Will they, won’t they? (enrol in their requisites)

W
IllustratIon By: Manpreet Bharj

We asked upper year students at Osgoode to describe their course enrollment experience this year. This is what they had to say:

  • *clears throat* “… so….”
  • “Limited. Constrained. Conflicting. Minimal. Disorganised.”
  • “Painstakingly annoying.”
  • “I’m still traumatised by it!” 
  • “Almost as stressful as figuring out first year.”
  • “Things need to be changed.”

Course enrollment for the 2024-25 academic session has been a less-than-successful experience for many upper year students at Osgoode. What began as a lottery system to sort students into their desired courses (as it does every year), quickly spiralled into a frustrating future anecdote with many students left wondering if they would even graduate on time. 

According to students, the process was “needlessly stressful” right from the beginning. There were a “million different documents and a million different portals and links” with each hosting a separate piece of the puzzle. In fact, Ibrahim, a 3L student, described the experience as a “giant puzzle game” which was onerous and tedious. Students can only enrol in two seminars per semester. They cannot participate in multiple clinical intensives. They must complete an Indigenous course requirement (which, despite being mandatory, can only be accessed through the lottery system). They must also complete their “upper year research and writing requirement” every year in their 2L and 3L years. While the summer enrolment guide is emailed, the course timetables are hosted on an online website, and the actual registration happens through another system altogether. The course codes in the enrolment guide differ from the course codes on the online timetables when only one of these was required to enrol. Angela, another 3L student, compared the experience to the Logic Games section on the LSAT, and rightfully so. As law students that work on complex cases with real-life implications, spending hours to create a schedule that satisfied these requirements seemed like a dreadful use of time when a simpler system would not be difficult to create. 

As students planned their tentative schedules to participate in the lottery run, they were disappointed at the course offerings. While there were at least 10 tax-related courses, there was only 1 immigration law course and only 1 entertainment and sports law (combined) course. Future criminal lawyers noted a unique predicament of a lack of 4-credit criminal law courses which meant they had to enrol in courses they were not particularly interested in to meet their requisite credits. Yandy, a current 3L, is now enrolled in privacy law simply because there weren’t any 4-credit criminal law options that worked alongside all the requirements. Another student lamented the lack of variety in the fall courses which meant they have an extremely heavy (albeit interesting) winter course line up but must first drudge their way through the fall. Angela further noted how courses like Financial Literacy for Lawyers and Mental Health, Wellness and the Legal Profession were excellent additions to the course list but there were not enough seats in these classes to accommodate student interest. The severe drought of 1 and 2-credit courses further meant that students were forced to enrol in a heavier course load than necessary. 

While some students appreciate the lottery system, others are not its biggest fans. The system was especially unfavourable to a 3L student this year who was allotted space on only 2 courses for the Fall semester. This resulted in them being placed on academic probation by OSAP for no fault of their own. It took them about a month to hear back from the university’s financial aid office and even then the assistance was insufficient. The student is yet to receive their OSAP funding and is unsure if they will be able to pay their tuition on time. 

Then there were the waitlists. Multiple students, including Ibrahim and Angela, expressed discontent with the 9:00 am updates to the waitlists that required students to religiously check the portal daily for changes in their position. If they made it to the top of the waitlist, the students then had 24 hours to enrol themselves in the course. Due to the lack of a “live” system that updates in real time and automatically enrolled students in a course once they top the waitlist, a 3L student lost their spot on 3 courses. On the flipside, some students that were never even on the waitlist for Advanced Torts were accidentally added to the course list. They were then removed from the course. A tangential and involuntary misadventure. 

Then there were the waitlists that magically disappeared. One moment you were on the list, and the next the list ceased to exist because the course was not being offered anymore, or the professor wanted the waitlist eliminated. Students were only informed of these changes after the change had been implemented. As if this wasn’t enough, there were multiple revisions to the course timetable that continued into the semester. As a result, folks had to grudgingly return to the drawing board and repeatedly prepare updated schedules. The catch? The lottery system had ended, and most courses were at capacity. For many such students, the only option was to put themselves on another waitlist and live in constant fear of another announcement that might transform their flawless 2-day work week to a four-day commuter nightmare.

At the risk of being accused of treachery, we would like to report that many students that completed their previous degrees at other universities found themselves longing for the cohesive, detailed, and one-stop-shop nature of enrolment systems utilised by their alma mater. York University itself has a Visual Schedule Builder which plots a tentative timetable for students and allows them to visualise overlaps. As Osgoode students we have access to this resource, but many of us are not aware of it. 

While there were some students who had a favourable outcome, most students that spoke to Obiter had an incredibly stressful time. Many students expressed a strong interest in their tuition money being invested in better software, i.e. a single website which allows students to access timetables, course details, course codes, restrictions, and design a tentative schedule. Ideally, it should also tell them what mandatory requirements they are yet to complete before they can graduate. Waitlists should not vanish into thin air. Course lists should be finalised well in advance of the add/drop period with minimal changes under extenuating circumstances. Class sizes for classes with especially high interest must be expanded. For a process that takes place every year and informs the type of law a person will be able to practise, it should not be this taxing (or at all). 

Current 1L students form a class size that is greater than Osgoode’s incoming classes in recent years. The problems outlined in this article will likely be exacerbated with increased student numbers if left unaddressed. The school has some of the finest faculty and administration staff that works tirelessly to ensure a successful law school experience for its students. Experiences such as these dampen the experience unnecessarily.

Finally, to upper years hoping to try their luck again come January, and current 1Ls: good luck!

About the author

Shreya Vohra
By Shreya Vohra

Monthly Web Archives