Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

Saying No

September 14, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

If there's one thing I don't like about the first week of classes, it's the task of saying "no" over and over again.

Like many community colleges, mine has far more students than we have slots available in most of our classes. It's a very rare course where I am able to accept everyone who shows up the first day trying to "crash" a class. More often, as with the three classes I met on my first morning of teaching this semester, I have wait lists of one- or two-dozen for classes that typically  have a maximum of 40. I generally do lotteries for available seats, and ask all those not selected to leave.

I'd like to enroll everyone, of course, and be the "nice guy." But if I did that, I'd be left with a classroom too tightly packed for anyone to move, and in serious violation of city and state fire and safety codes. I'd also be overwhelmed with papers and tests and journals, and my grading load -- with seven courses a semester and no teaching assistants -- is already immense. So for reasons of both safety and sanity, I have had to get very good over the years at saying "no."

Students beg and plead and, invariably, explain why it is that without this particular class, their entire academic career will be ruined permanently and the dreams of their parents dashed. Some students get teary with frustration at the depressing process of huddling in doorways and squatting on floors and ingratiating themselves to be admitted to over-crowded classrooms. A few try flirtation or flattery; on one or two occasions long ago, various bribes were rather openly proffered -- and politely refused.

College administrators have told me, on more than one occasion, that professors are not to use any method other than random lotteries to choose students for available spaces.  Apparently, the concern is that if students are asked to write an essay, or demonstrate a high degree of need for the class, then professors open themselves up to charges of bias or favoritism. After all, we are not truly in a position to judge the actual needs of our students. It is axiomatic that each semester, I will hear, over and over again, “Professor, yours is the last class I need to transfer. If I don’t get in, I’ll be set back an entire semester.” Is it possible, even likely, that many of these students are telling the truth? Of course. Is it equally likely that some students are exaggerating? Yes. Is it part of my job to evaluate the veracity of their claims and the urgency of their need? I don’t think so.

I find that saying "no" to a student who wants to get into a class is much harder than saying "no" to a student who has asked me to rethink a deservedly poor grade. When I've assigned a low grade to sub-par work, I generally feel quite confident in my assessment of the student's product. But the way in which students get into classes seems so arbitrary (and unfair, as returning students get priority) that I have a hard time defending the system that leads to the composition of any particular class.  And yet, any system where I am called upon to make judgments about a student’s suitability for a particular course seems an even worse prospect.

It's no fun for the students to put themselves through this. I honor them for doing it. The smart ones continue to call and visit every day, hoping that some enrolled student has dropped and a space has been freed up. Often, but not always, I am able to accommodate them once students start to drop after the first week, but I won't do so if it means a dozen bodies on the floor and students barely able to breathe. (I tend to pace around while I teach, rather than cling to a podium; I need a bit of walking space!) I’m also aware that the college can get cited for safety code violations by the fire department if we overcrowd the classroom.

Two true lottery stories: One year, I had about two dozen names on a list for my women's studies course in which five spaces were available. There were perhaps 17 women and 7 men trying to get into the class; by strange chance, all five of the slips of paper I drew had men's names. It was completely random, but as one of those women who wasn't selected left, she muttered in disappointment, "God, even in a women's studies class I'm fucked over by men." Lots of people heard her, and it set an awkward tone for the remainder of the morning.

Another year, I had three spaces available on a lottery list for a modern Europe class; one of the women on the list (of some 15 hopefuls) was a very pretty, bubbly scantily-dressed blonde. Her name was the first name that appeared -- at random -- when I pulled slips of paper out of a manila envelope. After the class, two students who weren't selected publicly accused me of rigging the lottery to pick the "hot girl," and they complained to the dean. (Who laughed them out of her office; incidentally, the "hot girl" ended up one of the top students in that particular section.)

There’s little prospect of this over-crowding changing any time soon. Community colleges, at least here in California, have an open-admissions policy. The fact that a student has been admitted to the college does not guarantee a space in a single class. Invariably, that means that more students are enrolled in the college than we have classroom (or parking) space available. Students report that in many cases, their academic careers are extended by one or two years because they are unable to get into all the classes they need in a timely fashion. The obvious answer is that we need more professors, more courses, and more buildings in which to do our teaching. But until, by some budget miracle, all of those resources are available, I will continue to have to say “no” to the hopeful, the ambitious, and the deserving.

I'm not asking for pity, mind you; saying "no" and dealing with the justifiably frustrated and disappointed is part of the job description. But it's pretty damn near my least favorite part of what I do.

Hugo B. Schwyzer teaches history and gender studies at Pasadena City College. He teaches and blogs about such issues as the interplay of faith and sexuality, American history, and masculinity.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Saying No

  • Problem solved
  • Posted by JMG on September 14, 2005 at 1:38pm EDT
  • This is a self-inflicted problem that is easily solved.

    1) Registration is a web-based auction, where we auction seats in classes. The reserve price is the standard tuition amount (which can be adjusted downward for those classes historically hard to fill -- the 7:45 a.m. labs, Friday afternoon classes, etc.)

    2) Would-be students complete a web-based schedule form and enter the maximum amount they are willing to spend to attend each course that they choose (they can bid different amounts for different sections, instructors, time of day, day of week etc.)

