...
- A majority of interested students were probably decided to go to Victoria.
- Few students did not get their GUS and course planner paper as nobody expected such a high attendance (suspicion that students wanted to avoid their regular classes - personal feeling is that at least 25 were really interested).
- At the start, not too much space for questions or discussion from the student's side (fast presentation-like style). (Reason is probably tight time schedule).
- Time limitations also probably led to the hectic and more chaotic atmosphere. This 'time stress' could affect students' understanding of what was said by student advisors.
- College didn't handle the organisation of the event very well - room was not very suitable for our P2P approach (auditorium-like layout of the room). Additionally, after 40 minutes (out of planned 120 minutes) they asked us to leave the current room, despite of the planned schedule.
- Most of the students started by choosing a Programme or a Major and got stuck (or just waited) for advisors. Some of them were able to fill in core courses and then got stuck.
- Some courses unnecessarily overcomplicated and illogical (ACCY 001) and as such, they were bringing lots of confusion and led to many mistakes (no matter how well it was explained by the advisor at the beginning).
- Advisors are using course codes heavily which seemed hard to follow (student hear course code but doesn't understand what's behind, could forget the code etc.).
- Programmes with pre-defined 1st-year courses were (obviously) easier to understand, follow and 'plan' (i.e. Architecture, Law). However, there still was at least little bit of explanation around requirements and rules (i.e. selection to Architecture specialisations based on grades).
- Almost no student applying for more a more flexible programme was able to fill in his plan for the 1st year on his own (they had usually filled in core courses or left it blank). Advisor had to come, took their pen and fill it in for them.
- At least 1 student was interested in his time-table and wanted to know where he could check it. Advisors told them to check it out on the website and noted he should be careful as this may change next year.
- Few students did not understand a term 'minor', another at least 2 forgot how many points they are supposed to have in every trimester (number of points was missing on the paper planner).
- Some of students' requirements could not be handled even by our students advisors on the spot. Ex.: Student playing soccer on the national level who needs to adjust his plan to fit his schedule (advisors gave him an e-mail to the person from Victoria who should be able to individually help him).
- (Computer Science major + Music minor/major) Too hard to plan courses for this one on the spot. Advisor suggested to search those courses on the website and read more details (i.e. pre-requisites for 200 level courses had to be checked and 100 level courses planned accordingly). With that said, this student did not finish his planning when we were leaving (a possibility he could give up & we would miss our opportunity to make another conversion).
- Advisors are able to reach around 3000 high school students (more at marketing-like presentation at the start of the year, less on the course planning). Course planning sessions are probably leading to our highest conversion rate, however, the rest of the NZ high school students are not reached by our outreach activities.
- Once or twice, advisors did not have enough time to fully understand student's motivation which could lead to misleading programme/major recommendations.
- Over time, some students demanded attention, but could not get it (only 2 advisors on 20 students in the room).
- Some students (I noticed at least 2) tried to give advisors their filled Course Planner back (Note: Did they think it was an enrollment? What to do after planning was communicated at least once [see Schedule, points 2 and 3]).
...
Conclusion
Course planning is a hard and confusing thing to do, even if students attend an event like this one. It's pretty clear that personal 1on1 meetings are most helpful, group planning is moderately helpful and website/GUS is least helpful (important to say that GUS is still doing its job pretty well if we consider it's just a book with no level of interaction).
Generally speaking, the more flexible programme is, the more confusion it brings to those interested in applying. With this said, identification of those programmes & putting extra effort to provide better and clearer information could help lower the confusion.