Instructions for Proposing a New Course or Changing an Existing Course

For assistance with curriculum proposals, please contact the Curriculum Manager, Randall Perez, rlperez@uw.edu.

For additional university-level guidance, please see the UW Curriculum Office (UWCO) Curriculum Application Guidelines pages.

Quick Links

Submission Deadlines

First Effective Quarter Submission Deadline to ECE Curriculum Manager College of Engineering CEP Deadline
Spring 2027 TBD Late Nov/Early Dec*
Summer 2027 TBD Late January*
Autumn 2027 TBD Late February*
Winter 2028 TBD Mid-May* 

*Tentative dates – CEP schedule not yet posted for 2026-2027 Academic Year

Neither the ECE Curriculum committee nor the College of Engineering Committee on Educational Policy (CEP) meet during summer quarter.

Before Beginning a Curriculum Proposal

Faculty considering:

  • new course proposals
  • changes to catalog-listed course information (titles, descriptions, credits, prerequisites, etc.)
  • parallel or jointly offered courses
  • substantial changes to course content or structure
  • distance learning designation
  • course fees

are encouraged to first discuss the proposed changes within their curriculum group and with the appropriate curriculum group chair before beginning the formal proposal process.

In general, changes affecting official catalog information require full curricular review through the appropriate departmental, college, and university review bodies.

Early discussion at the curriculum group level can help:

  • identify potential curricular overlap or downstream impacts
  • clarify prerequisite or sequencing concerns
  • improve alignment with broader curriculum planning
  • identify affected departments or programs that may require consultation
  • streamline later Curriculum Committee, CEP, and UWCO review

Faculty are also encouraged to consult Academic Services early when proposals involve:

  • new courses
  • prerequisite changes
  • course fees
  • distance learning designation
  • parallel or jointly offered courses
  • substantial curriculum revisions

Once proposal materials have been prepared and discussed within the appropriate curriculum group, faculty should alert their curriculum group chair that the proposal is ready for Curriculum Committee presentation.

Calls for Curriculum Committee agenda items are sent weekly to curriculum group chairs by Adrian Dela Cruz, Academic Services Program Coordinator (adc123@uw.edu).

After Curriculum Committee Review

Following ECE Curriculum Committee review, faculty should submit complete approved proposal materials to the Curriculum Manager, Randall Perez (rlperez@uw.edu), for preparation and submission through the formal CEP/UWCO review process.

Curriculum Committee review generally results in one of three outcomes:

Approved as Presented

The proposal is approved and may move forward as presented.

Tentatively Approved Pending Revisions

The proposal is approved contingent upon incorporation of specific requested revisions or clarifications. In most cases, proposals approved in this manner do not need to return to Curriculum Committee for additional review.

Revisions Required Prior to Approval

The proposal requires substantial revision, additional clarification, or further development before departmental approval can be granted. In these cases, faculty will generally revise the proposal and return for future Curriculum Committee review.

Proposal Materials Required Prior to Curriculum Committee Review

Beginning Autumn 2026, faculty are requested to provide a complete set of proposal materials prior to presenting a new or revamped course proposal for departmental curriculum review.

This includes all required catalog-facing information and supporting documentation applicable to the proposal type, such as:

  • course titles
  • transcript title
  • catalog description
  • prerequisite language
  • evaluation details
  • syllabus/MCD 
  • justification statement
  • supporting documentation

Please see the designated section for your proposal type below for specific required materials and additional guidance.

The intent of this process is to:

  • reduce revision cycles
  • improve proposal quality prior to Department, College and Campus review
  • ensure faculty review and approval of public-facing catalog information
  • streamline CEP and UW Curriculum Office submission processes

Incomplete proposals or proposals missing required materials may be delayed pending revision.

Universal Proposal Requirements

All curriculum proposals, regardless of type, must include the following materials.

1. Syllabus or Master Course Description (MCD)

All proposals must include either a syllabus or MCD.

For undergraduate course proposals proceeding to the College of Engineering Committee on Educational Policy (CEP) review, required UW syllabus policy statements must be incorporated into the syllabus or MCD.

Master Course Descriptions (MCDs) vs. Syllabi

ECE undergraduate courses use Master Course Descriptions (MCDs) as broad curricular reference documents describing the overall structure, scope, learning objectives, and topical coverage of a course. MCDs are intentionally broader and more stable than quarter-specific syllabi and may not reflect instructor-specific scheduling, assignments, or textbooks for a particular offering.

