Section 4 - Course Proposals

Nonsubstantive proposals include:

• Changes in course title or description that do not alter the nature of the course

• The following changes that affect only the submitting department:

  • prerequisite or co-requisite changes

  • registration restriction changes

  • adding/removing cohort from a course

• Changes in prerequisite(s) or corequisite(s) affecting another department that include a letter showing support without objection from affected department chair/director. Proposals without such a letter are substantive changes.

• Course number changes for sequencing purposes that do not change the level of the course between upper division, lower division, and graduate level. 

Nonsubstantive proposals must follow the approval process and receive final approval from the Chair or Vice-Chair of the University Curriculum Committee or registrar's designee for curriculum as defined below.

4.1.1 Approval Process for Non-substantive Course Proposals

Authority for approval of general nonsubstantive course proposals is delegated by the University Curriculum Committee to the Registrar’s designee for curriculum administration.

The Registrar’s designee is responsible for reviewing and approving non-substantive proposals that do not require curricular or faculty judgment as defined below.

The UCC Chair and Vice-Chair retain authority to review and approve any general nonsubstantive proposal and serve as the final authority in cases of escalation or ambiguity.

4.1.1.1 Escalation to UCC Leadership

The Registrar’s designee should escalate a proposal to the UCC Chair or Vice-Chair when the proposed change requires curricular judgment or introduces ambiguity regarding the nature of the course.

Escalation is appropriate when a proposed change:

• Creates potential overlap or conflict with courses or programs offered by other departments
• Involves title or description changes beyond editorial or clarifying revisions, or
• Otherwise creates reasonable uncertainty as to whether the course remains materially the same.

4.1.1.2 Examples of Non-substantive Changes

Examples of non-substantive changes that may be approved by the Registrar’s designee include, but are not limited to:

• editorial or clarifying updates to course titles and descriptions (as defined above),
• changes to the semester or term typically offered,
• course number changes that do not alter the course level (e.g., lower-division, upper-division, or graduate),
• prerequisite or corequisite changes that comply with existing departmental approval requirements,
• updates to registration restrictions, catalog data, or other administrative course attributes.

This list is illustrative and not exhaustive. Determinations should be guided by the escalation criteria above.

• Step 1: Originator

• Step 2: Department Chair (or Program Director if applicable)

• Step 3: Dean of College

• Step 4: University Curriculum Chair

• Step 5: SIS Implementation

• Step 6: CatTracks Implementation

• Step 7: Catalog Implementation

Substantive course proposals include new courses, courses requesting study abroad status, deletion of courses, changes in credit hours, or changes in course title or description that significantly alter the nature of the course, and prerequisite changes that affect other departments or significantly change the course. Course number changes from a lower division number to an upper division number or vice versa are considered substantive. Splitting a course with a specific designation (e.g., SUS, CEL) requires that both courses be resubmitted for approval.

Substantive course proposals that affect a program’s total credit hours will also require submission of a Substantive Program Proposal.

Proposals for cross-listed courses are required from all departments that intend to offer the course. The course title and number must be identical. The prefix will reflect each department.

Do not submit a course deletion form unless the department does not intend to offer the course at all. A course deletion should not be submitted if the course is simply being removed from a program but may still be offered as an elective. To re-establish a course that has been processed as deleted will require a new course proposal form.

Proposals for variable title courses: See CPPM Section 9

All substantive course proposals are to be submitted through Curriculog. To be reviewed at an upcoming meeting, proposals must reach the University Curriculum Committee step in Curriculog at least one week in advance of the meeting date. Deadline dates are located at the Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee web page. For inclusion in the upcoming year’s catalog, proposals must be passed by UCC no later than their January meeting and passed by Faculty Senate no later than their February meeting.

For effective dates for proposal changes, see PPM 4-2a.

• Step 1: Originator

• Step 2: Department Chair (or Program Director if applicable)

• Step 3: College Curriculum Committee

• Step 4: Dean of College

  1. Notification goes to Bibliographer

  2. Courses with a teaching designation then also need to be approved by the University Council in Teacher Education

  3. Graduate courses then need to be approved by Graduate Council

  4. Courses seeking a general education designation then need to be approved by GEIAC

• Step 5: University Curriculum Committee

• Step 6: Faculty Senate Executive Committee

• Step 7: Faculty Senate

  1. Bibliographer - if additional library support is needed

  2. President’s Council - if program name change

  3. Board of Trustees - if program name change

• Step 8: SIS Implementation

• Step 9: CatTracks Implementation

• Step 10: Catalog Implementation

4.10.1 Course Suspension 

Course suspension is defined as the temporary removal of a course from the active curriculum with the expectation that the course may be offered again in the future. Suspension is typically appropriate in situations such as low enrollment, temporary resource constraints, or other conditions that do not warrant permanent removal. When a course is suspended, it is removed from the academic catalog and is not scheduled for offering; however, it remains in the institution’s curriculum inventory in an inactive status. Suspension is not automatic and must be formally initiated by the department and approved through established curricular processes. A course may remain in suspension for a maximum period of three years. If the course is not reactivated within this timeframe, it will be automatically discontinued.

Courses may be suspended even if they are included in academic programs. In such cases, the department proposing the suspension is required to obtain written acknowledgment from any affected departments or programs. This acknowledgment confirms awareness of the change and affirms that those units will address any necessary adjustments to their curricula or degree requirements.

4.10.2 Course Discontinuance  

Course discontinuance is defined as the permanent removal of a course from the curriculum. Once discontinued, a course is removed from the academic catalog, is no longer eligible to be scheduled or offered, and is considered permanently inactive. Discontinuance may occur either through formal proposal and approval or automatically as the result of a course remaining in suspended status beyond the three-year limit.

A discontinued course may not be reinstated through a reactivation process. Instead, any future offering of the course requires submission and approval of a new course proposal through standard curricular procedures. As with suspension, departments are responsible for addressing any programmatic impacts associated with discontinuance. In practice, the distinction between suspension and discontinuance is defined by intent and permanence. Suspension reflects a temporary pause with the expectation of future reactivation within a defined timeframe, whereas discontinuance represents a permanent removal that requires full reapproval if the course is to be offered again. 

The process for discontinuing or suspending a university course is designed to ensure academic coherence while protecting the interests of students. It typically begins with a formal justification from the department, citing reasons such as declining enrollment, outdated content, or faculty realignment. This proposal must include an Impact Report to identify how the removal affects any other program’s degree requirements and any cross-departmental dependencies. These proposals can be approved under a non-substantive process provided that there are letters of acknowledgement from all of the affected programs. Without such letters, they must be approved by the body of the UCC.