The purpose of the extra credit assignments is to keep you challenged if you find the regular assignments too easy, or if you want to learn the material at a deeper level than normally covered in class. Therefore, I discourage you from doing extra credit assignments if you have difficulty completing the regular homework. In the latter case, you need to see the instructor for help; otherwise, you will most likely receive low grades for quizzes and tests. In other words, you may do extra credit assignments if you are doing well on regular ones (and possibly finding them too easy), but you should not try doing extra credit problems just to get extra points, and especially so if you are struggling with the regular assignments.

Your solutions of the extra credit problems must be  writtten in detail and neatly. I will not grade solutions which are either presented sloppily or are missing a substantial amount of detail.

In order to have your extra credit assignment graded,  (i)  you must also turn in the non-WebAssign part of your regular homework for the same section, and  (ii)  this entire regular homework (i.e., its WebAssign and non-WebAssign parts combined) must be more than 80% correct. I will not grade the non-WebAssign part of the submitted regular homework, but only mark mistakes that you have made (if any).  The hand-written part that you will hand in must be written neatly and stapled. Again: I will not accept a sloppily prepared extra credit work.

As with the regular homework, you are encouraged to seek help of the instructor with this additional homework. However, since this brings you extra credit, I will only give you a hint, but will not guide you through the entire solution, as I normally would do with a regular homework problem.

When doing an extra credit assignment, you may also work together with a classmate (but see a Clarification two paragraphs below this one). Keep in mind, however, that this will be beneficial to you only if you understand the solution and, most importantly, are able to repeat it on your own. I will check, at my discretion, whether you can do so, by asking you to repeat the solution and explain its steps to me. If you are unable to clearly do so, this will be considered academic cheating. As such, it will be reported to the UVM Center for Student Conduct. In addition, the first instance of it will result in an appropriate (at my sole discretion) reduction of your final course grade by between 5% and 7%. I.e., instead of receiving, for example, 0.4% added to your final numeric grade, you will have between 5 and 7% subtracted from it.  For the second instance, I will recommend to the Center for Student Conduct to give the student an XF for the course. No exceptions will be made from this policy. 

Since Generative AI can produce detailed, step-by-step solutions to any of the assigned problems, you should expect that, as a rule, I will be summonning everyone submitting an extra credit assignment for the first several (about five) submissions, i.e., until I know you well enough, to check whether you can explain the solution to me on your own. Of course, I can, at my sole discretion, continue doing so on any later submissions as well. Failure to explain the solution to my satisfaction will entail the consequences described in the previous paragraph.

Clarification on how I will handle collaborative extra-credit work
If you work with your classmate(s) as a group, you should just submit one solution and put all your names on it. (Each group member must still submit their regular homework, as described above.) Then I will divide the extra credit points by the number of people in the group and multiply the result by 1.5. This will still add bonus points to your final grade, of course; just fewer of them than if you had done the work all by yourself. If you have collaborated only on a subset of extra credit problems, the above "division rule" will apply only to those problems which you will indicate on the front page.
Example: John and Mary did one extra credit problem (A) together and, in addition, John did one problem (B) by himself and Mary did two (B and C) by herself. Then:
 - They each submit their separate regular assignments. John also includes the bonus problem B with his, and Mary includes bonus problems B and C, with her regular assignment.
 - One of them (say, John) submits problem A and indicates that he and Mary have worked on it together. Mary should then not submit problem A.
 - Suppose each problem is worth 1 point. Then John gets  0.5*1.5+1=1.75,  and Mary,  0.5*1.5+2=2.75,  bonus points.
- Note again that both John and Mary must be able to separately explain the solution of problem A to me; failure to do so will entail the consequences stated above in red to both John and Mary.

If several students submit essentially the same solutions that have merely cosmetic differences (at my discretion) and fail to acknowledge collaboration, then for the first time, I will subtract the whole weight of the problem in question (instead of adding part of it) to their scores. This will be done for each bonus problem that they have collaborated on but failed to acknowledge the collaboration.  Please note: Each person in the group is still responsible for being able to clearly explain to me the solution. Failure to do so by even one student in the collaborating group will entail - for everyone in the collaborating group - the consequences described three paragraphs above.
If a submission of merely cosmetically different works occurs for the second time, I will not give extra credit but will, instead, treat this as the 1st instance of academic cheating (see above) for each member of the collaborating group. (I.e., in this case I will not even go to the lengths of checking if any student understood the submitted solutions.) A repeated submission of merely cosmetically different works will be treated as a 2nd instance of academic cheating (see above).

If you are unsure about any of these rules, ask me before submitting your work.