Leadership Center An Unwise Expenditure

A newly proposed building at Purdue aims to foster leadership and excellence among students by creating a hub for academic assistance services, student organizations, and class team collaboration. This hub, known as the Center for Student Excellence and Leadership, is being spearheaded by President Córdova, Vice President of Student Services, Tom Robinson, and the Purdue Student Government.

The Purdue Board of Trustees recently approved to appropriate $1.2 million to begin the architectural planning stages of CSEL. If the architectural plans are approved and the board decides to go ahead with the project, the CSEL facility will be built in two phases on the northeast and southeast corners of Russell and Third streets.

The center is intended to improve student life on campus, but it is unclear whether many of the intended goals can actually be accomplished. More importantly, many students question whether it is prudent to be spending $30 million on a non-academic, non-research facility given the current economy and budgetary crisis especially without giving serious consideration to alternatives.

The idea for a Student Hub has been around for a while, but the most recent proposal dates back to a Tiger Team report during the strategic planning phase in 2007. The team proposed that Purdue create a Student Excellence and Leadership Center that would provide space for student organizations, academic support services, and career exploration and placement.

Brad Krites, the Student Body President-Elect and a junior in the Krannert School of Management, has probably had a greater involvement in the planning of CSEL than any other current student. He was the principle author of the Purdue Student Government whitepaper, which has been the principle document outlining the purpose and goals of the center. “I’m excited about what this kind of building could offer,” Krites stated.

The building will become the new home of the Business Office of Student Organizations; the Student Activities Office; the Boiler Volunteer Network; the Student Access, Transition, and Success programs; and the Academic Success Center. Additionally, the CSEL building will provide office and collaborations spaces, such as conference rooms for many of the largest representative organizations such as PSG, PGSG, Purdue Cooperative Council, the four main Greek group organizations, and numerous others. Collaborative space will also be provided for course teams.

Upon completion of the center, proponents hope that it will enhance learning, develop student leaders, and create an informal atmosphere for socializing and networking among students and student groups. They expect that the center will increase student involvement by providing a centralized, “one-stop shop” for academic help services and student organization and activities. In turn, proponents believe, that increased student involvement and collaboration among student groups and organizations will increase retention rates.

Whether these benefits will actually be realized by constructing a new facility, however, is anyone’s guess. The saying “If we build it, they will come” does not always apply. The building is exclusively for students, but there is not much evidence that students, outside of those in the main organization that will be housed there, will actually take advantage of it. Even Krites admitted that he cannot make “clear predictions about what the impact of CSEL would be.” 

Many of the spaces that are planned for that building will be incorporated in the already approved Recreational Sports Center renovation. There seems to be a significant amount of overlap concerning student organization space between the renovated RSC and the proposed CSEL buildings. 

Although these spaces are desired, they are not essential for student organizations to operate. It is true that having permanent space helps to create a group cohesion that can help an organization advance, but it is unclear how this will increase retention rates. Students do not join organizations because of the facilities that those organizations do or do not possess and most students are probably unlikely to choose a college based on student organizations, let alone student organization facilities. The reverse is also true: there are not many students (if any) who leave Purdue because of the lack of student organization facilities. Student involvement may help increase retention, but that can be accomplished without having to construct new facilities. The connection between CSEL and retention rates seems to be completely unfounded.

Much of the Purdue Student Government whitepaper on the project, like much of the most recent Strategic Plan, is full of ethereal goals, catch phrases, and general gobbledygook. According to the whitepaper, the Center for Student Excellence and Leadership will “provide endless opportunities for personal and professional growth” and will “provide a holistic setting that promotes cross-cultural understanding, thereby empowering tomorrow’s leaders to successfully transition from university life to the real world.” That a building can accomplish such lofty, “holistic” goals is absurd.

Programs, opportunities, and necessity develop leadership and excellence. Buildings do not; they merely help facilitate these. Unfortunately, it is unclear who will be developing and coordinating the programs within CSEL. Will the Vice President of Student Services do this, or will it be some other group, such as the Student Activities office? No one seems to know.

