Syllabus Agreement Definition

In each of the following cases concerning the academic programs, the students did not win their rights against the university. One case concerns a pharmacy school. In Gabriel v Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences et al, the student sued the college, 10 professors or administrators, and the Accreditation Council of Pharmacy Education (ACPE) for US$1.1 million and claimed a violation of the contract with discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when a curriculum was changed.18, 36 The teacher verified and notified the class of a gymnastics task, that it tolerated `limited` plagiarism, which it defined as a `free passport` for a sentence entirely copied from another work. The complaint referred to this phenomenon as a “free passport”. The claimant expressly argued that the program was a contract in which the contract did not mention the phenomenon of the “free passport”. He argued that the award of “free tickets” constituted a breach of that contract. The complainant, accused of plagiarism, claimed that he was denied a “free passport” because of his nationality and religion. The General Court dismissed the infringement and the actions brought under Title VII. The reason for the Tribunal`s rejection of the proceedings is that Title VII makes it illegal for employers, not educational institutions, to discriminate. Therefore, students do not have the opportunity to assert such claims against higher education institutions. Ultimately, you can`t hold a student to an expectation that wasn`t said and communicated just because you wanted the program to be interpreted differently. Teachers, as human beings, cannot always foresee all the mistakes or misunderstandings that students get when it comes to our school programs. Some authors and academic websites explicitly state that a school program is a contract between the teacher and the students.9,41,44-46 Asserting that a curriculum is a contract could lead to a different legal outcome.

While there is no harm in thinking that a course is a contract, there may be a legal risk of proclaiming it so.47 In none of the legal precedents has the faculty member characterized his or her curriculum as a contract. According to estoppel doctrine, faculty members who verbalize that their programs are contracts risk being treated as such. Estoppel is the principle that prevents a person from asserting something that goes against what is implied by that person`s previous act or statement or a previous court decision.47 Sometimes the school curriculum is intrusive or ambiguous or important guidelines are omitted. That is, the curriculum remains silent with regard to certain information about the courses. Changes are sometimes necessary, but they may not always be allowed. Some universities do not allow changes to the program as soon as it is made available to students. Students affected by subsequent changes to the curriculum, for example. B if an exam is cancelled, if the final exam is no longer given, or if the weighting of grades for a task is changed, may complain and mourn these actions. However, in an article about a survey of faculty members and students` perceptions of changes in program components after the start of the semester, the results showed that the majority of respondents preferred the program to be somewhat flexible and not static.2 Perhaps the due date could be changed, but not the type of order. Essentially, the school curriculum should be seen as a liquid document that will never be completed. Whether the teacher has taught a class for a year or thirty years, the curriculum must evolve. Departments or entire institutions should set up forums in which faculty members can share common flaws and thus help their colleagues stay ahead of the “law” of the curriculum.

. . .