working with AI, I identify natural pause points where a brief activity or question asks you to do something with the material before we move on — retrieving what you just heard, applying a concept to a new example, or surfacing a confusion you didn’t know you had. AI quickly generates multiple options for these embedded moments, which I then evaluate and revise based on the specific content and where students typically struggle. The goal is not to cover material but to help you build a working understanding of it.
4. Classroom Activities — I use generative AI to brainstorm and develop in-class activities — small group discussions, collaborative problem-solving exercises, case studies, etc. — designed to move learning out of a passive mode and into active engagement. I describe the learning goals for a session, ask AI to generate possible formats, and then select, combine, and reshape the most promising ideas based on my knowledge of the course and what the material demands. Every activity is revised until it’s clear enough that you can spend your energy on the learning rather than on figuring out what you’re supposed to do.
5. Worked Examples & Model Solutions — I use generative AI to draft worked examples that walk through the solution process for representative problems step by step, including common errors at each stage and explanations of why those errors occur. The purpose is not to give you answers to memorize but to make expert thinking visible — to show you how someone reasons through a problem, not just what the final answer looks like. I check all worked examples for accuracy before use, and I revise any steps where the AI’s reasoning is technically correct but pedagogically unhelpful.
6. Multiple-Choice Items — I use generative AI to build a larger pool of multiple-choice items than I could produce alone, which allows me to write more representative exams and provide practice assessments before high-stakes tests. Question stems, answer options, and explanations of why each option is correct or incorrect are drafted by AI and reviewed and revised by me for accuracy and alignment with course content. The explanations are designed to help you understand not just what the right answer is, but why the alternatives are wrong. If you still have questions after reading an explanation, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Evaluation and Feedback

If you do not use AI when you create your course materials, you could say:

I do not use genAI when grading or providing feedback on your work.

Then address whether you upload all or a portion of students’ work to AI with a statement like one of the following.

1. Without uploading student work — I use generative AI to help me write higher-quality feedback on your assignments, but I do not upload your work — or any part of it — to an AI tool. Instead, I use AI to help me articulate feedback I have already developed independently: for example, to find clearer language for a complex observation, to generate an illustrative example of a stronger approach, or to check that my feedback is specific and actionable.
2. Uploading sentences or paragraphs rather than the whole file — I use generative AI to help me write higher-quality feedback on your assignments. Rather than uploading your complete paper, I paste specific sentences or passages from your work into an AI tool — along with a brief description of the issue I want to address — to help me articulate feedback more clearly, find concrete language for observations I have already made, or generate illustrative examples of stronger approaches.
3. Uploading student files to a genAI — I use generative AI to help draft written feedback on your assignments by uploading your complete paper along with the assignment prompt and rubric. To protect your privacy, you will be asked to prepare each assignment specifically for this purpose: your name and any other identifying information should not be included in the text of the document, and you should use Word or Adobe Acrobat’s built-in tools to strip the file’s metadata before submitting. Instructions for how to do both of these things are provided on the course site. When I download the file from Moodle, Moodle will add your name to the filename. I will delete that before uploading the file to genAI.

You may also want to integrate the following into your policy above.

I use only institutionally-approved platforms to ensure privacy and security of student intellectual property.

Once you have described what you upload to AI, describe how you use AI.

1. Instructor-identified, AI-articulated feedback — I identify the key strengths and weaknesses in your work myself, then ask the AI to help me write a clear, detailed explanation of each one, drawing on specific passages, sentences, or examples from your paper to make the feedback concrete and actionable rather than general.
2. AI-generated options, instructor-selected and refined — I ask the AI to generate a list of potential strengths and weaknesses it notices in your work, then select the ones I agree with and consider most important for your development, and ask the AI to help me write feedback on those specific points using concrete examples drawn directly from your paper.
3. Criterion-by-criterion rubric feedback — I ask the AI to evaluate your work against each rubric criterion separately, generating a score or rating and a brief justification for each dimension, which I then audit for accuracy and adjust before returning it to you.
4. Holistic draft feedback — I provide the AI with the assignment prompt, rubric, and your work and ask it to generate comprehensive feedback addressing multiple dimensions of the work at once — argument, evidence, organization, clarity — which I then review, revise, and personalize before returning it to you.
5. Revision-focused feedback — I provide the AI with both an earlier draft and a revised draft of the same assignment and ask it to identify what changed, whether the revisions addressed previous feedback, and what still needs work, helping me give you targeted feedback on your revision process itself rather than treating each draft in isolation.
6. Pattern analysis across a class set — I submit a collection of de-identified student responses and ask the AI to identify patterns across the class — common strengths, recurring misconceptions, gaps in reasoning — which I use to plan follow-up instruction rather than to generate individual feedback.
7. Feedback consistency check across a class set — After I have written feedback for all students independently, I use AI to review the full set and flag inconsistencies — places where I evaluated similar work differently, used vague language with some students but specific language with others, or inadvertently gave more detailed feedback to some students than to others — so I can revise before returning work to the class.

