[Course Settings] Restrict Users to Their Own Section(s)

[millerjm]

I'm resubmitting the idea Limit visibility to Section Users submitted originally by Wade James and supporting information added by Ben Reynolds and  Melody CSUCanvasAdmin-Brake

When dealing with multiple sections (created manually or cross-listed), the ability to easily limit visibility to other sections users is very important in many cases to comply with FERPA or to maintain control and order in large courses with many sections and teachers/TAs.

A single, course-settings-level check-box would modify user privileges from "this user can view students in any course section" to "limit this user to only see fellow section users".

This can currently be turned on one user at a time. How do I limit a user to only view other users in the same course section?  It should be made more clear - it is not just one click per student to change this permission - it is actually 3 actions per user enrolled in the course. From the People starting point - it is (1) to select the user's name, (2) to set 'limit this user to only see fellow section users', and (3) to return back to the main People listing page [or backspace].  So, it really looks more like...

(click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), (click-click-backspace), ...

vs.

click.

In a course with multiple sections (we have several courses with with approximately 75 sections, 42 TAs, 4 Teachers and 2000 students), this is simply not a viable option.

We don't need to do this across the board, but we do have non-academic courses such as resources or labs that use these courses.

Comments from Instructure

:smileyinfo: Sometimes, with the volume of ideas we have come in, we miss a duplicate.  This idea has a duplicate with Course-Level Setting: Restrict Users to Their Own Section(s).  Both threads will receive the same updates.

[Nancy_Webb_CCSF]

I agree,  @kmeeusen ​, we want it set in the Settings/Sections area, by section, where the instructor can choose with a checkbox or radio buttons.  Thanks  @olsona ​ for making it so clear.

I can only hope this will be available before next semester starts.  What a lot of work it is to do on an individual basis.  Not to mention keeping up with adds at the start of the semester.

[John_Lowe]

Exactly!  Allow system admins to set the default behavior, but also allow instructors to *easily* change this setting in their own courses or sections.  If admins set the default to "on" for the section privacy wall, allow instructors to tear down the wall in their own course settings.  If admins set the default to "off" for the section privacy wall, but a situation arises where instructors need to separate their sections by the wall, allow instructors to turn on the section privacy wall in their course settings.  Both ways make this setting change much easier to implement than is currently possible.

This gives the best of both worlds for those campuses who prefer a more conservative approach to FERPA and to those who are more liberal with their application of these restrictions.  We have historically been in the latter camp ourselves -- allowing instructors to pretty much do whatever they want in their courses as long as there was some academic purpose.  But that July statement from LeRoy Rooker made our institution shift its view 180°.

[John_Lowe]

I really like the idea of admins being able to set the default behavior at the account and sub-account level.  There are some departments that may want the section privacy wall enabled for all courses as the default and others who prefer not to have that default setting enabled.  For example, if the institution decides not to enable this as the default at the account level, but the Law School does want it enabled for all of their courses by default, an account/sub-account level setting could easily accommodate both of these default preferences.

[cward]

We've added this request to the Canvas backlog. Although I can't communicate any timelines, know that we'll keep evaluating this request as we plan our development sprints. Thank you for taking the time to vote and participate in the community!

[craigring]

Hello all,

It looks like the new addition to enrolment CSVs in the latest Beta Release Notes may make this a LOT easier. 

https://community.canvaslms.com/docs/DOC-9113-canvas-beta-release-notes-2017-03-20

Have a look at the final Platform/Integration update. 

Thanks,

Craig

[Renee_Carney]

Please take a look at the SIS Import Format Documentation  section of the Canvas Beta Release Notes (2017-03-20).  Adding an end date to courses that you would like move to 'past enrollments' might help with this idea.

[John_Lowe]

The SIS imports are a step in the right direction, but in cases of instructors using the native cross listing feature in Canvas, the SIS will never know the sections were cross listed.  A course-level setting is still needed.

[Renee_Carney]

Find more information about the feature mentioned in the 2017-03-20 Beta Notes in the Canvas Production Release Notes (2017-04-01) 

[Renee_Carney]

Totally agree and understand John, but it's nice to have a bulk option!

[Renee_Carney]

The Radar idea stage has been removed from the Feature Idea Process.  You can read more about why in the blog post Adaptation: Feature Idea Process Changes.

This change will only impact the stage sort of this idea and will not change how it is voted on or how it is considered during prioritization activities.  This change will streamline the list of ideas 'open for voting', making it easier for you to see the true top voted ideas in one sort, here.