By contrast, syllabi are generally offering-specific instructional documents that include details such as:

  • weekly schedules
  • assignments
  • exams
  • grading breakdowns
  • instructor-specific course policies
  • quarter-specific logistics

ECE generally uses MCDs only for undergraduate courses. Graduate courses typically use offering-specific syllabi instead. One common exception is undergraduate/graduate parallel course pairings, where a single MCD may be used to cover both courses.

Decision Rule

  • Undergraduate course proposals should generally include an updated MCD.
  • Graduate course proposals should generally include a syllabus rather than an MCD.
  • Undergraduate/graduate parallel course proposals may use a shared MCD covering both courses.
  • If submitting an MCD or syllabus for CEP review, required UW syllabus policy statements must be included.

ECE MCD Template

COE Syllabus Template

2. Justification for the Proposed Change

Provide a brief explanation describing:

  • the nature of the proposed curriculum change
  • why the change is being made
  • any curricular, pedagogical, accreditation, or programmatic rationale

The level of justification required depends on the scope of the proposed change.

3. Course Prerequisites

List any required prerequisites for your course

Please ensure the prerequisite format complies with UW Curriculum Office (UWCO) catalog style. 

UWCO Prerequisite Guidelines

4. Instructional Hours & Workload Expectations

Please estimate weekly instructional hours (lecture, seminar, lab, etc.) and non-instructional hours (homework, projects, study time).

This information is used to ensure alignment with UW’s credit-hour policy:

1 credit ≈ 3 hours/week of total student work

Examples:

  • 4 credits ≈ approximately 12 hours/week/person total workload
  • 5 credits ≈ approximately 15 hours/week/person total workload

Typically this is about an hour of engagement time in class, followed by two hours of work outside of class. However, all three hours/week/credit can take place in class if there is no work outside of class

Credit Hour Expectations

UW and CEP review bodies evaluate whether proposed instructional hours, assignments, and course expectations appropriately justify the requested credit hours.

In general:

  • 1 lecture hour + 2 hours of outside work per week ≈ 1 credit
  • 2 recitation hours + 1 hour of outside work per week ≈ 1 credit
  • 3 laboratory hours per week ≈ 1 credit

5. Evaluation Details

Provide grading and evaluation details, including:

  • graded components
  • percentage breakdown for each component up to 100% of the grade
  • major assignments, exams, projects, labs, etc.

If evaluation details are already included in the syllabus or MCD, separate documentation is not required.

6. Overlaps & Impacted Departments

Please identify:

  • potentially overlapping or equivalent courses, including courses outside the department, college, and other UW campuses (Bothell and Tacoma)
  • affected programs or curriculum areas
  • impacted departments within UW Seattle, UW Tacoma, and UW Bothell, if applicable

This information helps determine whether additional consultation or approvals may be required. Recent proposals have been delayed approval status due to outside departments identifying content overlap that was not included in the original proposal. 

Proposal Types

New Course Proposals

New course proposals require the most extensive documentation and review.

Faculty proposing a new course should be prepared to provide complete curricular, instructional, and justification materials prior to Curriculum Committee review.

Faculty Must Provide

  • Proposed course prefix and number
  • Proposed course title
  • Proposed abbreviated title (transcript title)
  • Proposed catalog description
  • First effective quarter/year
  • Proposed credit structure
  • Instructional activities and workload expectations
  • Evaluation details
  • Learning objectives
  • Syllabus or MCD
  • Justification explaining:
    • curricular need
    • relationship to existing curriculum
    • expected student audience
    • anticipated enrollment
    • resource implications, if applicable

Formatting & Character Limit Guidance

Several fields in the UW Curriculum Management system have strict formatting and character limits.

Course Title

  • Maximum 120 characters
  • The “&” symbol should not be used in course titles

Transcript Title (Abbreviated Title)

  • Maximum 20 characters
  • Must be entered in ALL CAPS

Catalog Description

  • Maximum 450 characters
  • Self-referential language is not permitted (e.g., “this course introduces…”)
  • Catalog descriptions should focus on course content rather than instructional framing

Recommended Preparation

  • Maximum 250 characters

Evaluation Details

  • Maximum 1000 characters

Learning Objectives

  • Maximum 2000 characters
  • Learning objectives may be pulled directly from the syllabus or MCD, if provided

Prerequisites

  • Maximum 300 characters
  • Must comply with UW catalog style requirements

UWCO Guidance Resources:

Curricular Relationship Information

Faculty should identify any:

  • jointly offered courses
  • parallel courses
  • overlapping courses
  • equivalent courses
  • potentially impacted departments or programs

This includes UW Seattle, UW Tacoma, and UW Bothell, where applicable.

