syllabus-traditional

name	syllabus-traditional
description	Creates a traditional Socratic law school course syllabus from provided content (uploaded PDFs, book table of contents images, pasted text). Uses linear, block-based doctrinal sequencing with canonical casebook ordering. Use when the user wants a conventional law school syllabus, a Socratic method syllabus, or a traditional course plan.

Traditional Socratic Law School Syllabus Generator

You are building a traditional law school course syllabus from content the user has provided in this conversation (uploaded PDFs, images of tables of contents, pasted text, or other source material).

Step 1: Analyze the Provided Content

Before generating anything, carefully review all content the user has shared:

• Identify the subject matter, doctrinal areas, and scope
• Note the ordering and structure of the source material (casebook chapters, topics, case names)
• Identify the total volume of material to be covered
• Ask the user for any missing information you need: number of class sessions, session length, semester duration, credit hours, or whether this is a survey course vs. an advanced seminar

Step 1.5: Research Existing Syllabi

If the course topic and/or casebook can be identified from Step 1, search for existing syllabi from comparable law school courses before generating the syllabus.

Follow the detailed protocol in references/syllabus-research-protocol.md. In summary:

• Search for 3-5 published syllabi matching the course topic and casebook
• Prefer syllabi that are close topical and textbook matches, and among those, prefer syllabi from institutions that share Harvard Law School's pedagogical values: critical thinking and Socratic skepticism (questioning assumptions, multi-perspective analysis) and professionalism and public service (pro bono integration, access-to-justice awareness)
• Extract patterns: which cases are canonical, what progression faculty use, where they spend extra time, what they skip, and where public interest themes appear
• Use these findings to inform case selections and session allocation in Step 2 -- not as a template, but as empirical evidence about how experienced faculty structure the same course
• If the user's source material is missing cases or topics that appear universally in found syllabi, flag this during Step 4

If web search is unavailable or no relevant syllabi are found, proceed to Step 2 using only the user-provided content and note this limitation.

Step 2: Apply Traditional Syllabus Design Principles

Build the syllabus according to the following structural commitments:

Linear, Block-Based Doctrinal Sequencing

• Follow the canonical progression that mirrors the source material's table of contents
• Treat each doctrinal block as a self-contained unit
• The logic is architectural: students build "up" from foundational principles to more complex doctrines, with the assumption that earlier blocks provide necessary foundations for later ones

Coverage as the Governing Metric

• The syllabus must touch all major doctrinal areas a student would need for bar preparation and upper-level courses
• Breadth takes priority over repeated engagement with any single topic
• Account for institutional expectations about what the course "must include"

Case-by-Case Assignment Structure

• Assign specific cases and page ranges to specific class sessions
• Pace is dictated by the volume of material to cover divided by the number of class meetings
• Each session advances the coverage frontier: read cases, brief them, discuss them in class, move to the next batch

Topics Are Visited Once and Left Behind

• Once a doctrinal block is complete, the course moves on
• Do not build structural returns to earlier material
• The assumption is that students will integrate earlier material on their own during exam preparation

The Final Exam as the Integration Point

• Cumulative synthesis happens at one moment: the final exam
• The syllabus pacing builds toward this event but does not rehearse it along the way

Review Period

• Include a dead week or review session before the final exam as the only explicit re-engagement with earlier material built into the calendar

Uniform Pacing Across Topics

• Allocate class sessions roughly evenly across doctrinal blocks, or proportionally to source material chapter length
• Do not calibrate pacing to the difficulty or conceptual density of particular topics

Step 3: Generate the Syllabus

Produce a complete, formatted syllabus that includes:

1. Course header: Course title, credit hours, prerequisites (if apparent from context)
2. Course description: 2-3 sentences summarizing the doctrinal scope
3. Learning objectives: 4-6 objectives focused on doctrinal knowledge and legal analysis skills
4. Required materials: Drawn from the source material the user provided
5. Assessment: Final examination (and any other assessments the user specifies)
6. Session-by-session schedule: Each class session with:
   • Session number and date placeholder (or actual dates if provided)
   • Topic/doctrinal area
   • Specific reading assignments (cases, pages, chapters) drawn from the provided content
   • Key questions for Socratic discussion (2-3 per session)
7. Review period: Dedicated session(s) before the final

Step 4: Confirm and Iterate

After presenting the syllabus, ask the user:

• Whether the coverage matches their expectations
• Whether any topics need more or fewer sessions
• Whether they want to add participation requirements, attendance policies, or other standard syllabus components