 |
 |
The UA is considering eliminating the written course catalog in lieu of the online version. While this is certainly progressive, eliminating the written catalog is unnecessary, unreasonable and unwise.
Catalog readers and computer illiterates, beware. The information superhighway may be winding its path into your academic lives, welcomed or not. University administrators are considering substituting the written catalog you've come to know and love with a digitized version, complete with pretty pictures and links.
The problem does not lie wholly in the on-line catalog itself. It will be more informational and current than the written version. Increased clarity will come with the new medium as well. The fallacy lies in abandoning the bound form of the catalog completely.
The written version, despite its deficiencies, remains essential for UA students. Deserting the catalog, a book created for student convenience, will ironically cause students substantial inconvenience.
This is partly due to the lack of complete computer access for every student. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a personal computer, and even fewer possess Internet access. Moreover, the tolls to start cruising the information superhighway can get steep. Students without computers may become helpless speed bumps.
The administrative answer to this problem is the computer labs. The fallacy here is purely numerical. Only six labs are currently open to the general student body. This amounts to roughly 240 seats for over 33,000 students. Even when factoring in departmental computer labs, the student-to-computer ratio remains over 100:1.
Compare this to ASU's ratio of 40:1. CCIT support systems analyst, Randall W. Blondeau, says, "We're way far behind." The UA is hardly in the position to promote such a computerized exodus, for the transition may turn into a technological stampede.
Computer illiteracy is also a serious dilemma. While the majority of students may have succumbed to computerized ways, many lost souls are still struggling with point-and-click. So far, these neophytes have only missed the enjoyment of Doom and the occasional hot chat. Now, they may be locked out of crucial academic information.
Even technological wizards stand to lose with a sole on-line catalog. A coffee spill near a CCIT mainframe may cause a campus-wide network failure. Campus Internet access has also been very fickle recently. Computer literacy cannot battle a comatose network, and sporadic access to such information is not satisfactory.
Finally, a computerized catalog can not offer some of the small advantages inherent in a written catalog. A book can be transported, ear-marked, written in and used at anytime. These small, yet significant, conveniences are not possible with an on-line catalog.
Separately, none of these dilemmas is truly earth-shattering. Summated, however, they do cause inconveniences for students that are easily alleviated by a written version. The on-line catalog is an excellent advance and a positive asset, but alone, it can not accommodate the benefits of a written catalog.
The two mediums should be used in conjunction, allowing students to travel by highway or foot. Otherwise, the administration will be leaving many disgruntled students at the side of the road.
Editoral Staff
|
|
|