000			01332nam a22002297a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20241120131337.0
008			241120b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a1052-4800
040			_aMSU _bEnglish _cMSU _erda
050	0	0	_aLB1778 JOU
100	1		_aKauffman, Kent D. _eauthor
245	1	2	_aA legal analysis and contrarian view of the syllabus-as-contract perspective _ccreated by Kent D. Kauffman
264	1		_aCanada: _bMiami University, _c2015.
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_aJournal on excellence in college teaching _vVolume 26 , number 2,
520	3		_aDespite the claim made in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) literature for over two decades that a syllabus is a contract, the courts have uniformly ruled that it is not. While there is no harm in thinking one's syllabus is a contract, there may be legal risk in proclaiming it so. The author provides an analysis of the syllabus-as-contract dilemma as well as a review of the legal precedents. Best practices from contract drafting are applied to syllabus creation to enhance teaching and learning and minimize the legal risks of student grievances.
650			_aCourse descriptions _vLegal problems _xContracts
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c168311 _d168311