Common Review Concerns

Common reasons new course proposals are delayed include:

  • incomplete catalog descriptions
  • unclear curricular overlap
  • missing syllabus policy statements
  • insufficient justification
  • missing external consultation or approvals
  • transcript title issues

Additional Guidance for New Course Proposals

New courses represent a significant commitment of departmental instructional resources and are therefore closely reviewed at the department and college levels.

Two common concerns raised during review are:

  • course proliferation
  • “boutique” courses with limited instructional coverage or narrow student audiences

Faculty are encouraged to address how the proposed course fits within the broader curriculum and anticipated instructional capacity. Because new courses represent ongoing curricular and instructional commitments, reviewers carefully consider whether proposed courses fill durable curricular needs, complement existing offerings, and can be sustainably staffed over time. This review also helps address concerns regarding course proliferation and highly specialized “boutique” courses with limited long-term sustainability. 

The following approaches are often helpful when proposing a new course:

  • proposing a new course while simultaneously retiring or replacing an older course
  • demonstrating strong student interest through prior special topics offerings
  • framing the proposal as part of a broader curriculum revision or curricular modernization effort

When applicable, faculty are encouraged to explain:

  • how the proposed course fits into the broader curriculum
  • how the course differs from existing offerings
  • how the course will be staffed sustainably over time

Catalog Description Changes

Changes to catalog descriptions are reviewed closely by both CEP and UWCO because catalog language becomes part of the official university catalog.

Faculty Must Provide

  • Updated catalog description
  • Brief justification for the proposed revision
  • Updated syllabus/MCD if course content is also changing significantly

Important Notes

Catalog descriptions:

  • are limited to 450 characters
  • must comply with UWCO formatting requirements
  • should avoid self-referential language (e.g., “this course introduces…”)

Because catalog descriptions are public-facing university records, grammar, punctuation, and clarity are reviewed carefully during CEP/UWCO review.

UWCO Course Description Guidance

Prerequisite Change Proposals

Adding or Removing Prerequisites

Adding or removing prerequisites to or from a course requires review and approval by the ECE Curriculum Committee.

Because prerequisites create enrollment barriers for students and may have downstream impacts on other courses and curricular pathways, faculty should carefully consider the broader curricular effects of proposed prerequisite additions or removals.

Faculty Must Provide

  • Current prerequisites
  • Proposed prerequisites
  • Brief justification for the proposed change
  • Updated syllabus/MCD if prerequisite changes substantially affect course expectations or content

Important Notes

Prerequisite language:

  • is limited to 300 characters
  • must comply with UW Curriculum Office prerequisite standards and catalog style requirements

Examples of unsupported prerequisite language include:

  • “permission of instructor”
  • vague conceptual requirements
  • student classification restrictions (e.g., “seniors only”)
  • section-specific prerequisite language
  • prerequisites based on credit totals rather than specific courses

Graduate Course Prerequisites

Graduate courses may list prerequisites or recommended preparation even where those prerequisites are not strictly enforced during registration.

Because graduate students often enter UW with preparation from a wide range of institutions and academic backgrounds, strict prerequisite enforcement at the graduate level can create significant administrative and advising challenges, including manual verification of course equivalencies prior to registration.

As a result, ECE generally discourages strict prerequisite enforcement for graduate students except in limited circumstances where such enforcement is pedagogically necessary.

Faculty proposing prerequisite changes to graduate courses should therefore consider whether prerequisite language is intended primarily to:

  • communicate expected preparation
  • restrict undergraduate enrollment
  • function as a formal registration restriction

Academic Services can help determine the most appropriate implementation during proposal preparation.

UWCO Prerequisite Guidance

Course Title Change Proposals

Faculty Need To Provide

  • Proposed new course title
  • Proposed abbreviated title (transcript title)
  • Brief justification for the title change

Important Notes

Faculty only need to provide updated course titles or abbreviated titles if those elements are being changed as part of the proposal.

