: Enrollment opens immediately if no enrollment start date is set (causing confusion for future-dated courses)

Hello everyone,

I’d like to highlight an issue we recently faced with one of our clients, and I think it may point to an area in Open edX where the default behavior could be improved.


The situation we observed

  • A course was created in 2022 with a course start date set in 2024.

  • No enrollment start date or enrollment end date was configured in Studio.

What happened:

  • Students were able to enroll in the course immediately from 2022 onward, even though the course itself was not supposed to start until 2024.

  • As expected, these students could not actually perform activities or access content until the course start date arrived.

  • However, their enrollments were still recorded in the system, so when the course team later advertised the course for pre-enrollment in 2024, they were surprised to already see ~100 students enrolled from earlier years.


Why this is confusing

For new course teams and institutions, this behavior is very unintuitive:

  • The natural assumption is that if you leave enrollment start date blank, enrollment will only open at the same time as the course start date.

  • Instead, the platform silently defaults to “enrollment is open immediately,” which can cause enrollments years before the actual launch.

  • To instructors or administrators, this looks like a bug or misconfiguration. In our client’s case, they thought the dashboard was showing incorrect data because they hadn’t advertised the course yet.


Possible explanations

From testing, we see two scenarios that could cause this:

  1. Enrollment dates not set — When no enrollment start date is defined, Open edX assumes enrollment is open from course creation time.

  2. Course was previously active — If the course was ever launched before, those earlier enrollments remain even if the course is relaunched later for a new run.

In our case, it seems more likely that the first scenario applied, since the students could enroll but could not actually perform any activities before the course start.


Why this matters

This is not technically a bug, but it creates confusion for both instructors and learners:

  • Instructors see unexplained early enrollments.

  • Learners may be able to “join” a course but then find that they cannot do anything, which is a poor experience.

  • For organizations running multiple MOOCs, this can create misleading enrollment reports and complicate relaunches.


Suggested improvement

A more intuitive default would be:

  • If a course has a future start date and the enrollment start date is left blank, the system should default enrollment start to the course start date, OR

  • At minimum, Studio should prompt course authors to explicitly set enrollment dates when scheduling a course.

This way, course teams won’t be surprised by early enrollments, and learners won’t be confused by being able to enroll in a course they cannot yet access.


Question to the community

  • Have others run into this same situation?

  • Would the community support adjusting this default behavior, or at least making it more explicit in Studio?
    Would love to make a PR for this once i get community views about it

Thanks,

2 Likes

I’ve never had a “problem” with this default behaviour, but I do concur with your reasoning, I think either making enrollment start a required field, or defaulting to the course start date if undefined both seem like reasonable solutions to me.

To take it a step further, depending on the community desires, maybe one of those options could be implemented as the “new default” and have a customisable (MFE API?) feature flag allowing site admins to define their individual preferred behaviour as an override? eg. DEFAULT_ENROLLMENT_START_DATE = {required | optional | use_course_startdate} (pseudo-code options, not an exact recommendation)

1 Like

Hi @Abdul_Muqadim ! This is the perfect time to make a Product Proposal for the change in behavior you describe, for the Open edX Community Product Team to consider. See https://openedx.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/COMM/pages/3875962884/How+to+submit+an+open+source+contribution+for+Product+Review - given what you’ve written up, I would make this an official Product Proposal and follow the process for that.

1 Like

@joel.edwards I agree with your point that while this default isn’t technically “wrong,” it does feel unintuitive for many course teams. Making enrollment start either a required field, or defaulting it to the course start date if left blank, both seem like strong candidates for a better baseline.

Hi @sarina , thanks a lot for pointing me in the right direction!

That sounds perfect — I’d love to work on this and will add it to my priority list. I’ll go through the Product Proposal process as you suggested and draft something based on the write-up we’ve discussed here.

Really appreciate the guidance — looking forward to contributing this improvement back to the community!