STARTING next fall, Information Technology and Communication, or ITC, will change their computing labs to a setting unfamiliar to many current students. Two of the computer labs will be stripped of their desktop computer facilities and redesigned to accommodate students with laptop computers. The proposed changes are illogical and do not consider the position of economically disadvantaged students.
The changes that have been approved concern the first-year computer labs in Dabney and Tuttle residence halls. Starting next year, both of these computer labs no longer will possess the numerous desktop computers accessible to all students. Instead, the desktop computers will be replaced with comfortable furniture and laptop hookups. These will enable laptop users to gain access to the Internet by connecting their personal laptops to the outlets or by taking advantage of the wireless Internet access supplied. The laptops, incidentally, will have to be students' personal ones, because ITC is not going to be renting laptops or placing any laptops within the lab itself.
These measures to transform the first-year labs are negative and elitist, especially when their consequences are examined. One of the reasons why the labs in first-year dorms are popular is because they encourage a work-type atmosphere: The current environment places the computers facing away from each other in a formal arrangement, and thus emphasizes work over socializing more so than the new format, which is a more informal setting.
The labs, unlike suites, do not have the comforts or distractions that a dorm room provides, and to outfit the computer lab with comfortable furniture runs the risk of turning the lab into an informal lounge rather than a work environment. By trying to create a more friendly and comfortable work environment, ITC is taking away one of the most appealing aspects of the lab, which is its discouragement of relaxation and socializing. If someone wants to do that, then he might as well stay in his dorm room.
However, this preference of work over comfort is minor when compared to the larger problem that ITC's new proposal creates. The new proposal sacrifices students' convenience if they do not want to shell out money for a laptop. This is biased and elitist. Though it is not a majority, there are many students who attend the University who do not own a PC. Instead, they are forced to use one in a computer lab, and this new policy is detrimental to those who cannot afford to buy a laptop or who would rather buy a desktop for a lesser price. ITC is taking for granted an advantage that many students may not be able to afford.
Mary Hanna, the Manager for Labs and Software for ITC, attempted to justify the changing of the work oriented computer lab to a "laptop lounge area." She pointed to the large number of students who do own laptop computers and can take advantage of the labs. However, according to the ITC Web site, three times as many students in last year's entering class brought desktop computers than those who brought laptops. As long as there are people who own desktops or simply don't own computers, their needs have to be taken into account as well.
It is illogical to expect that nobody will be negatively affected by this. Since dorm computer lounges are both close and convenient as they currently exist, nothing is being done for the particular students who are poor and either cannot afford laptops or computers to begin with. A response to that could be that these students can use other labs. In other words, students without laptops simply will not have access to resources they once had, and these students' needs have been disregarded by ITC in this situation.
All of the emphasis has been placed on owning laptops rather than the trouble that some people have affording them. If this is the best justification - or lack of justification - that ITC can give for excluding the economically impoverished, then the plans for the new "study laptop lounges" are biased and disgraceful. The labs should be inclusive to people of all economic backgrounds, and for this purpose, the current desktops are the best solution, since anyone is able to use them.
The plans for the ITC labs are illogical and disregard the needs of many students. While converting a lab into a study lounge is bad enough, the situation becomes even worse if that lounge becomes economically selective. The justification for this is poor at best, and as long as the University is making attempts to diversify itself, it should start by making its educational resources available to the entire student body.
(Kevin James Wong's column appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at kwong@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 3 hours agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 2 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