    Students are free to bid LESS THAN the reserve price as well, so that if the class doesn't fill at the reserve, it is then filled with those who bid less.

    3) When the registration period closes, classes fill from among those who wish to attend the class as a main choice and who bid the reserve or more. If the class doesn't fill immediately, then it fills with those who bid less than the reserve.

    Once a student wins a seat in a class that they want more (evidenced by higher bid) they are dropped from auctions for the same class (at a different time) or conflicting courses (held at same time).

    4) But when classes are oversubscribed (there are more people who chose the class as a main selection) then all those who chose the course are ranked by the amount that they are willing to spend to attend that class, at that time, that term. The class fills from top to bottom, and each student pays only what they said the class was worth to them.

    5) Financial aid and scholarship students are accomodated easily by giving them ranking boosts (adjustments):

    a) scholarship students -- the school tailors the scholarship offer to their desirability (just as now) ... only instead of a fixed cash value, the student is given an automatic ranking in the auctions -- that is, whatever classes they choose, their student # automatically ranks in the auction at a given rank (first, fifth, tenth, twentieth, etc.). Then, when the auctions are complete, they are seeded into the classes as if they had bid the corresponding amount.

    b) financial aid students (who presumably lack the resources to augment their bids over the standard tuition) can be handled the same way -- their bids can all be augmented by a fixed number of ranks. For instance, a financial aid award could be a certain number of dollars (as now) but also a rank boost score (five places, ten places, twenty places, etc.) so that the student can win seats despite bidding less. Some students would not get any rank boost, but they could hoard excess aid saved by taking less popular sections and use that to raise their bids for more popular classes.

    c) Really wealthy (or avid) students can simply enter an open bid for a specific seat -- that is, they are allowed to bid whatever it takes to fill a specific seat ranking (to get the 30th spot in a class of 30, for example, or the 1st seat, or any in between, etc.), before scholarship boosts and financial aid boosts are taken into account. Thus, a student who says "I'll bid whatever it takes to take seat #10" ensures that they rank 10th (before all the financial aid students and scholarship student adjustments are considered). If, after that's done, they are still ranked high enough to get a seat in the class, they pay what it would have cost them to have that original ranking.

    This would be good for all: students would learn to manage resources and how to optimize. Being willing to get up for the 7:45 lab means paying less, while giving them teh ability to get a seat in that "really important class." And the school would optimize use of its resources.

    The "excess" money that students bid above the standard tuition would all be returned to other students in the form of financial aid and scholarships. Thus, although it would be quite a refreshing change for a school to openly acknowledge that students have different amounts of money to spend on school, any hostility resulting is mitigated by the fact that the extra money paid by some to attend a "hot" class is what helps fund the scholarships and financial aid to help other student attend (including the hot classes). Everyone in every class is paying only what they chose to pay.

    Thus, everyone wins. If there are more students than seats, then the school gets more money to use for financial aid and scholarships to improve diversity. The student who wants the Tuesday-Thursday party-all-weekend schedule (or the "only night classes please," or the "I work Wednesday through Sunday and have to cram my classes into Monday and Tuesday," or variations thereof) are all easily accommodated.

  • Why random?
  • Posted by RW , Prof at Midwest State U on September 14, 2005 at 1:38pm EDT
  • Could you expand on why a random drawing is used rather than selecting students from the wait list in the order in which they were added (i.e., first come, first served)? Is there a compelling (or bureaucratic) reason for not admitting students based on their order on the wait list?

  • massive classes
  • Posted by tha Doctah , Itinerant Scholar at Roosevelt University on September 14, 2005 at 1:41pm EDT
  • This is a very hot topic at my univ. right now, as a new provost from a Large University With A Huge Endowment has arbitrarily decided that all classes will have a limit of 30 students, thus limiting the number of sections offered. We are a small school traditionally commited to serving the underserved, with a new PR slogan of "Students First", but in ESL and foreign languages, to only meet 2 days per week in classrooms that don't even have 30 seats, trying to engage 30 students within 75 minutes is insane. And it certainly is not putting the students first. The scary part of this, in contrast to today's article, is that we do NOT have an open admission policy; in the case of ESL courses, our institution even advertises limited class size! (Every section of ESL now has 26 students.)

    We're beyond frustrated, and with almost all language sections filled, there are a lot of students who registered fr the small liberal arts experience who are walking away with nothing but "sorry, Charlie."

  • wait lists
  • Posted by Hugo at Pasadena City College on September 14, 2005 at 2:57pm EDT
  • RW, the wait lists I'm talking about are the ones students sign when they show up on the first day of class. We don't generate a computer wait list. If we took them first-come, first-serve, there would be a riot -- students would push and shove, etc. Lotteries are nonviolent.

  • I'd LOVE to be able to turn students away...
  • Posted by Bill on September 16, 2005 at 4:38am EDT
  • ... compared to our department's current reality of building a new degree program in a system where the enrolment *minimum* is religiously enforced.

  • overloaded classes
  • Posted by John Mullen , Professor Emeritus on September 16, 2005 at 10:19am EDT
  • Given the hideous "consumer" model that has been allowed to consume higher education, oversubscribed courses amount to the old bait & switch swindle. Sooner or later, lawsuits will be filed by disgusted--and swindled--students.