September 20, 1993 Telephone by Holly Keyes Douglas College decided to modernize its registration process for the Fall ’93 semester. Telephone registration, the curse of too many other institutions of higher learning, came here. It’s too bad telereg can’t do a satisfactory job. In the first two weeks of its existence there were an es- timated 400,000 calls to the registration number! There were only 16 lines available for the more than 8000 people all trying to get through at once. In three weeks everyone was supposed to have had the opportunity to register. Mathematically, that’s about 18 people per line at any one time. As is the case every semester, there were too few courses for the number of people trying to register. Most of the avail- able courses were“filléd by the second week of registration. Telereg was only open from 6 am to 8 pm. It should have begun earlier and ended later. There could have been more than 16 lines available. The possibilities for improvement in the telereg system are many. One of telereg’s biggest downfalls was the 10 minute time limit. The limit often cut students off before telling them how much money they owed. Some people might have stayed on until they got all of their courses, really tying up the lines, but having to call back a second time was extremely time con- suming and frustrating. Either way, the time limit was a no win situation. The help line was a good idea. If there was a problem with the telereg system students could talk to a human (usu- ally) and possibly get the necessary help. Unfortunately, the help line was only open until 4 pm. If perspective registrants needed help after four o'clock, too bad. The fabulous computer at the core of the telephone reg- istration process isn’t advanced enough to know when a stu- dent needs help. It doesn’t notice if a student registers for a course without a prerequisite. It also ignores scheduling over- laps. The computer doesn’t limit the number of courses reg- istered and students paid a deposit only after registering, some Other Press Telereg Extravaganza! Registration Sucks! over registered. These students then drop these courses in the first couple weeks of classes, effectively keeping other students from getting the courses they need. There are a few simple solutions to the problems that may eliminate a lot of frustration. For instance, the registration days could be divided by more time slots, like the old system. By not allowing people who miss their slots to call dur- ing other time slots, only those who are supposed to be on the line will be on the line. This would free more phone time. Another solution may be to implement a prepaid de- posit. Finally, if the computer was programmed to know when a student is registered for more than the normal course load (15 credits), then students wouldn’t be able to hog courses that they intend to eventually drop. It was about that time Douglas College modernized the registration process but there are too many bugs in the new system. We can only hope these problems will be corrected before winter registration! And You Thought Telereg at Douglas was Rough... The following is a news release reprinted from VICTORIA This Week: A central agency is to be established to make it easier for B.C. stu- dents to apply for admission into public post-secondary institutions. After September 1994, students applying to attend these institu- tions in B.C. will do so through the new agency, rather than directly to individual institutions. The centre, to be located in Kamloops, will provide students with information on the status of their appli- cations and updates on program vacancies. Advanced Education Min- ister Tom Perry says it will ensure an accurate assessment of student demand for spaces in post-secondary education and training by elimi- nating distortion of demand caused by double and triple applica- tions. (Contact: Alan Strickland, AETT, 387-5787.) 3 Toronto Student Politicians Forced To | Sing School Song by G. Bruce Rolston (Source: The Varsity, University of Toronto) TORONTO (CUP) — “Rippity rappity rippity rappity ree!” Those rousing words, among others, will open every Univer- sity of Toronto student council meeting, after the council’s recent decision to sing a “U of T Song” before every board meeting. The decision came shortly after the council defeated an ear- lier motion that had asked for a rendition of the Lord’s Prayer and the National Anthem before meetings. The motion, put forward by councillor Dan Proussalidis, was rejected by board members at the Aug. 4 meeting, who said such matters were a waste of time and not inclusive enough for a univer- sity student council. “T didn’t think they had any purpose,” said Inga Gimelshtein, the council’s human rights officer. But members had fewer objections when the question of the “U of T Song” came up. Forestry rep Greg Todd spoke strongly in favor of the song,. which he said was a way for the council to rekindle cross-university spirit. As there was no “U of T Song” in the files, Todd asked his mother to write down the lyrics as she remembered them. “I looked all over the school. There was no one at school at all who knew it, except for some of the engineers,” he said. Council president Ed de Gale tried to raise some criticisms of the song, but was ridiculed by the board as being “politically cor- rect” De Gale said he was concerned about such lines as “Shout O shout men of every faculty,” and “All thy sons thy very name revere,” which he considered sexist. In the end, De Gale voted for the song. Board members Sarah Niles and GregTodd said on Friday they would move for the removal of sexist language from the song at the next SAC meeting In the vote, only University College rep David Ruddell voted against the “U of T Song”, largely, he said, because he thought it sounded silly. “I voted against the song for purely aesthetic reasons,” he said. “I just don’t like it very much.” Law rep Steve Hudovernick said he hoped the board would stop considering procedural matters and move on to real business. “T'd like to see some more substantive issues tackled,” he said. \ ONLY AT THE END . A pb ‘ ee wT Dpity, DID BARNEY M. Y ne : REALIZE THE Wi | NE DISADVANTAGES ! OF HAVING A SEEING-EYE LEMMING. 4 | 3 JOBST caw rer et