"Fast, easy, simple"? SES-diverse transfer students' sociotechnical experiences registering for classes

Paper Title

“Fast, easy, simple”? SES-diverse transfer students' sociotechnical experiences registering for classes

Publication Info

• Topic area: Socioeconomic equity in higher education registration systems
• Keywords: SES-diverse students, transfer students, class registration, inclusivity bugs, higher education, computing education, sociotechnical systems, equity, SESMag, registration risks

Background and Problem

• Problem / challenge: Registration processes in higher education are understudied, particularly their impact on students from diverse socioeconomic statuses (SES). Existing systems may unintentionally disadvantage lower-SES students, leading to barriers in academic success.
• Significance: Registration issues can have long-term consequences, such as delayed graduation, financial aid loss, and increased dropout rates, disproportionately affecting lower-SES students.
• Motivation and related work: Prior studies have explored sociotechnical systems in education and equity issues in computing education, but none have specifically addressed SES-diverse transfer students' experiences with registration systems. This paper fills that gap by investigating SES-inclusivity bugs and risks in registration workflows.

Solution

• Proposed approach: The study employs the Socioeconomic Inclusiveness Magnifier (SESMag) method to identify and analyze SES-inclusivity bugs in registration systems, focusing on transfer students.
• Novelty:
  1. First field investigation into SES-diverse CS transfer students' registration experiences.
  2. Application of the SESMag method to uncover SES-equity issues in university registration systems.
  3. Identification of SES-inclusivity bugs, registration risks, and downstream problems across multiple universities.
  4. Recommendations for sociotechnical fixes to improve equity in registration systems.
• Procedure and key techniques:
  1. Study 1: Case study with education professionals using SESMag to identify SES-inclusivity bugs.
  2. Study 2: Interviews with faculty, staff, and students from 8 universities to validate and generalize findings.
  3. Study 3: Observations of 14 SES-diverse transfer students registering for classes, combined with surveys and think-aloud protocols.

Results

• Concrete findings:
  1. Identified 5 SES-inclusivity bugs, encountered 30 times, with lower-SES students experiencing them 72% more often than higher-SES students.
  2. Found 5 registration risks, with lower-SES students encountering risks at half the rate of higher-SES students but experiencing a 3.85x higher conversion rate of risks into problems.
  3. Lower-SES students anticipated downstream problems (e.g., financial aid loss, enrollment issues) 3 times more often than higher-SES students.
• Advantage over baselines: This study extends prior work by focusing on the intersection of SES diversity and sociotechnical registration systems, offering actionable insights into equity issues not previously addressed.
• Experiments / evaluation:
  • Study 1: SESMag walkthrough with university staff to identify bugs and risks.
  • Study 2: Semi-structured interviews with representatives from 8 universities to validate findings.
  • Study 3: Think-aloud sessions with 14 transfer students, triangulated with surveys and interviews.
• Limitations and future work:
  • Lack of controls in real-world case studies.
  • Focus on CS students may not generalize to other majors.
  • Results primarily applicable to universities using the same registration portal; further studies needed in other contexts.
  • Potential for additional inclusivity bugs if other SESMag personas (e.g., Fee) were used.

Summary

This paper investigates the sociotechnical registration experiences of SES-diverse transfer students, revealing 5 SES-inclusivity bugs, 5 registration risks, and 3 downstream problems disproportionately affecting lower-SES students. Using the SESMag method, the study identifies systemic barriers and proposes sociotechnical fixes, such as improving advising accessibility and simplifying communications. Findings suggest that registration processes are inequitable for lower-SES students, with implications for over 700 universities using similar systems. Future work should explore broader contexts and additional SESMag personas to uncover further equity issues.