U of T’s course registration portal, ROSI, continually gives U of T students headaches with delays, crashes, and inexplicable disorganization. Photo by David Pike
It’s the most stressful time of year for a University of Toronto student and it’s not even exams. It’s not even during the regular school year, but during the summer: course registration on the Repository of Student Information (ROSI).
Imagine you’re like me: majoring in English, with a double minor in Drama and Writing and Rhetoric. Each one of these programs has its own set of course requirements that you must somehow fit into your course calendar for not only this year, but the two that succeed it.
We all remember what happened during course registration last year. At least, I do. Due to system failures on ROSI, many of us couldn’t even get in at our start times. I had spent a good hour planning out my year and fitting courses into my schedule only to find that when I sat down for my course registration at 3:30 p.m., one of my friends, who is in the sciences, still couldn’t get in. Her start time was at 1:00 p.m.
Now, to say that I panicked would be an understatement. I spent an hour typing and retyping my information into the login page. When I finally got in after what seemed like forever, most of the classes I planned to take had already filled up. So I was left to scramble through my calendar and timetable, entering courses I didn’t even want to take or pay for just so I could hope to meet requirements necessary to emerge from U of T’s hallowed halls with a degree. I didn’t even get into half of the new courses I chose. Sometimes ROSI logged me out while I was waiting, which simply added insult to injury as I tried in vain to get back in.
U of T’s admin would later concede the difficulty students had with their course registration, promising that next year would be better. I must ask: is there not a better way? Is there no way U of T, one of the best schools in Canada, can ameliorate this system?
I have an idea of my own. As I mentioned, my friend in the sciences got to have an earlier start time. This is ridiculous. There is way more competition to get into smaller Arts classes than to get into larger Science classes. Despite the time it took her to get into ROSI, my friend found not a single one of her classes filled. I propose that Arts students be given earlier start times than Science students in their years. Last year, as the Arts students logged on, the server was still being clogged by all the Sciences students trying to get in. If this were reversed perhaps the Arts students could get their course registration out of the way without all the added traffic in the system.
It’s worth mentioning that this year is shaping up to be just as bad as the last. I spent two hours planning the next two years of my life this past Saturday. All the courses I chose were not only listed in the Calendar, but also the Timetable. I noticed that a couple said they weren’t offered in the 2009/2010 year, so I figured I might as well check with ROSI to see if they were offered this year. To my surprise, not only were those courses not offered, but other ones I had chosen (that were in both the calendar and timetable) were not offered either. And so it begins. How can U of T’s students be expected to choose their courses when they have Calendars and Timetables that aren’t even updated properly? Is the university so busy that they can’t be bothered to change the list that says “not offered in the 2009/2010 year” to “not offered in the 2010/2011 year”? What about the people who don’t check ROSI to make sure their class is offered? And why can U of T not give us a break?
The facts are simple. U of T needs to do a little to keep its students happy during course registration time. We need a Calendar and Timetable that are truly their latest, updated versions. Don’t worry about giving them to us the first week of April. Give them on the last week, as long as they have accurate courses. We also need a course registration system that does not crash when we use it. Seems simple, right? So why aren’t we getting it?
Comments
Nice article
I didn't even know about the earlier start times for science students. I wonder if it would make more sense to have Arts students and Science students sign up on different days, considering the discrepancy in class sizes and the problems of waiting times.
I just hope that this year won't be as much of a headache as the last.
Jul 6, 2010 at 06:45 PM
I just transferred from UBC and I have been introduced to ROSI which has been described to me as "a nightmare" by fellow students. I was not only shocked to find out that start times here are randomly assigned (UBC does it by year and GPA within your year), but also the wide breadth of system errors that exist in ROSI.
If U of T wants to change their registration process, they need to:
1) Incorporate checks for time table conflicts 2) Incorporate checks for prerequisites 3) Incorporate a search engine into ROSI 4) Fairly assign start times (by GPA) 5) Expand server resources
I am absolutely thrilled to be at U of T and I truly believe this school has a lot to offer. That said, more priorities should be dedicated to ensuring that IT systems like ROSI remain competitive with other schools in the country. My start time is July 13th... let's hope I get what I came to U of T for.
Jul 8, 2010 at 12:04 PM
Dear The Varsity: This comment article is a joke, right?
As for the article, it's full of misinformation and misdirected whining: the author is conflating different issues and also is not sure who to be angry at. ROSI is more than just course registration/enrolment. If it's down, then direct disdain at the IT or computing folks. Are course listings, prerequisites, and requirements a problem? Complain about the faculty then (in this case, Arts & Science). The University of Toronto is not one big uncaring monolith; it's made up of campuses, schools, faculties, unions, clubs, colleges, departments, libraries, offices, and people such as students, professors, and workers.
