How many times do students need to express their concerns before the Faculty listens?
I’m not the first person to make a plea for lecture recordings, and I certainly won’t be the last. Amidst changes in technology, adoption of lecture recordings by other law schools, and a global pandemic, the Faculty has remained firm in their policy against recording lectures.
The Academic Handbook states that “because of a host of pedagogic, privacy and intellectual property concerns, the Faculty of Law does not permit the recording of classes, nor does it permit instructors to grant such requests. In instances of disability accommodation or extraordinary circumstances where students are required to miss class, students should expect to rely on class notes. Such notes can be requested at the University of Toronto’s Accessibility Services. The Assistant Dean, J.D. Program, can also help recruit note takers where Accessibility Services is unable to do so.”
When searching the Ultra Vires’ archives, I found requests for lecture recordings from students dating as far back as 2016. During a 2017 townhall on a draft Mental Health and Wellness Strategic Action Plan, students again raised concerns to the Faculty to no avail. Most recently, in 2020, the Students’ Law Society (SLS) penned an open letter to the Faculty advocating for lecture recordings, with over 150 students signing in support.
There are many legitimate reasons to record lectures that go beyond assumptions that these requests are motivated by laziness and a desire to skip class. To be frank, the same Faculty that advertises their school as attracting “the strongest student body in the country” should not be concerned that offering lecture recordings will suddenly change their students’ engagement.
According to the SLS’ open letter, the Faculty’s main concern with recording classes is that “some professors or students may feel ‘uncomfortable’ speaking their mind while being recorded.” Like the SLS notes, this is not a justifiable reason to make the law school less accessible. As they note, students have many reasons for missing a class or two—illness, disability, family responsibilities, religious obligations, job interviews, etc.—and they should not be deprived of their costly legal education to account for some individuals’ fear of accountability.
The current recourse for missing a class on the basis of one of these legitimate reasons is to request notes from a classmate or through the note-taking service, if you are already registered with Accessibility Services. In fact, volunteer note-taking is the most commonly required accommodation for registered accommodated students. Unfortunately, this is not an effective solution. For one, everyone has different note-taking habits and makes notes in ways that work best for their personal learning style, and reflects what they feel is important from the lecture. Others have noted that there is no quality control process to ensure that notes submitted are accurate or complete. As such, notes from a classmate cannot be considered an equivalent alternative to providing lecture recordings. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, such notes, though insufficient as they are, are not always guaranteed.
My friend passed away in February 2020. I actually found out about her passing in the middle of a class. Understandably, I was unable to focus in that lecture and could barely attend classes for the remainder of that week. When I reached out to the Assistant Dean, JD Program, I received condolences and a note that, while the note-taking service operated through Accessibility Services is exclusively for students registered with accommodations, the administration would be happy to ask students in my classes if they would be willing to volunteer their notes. This request was indeed made to my classmates; but, by the end of the week, I received a single set of notes for just one of my missed lectures. I was enrolled in three classes.
To be clear, I don’t blame my classmates. The burden should not be on students, especially law students graded on a curve, to ensure that there are accommodations in place. But my experience, and the experience of many others who have gone through this process, shows that the current systems in place are not sufficient, nor reliable. We are paying tens of thousands of dollars to attend this law school. When a student misses class for a legitimate reason, they should not have to stress about missed lectures and inadequate or absent notes. When missing class due to illness or compassionate reasons in particular, the last thing students need to worry about is falling behind in constitutional law.
Osgoode Hall, Western Law, and the University of British Columbia Peter A. Allard School of Law already made lecture recordings available to their students before the pandemic hit. Clearly, implementing lecture recordings has not lowered the calibre of these schools, nor has it resulted in any scandals relating to statements made in class being taken out of context. Additionally, it is clear that the instructors’ copyright in their lectures does not render lecture recording impossible, and that there are technological measures which can be used to prevent copying or even watching the recordings past the end of a semester.
This problem is not new. And especially given that most classes in our pandemic-era have Zoom already set-up, implementing lecture recordings is not particularly onerous or far-fetched. Some professors have even tried to record lectures themselves, to make their classes more accessible and create an equitable environment for students with disabilities. It is well past time that the Faculty takes their students’ concerns seriously and implements a lecture recording policy.
