In 2022, Camosun reaffirmed academia’s commitment to exclusionism by moving the 100-percent-tuition-refund course-drop deadline backwards three weeks. Historically, the deadline was after classes began so students could, without financial penalty, drop a course after attending a few lectures. But the requirement to lock in course enrolment (and tuition) before classes start is problematic.
Because of this timeline, students are unable to see a current course syllabus, assess teaching styles, meet their peers, or verify the course workload before committing hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. Students no longer get to determine—in person and for themselves—if a class is a good fit without losing at least a percentage of their tuition and student fees.
The college emphasizes the importance of course selection to ensure students stay on their program track and to show that students have choices in their education. Camosun has a wide breadth of courses, but it’s intentionally missing the point: students consider much more than timetables and requirements when selecting courses. Workload, group work, and the cost of assigned readings are just some examples that are important to students. These variables (and their consequences) are often amplified for students new to the country, those with neurodivergences or disabilities, or those with other responsibilities.
As both a life-long student and a previous post-secondary administrator, I see the pros and cons of this policy from both the institution and student perspectives. The fact that this policy has remained in place for four years tells me that it’s likely here to stay. So, what can be done to address the burden it places on students?
Instructors could prepare their course outlines as soon as teaching assignments are finalized. Links to outlines should be placed in MyCamosun’s registration course catalogue. Course syllabi need to be available before the tuition-drop deadline to ensure students know what to expect if they take the course that term, with that instructor. Currently, students can only use an incomplete syllabi archive for this purpose. Personally, I’ve found more information helpful to my course selections on ratemyprofessors than in the college’s syllabus archive.
Students who meet predetermined criteria (for example, being registered at the Centre for Accessible Learning (CAL) or new international students) should be allowed to appeal for a full refund within the first two weeks of classes. Should a marginalized student be forced to stay in a learning environment where they feel unsafe? If a student with disabilities did everything to ensure their success only to find it won’t work after all, should they be penalized financially? Exceptions must be allowed for.
Students should be told—loudly, clearly, and frequently—that they can reach out to professors about courses they are interested in. Academic advisers know about policy and program requirements, but most are not experts on the nuanced needs of individual marginalized students. CAL advisers can put supports in place, but they are not always available as needed. Most instructors are very open to discussing their upcoming classes with prospective students, and students can make their own assumptions if professors aren’t receptive when asked.
These suggestions make more work for professors and administrators, but addressing student needs and injustices within policy is part of the job. This policy furthers systemic marginalization—tell Camosun’s Board of Governors or Education Council how you feel.
Increased class enrolments, successful course completion rates, and the sustainability of the college’s finances through increased tuition income are all factors to be considered when developing college policy. Another important, and often under-considered, factor is accessibility.
This policy continues to perpetuate academic elitism through exclusion.