At The Daily Cardinal, we have been supportive of the Madison Initiative for Undergraduates (MIU) and its original intent: retaining UW's quality of education while helping foster economic diversity in the student population through increased scholarships and competitive tuition.
While most of the 114 MIU proposals, including the 31 heard by Chancellor Martin last week, seemed to fit that criteria, one pitch was particularly surprising.
The idea for a $6.7 million e-learning classroom seemed like an idea that needed added scrutiny, especially since only $12 million, according to ASM Vice Chair Tom Templeton, in MIU funds remain to be handed out for the proposals being considered.
According to Aaron Brower, Vice Provost for Teaching and Learning and a member of the MIU Oversight committee, the center would consist of multiple computer pods or tables, each holding six to eight computers. The classrooms would be used for math classes, utilizing computer-based quizzes; language classes, for web-based activities like chatting with foreign students; and eventually engineering classes.
In its defense, the e-learning proposal does not expect to receive the full $6.7 million. Its realistic supporters, including engineering Professor John Booske say the center will probably not get the full amount initially requested in the 10-page proposal.
But the e-learning classroom would not be a one-time expenditure. Most of the MIU money being requested would be spent on renovating large spaces, probably in College and/or Wendt Library, to become ""e-learning centers."" The cost of repair and replacement for what could be dozens of computers and cost of what sponsors hope would be software made in-house could cause this proposal to be much more expensive than it seems. Committing with start-up money now would require continued expenditures over the years, before even adding plans of expansion the center sponsors hope for.
Sponsors argue that the center could actually be cheaper in the long run than current alternatives. Prof. Booske said that the costs of heating and cooling a large lecture hall throughout influxes of people and seasons is a hidden expense often overlooked. He sees the e-learning center, which could be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, as a more efficient way to serve students, with costs like heating, cooling, and equipment replacement kept constant.
But in many ways, the e-learning center seems similar to a room for forced group work on computers. How necessary is this with the same libraries housing the center computer labs? Not to mention, for the minority of students without laptops, computers are available for free usage from libraries.
Incorporating more technology into the classroom setting is a laudable and ambitious goal, if only to keep UW above the curve of technological innovation among our academic peers.
But we question the suggestion of funding such costly renovations with MIU money. If done properly, the e-learning center could indeed help tackle the main focus of the MIU—alleviating enrollment problems in bottleneck courses. But this does not seem like the most cost effective use of MIU money.
As Booske said, there are other sources of funding available that he, and others, hope can be used for such extensive renovations. Libraries have annual budgets that include money for remodeling.
Templeton is hopeful about fundraising possibilities for such an expensive endeavor.
We would rather see these proposed millions spent hiring new TAs and professors so that we can create more sections in bottleneck courses and increase student interaction with human instructors and experts, not just computer screens and fellow students.
Technology can be an important component for our school to stay competitive and interesting. But technology ranks second to the importance of the quality and quantity of faculty we need to bring in to teach.
