Begin with a Problem, Not a Topic

Strong course descriptions open with a question, tension, or intellectual problem — not with a neutral statement of coverage. Instead of “This course examines X…” begin with a conceptual puzzle, historical contradiction, or political, moral, or aesthetic problem that remains unresolved; a question for which we do not yet have a settled answer. Above all, it should aim to capture the thrill and excitement of one’s first year of graduate school. Try to remember the most exciting and meaningful courses you took and seek to recreate that feeling.

Establish Stakes and Arc of Inquiry

Within the opening paragraph or two, clarify both what is at stake in the course and how the inquiry will unfold. Identify the misunderstandings the course challenges, the assumptions it unsettles, and why the questions it raises remain urgent. This is not about contemporary relevance for its own sake, but about enduring significance.

You may also wish to indicate the intellectual trajectory of the course: whether it proceeds historically, conceptually, or thematically; whether it follows a figure, tradition, debate, or variety of texts; and how different periods, genres, or methods will be brought into relation.

Situate the Course Intellectually

Most descriptions include some sense of where the course sits:

• In relation to major thinkers, movements, or traditions
• In relation to existing debates or bodies of theory
• In relation to historical or political contexts

This situating should feel substantive, not credentialing. Name figures and texts because they matter to the inquiry, not to signal exhaustiveness or authority.

Strong course descriptions explicitly pose open-ended, or even uncomfortable, questions that already indicate the kind of thinking the course will encourage.

Readings

It may be appropriate in some cases to list:

• A central primary text
• A representative (not exhaustive) set of authors
• A translation or edition, if relevant

Avoid full bibliographies or syllabus-style breakdowns.

Tone and Language

Course descriptions should be written in the first-person plural (“we” not “I”). The tone should be serious but accessible and exciting to educated non-specialists — confident without being declarative or dogmatic. Assume an audience of intelligent, self-motivated adults who want to think carefully and slowly.

Avoid marketing language (e.g., “dynamic,” “hands-on,” “innovative,” “empowering”) and neoliberal buzz-words (“learning objectives,” “outcomes,” “deliverables”) or any language referring to “teacher,” “professor,” or “student” (“participant” is BFI’s preferred term for the latter).

A short (one-line) epigraph might be appropriate in some cases, but block quotations or citations of any kind are not.

Seminar Format

Even when not stated explicitly, descriptions should imply that this is a seminar — discussion-centered, text-driven, dependent on sustained participation. You do not need to describe your pedagogical approach in detail, but the description should make clear that this is not a lecture series or a survey course.

End by Opening, Not Closing

Strong descriptions often end by returning to the opening problem in a new light, posing a final, unresolved question, inviting reflection on what it means to read or think about this material now. The ending should feel like an invitation, not a summary.