> Skip to content
FEATURED:
  • The Evolution of Race in Admissions
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
ADVERTISEMENT
First Person
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Show more sharing options
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Copy Link URLCopied!
  • Print

The Syllabus as a Contract

How do you deal with clever students who find loopholes you didn’t intend?

By  Amber R. Comer
July 27, 2016
Careers - Loophole

Every semester, professors are forced to act as prosecutor, judge, and jury as they vigorously defend their course policies, deadlines, and expectations on a seemingly innocent document called the syllabus. What began as a simple list of class topics has morphed into a sort of contract between professor and student.

The concept of the syllabus as contract seems especially apt now, as more and more colleges require faculty members to adopt standard language on various campus policies.

Even once-straightford elements of a syllabus, like due dates, have gotten complicated thanks to technology. In the past, when a due date for an assignment was listed on the syllabus, it was inferred that the assignment was due on that date in class. Now, however, the ability to submit assignments electronically, via course websites such as Blackboard and Canvas, has forced professors to be far more specific.

We’re sorry. Something went wrong.

We are unable to fully display the content of this page.

The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.

Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.

If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com

Every semester, professors are forced to act as prosecutor, judge, and jury as they vigorously defend their course policies, deadlines, and expectations on a seemingly innocent document called the syllabus. What began as a simple list of class topics has morphed into a sort of contract between professor and student.

The concept of the syllabus as contract seems especially apt now, as more and more colleges require faculty members to adopt standard language on various campus policies.

Even once-straightford elements of a syllabus, like due dates, have gotten complicated thanks to technology. In the past, when a due date for an assignment was listed on the syllabus, it was inferred that the assignment was due on that date in class. Now, however, the ability to submit assignments electronically, via course websites such as Blackboard and Canvas, has forced professors to be far more specific.

What happens when smart students find a way to reinterpret the language on your syllabus to their benefit — in ways that you did not intend?

Whatever the professor’s intention, when students see a due date on the syllabus, they often assume that the assignment is due via online submission by midnight on that date. Even the midnight rule is murky. Is the assignment due by 11:59 p.m. on the day before the due date? Or by 11:59 p.m. on the listed date? (You can avoid that problem entirely by specifying 11:59 p.m. rather than midnight.)

Technology has forced professors to be extremely specific on these details or else face inevitable challenges from students. And it’s precisely when such challenges arise that both professors and students look to the syllabus as a contract.

ADVERTISEMENT

But what happens when smart students find a way to reinterpret the language on your syllabus to their benefit — in ways that you did not intend? Should faculty members in those situations vigorously defend their intent or yield?

One way to deal with students who believe they have cleverly found a loophole in some policy on your syllabus is to turn to the court system has dealt with defiant “students” of the law (i.e., defendants) for hundreds of years. Although it is frustrating when a clearly guilty defendant must be released because his lawyer found some gap in the law, the court begrudgingly does so and then proceeds to patch the hole so as not to be caught in the awkward position of being outwitted again.

The concept of amending our legal system as loopholes are discovered can be transferred to the syllabus. When students challenge some provision of the syllabus, the professor must (reluctantly) set the students free and then amend the syllabus so that this loophole is not rediscovered in a future semester.

In essence, the syllabus should be considered a fluid document, which is never completed. Regardless of whether the professor has taught a class for a year or 30 years, the syllabus must evolve. Departments or entire institutions should set up forums where faculty members can share common loopholes and thus help their colleagues get ahead of the “law” of the syllabus.

When students find a loophole, all you can do is honor it, and then make sure it is eliminated.

Under contract law, any unwritten terms and agreements reached before the signing of a contract, or any changes made after it is executed, are not recognized by the courts, which invoke the adage, “It must be in writing.” If the syllabus is to be regarded as a contract with our students, then the same adage must be applied.

ADVERTISEMENT

Getting it in writing is important for several reasons. For instance, it provides a road map for both students and professors. Clearly defining expectations allows professors to remain impartial and avoid being viewed as playing favorites.

That holds true, however, only when professors routinely enforce the policies on their syllabi. When we don’t, we are essentially telling students that the syllabus does not matter. Under contract law, when provisions of a contract are not enforced, the court can hold that an offender cannot be forced to follow a provision that the offended party failed to enforce in the first place.

Letting your syllabus rules slide all semester long — only to enforce them during finals week — will leave students asking themselves, “Why me? Why now?”

We are not doing our colleagues any favors, either, when we are lax about enforcing our own syllabus policies. Students may get used to that and be shocked to encounter a professor who actually does adhere to the standards outlined on the syllabus.

Ultimately, you cannot hold a student to an expectation that was unspoken and uncommunicated, merely because you intended the syllabus to be interpreted differently. Professors, being human, cannot always anticipate every error or misconception reached by students regarding our syllabi.

ADVERTISEMENT

So sure, your syllabus is a contract — but a fluid one, which gets updated and amended regularly. When students find a loophole, all you can do is honor it, and then make sure it is eliminated.

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
    Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
  • The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
    The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
    Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  • Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
    Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2023 The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin