Money invested in building addition should instead be spent on technology

The new hot topic at Central is the renovations and additions coming to the building during the next two years. They plan not only to create a 50 thousand square-foot addition to the one-side, but to also repurpose many of the classrooms that will soon be in the new east side building. Students had many reactions: happiness that they would have better places to work on their preforming arts, sadness that the one side would lose its iconic view, or indifference since it did not affect them. For me personally, I don’t think that we need this new addition at all.

The first reason why I believe this addition is not necessary is because not all the students will benefit from the building. Although it is amazing for the art department, theater department and music department; the rest of the students do not use or need this extra space devoted primarily to preforming arts. Some may argue that it may free up space, both in the school and more room for other departments, and that is true. Central is one of the biggest schools in OPS and is packed, but we survive. All the students and teachers can get to their classes without too much foot traffic and thrive with the space despite the limited size.

The second reason why Central doesn’t need 50 thousand more square feet is because the money can be used for something so much better that would help more students. Although maybe one-third of the students at Central have a class or work in a production with the preforming arts department, almost every student could use some better technology, better stairs and elevators, or more modern classroom appliances. For example, during MAP testing this year, there were many complications with the server and with the computers itself. Almost all students need use technology for classroom activities, projects, and homework. If the Central Foundation had chosen to use the fundraising money to assist with technology, such as upgrading the computers, or giving the students tablets, or even hiring more tech support for the broken computers, it would have been more influential to Central’s students. Another example is escalators and better elevators, since we all have classes not on the first floor. If Central added escalators, it would cost about $3.4 million assuming it cost $210 thousand for each flight of stairs (according to RSMeans’ Building Construction Cost Data) in the main building making students’ lives easier and more efficient. All in all, the $22 million dollars could be better spent for technology or stair/elevator renovations.

The third reason why Central doesn’t need the extra additions is because of the disruption they pose to the school day. Since my first weeks as a freshman, there was always been some sort of renovation going on around the school, making the learning classroom both chaotic and hard to focus in. In my English class for example, the scraping sound outside the room was so disruptive that my teacher stopped teaching until the sound was muffled to a dull roar. By choosing to create a new building on the school grounds, it has shaken the building, annoyed students and staff and interrupted traffic and bussing.

In my opinion, the addition of the one side building is not worth the cost. It doesn’t apply to all students, the money could be used for other technology that would be more influential to Central students, and the construction disrupts. I am not saying I am ungrateful to all the people who gave their money to help Central educate high school students better. I am just saying that maybe next time they should ask the students what would be most helpful and influential to them.