As the tidal wave of finals looms overhead, I find myself laptop-less, victim of a failed hard drive — forced to find refuge in the cacophonous lobbies of Alderman, Clemons and Clark Library. The simplest of assignments takes me hours to complete as I procrastinate at every chance I get. But when the time comes to finally print out my excuse of an essay, one thing baffles me above all else: Why do I have to pay for printing?
What if I were to tell you that all athletes receive free printing? That they have an academic center buried within John Paul Jones Area where they print to their hearts’ delight? Or that professors and teaching assistants have their own communal offices scattered throughout buildings — complete with unrestricted printing? Well, as an athlete and reporter, I can verify these statements.
I ask, why can’t the general student body have this same access to free printing? What makes athletes, professors and teaching assistants more important than your run-of-the-mill student?
Let us take a look at the statistics: Clark University conducted a study in which researchers annotated the average use of paper per month, totalling 100 cases of paper. Considering the University has a student body roughly eight times the size of Clark’s we might assume the University uses roughly 800 cases per month or 7,200 cases per academic year (beginning of September to end of May, roughly).
Considering an average case runs for around $50 and contains exactly 5,000 pages, that puts the average price per sheet at around $0.01. For the sake of argument we will bump this price up to $0.05 in order to factor in the average price of ink and other printing related resources.
Now realize that the University charges students $0.08 per page. While only $0.03 more, this disparity, over the course of 7,200 cases, results in a revenue of over $1,080,000. Sure, the University has to pay for ink, printer maintenance, etc., but this seems egregious. Regular students are paying for their peers and teachers to have free printing. In no way can such inequality be justified.
Proponents of the current pay-as-you go system have several arguments. Their first: the pay-as-you-go method prevents wasteful printing. Moreover, it saves the University money and benefits the environment.
I would argue, however, that such a claim cannot be made. Sure, students might print more liberally with unrestricted access, but as students paying yearly tuition of over $23,000, or $50,000 for out-of-staters, we have a right to print for free.
To claim the University institutes this high charge in order to benefit the environment is preposterous. Those who truly seek to benefit the environment will do everything in their power to avoid printing regardless of the University’s restrictions. Similarly, students who rarely think of the environment will not suddenly change their perspective because of pricing. They will either continue to print, or find other cheaper outlets.
I propose a system in which all students are granted the same set number of free pages per year. This number should be calculated based upon average professorial needs. For example, the University of Pittsburgh allocates students 900 “print units” per semester — a number based on a student’s average need. Black and white sheets cost one point whereas color sheets cost seven. In this system, students in fear of spending their own cash knowingly manage their points so that they only print when necessary.
This proposed system both combats wastefulness and provides students with a fairer alternative to the University’s current system. Students prone to over-printing will still have to pay in the end, while responsible printers won’t shed as much of their own cash.
In any instance, the current system excludes athletes, professors and teaching assistants, and instead places full responsibility of the University’s paper costs on the rest of the University’s student body. The exclusive system the University has now is an unfair and unjust system that unfairly benefits the University administration. We should not have our money sucked away from us due to printing, of all things.The system must be changed.
Nate Menninger is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at n.menninger@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Big donors are dominating the Board of Visitors
By Ryan Williams | YesterdaySuch appointments being dictated by connections and donations creates a Board composed of big donors instead of members passionate about University goals.
EDITORIAL: Collectives are a misinterpretation of the mission of NIL
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoA large driver of this inequality comes in the form of collectives, the structures many schools use to organize their NIL payments.
CARTER: Data science without sustainability is insufficient
By Nathaniel Carter | 6 days agoThe University appears committed to a future defined by data, but lacks the dedication to meeting this future’s energy needs in a sustainable way.
