News | Arts | Features | Opinion | Sports | Staff | Archives | Email the Editor | Email the Webmaster
by Michael Andersen
News Editor
Speaking before Joint Board one week after the student body overwhelmingly approved an initiative calling for more dorm labs, Dean of the College Jim Swartz and Information Technology Services (ITS) Director Bill Francis argued that fiscal discipline will motivate what they called a “modest and reasonable trimming” of general-usage computing services.
Under plans circulated by ITS last month, about half the machines from the Younker Memorial Computing Area (YMCA), which is slated for closure in May, would be used to replace older machines from existing labs, and none would be used to create any new labs. The plan would transplant one of South Campus’s three labs to the new East Campus dorms, three of which will open next fall.
No other labs would be closed under the plan.
The plan also includes the further improvement of Grinnell’s two-year-old wireless network, which Francis has long argued will reinforce a recent trend toward students’ bringing their own computers to campus. In turn, he said Monday, increased usage of ResNet (which has recently topped two-thirds of the student body) and of the wireless network (with 158 student users) will take pressure off overcrowded labs.
In the wake of the ITS proposal, 94 percent of voters—out of the 68 percent of the student body that voted—had supported an initiative calling for “at least two 24-hour dorm labs on East Campus and one in Gates Pit using the YMCA’s computers,” as well as the retention of all existing dorm labs.
Swartz and Francis said they were not yet familiar with the initiative, but Francis told the S&B when the ITS plan was released that “reiteration of points already brought up” by opponents to the plan would “not be persuasive.” The administrators did not comment on a draft of the initiative provided by SGA members.
One issue that had not been frequently discussed was brought up at the meeting, and seemed to emerge as the central reason for ITS’s decision to reduce public lab facilities: expense. When Erik Burton ’03, who came to Joint Board to express his opposition to the new plan, said that lab upkeep seemed like at most a marginal cost to ITS, Swartz responded that marginal costs add up.
“Jacob [Kaufman-Osborn ‘04] comes to the budget steering committee and says we need to have a really low tuition increase,” said Swartz, referring to the student representative on the committee. “That’s how they’re linked.”
Other students countered Francis’s contention that increased ResNet usage necessarily removes the need for computer labs, saying they are useful for specialized software, and that many students may have computers but not printers, or may have to leave their rooms to let a roommate sleep. Still others said that laptop purchases added expense to the already-great cost of attending Grinnell.
Francis responded that the total number of college-owned computers has actually increased in recent years, with the creation of a lab in Burling Library and a number of specialized machines in departmental facilities. He also noted that, between college- and student-owned computers, there are now more computers than students on campus.
Students could afford to forfeit some convenience in order to use those computers, he said, but the college should focus on making personal computers more attractive rather than continuing to fund public labs. “The question is,” he said, “can we get to a point where we can provide the support where the students who have computers will feel comfortable using them?”
And as for expense, Francis said, ITS had proposed a system of financial aid for computer purchases when it had drafted a proposal to require laptops for all incoming students. When students seemed to oppose that plan, ITS discarded it.
Furthermore, Francis argued, student computer groups have a long tradition of resisting changes. In 1990, he recalled, the Student Academic Computing Committee (SACC) and the User Consultant Corps—the two groups that have led opposition to the current ITS plan—had vehemently opposed the computer labs’ move from VAX terminals to IBM PCs and Macintoshes, saying the old platform fostered a unique community among computer users.
Francis also suggested that initiatives like last month’s, or the petition that drew 914 student signatures for a similar proposal at the end of last semester, may be driven by a core of dedicated activists, while most students will follow their lead without caring deeply about the issue.
Last month’s initiative was sponsored by SACC, a student group that aims to improve student access to technology, and by SGA president Alejandro Oyarzabal ’04. Though visiting SACC members and many senators argued against the ITS plans, Oyarzabal, chairing the meeting, did not voice an opinion.
Swartz and Francis, for their part, seemed firm in their dedication to the current plan.
“The number ‘1000 student-owned computers’ sticks in my head,” Francis said, “and it’s really very convincing.”