Project+Methodology

After an extensive review of the available literature on course syllabi, noting both best practices and quasi/experimental studies, it was decided that a multi-pronged approach to the design of the study would be taken.
 * Project Methodology - Background Information**

The item analysis tool was developed to identify what instructors of today are including in their syllabi. Several studies shaped the design of the item anlysis tool which is broken into 13 content sections and three format/design sections with more than 100 items total.Those studies include but are not limited to:
 * Altman, H.B., & Cashin, W.E. (1992/September). //Writing a Syllabus//. IDEA Paper No. 27. Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University.
 * Davis, B. (1993). The Course Syllabus. In, //Tools for Teaching// (pp. 14-19). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [available: []].
 * Lowther, M. Stark, J. & Martens, G. (1989). //Preparing// //Course Syllabi for Improved Communication//. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
 * Parkes, J. & Harris, M. (2002). The purposes of a syllabus. //College Teaching//, 50 (2), 55-61.
 * Parkes, J., Fix, T. & Harris, M. (2003). What syllabi communicate about assessment in college classrooms. //Journal on Excellence in College Teaching//, 14 (1), 61-83).

The survey was developed with the goal of better understanding:
 * how students experience faculty use of course syllabi,
 * what items they perceive to be important in a course syllabus,
 * how they themselves use a course syllabus, and
 * what they attend to over the course of the term and if what they attend to changes over time (i.e., semester).

Three key studies formed the basis of the survey's design. They include:
 * Becker, A. H., & Calhoon, S. K. (1999). What introductory psychology students attend to on a course syllabus. //Teaching of Psychology,// 26(1), 6-11.
 * Garavalia, L. S., Hummel, J. H., Wiley, L. P., & Huitt, W. G. (1999). Constructing the course syllabus: Faculty and student perceptions of important syllabus components. //Journal on Excellence in College Teaching,// 10(1), 5-21.
 * Smith, M. & Razzouk, N. (1993, March/April). Improving classroom communication: The case of the syllabus. //Journal of Education for Business//, 68 (4), 215-221.

The content analysis tool used to asses the alignment between the stated learning/course objectives and specified course assessments as presented in the syllabus (i.e., listing and description). We drew on the concept of constructive alignment originally coined by John Biggs (1999) in crafting the analysis tool.
 * Biggs, J. (1999). //Teaching for Quality Learning at University.// Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.