What is a course syllabus?
A course syllabus is the document that describes one course: what it teaches, what students can do after it, how it is taught week by week, how it is assessed and what materials it uses.
The usual sections are course information (code, credits, contact hours, prerequisites), a short description, course learning outcomes (CLOs), a weekly teaching plan, teaching and learning methods, assessment and weights, learning materials, and course rules. The exact template, section names and order are set by each institution, so follow your own.
What decides the quality of a syllabus is how three layers line up: CLOs say what students can do, the weekly plan says what is taught to reach which CLO, and the assessment says which CLO is measured and how. If a CLO has no teaching week or no assessment, the syllabus has a gap.
Writing in Word, using ChatGPT, and using EduFlow
| Criterion | By hand in Word | ChatGPT or a general tool | EduFlow |
|---|---|---|---|
| Syllabus template | You follow your institution template and fill each section. | You paste your template into the prompt and check that every section is present. | Not yet: the course syllabus screen is on the roadmap. The app does not build a syllabus template today. |
| Writing CLOs | You pick measurable verbs and check the level yourself. | You ask for CLO suggestions and check the verbs and the Bloom level yourself. | Not yet: a CLO gate by Bloom level is on the roadmap. Today you check this yourself. |
| Weekly plan tied to CLOs | You build the table and cross-check CLOs against each week. | You ask for a table and cross-check the weeks against the CLOs. | Not yet: the weekly plan and CLO tracing are on the roadmap. |
| Reusing existing lectures | You open the lectures and copy points into the syllabus. | You paste lecture passages into the conversation. | Yes, at the level of adding documents: add PDF, Word or PowerPoint files to a course project (up to 80 MB and 300 pages per file); the app reads them on your machine and lets you search passages. It does not build CLOs or a syllabus from them yet. |
| Asking questions about course materials | You search the files yourself. | You paste the relevant passages and ask. | Yes, in a course project: the assistant picks matching passages on your machine, shows them as chips you can remove before sending, and an answer carries a Source chip that opens the exact passage. |
| Approval and sign-off | Through your faculty and university process. | You record the approval outside the tool. | Not yet: approval through a signed package is on the roadmap. At school level, Approve is the last step. |
Table checked on 15 Oct 2026.
Writing CLOs by Bloom level
A good CLO starts with a measurable verb at the cognitive level the course aims for. The revised Bloom scale orders cognitive levels from low to high, each with typical verbs.
- Remember and understand: state, list, describe, explain. Fits the foundational knowledge of the course.
- Apply and analyse: apply, calculate, compare, analyse. Fits problem solving and handling cases.
- Evaluate and create: evaluate, design, build, propose. Fits products, projects and capstone work.
- Verbs to avoid: know, master, understand well: they cannot be measured directly, so they cannot be matched to an assessment.
The weekly plan and the CLO to assessment matrix
Each week should state its learning outcome, content, teaching and learning activities, and the CLOs the week helps achieve. The weeks run without gaps, and the total hours match the course load.
- CLO to assessment matrix: A table with CLOs as rows and assessment components as columns (attendance, midterm, project, final); each cell says which component measures which CLO. Every CLO needs at least one marked cell.
- Tracing both ways: From a CLO you can find its teaching weeks and assessments; from an assessment you can find its CLOs. Two-way tracing is the easiest way to show a reviewer the syllabus has no gaps.
Where EduFlow stands on the course level
EduFlow has three levels, school (K-12), course and programme, but the first release has drafting tools only for the school level (tests, lesson plans, slides). At course level the app lets you create a course project, add documents and ask the assistant; a course project has no drafting screen, and the first-run introduction states that course and programme features are still being developed.
- Direction: On the roadmap, course tools are meant to include CLOs checked by Bloom level, a weekly plan tied to CLOs, session plans, assessments, a ten-section syllabus with a source for each paragraph, and approval through a signed package. This describes a direction, not an available feature, and it has no release date.
- Available today: Document adding and the assistant already work in a course project; see the guide on adding documents. Add documents for the assistant.
Writing a syllabus with EduFlow: what exists today and what is roadmap
The first two steps work in the current app. The four after them are on the roadmap; they are listed so you can see the direction, and they have no guide.
- Available today: create a course project and add lectures. Create a project at course level, open Project details, press the add documents button and choose a textbook, an old syllabus or lectures. The app reads them on your machine and does not send the original files. Add documents for the assistant
- Available today: ask the assistant about the course materials. Ask the assistant inside the course project, for example what a given week of the textbook covers. The assistant only suggests; it does not draft a syllabus and does not approve for you. Use the AI assistant
- Roadmap, not available: AI proposes CLOs, checked by Bloom level. The plan is for AI to propose a set of CLOs from your materials, with a gate (G3) catching verbs that do not match the Bloom level. Not in the app yet.
- Roadmap, not available: a weekly plan tied to CLOs. The plan is for each week to carry a learning outcome, a Bloom level and linked CLOs, with the weeks running without gaps. Not in the app yet.
- Roadmap, not available: a ten-section syllabus with sources. The plan is to build a ten-section syllabus in a standard template, each paragraph with its source, and a section turns approved only when the lecturer marks it passed. Not in the app yet.
- Roadmap, not available: gates and approval through a signed package. The plan is twelve gates, G1 to G12, and a package sent to the head of department for approval. Not in the app yet.
What EduFlow does not do yet
- All drafting tools for courses: CLOs, weekly plans, 90 or 150 minute session plans, assessments and the ten-section syllabus. Not available, on the roadmap, with no release date. The first release focuses on the school level.
- The twelve course quality gates, G1 to G12, and approval through a signed package: not available. Quality gates that really run exist only at school level (tests, lesson plans, slides).
- Building CLOs or a syllabus from added lectures: not available. A course project only adds documents, searches passages and asks the assistant.
- Reading text from scanned pages or photos: not yet. The app only prepares page images on your machine; Word, PDF and PowerPoint files with a text layer are read.
- Deciding the syllabus content: EduFlow does not do this. Anything AI writes, when it exists, is only a proposal for the lecturer to edit and approve.
Related topics
- Part ofAI for lecturers
- AI test generatorSet a four-level matrix, let AI write the items, run quality gates, approve, then export the test and answer key.
- Shuffle test versionsReorder items and options into several versions, each with its own correct key, exported to Word or PDF.
- AI lesson plan generatorAI drafts a lesson plan in the Official Letter 5512 structure with four activities; you approve, then export Word or PDF.
- AI slide generatorAI writes a 16:9 deck with quizzes in the lesson; you preview, check the gates, approve, then export PDF or PPTX.
- EduFlow vs ChatGPTWhen ChatGPT is enough for tests and lesson plans, and when you need a blueprint, gates, test versions and a reviewer.