For course listings, one should always check the most up-to-date version of the Registration Handbook and Timetable: the one that's online. If anything, the author should be asking why they're still printed. (I feel that the Calendar needs to be printed; it has rules and requirements, and it's good for students to have a hard copy)
Are readers supposed to care that the author has a major in English and minors in Drama and Writing and Rhetoric? I have majors in Linguistics and Neuroscience. I have friends doing specialists. So what? All A&S students need to complete their Subject POSts.
The author needs to read her Registration Handbook. It states that:
Students are streamed onto ROSI in descending order of “year of study,” and within each year by the number of courses completed or in progress. Start times for fourth-year students are assigned by the number of credits in ascending order. Start times for third and second-year students are assigned by the number of credits in descending order. (from http://www.artsci.utoronto.ca/current/undergraduate/course/timetable/1011_fw/step-4-check-your-start-time )
So that has nothing to do with being a this student or a that student! Me, I can choose to graduate with either an Hon.B.A. or an Hon.B.Sc. degree. If one wonders about first-year students, enrolment controls nullify the effect of early start times for a certain group most of the time, and they don't have programs/Subject POSts until second year. If course enrolment isn't your thing, students in other faculties at the university don't deal with course enrolment.
Yes, ROSI can suck, but it's awesome in that it's a central location where you can enrol in courses, find your grades, request transcripts, vote in certain elections, check your account balance, and ultimately request graduation from the university to get that cherished/damned piece of paper. And if you hate the Student Web Service, let me tell you that before the SWS there used to be something called the Student Telephone Service. I wasn't a student back then, but my guess is that course enrolment sucked a lot more with the STS over the phone.
Jul 9, 2010 at 09:37 PM
"Imagine you’re like me: majoring in English, with a double minor in Drama and Writing and Rhetoric."
-Well there's your problem. Maybe that's where your sense of entitlement comes from.
"Each one of these programs has its own set of course requirements that you must somehow fit into your course calendar for not only this year, but the two that succeed it."
-Good point. You.. and every other student at this school.
"There is way more competition to get into smaller Arts classes than to get into larger Science classes"
.. No?
"The facts are simple. U of T needs to do a little to keep its students happy during course registration time. We need a Calendar and Timetable that are truly their latest, updated versions."
-Indeed, the facts are simple. U of T supplies with "their latest, updated versions" of the calendar and timetable here; http://www.artsandscience.utoronto.ca/ofr/calendar/
and here; http://www.artsci.utoronto.ca/current/undergraduate/course/timetable/1011_fw
respectively. Also, you may be interested in a list of changes since publication, here; http://www.artsandscience.utoronto.ca/ofr/calendar/updates.htm
James brings up an excellent point, that start times are not arbitrary. They are actually, in most cases, fairly assigned.
"I have an idea of my own." uh oh..
Jul 10, 2010 at 02:19 AM
I will agree on point however, that ROSI can suck at course selection time. But for every other day of the year, it's great to have a centralized location for our financial info, transcripts, time tables and marks.
Jul 10, 2010 at 02:28 AM
James mentions some good points but there is something to be said about the 4 different and highly confusing - rather contradictory - course listings at UofT.
In fact, to add to James' query, why do we print the other 3 forms, and why don't we care about even getting the course listings, the most important part of them, right?
Why don't we just have the correct timetable, and scrap the other ones?
Regarding ROSI, I don't know how accurate James' quote is. No offense, but I am in my final year now, and I have both far more credits and a higher GPA than people who had an enrollment time set 20 minutes before mine. In my program, course enrollment is limited to semesters of max 15-20 people in 4th year courses.
That just doesn't add up. Is this because I am an international student? ... I am paying UofT more, I do better than these other guys, so what gives? I mean honestly. Does anyone know what other factors contribute to this?
Let's look at it from the basic question that many egalitarians have: Why don't all people in the same year get the same enrollment time? I would ASSUME, not take it for granted, that this is because we shouldn't murder the UofT servers.
But then why should people who are not specialists, majors or minors get equal priority for some courses that are not, strictly speaking, related to their degree? I am all for allowing people to mix and have fun with their courses, but this should not be allowed on day 1.
@ the author: Please put more effort into this for next year. We deserve a serious article looking at the causes of what is wrong, why it is the way it is, and THEN you can comment. Don't skip ahead next time.
Jul 10, 2010 at 05:40 PM
Is this a piece of satire? The hopelessly clued-out author should switch to engineering - we don't have to use ROSI except to choose humanities/social science electives - if she honestly thinks that course enrollment is the most stressful part of her academic life. I must warn her, though - we have classes on all five days of the week.
I expected writing just a touch above a Grade 9 level from an English major, but I guess this is the best we can expect from someone too brain-dead to handle a specialist program.
I would suggest that Ms. Cooper peruse the Arts & Science Course Calendar more thoroughly. She may find that there is no such thing as a "Science student" or an "Arts student" and that most of what she is writing is whiny gibberish. Whatever they teach you in first year English courses, apparently they don't cover the fact that anecdotes aren't arguments. Maybe that is an upper-year limited-enrollment seminar?
Given that she couldn't even come up with a credible argument against the most hated IT resource at this university, perhaps Ms. Cooper should reconsider her minor in, uh, Writing and Rhetoric (whatever that is).
Jul 15, 2010 at 01:48 AM
This is for you, Rishi:
At the start of September I'll only be a lowly frosh and, horror of horrors, all of my planned first year courses fall under the humanities umbrella. ZOMG, I just know that each and every one of these courses will prove to be useless. After all, everyone knows that arts students are idiotic drunkards with nothing to do all day but angst about their futures at McDonald's. You know what's weird, though? Turns out I'll also be having classes on all five days of the week. So get off your high horse. We all know the course load for engineering is rigorous, okay? You should be old enough by now not to need a pat on the back for it.
Moving right along... I THINK the point you were trying to make is that this article could have benefited from a little more research. I'm not too sure though; I know this isn't a real-life conversation but, I gotta say, I could barely hear you over the condescension.
Case in point -- your estimation of Ms. Cooper as "brain-dead" is absolutely ridiculous. There are a lot of students who choose to pursue the double major option over the specialist program and, believe it or not, a sizeable portion of them do so because their tastes are eclectic, not because they're any less intelligent than those of your ilk. (Godly as engineers are.) You requested that Ms. Cooper do her research. Fair enough. But you should've done yours first.
And that parting shot about her chosen minor? I'd be more easily convinced of YOUR ability to "come up with a credible argument" if you could do so without resorting to ad hominem attacks like that one. For all your insults, you didn't offer even a smidgeon of evidence to support your dismissal of the article as "whiny gibberish". Who are you to look down on her for finding the process of course enrollment stressful? Like you said, you barely even use ROSI.
So let's wrap things up here. You set out to make a fool of Ms. Cooper. (God knows why -- were you having that bad of a day?) But, despite this article's flaws, you've ended up making a bigger fool of yourself. Actually, maybe I should substitute that 'f' for a 't'.
Your comment screamed "tool".
Jul 16, 2010 at 12:55 AM
Heba, you proved my point by patting yourself on the back for your 5-day timetable (average of 3 hours per day, I assume). Engineering timetables aren't rigorous. They're full-time. You only see them in the way that you do because your sense of entitlement tells that you ought to have no more than 15-20 hours of class per week, that you should have time to party on weeknights, that you somehow deserve to be able to hold down a full-time job while supposedly being a full-time student.
Heaven forbid that I expect full-time students to have a course load indicative of that full-time status. I wish that having 30+ hours of class per week entitled me to get on a high horse. In reality, it is just a normal full-time workload for any occupation. I don't expect to have a day off - why should I? I am reminded of a comment I read here last year during the flat fees debacle: the gist of it was that taking 5 courses was too hard, and that if students took 5 courses they wouldn't have enough to time to visit "films and art galleries". I threw up in my mouth a little when I read that, but it characterizes the educational paradigm of most arts programs quite well. Lower the bar so far that there really is no commitment to your studies required.
Now, there are good arguments for reducing the number of in-class hours that students have well below 30. I've had conversations about the ideal weekly schedule with the undergraduate chairs of the departments of math, physics, chemical engineering and philosophy, respectively. While none of them thought that the top-down hours-based accreditation model of engineering was ideal, all of them felt that the total workload of university undergraduates was in an endless downward spiral. Engineering remains the only academic unit willing to say to students "if you can't handle it - too freaking bad" and I think there's something to be said for that attitude in an institution that wants to maintain its reputation.
After you've actually been a university student for a few years, and done something more than just read the Course Calendar, I think you will find my estimation of double-major students accurate (and please excuse me if I wonder about your extensive knowledge of university students given that you are not yet one). You will soon discover that things are a little more complex than picking the headings that sound interesting out of a book to determine your program of study. There's nothing wrong with being interested in economics and linguistics, but there is something misinformed about thinking that a double major in those fields is the best way to pursue that interest.
If you are truly interested in a topic, you will want to take several advanced courses in that area. 100 and 200 level courses in Arts & Science, with a few exceptions, are mostly trivial and will be unsatisfying to someone with more than a cursory interest in a topic. Yet in a major program, you might take no more than a single 300-level course and no 400-level courses. You can graduate and claim to have a degree having taken no advanced courses in any area. Eclectic tastes are fine, but pursuing several of them diligently means adding to your workload with a double-specialist program.
Considering that a double-specialist program in Arts & Science would still leave you should of a full-time schedule, I see no reason for those with broad and varied interests not to pursue one. Unless, of course, they are too lazy, don't actually have a clue what they're interested in, got such horrific marks that they wouldn't be approved for both POSts, and are looking for the easiest route to a BA. When people run out of breath before they can finish telling your what their POSt is, eclectic tastes are usually pretty far down the list of reasons why.
As for my so-called "lack of evidence", you may wish to review the difference between an argument and a rebuttal to an argument. "Your statements are insufficient to justify your claim" is, in fact, a totally legitimate RESPONSE to an argument. It is not my responsibility to prove anyone wrong when they have not offered any evidence in support of their claim in the first place. I presume you are one of those people who thinks that Obama is a Muslim because no one can prove that he's not.Just because you think history sounds interesting doesn't mean you will enjoy studying it in
You see Heda, when people present poorly written articles I feel comfortable calling them out on it. I don't hover around Sid Smith eavesdropping on conversations looking for an error to point out, but you take the time to publish your opinion in a newspaper, you shouldn't be surprised when people call you out on your failings. And when your failings are symptomatic of a general scourge on this campus, there might be just a slight tinge of anger.
Jul 18, 2010 at 12:00 AM
I love how this has turned into a pissing contest.
All students have these troubles, and many of them are either necessary evils (such as class size caps) or are easily avoided (always check the latest, online version of the calendar).
The single glaring problem is that ROSI needs a lot more power to handle the heavy increase in traffic it gets during enrollment. I'm not a tech expert but I'm sure it could be done. With enough bandwidth capability, the site could allow all students of a given year to begin at the same time, with no crashes.
Jul 20, 2010 at 06:27 AM
Successful troll is successful
Jul 21, 2010 at 07:00 PM
^ Varsity comment of the year.
Jul 21, 2010 at 11:32 PM
Rishi, you're still resorting to ad hominem attacks.
You might be surprised to learn that I am not, in fact, a complacent brat. I don't feel at all entitled to party every weeknight; I'll be holding two jobs. And I'm not as green as you'd like to think. Sure, I haven't lived through the experience myself yet but, given that I have four older siblings, each long past undergrad, I think you'll find that my brain's already pretty saturated when it comes to advice. Though I do appreciate your show of pedantry, really.
And no, I haven't assumed Obama to be Muslim. I don't see why you're bringing the concept of falsifiability into this discussion at all. It isn't relevant (and actually I'm of the opinion that Obama's regular attendance at church is proof enough). When you make broad, sweeping generalizations about a person's written work, you'd better expect to be asked for specific quotations to back yourself up. One area of your argument that could have benefited from better use of evidence, for example -> your estimation of my character as "entitled". The only thing supporting that criticism was your assumption that, in mentioning my courseload for next year, I was attempting to pat myself on the back. I was actually mocking your inability to do anything BUT pat yourself on the back.
And I don't know what your definition of "full time schedule" is but, according to our friendly neighbourhood course calendar, five credits per year is the recommended amount for artscis. Six is the maximum. A double specialist wouldn't leave you short of anything. And note: your sole criticism of the major program is that a student MIGHT neglect to take any 400-level courses. But wait -- you have absolutely no idea what Ms. Cooper's plans are, do you? Do us all a favour and stop making baseless allegations.
Your dismissal of the pursuit of any program lighter than the double specialist option as "lazy" is a little egregious. Not everyone has the money to blow on extended victory laps and you're delusional if you think it's possible to finish off a double specialist (unless it's an official "joint specialist" between two departments) in only four years. Six credits per year is the maximum, remember? And arts courses are sometimes flighty. Maybe that one seminar you need just isn't offered in a given year. Or, going back to the original point of all this flaming, an inconvenient start time just fucks you over enrollment-wise.
And anyway, it isn't as though arts students are forced, under pain of death, to go into the fields of either research or education. If, conversely, I were to aspire to be a museum curator, let's say, or a journalist, don't you think certain extracurriculars and/or internships (maybe even at one of those art galleries you find so contemptible) might prove more valuable to me in the long run than a few extra 400-level courses?
Look, I know you're never going to agree with this article (not that I necessarily agree with all of it myself) but is it too much to ask that you be respectful of programs that, god forbid, just might happen to fall outside the realm of engineering?
Driven arts students do exist, you know.
Jul 26, 2010 at 10:18 AM
This is an eight paragraph article. I'm not going to do a line by line analysis of it. I can only assume that anyone of moderate intelligence can recall the gist of something so brief for the two minutes required to read my comments on it. I'm not writing a court decision or a journal paper so complaining that my comments are not exhaustively cited is pretty spurious. I don't write for the deliberately dense.
I actually made it pretty clear what my definition of "full-time" is. If you choose to ignore it that's your call, I'm not going to repeat myself. For what's worth my definition actually means something outside of the artificial world of arts students.
Your criticism of me for judging POSts based on their requirements is, once again, a serious reach. Of course someone doing a minor in economics just MIGHT take 15 FCEs in economics. It's certainly possible. But in judging the students enrolled in a particular POSt I fail to see the usefulness of any metric except that which is common to all. And this is without mentioning the fact that many if not most 400-level courses have R enrollment codes.
There is nothing wrong with a major, in and of itself. But a major on its own does not and cannot constitute a degree, because it is not a sufficiently advanced level of study. So why should the sum of two linearly independent majors be a degree? (I'm not going to phrase that in a non-mathematical way, there is no equivalent). Can you do 1/5th of 5 different theses and get a Master's degree? How about 1/2 of two different dissertations for a PhD? It's nonsensical to grant someone a Bachelor's degree for having completed half of two degrees.
Double major degrees are an abortion perpetrated on this university by the Ministry of Education in order to assist BA grads in the future career as teachers, and for no other reason. By EDU standards, a double major is actually better than a specialist, which is why we have no competent math teachers. Such schemes do not exist in professions that have functional requirements, since no one would find much use in someone who was 50% neurosurgeon and 50% orthopedic surgeon. If you wanted to hire a civil engineer and you found someone who told you that he only had half of a CivE degree, but the other half of his degree in transnational and diaspora studies would give him greater perspective on how to build your home, I'm pretty sure you'd tell him to get lost. Only when modus operandi is perpetual clinging to the government teat can a system which promotes under-achievement thrive.
And therein lies the crux of the matter. Why do we go to school? That is where arts and professional students differ, and why I respect the arts disciplines but can not respect most of their students. Ultimately most of them are here just for the sake it, with no goal in mind, and I do not support the use of government funds to subsidize such pursuits. You can quadruple minor if you like, but please do it on your own dime.
Jul 26, 2010 at 01:26 PM
So what you're telling me is that Obama is a Muslim
Okay
But Rishi, double majors aren't that bad. I've got my economics subjects thanks to UofT's great and flexible degree opportunities, in addition to my personal joy of studying political science. I know people don't see it as a practical science but it can be valuable.
What is not valuable however, from your highly functional perspective on education, is when you combined pure social sciences into double trouble degrees. And yes, I do understand and agree with you to an extent, that they should be more practical. That is the short-coming of designing social sciences though. We should add more science-subjects and/or other subject width requirements. I think it is unacceptable to see people graduate with a degree in social sciences without taking introductory economics - as this controls pretty much everything a public and private agent can do to deal with an issue.
Heba, if you're so mature then you need to stop responding so easily to a well-trained troll. Doing two jobs ain't much btw. I have three jobs.
Jul 31, 2010 at 03:08 PM
Yeah, I've learned my lesson about trolls, Realist. I just thought Cooper needed to know that at least one person knew where she was coming from.
I wasn't trying to imply that having two jobs is crazy, by the way. Just pointing out I'm not a complete and utter deadbeat.
I think I'm done commenting on here for a while lol. Varsity-saturated.
Aug 2, 2010 at 01:33 AM
All I need to know about ROSI is what this charming young woman sent to me.
"Flowers" U of T is so "Flowers" "flamboyant" with their "Stuff". says its up at 6:00 but they only start their maintenance shit at 6 what kinda god damn institution does that? Hay guys! enroll at 6:00 AM woops sorry nvm we're still setting it up go EFF yourself
Now If ROSI could do this to her, Imagine the effects on some students more prone to violence.
Aug 6, 2010 at 04:54 PM
ROSI is a disaster of a website for the value of it to students. I can't see any reason why ROSI can't be fixed. Where are the compscis and engineers?
Aug 27, 2010 at 02:58 AM
Post a Comment