Instructor Use of Feedback on Student Writing

Although Simpson does not require that you give students the ability to opt out of receiving AI-generated feedback, it’s worth considering allowing them to do so. The text below is how I have provided students with that option.

One of the most important ways I support your growth as a writer is by giving you clear, honest, and encouraging feedback on your work. I hold high standards because I believe in your ability to meet them. When I give you detailed feedback, it’s because I see your potential and want to help you get there. Please know that receiving a lot of feedback is not a sign that you’re doing poorly; it’s a sign that I’m engaging closely with your ideas, and that I care about your development.

To help make that feedback as clear and useful as possible, I sometimes use generative AI tools like ChatGPT or Claude to assist me. These tools can help me explain my thoughts in more student-friendly language and provide fuller explanations than I always have time to write on my own. That said, I want to be completely transparent with you about how I use these tools—and you get to decide what level of AI involvement you’re comfortable with.

You have three options to choose from:

 Option 1: No AI Use

If you prefer that I do not use any AI tools in your feedback—perhaps for ethical, environmental, or personal reasons—I completely respect that. You’ll receive feedback directly from me, similar to what I provided before AI tools were available: focused and honest, though likely more concise. You’ll still know what needs the most attention, but explanations may be shorter.

 Option 2: AI-Assisted Feedback Without Sharing Your Writing

If you’re okay with me using AI to help refine and expand my written feedback, but you prefer that I not upload your actual paper into the AI, this is a great middle ground. In this case, I might summarize your issue (e.g., “student needs to elaborate on their discussion of topic X”) and ask the AI to help me rephrase that in more accessible language. The result is slightly longer and warmer feedback, though it may still be somewhat general.

 Option 3: Full AI-Enhanced Feedback with Your Consent

If you’re comfortable allowing me to upload your paper along with my comments to an AI tool, I can generate personalized, in-depth feedback specific to your writing. Importantly, the AI is not deciding what to say—I am. What it helps with is writing out the suggestions I would give you if I had unlimited time. For example, instead of simply saying “elaborate on your discussion of topic X,” your feedback might say: “You’ve already discussed A and B in this section—consider adding C or connecting it to D to strengthen your argument.”

You’ll be able to indicate your preference on a short form at the start of the semester, and you can change your choice at any time. No matter which option you choose, please remember: I give feedback because I care about your learning, and I know you are capable of growing as a writer. Feedback isn’t a judgment—it’s an invitation to take your ideas further, and I’ll be right here to support you along the way.

If you ever have questions or concerns about any part of this process, I’m always happy to talk.

Program Assessment

Here is an example of a statement regarding using student work for program assessment.

Our department uses generative AI to help analyze student work from this course for program-level assessment — an ongoing process through which our department evaluates whether the curriculum is achieving its learning goals and identifies where instruction could improve. To protect your privacy, we will remove your name from the contents of the document and/or from the filename. We will also use the built-in tools from Word or Adobe Acrobat to strip the file’s metadata.

Use of AI Detection Tools

If you use AI detection tools (e.g., GPTZero, EyeSift, Scribbr, QuillBot), consider including a statement such as the following:

I may submit your work to an AI detection tool to help me evaluate whether it was written with unauthorized AI assistance. You should be aware that AI detectors are imperfect: current tools produce both false positives, in which human-written work is flagged as AI-generated, and false negatives, in which AI-generated work is not flagged. A detection result — in either direction — is therefore not conclusive evidence, and I will not make academic integrity decisions based solely on a detector’s output. If a detection result raises a concern, I will discuss it with you directly before taking any action. To protect your privacy, before submitting any work to a detection tool I will remove your name and any other identifying information from the text of the document, use Word or Adobe Acrobat’s built-in tools to strip the file’s metadata, and delete your name from the filename that Moodle automatically appends when I download the file. Any academic integrity concerns arising from this process will be handled in accordance with the course’s academic integrity policy and the institution’s established procedures.