Course Title

  • Maximum 120 characters
  • The “&” symbol should not be used in course titles

Transcript Title (Abbreviated Title)

  • Maximum 20 characters
  • Must be entered in ALL CAPS
  • & Symbol is acceptable

Titles should:

  • clearly reflect course content
  • align with catalog descriptions
  • avoid unnecessarily broad or vague terminology

UWCO-Course Title Guidance

Joint and Parallel Course Proposals

Faculty proposing jointly offered or parallel undergraduate/graduate courses should clearly identify the relationship between the courses and provide any required coordination or differentiated expectations between student groups.

Faculty Must Provide

  • Identification of jointly offered and/or parallel courses
  • Explanation of the relationship between the courses
  • Updated syllabus or MCD, if applicable
  • Evaluation details for undergraduate and graduate students, where applicable

Parallel Undergraduate/Graduate Courses

For parallel undergraduate/graduate course proposals, faculty should clearly distinguish expectations for graduate students from those for undergraduate students.

Per Graduate School Policy 2.1.4 and recent CEP guidance, proposals should explicitly state that graduate students are held to a higher academic standard than undergraduate students.

Proposals should include language indicating that a graduate student completing work only at the undergraduate level would receive a grade below 2.7.

This statement may be included in:

  • evaluation details
  • grading expectations
  • proposal justification
  • syllabus/MCD language

Because CEP has recently returned proposals where this distinction was not explicitly stated, faculty are strongly encouraged to include this language proactively.

Important Notes

All affected departments must review and approve jointly offered course proposals prior to CEP/UWCO submission.

Departments may request consultation if they reasonably believe a proposal affects their curriculum or instructional area.

UWCO Parallel Course Guidance 

UWCO Jointly-Offered Course Guidance 

Distance Learning (DL) Proposals

Distance Learning (DL) designation is relatively uncommon within ECE, but proposals involving DL delivery require additional university review and documentation.

This section applies both to:

  • new DL courses
  • adding DL designation to existing courses

Faculty Must Provide

  • Delivery method
  • Pacing structure
  • Student interaction methods
  • Feedback methods
  • Online instructional hours
  • Online assessment/exam structure
  • Distance Learning syllabus, if required

Important Notes

DL proposals often require additional review materials and may require both face-to-face and DL syllabi depending on the nature of the proposal.

UWCO-Distance Learning Courses Guidance

General Guidance

Master Course Descriptions (MCDs)

For undergraduate courses, the department expects MCDs to remain current and aligned with actual course content and expectations.

Course proposals involving undergraduate coursework should generally include an updated MCD unless the proposal is limited in scope and does not affect course content.

ECE MCD Template

External Department Review

CEP and UWCO take external department consultation seriously.

Any department or program that may reasonably view itself as affected by a proposed curriculum change should generally be consulted prior to submission. This includes programs at UW Seattle, UW Tacoma, and UW Bothell, where applicable.

External consultation is especially important for proposals involving:

  • overlapping or substantially similar course content
  • jointly offered courses
  • prerequisite changes involving outside departments
  • parallel course relationships
  • new courses in rapidly evolving or interdisciplinary subject areas

In some cases, CEP or UWCO may request evidence that affected departments were consulted as part of the review process.

Recent proposals have experienced delays during review because potentially impacted departments were not consulted early in the proposal process. Faculty are therefore strongly encouraged to consult affected departments proactively whenever significant curricular overlap or downstream impact is anticipated.

Course Fees

Course fees require additional review and approval beyond the standard curriculum process.

Under UW policy, course fees are intended to support specific course-related instructional costs that are not otherwise covered through standard departmental instructional budgets.

Examples may include:

  • laboratory materials and supplies
  • consumable course materials
  • fabrication costs
  • field trips
  • specialized software or equipment costs

Course fees should not be used to offset ordinary instructional or departmental operating expenses.

Faculty Must Provide

Proposals involving course fees should include:

  • the proposed fee amount
  • a brief explanation of how the fee will be used
  • justification explaining why the fee is necessary

New course fees exceeding $50, or increases greater than 10% of an existing approved fee, require additional university-level review and approval.

Faculty considering a new or revised course fee are strongly encouraged to consult with Academic Services early in the proposal process.

For additional guidance, please see:

Common Reasons Proposals Are Returned for Revision

Common issues that delay proposals include:

  • missing syllabus policy statements
  • incomplete catalog descriptions
  • unsupported prerequisite language
  • missing impacted department consultation
  • missing graduate grading distinction language for parallel courses
  • transcript title formatting issues
  • incomplete evaluation details
  • insufficient justification language
  • Learning objectives that are not measurable

Helpful Resources

UW Curriculum Office Resources

ECE / College of Engineering Resources