Last Friday, the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities released a memorandum to Ontario universities clarifying how the government’s ancillary fee regulations apply to new online applications, which is welcome news to university students across Ontario.
We blogged last year in November and January about potential violations of the ancillary fee regulations at two Ontario universities. After further investigation at our other campuses indicated violations were likely more widespread, former OUSA President Meaghan Coker wrote in February to the Honourable John Milloy, Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. In the letter, she detailed our concerns regarding the ancillary fee regulations and asked for a memorandum to be sent to all Ontario universities clarifying the current regulations and reminding institutions of their important role in ensuring compliance with the provisions.
The fees in question are for online products that faculty members require students to purchase for online assignments, tests and examinations that constitute a portion of the student’s final grade. These products, including applications such as Aplia, Lyrnyx, Mastering Chemistry, MyCanadianCompLab and Wiley Plus, often expire after the course or academic year is complete.
The Ministry’s memorandum outlined that fees charged for the administration of assignments, tests and examinations for credit courses fall into the category of tuition-related ancillary fees, which are levied to cover the costs of items normally paid for out of operating revenue. Tuition-related ancillary fees have been disallowed by the ancillary fee regulations since September 1, 1991. Though the emergence of online learning creates exciting new possibilities for teaching, learning and student success, the Ministry has thankfully clarified that rules put in place to prevent unfair fees still apply to this new frontier.
Students understand that many of the violations uncovered by students over the past several months have been inadvertent, stemming largely from a misunderstanding of regulations rather than a conscious attempt to undermine them. That is why we are encouraged by the government’s suggestion to share the clarifications and ancillary fee regulations with all academic departments and faculties.
Additionally, the ancillary fee regulations found in the Ontario Operating Funds Distribution Manual have not been significantly changed since the 1990s, well before the widespread integration of online tools into classrooms. We want to be clear that we are not suggesting these online applications should be banned on campuses. However, some universities and colleges have avoided the use of these fees by making online assignments optional, by making accommodations for those that choose not to purchase the applications, by developing their own online assignments using the university’s online learning environment, or by having the university purchase the online access codes for students though the operating budget, as it does with other software. While the latter option is the most preferable, all of these solutions are viewed by OUSA as acceptable mechanisms of rectifying the ancillary fee violations associated with online marking and assignment tools.
The regulations regarding compulsory ancillary fees are of the utmost importance to students. Resting decision-making in the hands of student governments has been a priority for our organization since our inception. These regulations were put in place to prevent universities from shifting operating costs onto students through additional fees. We understand that some additional costs associated with learning materials are allowable if retained by the student. These online access fees, however, represented a downloading of the cost of instruction onto students through additional ancillary fees.
We want to thank Minister Milloy and the Ministry for clarifying this important matter for students. We look forward to continuing to work with institutions and government on how to improve the student experience while ensuring a fair cost sharing model.
-Sam Andrey
Executive Director
Interesting. If the rules haven’t changed mostly since the 90s, that means OUSA’s increased fees that didn’t go through a referendum(something that I repeatedly told the UWSA council during meetings and asked OUSA steering commmittee members about in emails) so CLEARLY the UWSA is in contempt of this fee protocol as is every OUSA member school. Perhaps a memorandum should have been delivered to OUSA’s home office?
Thanks for commenting on this, as it’s an often-misunderstood component of the ancillary fee regulations. The regulations exempt all existing and future fees established by elected student governments, including those from referenda sponsored by them. As OUSA’s fee has been established by student governments, it falls within the purview of this exemption. There exist no government regulations as to how student governments can establish, approve or increases fees (whether by referenda, council vote, board vote, etc.), and that remains at the discretion of the student government. There exist a wide variety of approval mechanisms across the province.
However, OUSA’s bylaws prevent fee increases above inflation as defined by the Ontario Consumer Price Index without a two-thirds majority vote of Steering Committee and at the General Assembly, a democratic assembly made up of proportional student representation from each member school. After such a fee increase passes, OUSA members then should approve the increase as defined by their internal procedures.
If you have any more questions about the fee regulations, or how OUSA functions, please don’t hesitate to contact us.