Your syllabus should include your name, office location (or location of student hours), email address, and phone number.

Here are a few additional tips.

Preferred Name.  Tell students what you want them to call you (e.g., Dr. Meyers, Professor Meyers, or Sal) in addition to providing your full name and title.

Cell Phone Number. Will you give students your cell phone number? Will you give them a different number from a burner account (https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/burner-accounts-101-how-to-get-extra-numbers-for-a-smartphone)?

How and When to Contact You. Do you prefer students to send you emails or text messages?

When to Expect a Reply. Let students know how long it might take you to reply when they contact you. What time do you stop replying to their messages in the evening? Will you reply within 24 or 48 hours? Should they resend their message if they haven’t received a reply within 24 hours?

How to Schedule an Appointment. Let students know how they can make an appointment with you. Do you want them to email you to set up a time? Do you want them to sign up on a piece of paper outside your office door? Do you use Microsoft Bookings (which is part of your MS Office account provided by the college) or some other online scheduling tool (e.g., calendly.com)?

Should the normal instructional activity on the campus be shortened or interrupted by a campus-wide closing, students will receive information from the instructor or other representative of the college about when and if the course might be continued or completed remotely.

If your course can be used in partial fulfillment of any of the requirements of Simpson Core or the Engaged Citizenship Curriculum (ECC), information about those requirements and how the course will meet them needs to be included in your syllabus.

For Simpson Core requirements, you can copy the relevant information from Simpson Core Syllabus Grids.

For Engaged Citizenshipship Curriculum requirements, you can copy the relevant information from ECC Grids.

Every major and program at Simpson has a set of student learning outcomes (SLOs). These SLOs are listed in the program’s assessment plan. The curriculum map that is included in the assessment plan identifies which SLOs are associated with which courses. Syllabi should include the program-level SLOs associated with the course. Contact your department chair if you aren’t sure which SLOs are associated with a particular course.

The time and location of student hours (aka office hours) should be clearly indicated in your syllabus. We strongly recommend labeling them student hours instead of office hours. Many students, especially those new to college or from underrepresented backgrounds, misunderstand the term “office hours.” They may believe these are times when professors are busy with their work, not times when students are welcome to visit. Using “student hours” makes it clear that this time is set aside specifically for students, signaling that their presence is expected and encouraged.

Requirements. Full-time faculty members are expected to have at least six hours of student hours per week, and those hours should be spread out across the week. Please refrain from scheduling office hours on Wednesdays from 12:45 to 2 p.m., as this is when faculty meetings are held.

Encourage Students to Come. The teaching and learning center at the University of Albany provides great advice at https://www.albany.edu/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources/make-office-hours-better, including the following text you could adapt for your own syllabus:

Instructors are required to include a paragraph about Simpson’s academic integrity policy in their syllabi, but there is additional information that it makes sense to add to your syllabus.

Clarify your view of collaboration. Unauthorized collaboration is a violation of Simpson’s academic integrity policy, but students need to know whether collaboration is allowed in your class and on each of your assignments. Two examples from https://mcgraw.princeton.edu/faculty/syllabus-resources-faculty are provided below, but there are more examples on their webpage. You’ll also find additional examples at https://cndls.georgetown.edu/resources/syllabus-policies/collaboration/.

Explain what academic integrity looks like in your class. This might mean explaining what plagiarism is and how to avoid it. You’ll find several examples of explanations of plagiarism at https://sites.google.com/view/syllabus-elements/policies. Here’s another option you could adapt for your own class.

I want you to know that your safety, well-being, and dignity matter deeply to me. No one should ever have to experience sexual harassment, assault, domestic or dating violence, or stalking — and if you have, or if you do, you are not alone. I will listen, I will believe you, and I will help you connect with people who are trained to support you.

If you feel comfortable, you are welcome to reach out to me for help accessing campus resources. Please know that, as a faculty member, I am required to report any disclosures of sexual misconduct to the Title IX Coordinator, Heath Moenck. While I must share that a report has been made, you remain in control of how your situation is handled — including whether or not you wish to pursue a formal complaint. Our shared goal is to ensure that you know your rights, your options, and the support available to you.

