THIS SURVEY WAS conducted during Spring 2020. All of the syllabi evaluated were found using publicly available search engine tools or university websites. In total, 71 syllabi were evaluated from 62 different institutions, ranging from small, private liberal arts universities to large, public institutions. Our analysis looked at two components in each syllabus: first, student learning outcomes provided by the instructor; and, second, assessments. “Student learning outcomes” were established by looking for syllabus sections with a similar heading, which also included “Student Learning Goals,” “Course Objectives,” “Learning Objectives,” and others. Our survey intentionally excluded learning outcomes that were discernibly not created by the instructor, such as institutionally mandated learning objectives. Unique student learning outcomes were established by looking for orthographic divisions and breaks in the syllabus, such as bullet points, periods, and semicolons. This survey did not divide student learning objectives that included a discrete list of items that might be considered individual objectives. For example, “Identify and examine distinguishing characteristics, including ideas, values, images, cultural artifacts, economic structures, technological or scientific developments, and/ or attitudes of people in a society or culture outside the United States,” is counted as one student learning outcome. “Assessments” were established by looking for syllabus sections that identified graded components in a course, as well as any subsequent explanation of those graded components. In total, these syllabi included 364 unique student learning outcomes and 531 unique assessments. Students learning outcomes were open-coded based on the Core Competencies and Learning Outcomes from American Historical Association's 2016 Tuning Project, and included up to six different codes. Assessments were open-coded according to the categories below, and included up to five different codes.

This appendix includes only summative data from our analysis, but a comprehensive investigation of this study, including a faculty survey, will be included in a forthcoming manuscript. Raw data for this survey is available upon request from the authors. Any researcher, scholar, or other interested party who would like to use this data may do so with appropriate credit given to the authors.