‘Sortition Transfer System’ is a new course registration system that has been introduced for the first time at Chung-Ang University (CAU) for the 2021 Spring semester with renewal course registration system. Sortition transfer system transfers 50% of class spots in random, which have not been transferred from the Wishlist, because there are more applicants than the maximum number of seats. Unlike the previous registration method, which was on first-come-first-served basis, the ‘luck’ strongly plays a role in sortition transfer system in that 50% of the seats are automatically transferred. Some say that this luck guarantees fairness, but did students who have experienced the newly introduced sortition transfer system this Spring semester also think so? Let’s look at the problems of the sortition transfer system, and the responses of students with CAH.

New Change in Course Registration: Sortition Transfer System

           CAU introduced a new course registration method called ‘sortition transfer system’ by restructuring the course registration system. The newly changed course registration system prohibits ‘multi login’[1] and ‘macros,’[2] enabling fairer enrollment. In the case of the Wishlist, you can apply for the course after inquiring on opening courses without restriction to the number of people, which is the same way as the previous method. In addition, all subjects that do not exceed the maximum number of seats in the Wishlist automatically are registered as before. However, the difference with the introduction of sortition transfer system is that if the courses in the Wishlist is not automatically registered because the number of applicants is more than the maximum number of the seats, only 50% of the seats in each of 4 groups[3] are registered in random, and the remaining 50% of the seats require students to apply directly during the course registration period. As a result, students who failed on transferring must apply for the course during the course registration period, which is the same with the previous first-come-first-served basis system. Let’s find out what problems the sortition transfer system has.

Problems of the Sortition Transfer System

Lack of Legitimacy of Introduction in Sortition Transfer System

           Before the introduction of sortition transfer system, the university conducted a preliminary survey to find out student’s opinions on a sortition transfer system. However, the lack of notification and poor participation in the preliminary survey are pointed out as problems. First of all, the university did not actively notify students even though the change of course registration system to sortition transfer system was an important matter affecting all students at CAU. The university sent a push notification through the CAU portal app on October 20^th last year, saying “We are conducting a survey on the course registration sortition system on the portal, so we hope you participate.” However, the university had to use more active ways such as text messages and departmental notices rather than simply a push notification so that all students could fully recognize and participate, since changing the course registration system is a crucial issue.

           Due to the lack of such public notice, the participation rate of the survey was also low. According to the CAU Newspaper 1093 issue, only 6,640 out of a total of 31,237 students participated in the preliminary student survey. This is 22% of all students, and about 52% of them were in favor. The number of 3,428, who voted in favor is certainly not enough to represent all students. Therefore, the complete change of the previous course registration method into a sortition transfer system reflecting only about 11% of the total number of students’ opinions can’t be said to have fully considered all students’ opinions. As a result, the representation of the results of the survey and the legitimacy of the introduction of the sortition transfer system are debatable.

Increased Burden in Applying Courses

           The sortition transfer system has the problem of increasing students’ burden of applying for courses. Students who are lucky enough to have been automatically registered for the random transfer are relieved. On the contrary, the sortition transfer system is rather toxic for students who must apply for courses during the course registration period because they are not lucky enough to be automatically registered. That’s because, as aforementioned, there are only 50% of seats available on the course registration period and it makes the competition fiercer. For example, if there are a maximum of 50 of seats in CD/CY [4]section of course A, 25 seats, which is 50% of the maximum number of seats, are automatically transferred at random, and only 25 seats are available during the course registration period. Then, no matter how many students failed to transfer in CD/CY section, they must compete for the remaining 25 seats. This greatly increases the burden of students on applying for courses by reducing the number of seats eligible to enrollment.

A Course Registration System Depending on ‘Luck’

           Sortition transfer system was introduced to provide students with fair opportunities. However, its effectiveness is questionable. If the previous first-come-first-served application system was decided only at the click speed of a student, the sortition transfer system is left to luck firstly, not individual’s ability. For this reason, the frustration and deprivation students feel is bigger when they fail to apply the courses. In such a system where luck plays an important role, students are degraded to passive actors in the system. Applying for a course is an important procedure to determine one’s time table and curriculum for a semester. Is it really reasonable to leave it to luck? It is clearly undesirable for students to fail to take the courses they want because ‘they are not lucky enough’ while paying their tuition.

The Reaction of CAU Students

           What do CAU students think about the sortition transfer system? To find out, CAH has conducted a survey on 111 students from CAU. In the end, 68.5% of students thought negatively about the sortition transfer system, and only 10.8% thought positively. The top 3 reasons for the negative responses were ‘dissatisfaction with the luck-dependent sortition system,’ ‘decrease in seats available for enrollment,’ and ‘increased burden on applying for courses.’ In addition, only 52.3% were aware of the sortition transfer system survey conducted last year. Given that 78.4% of students want the previous first-come-first-served method, the current sortition transfer system seems to need to be improved or replaced.

Improvement Suggestions for Sortition Transfer System

           With the introduction of the sortition transfer system, 68.5% of students expressed negative opinions about it. Then, what are some ways to improve the sortition transfer system? On our survey, many students left their opinions. Some of the students pointed out the problems with the priority in taking courses generated by the sortition transfer system. They said that “the courses that students must take in order to graduate have priority according to time, but it is ignored in the sortition transfer system,” and that “there are definitely courses that are first for me but fourth for others. If those people add courses on their Wishlist as an insurance and if they are transferred luckily, the competition among those who must take the course gets fiercer.” Reflecting these opinions, changing the system to let students prioritize their courses in the Wishlist can be an improvement plan. This will reduce the number of students who fail to apply for courses that they absolutely must take. In addition, there was an opinion that the university needs an active attitude to listen to the overall opinion by mandating the evaluation after the implement of sortition transfer system, and adjust the ratio of transfer or reconsider the system. This evaluation will provide hints on future improvement by allowing various opinions of students on sortition transfer system. As students’ dissatisfaction with the system are confirmed, the university should make efforts to ease students’ difficulties by suggesting suitable improvements.

The sortition transfer system was introduced as a complementary and alternative system for the previous first-come-first-served course register system under the guise of providing students with a fair opportunity to apply for courses. However, the students’ responses were different from anticipated. Starting with the spring semester of 2021, the sortition transfer system will continue in the future in CAU. Students have to adapt to the changed course application system, but the university must look at the problems and students’ difficulties. If students continue to struggle and protest in the future, the sortition transfer system should be replaced by the previous first-come-first-served course application method. In the current process of trial and error, it seems desirable for CAU to find ways to ensure students’ right to take courses while continuing the sortition transfer system.