Simpson College is committed to providing a learning environment that is free from discrimination, harassment, and violence. There are trained staff members available to assist with health and counseling services, academic or housing accommodations, and legal resources such as protective orders.

If you would prefer to speak with someone confidentially, you can reach out to:

• Counseling Services: 515-961-1332
• Sexual Assault Response Advocates (SARA): 515-330-6392 (call or text, 24/7)
• Campus Chaplain: 515-961-1684

SARAs (Sexual Assault Response Advocates) are Simpson students trained to support and advocate for students impacted by sexual or relationship violence. The phone and text line is completely confidential and staffed 24/7 during the academic year. SARAs are available at 515-330-6392.

For more information, visit https://simpson.edu/community-and-belonging/title-ix/

It is my goal that every student in this class feels seen, respected, and supported. I want the learning environment we create together to serve students from all backgrounds, identities, and perspectives. I strive to ensure that the materials, activities, and conversations in this course reflect a commitment to inclusion — across dimensions such as gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, religion, culture, and more. The diversity you bring to this class is a resource, a strength, and an important part of our shared success.

To support that goal, we’ll work together to build a respectful and inclusive learning community. Each of us contributes to the classroom environment, and our differences — in lived experiences, identities, and viewpoints — have the potential to deepen our understanding. This includes differences in race, culture, age, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious belief, socioeconomic background, and other aspects of who we are.

In an inclusive classroom:

• We appreciate the value of differing perspectives.
• We engage in conversation with openness, curiosity, and respect.
• We listen thoughtfully, speak with care, and recognize the impact of our words.
• We approach challenging discussions not as obstacles, but as opportunities to learn and grow together.

You are always welcome to share suggestions for how I can make this course more inclusive or supportive — for you personally, or for others. I genuinely appreciate your input.

Finally, I have done my best to avoid scheduling exams or major deadlines on religious holidays. If I have inadvertently created a conflict with your religious observances, please let me know as early as possible so we can make alternate arrangements.

Knowing and using the names and pronouns that students go by is an important part of creating a respectful, inclusive, and welcoming learning environment — one where everyone can feel a sense of safety, dignity, and belonging.

You’re welcome to share your preferred name and pronouns with me at any time during the semester, and I will do my best to use them correctly. I understand that names and pronouns can change, and I’m always open to updates.

I go by [your name], and my pronouns are [your pronouns].

To support your learning, I may occasionally record class sessions and make those recordings available for student use. To protect everyone’s privacy and help us maintain a respectful classroom environment, no other audio or video recording, screenshots, or sharing of class content is allowed without the explicit permission of both the instructor and anyone else who appears in the recording. Thank you for helping to create a space where everyone feels safe to participate and learn.

The TLC strongly recommends including a list of support resources available to students. If you prefer, you could put this information on a tab in your Moodle site rather than in the syllabus. This Word file contains the Sources of Support.

This is a four credit course that meets 3 days per week for 60 minutes. It is designed to have learning opportunities and activities totaling approximately 143 hours over the 15 weeks of the course (including finals week).

This is a four credit course that meets 3 days per week for 60 minutes and 1 day per week for 3 hours. It is designed to have learning opportunities and activities totaling approximately 148 hours over the 15 weeks of the course (including finals week).

The designed activities may take each student a different amount of time to finish, however the average will be 148 hours. Further estimates include:

This is a four-credit undergraduate course that meets face-to-face twice a week over the semester. It is designed to provide learning time totaling approximately 148 hours over the 15 weeks of the course (including finals week). This estimate is for the typical undergraduate student. Estimates of the time you will need for learning time follow:

This is a four credit undergraduate course that “meets” for chat on Tuesdays from 6:00 to 7:00 pm. It is designed to have learning opportunities and activities totaling approximately 140 hours over the 8 weeks of the course – 8 hours in “chat” and 131 hours outside of class. This estimate is for the typical undergraduate student. The designed activities may take one person longer to complete and another person may complete the activities in less time. We are all individuals. Here are some further estimates:

This is a four credit graduate course that meets weekly on the West Des Moines Campus on Tuesdays from 5:30 to 9:30 pm. It is designed to have learning opportunities and activities totaling approximately 140 hours over the 8 weeks of the course – 32 hours in class and 108 hours outside of class. The designed activities may take one person longer to complete and another person may complete the activities in less time. We are all individuals. Here are some further estimates: