In January 2015, it came to the attention of the Office of IT and Academic IT that a default
setting allowed faculty to add unregistered people to their Canvas courses. Most faculty
members did so in good faith, without understanding the consequences of their actions. Others
did so even after knowing that it was prohibited. Both inadvertently created the potential for
significant security breaches and committed policy violations. As soon as the risk and policy
violations of unrestricted additions were evaluated, the unrestricted ability to add anyone to a
Canvas course was removed and a message on the change to the Canvas system security went to
the deans, to all Canvas users via a Canvas system administrator message, and on a banner
within Canvas website.
Below are the main issues that have arisen out of faculty members trying to help students or
others by adding them unofficially to Canvas courses. We truly believe that most violations are
out of a lack of knowledge of laws and policies, as well as a lack of information on how the
situations create unintended consequences.
“Incomplete” Incompletes
The most common situation is when faculty members want to help students finish incomplete
coursework by adding them to courses. It’s been helpful to thousands of students over the years.
In many cases, though, faculty members have been unaware that UVU has a policy that applies
to Incomplete grades, including the parameters under which Incompletes can be given. Policy
523, Grading, Section 5.3.1 states that students have to be passing the course and have
completed 70% of the assigned coursework to qualify for an Incomplete. The student is then
required to work with the faculty member over the next year to finish the remaining 30% or less
of coursework. In some cases, faculty members have ignored the policy and have given
Incompletes arbitrarily to students, including those who completed little of the required
coursework.
Incompletes
In cases where the student has 30% or less work to finish the course, there are options other than
adding a student to a new course to allow the student to complete missing work. They are not as
seemingly simple, but they follow federal, state, and UVU laws and policies.
Retaking a Course
Sometimes a faculty member will allow an unregistered student to sit in on a course to repeat
sections or get new information previously not completed and then offer to replace the
Incomplete with the grade earned in the “new” course. Section 5.3.5 does not allow a student to
complete work for an Incomplete by retaking the course. Instead, the student has to accept the
grade he/she would have earned with the work incomplete in the original course (often an E) and
register again for the course to replace the I or E grade.
Budget
Other than issues in Policy 523, another problem with adding unregistered students into courses
is that it stops the university from recouping the costs of educating those students. Policy 501,
Undergraduate Admissions and Enrollment, informed by multiple USHE policies (especially
those in the 500 section, covering Tuition and Fees) state that the university, with the approval of
the Regents, has the responsibility to establish budgetary systems and enrollment requirements.
A student who has already taken a course and received an I or an E must re-register for the
course if he/she intends to replace the grade because the university spends resources on
educating that student. Although departments have meant well, such actions create an arbitrary
tuition system.
Challenge Credit
Linked to this is challenge credit. When used properly, it allows a student to challenge a course
based on prior learning, such as in a language course. In improper uses, students have been
allowed by well-meaning instructors to sit in on a class (in or outside the LMS) and then to
challenge the course so that they do not have to pay the full price of the course or a program.
Chairs have approved the challenges, allowing the students to circumvent the appropriate
enrollment and tuition requirements. Similar to allowing a student to retake a course for free,
abuses of challenge credit have significantly impacted budgets, threatened accreditation, and
violated fairness. It violates UVU’s and USHE’s policies on enrollment, registration, and
tuition: we do not allow some students to pay full price for an education and others a discounted
price outside of official institutional budgetary systems (e.g., scholarships, differential tuition,
etc.). If students are having difficulty paying for courses, we can help them by referring them to
Financial Aid’s resources.
Institutional Criteria
Further, for students, Canvas is directly tied to registration/enrollment as recorded in Banner.
Without fully knowing a student’s current standing at the university, some faculty have allowed,
unintentionally, students into courses when they have not satisfied institutional criteria, such as
good academic standing, good financial standing, etc. Again, this is a situation where faculty
members are trying to be helpful. However, only students registered for a course may be in a
Canvas course because those students have met institutional criteria. Faculty, departments, and
even schools are not allowed unilaterally to bypass the enrollment or registration system.
Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
In order to give students a practicum experience or adjuncts the opportunity to train or help,
faculty have added them as teaching assistants without being properly hired or paid. It seems
that as long as students receive practicum credit or adjuncts are not required to participate as a
part of their employment, that it follows laws and policy. As UVU has found out through an
audit, this is a huge violation of the FLSA because it undermines fair pay and hourly laws.
Because this practice is against the law, departments in which the violation occurs are
responsible for paying any students or adjuncts who are added to a course as teaching assistants,
and, if audited, any fines for failing to complete required hiring procedures. This can get
expensive. It would not be out of the question for a department in violation to get a $1,700+ bill
per "free" student teaching assistant (e.g., 10 hours a week x 16 weeks x minimum $8.50/hr +
benefits) or a higher bill for an adjunct (up to $57.98/hr, plus benefits up to $17,000/yr for a
family rate).
Federal Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
Because Canvas courses contain sensitive information and many of the individuals added have
had no official (by institutional standards) relation to the course, faculty members were
inadvertently violating FERPA. Allowing non-official people to view confidential information
also creates the potential for security breaches. As privacy issues have become more important,
FERPA has covered more and more areas, especially when an individual is in a supervisory role
(TA, co-teacher, etc.). There is now a process to allow faculty to add people once they sign a
FERPA agreement (e.g., official teaching assistants, instructional designers, chairs, deans, etc.)
and have a justified reason for being in the course. I'm using the process this semester because I
have included an “embedded librarian” to help improve students’ researching skills. It took me
all of a half hour to complete (it hasn't yet been automated, but is in the process) and walk
around to get the approvals.
Violence Against Women Act/Clery Act/Title IX
As sexual violence and other harassment and discrimination has come to light on campuses, the
federal government has begun to audit the safety of universities, including all physical and online
areas. As a result, we found within the last few weeks that proper recording of students, staff,
faculty, and visitors in a course is also demanded by the VAWA/Clery/Title IX. If a student is
not registered in a course or another person has no official relationship to the course, he/she may
not be in any area of the course, including the Canvas site without proper documentation
provided by the university. In cases when the course to which students are added to includes
minors (or the added student is a minor), there are additional federal regulations involved.
These interpretations are not Academic Affairs’. These interpretations have been determined
and/or approved by the Board of Regents, the Board of Trustees, President’s Council, and legal
counsel (including the AG’s office and the Utah Division of Risk Management).
There may be situations where policies can be reviewed and re-evaluated, however, those related
to state or federal regulations are less negotiable. If the administration of Canvas is undermining
UVU’s mission and the issue is part of a UVU policy or practice unrelated to state (including
USHE) or federal policies and regulations, please contact Kat Brown at kbrown@uvu.edu and
we can discuss it.