On the paper trail: Senate and Admin face off over printed schedules

-- Meghan Dusek

“I see the Senate as the student voice, really,” said Student Senate president Melissa Heinz when we met to discuss some new changes on campus. “We have a unique student body that’s not represented all the time. A lot of our students are too busy with their jobs or families or other things to take the time to be able to pay attention to what’s happening on campus.”

Heinz paused for a second. “And this is affecting a lot of students.”

This change that has already been implemented is the end of printed class schedules. Formerly a familiar site in racks at all three campuses, Metropolitan State University will no longer provide printed schedule booklets and is replacing them entirely with an online version, accessible at www.metrostate.edu. The decision is quickly becoming a hotly contested debate between the Student Senate and members of the administration.

The Student Senate has taken up arms—in a grassroots sense. They’ve done a survey with a fair sampling of the student population—400—with over seventy percent of respondents saying they have used a hard copy of the course schedule and think it’s a useful resource. On Oct. 17 the Senate passed this referendum, unanimously and unambiguously:
Whereas the students of Metropolitan State University are a diverse population;
Whereas not all students have readily available Internet access or computer resources;
Whereas the hard copy of Class Schedules are viewed as an asset by many Metropolitan State University students in their planning and registration process;
Whereas the Administration has announced their decision to terminate the distribution of printed schedules with an online version;

Be it resolved that the Metropolitan State University Student Senate finds the decision to be ill advised and finds that the students were not consulted before this decision was made; Further be it resolved that the Student Senate requests that the Administration accept a compromise to make available hard copy Class Schedules in lower quantities.

On the administration’s behalf, Provost William Lowe and Interim Vice President Paul Hesterman provided me with the framework behind the decision, made last year with the support of the Deans and faculty. “The print class schedule is inaccurate the moment it goes to the printer,” they said in a joint e-mail response. “Thus, students who relied on the print class schedule were working with incomplete and inaccurate information.”

Lowe and Hesterman also cited the fact that a “significant proportion” of the schedules were never picked up and ended up recycled.

“In this context,” the e-mail continues, “it did not seem good stewardship of university financial and staff resources to continue to print a document that was being used less and less and by fewer and fewer people.”

The Student Senate sees it differently.

“The administration talks a lot about the leftover schedules,” Heinz said. “That’s because they were printing around 12,000 every semester, and enrollment is only around 7,000 per semester…well, of course there’s going to be extra schedules!”

Student Senator Tim Page related a story about meeting with his advisor and trying to plan for spring semester. “It was difficult,” he said. Page and his advisor had a hard time searching and finding the classes, as well as looking at the prerequisites and keeping in mind courses that he had already taken—things that students universally accomplish in printed schedules with highlighters and margin notes.

So far, staff support seems split. Heinz informed me that the faculty senate is preparing their own resolution in support of printed schedules; Lowe and Hesterman claim that the majority of the staff is in support of the decision.

They did address some concerns of the Student Senate. One is the problem that Page and his advisor ran into—the printed schedule provides important, convenient registration information like deadlines, policies, etc. The administration responds that they are creating a new guide especially for registering, to be updated annually, with information other than course listings. The Student Senate also drew support from other MNSCU campuses. “No other schools have done this,” Heinz said. “Actually, most campuses take a lot of time with their class schedules and use them as a recruiting tool, which we should, too.” Heinz cited the clear advantages of placing the schedules in high schools and community colleges, where Metropolitan State draws a portion of their student population.

The administration has other plans. “We recognize the need for registration materials for current students and different materials targeted for recruiting new students,” the joint e-mail read. “In order to address some of the concerns, the university committed to preparing materials more appropriate than the class schedule for marketing and student recruiting.” The hope is to put the resources formerly reserved for the class schedule to better use for providing information to potential and current students.

As previously stated by Heinz, Metropolitan State entertains a varied student body with a variety of resources (and lack thereof). A large concern of the Student Senate is how the lack of printed schedules will affect students who have no or limited computer access; and how this action further drives the wedge between students and administration.

“It’s alarming,” Heinz said. “It’s alarming that they’ve made this decision without showing any proof of student consent, no research, no feedback. It’s alarming that a school that has staked its reputation on ‘serving the underserved’ has totally alienated a portion of its student body.”

Vote Intern Chad Frederick, who sat in on my meeting with Heinz, quoted several sections from the Equal Opportunity and Diversity office’s regarding Metropolitan State’s mission to not only “serve the underserved” but not to discriminate on any basis—including economic, or one’s computer-savvy.

Lowe and Hesterman point out that students have access to computers in labs on all campuses and libraries—“with university email the official means of communication to the students, the student portal the primary means for providing students information about their records and accounts, and many courses using online communication and resources extensively, students are expected to access and use online resources.” A PDF version of the schedule is available online, affording students the option of printing off select pages for their planning.

In terms of alienation, Lowe and Hesterman see a different side. In terms of the ever-evolving schedule—the print version of which, they say, is out of date before it hits the racks—it isn’t helpful for any student to be relying on inaccurate or incomplete information. Nor is it conducive to “enable students to avoid computer usage,” and furthermore, “it does not seem right to direct the least accurate information to underserved students.”

In light of these seemingly diametrically opposed groups, both have hopes of compromise. “They know our opinion,” Heinz said. “I’m optimistic they’ll make the best choice.” Likewise, Lowe and Hesterman ended our e-mail correspondence with an invitation to the Student Senate “to work with us as we craft materials that are correct, useful and student-centered.” It shows that the motives behind each stance are the same: the best interests of us, the student body, particularly those who can’t speak for themselves.