According to Eddie VanBogaert, a Senator from the College of Liberal arts and Chairman of the Purdue College Democrats, “There are a lot of limits on the current facilities that are offered to student organizations and I think that building this building would help student organizations in having appropriate permanent facilities for their operations.”

Many students, faculty and staff, including VanBogaert, have reservations about whether this is the appropriate time to be pursuing a $30 million student leadership building. Trustee Michael Birck expressed the same concerns when the Board of Trustees approved of going ahead with the planning stages of the project on April 9.

Purdue intends to raise all of the money to fund the project from private donors. State funds and tuition will not be used in the construction of the project. To attract donors, President Córdova has allocated $15 million from her discretionary fund for special projects. This money is all from gifted funds, but they were not earmarked for this specific purpose, and this raises the eyebrows of many people who think this money could be put to better use in the current economic climate.

 “How prudent,” VanBogaert asked “is it to spend special projects money on construction of non-academic, non-research facilities in a time when our budget is being cut by $67 million over the next biennium?” He suggested that the discretionary money might be better allocated for rehabilitating existing buildings which are falling into disrepair, funding employee benefits, or restoring funds to academic programs.

The source of funding is not the only financial concern that people have with this project. As Senator-elect from the Krannert School of Management, Matt Swiontek, pointed out, “Regardless of who’s paying for the construction, Purdue is going to have to foot the bill to pay employees to staff the building, pay employees to clean the building, and pay utilities and electric that has to go with it.”

Part of the reasoning of including group meeting spaces and conference rooms for student organizations in this building is that student groups have to pay for the use of projectors and equipment in rooms in the Stewart Center and the Purdue Memorial Union. Putting this kind of equipment in CSEL will not make it free though; someone will still have to pay for it. Good projectors are quite expensive and must be replaced every three to four years of heavy use. Bulbs have to be replaced once or twice per year. Computers also have to be replaced on a continual basis and charged fees for internet and network connectivity. These costs will not disappear with the construction of a new building. Though students and taxpayers will not pay for the construction, they will pay for the maintenance of this facility.

Alternatives which may reduce the cost of the project have not been seriously considered. The Purdue Student Union Board, which once favored a student hub, is not in favor of CSEL. In a letter to President Córdova and other administration officials, PSUB outlined an alternative plan that would repurpose and better utilize current space in the Purdue Memorial Union and Stewart Center. Remodeling and repurposing space in these two facilities would create an additional 3,000 square feet of space for student organizations.

Additionally, Purdue should evaluate whether many other departments that currently reside in Stewart center should continue to do so. Some departments and resource centers should be eliminated completely, such as the Envision Center and the ITaP Shopping Offline Store. Freeing up these spaces in PMU and STEW would allow all student organizations to be in one central location. This is a goal of CSEL, but with nearly 900 recognized student organizations, most of their offices would still be located in PMU and STEW. The majority of student groups would then be farther away from BOSO and SAO than they are currently, a problem that CSEL aims to solve. 

The fast tracking of the CSEL facility in spite of many legitimate financial concerns only furthers the opinions of many students, faculty, and staff that this administration does not possess the leadership required to manage a university the size of Purdue. President Córdova wants to build a legacy as the students’ President. Although it is encouraging that she has chosen students on which to build that legacy, throwing money at CSEL in the current economic and budgetary climate without seriously considering alternatives will not establish that legacy. Such actions then, seem more contrived than genuine.

The Board of Trustees has only approved the architectural planning phase of the Center for Student Excellence and Leadership. The project faces several more hurdles after the planning process, however. Once the planning process is completed and the steering committee for the facility approves of the design, the Board of Trustees will have to approve the actual construction of the project. Before construction can begin, however, the Indiana State Senate will have to approve the funding of the project, which will be a very difficult sell. Getting the approval for the RSC renovation from the State Senate was difficult; getting the approval for another student-life improvement will likely prove to be even more difficult given the budget crisis.

Many people would agree that CSEL is a good idea and that it would meet many needs of the student body, but this is not the right time to be actively pursuing a non-academic, non-research project of this scale. The project should not be taken off the table, but it needs to be reevaluated at every level before moving ahead.