Opinion: Colleges should invest in software, not buildings
By Donn Davis, Washington Post
For decades, America’s colleges and universities have been on a massive spending spree, building new dorms, student centers, sports complexes, and academic buildings. Despite all these expenditures, the key metrics are not much better. Graduation rates haven’t increased at the pace of much of Europe and Japan. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the percentage of young Americans who are less educated than their parents exceeds other leading nations.
What if the leaders of our colleges and universities had channeled just a fraction of this edifice-complex capital into technology improvements instead?
In technology terms, higher-education has spent massive amounts in “hardware” while dramatically under-investing in “software.” Software is the technology, tools and systems that make any business or organization more effective and efficient. Ask any of the tens of millions of students back on campus this fall at any of the thousands of universities and colleges: “How has technology been used to improve the classroom or enhance the learning experience” and you will get a blank expression. Technology has infused and changed every part of this generation’s life – except for education.
Despite an increase in edtech spending, up 11 percent from 2012 to $13 billion, 62 percent of that is still spent on laptops, tablets, and netbooks, which can only service one student at a time and quickly become outdated. With more and more students in the position to provide their own devices it is important to not overspend on hardware and allocate money to software programs that can run on multiple devices and be used by thousands of students at once. Schools will still need to provide a small pool of school-owned devices to be borrowed but this mentality will reduce costs.
Donn, I hate to point out the obvious, but every time you turn around in the Technology Industry there is new “Software” known as The Operating System.
Microsoft Windows has gone through 7 major revisions in 16 years and Apple’s Mac OS X has gone through 9 major revisions in 13 years! And I can’t even keep track of the revisions to the Hand Held/Tablet market.
I would suggest that the Software Cycle has gone too far too fast for students or people to keep up with.
Look at the OS Product Life Cycle as a guide to Technology turnover. Ex. Windows 7 was introduced in July 2009 and Microsoft will support this platform until 2020 or ten years; sounds reasonable to me.
“What if the leaders of our colleges and universities had channeled just a fraction of this edifice-complex capital into technology improvements instead?”
“Certainly some of it went to luxury or ego projects that do not have the impact for students that investing in technology innovations could have.
The building craze is a major contributor to annual tuition increases”
Which truly is a large part of why Measure F needs a NO Vote !
Toxic. The last decade saw a rise of Student Enrollment of about 30%. There was a slight dip in enrollment the past year or two because some students are finding jobs and leaving school, but projections are for student enrollments to increase in the next several years. I am not sure about improvements at college sport complexes like football stadiums but clearly more students means you need more facilities.
Hard to miss the irony of a measure F ad banner above the article!
Good laugh to begin the day on!
Btw I really appreciate this E paper!
Wait a minute Rock, are you referring to student enrollment throughout the state or at LTCC? If you research LTCC’s enrollment, is has clearly dropped and continues to drop. The only thing that has increased over the last several years is online enrollment. With that in mind, no need for buildings – No on Measure F!
Online education IS the future. Heck, for many, it is the present.
State run education is too bloated with bureaucracy to jump into the inevitable. Slow and unresponsive to the needs of today’s reality.
Just because something is projected, doesn’t mean it will happen. It’s all someone’s dream that all these things will happen if they get the homeowners hard earned money. And if it’s a big bust, what do we get back? An apology? NO on F.
Linda, there has been a uptick in LTCC enrollment this year of over 15% and they are working on increasing it even more.
Dog though online education is increasing it is really not for everyine, much like home schooling is not for everyone. it takes disipline to stay up on the courses. I know quite a few ltcc students that have tried both online and live classes and alot of the online classes more than half of the students I know dont finish them whereas they do fine with the live classes.
Very interesting that the pro Measure F people have stopped talking about their plans to build a soccer stadium for their year-round teams, so they can recruit players to LTCC. Plans must include a dome.
We have the most “Gold” in the country thanks to 3 Sierra At Tahoe girls and yet LTCC hasn’t been able to capitalize on that. Seems like a missed opportunity. (who wants to live in dorms or play next to the poop pond and that awful smell, anyway? just sayin’)
Glad to hear it Reloman, but it’s been years of declining enrollment. It will hard to sustain what is already in place, without an expansion. I don’t want to see LTCC fail, but this Measure is way overboard. It’s hard to justify more builidng when many programs have failed and are sitting vacant. Why can’t the cafeteria, art gallery, and gymnasium be re-purposed? There’s lots of space for classrooms if used properly. Can’t half of the library be re-purposed? I have no faith that more building will produce anything but the same. Sorry, still No on F.
All of this would be moot if the previous and current administrations at LTCC had simply lived within their means, IMHO. It is a lesson that should be heeded by many government entities. Many taxpayers are tired of paying for your judgement errors.