Laptop Options for Students 

Debora Huggins, Michelle Fowkes, Nicole Standal

ENGLISH 3400

October 12, 2009

 

         

    Abstract:

USU is a university facing challenges with a growing student population, all of whom need

computer access. As of fall 2009, there are 25,065 students enrolled and 21 computer labs in

various locations across campus. Each individual lab, therefore, serves 1,194 students. These

numbers include both on-campus and regional/distance-education students, and the off-campus

students have pressing need for access to computers. Some may have a computer to use, but it

may be antiquated and not very suitable for educational purposes. Enrollment levels are expected

to rise, along with pressures on the existing labs, with more people seeing higher education as an

investment in career and future. Creating new labs will include either more building or taking

away vital classroom space. There are two laptop alternatives to this, Option A (lease with option

to buy) and Option B (semester rental).  

Introduction: 

There are a great number of college students who cannot financially afford to purchase a

computer, and the labs on campus are insufficient to amply supply the demand. According to the

Utah System of Higher Education, USU has surpassed 25,000 students for the first time (Jenkins,

2009). This means with its 21 labs, each lab caters to 1,194 students on average (USU, 2009).

USU is expected to continue to grow, and the space and resources required to expand or create

new computer labs will take away from any new housing, classrooms, and other usable spaces.

The rise in technical jobs and training increases the need for access to computers. There are

multiple options available to satisfy this need; however, they were narrowed down to the

following two choices. The first (Option A) is a lease with an option to buy and the second

(Option B) being a semester rental.

 

Criteria:    

Cost: Initial cost to the university is unavoidable as the computers must be bought

outright and later distributed to the participant of the program. The cost to the university

will range from $899 to $2,299 per computer (Carrel, 2009). The fee needs to cover the

cost of the computer and repairs not covered by the warranty but still be affordable to the

student.

Staff: The staff would have to be knowledgeable regarding problems arising from

computers such as hardware and software issues. Personnel would need to be integrated

into the exiting department.

Current Infrastructure: It is important to know if solutions can be merged into the

existing program, as it would require fewer resources, promotes greater unity and

simplicity. This would be a cost effective solution in light of the current economic

situation.

Discussion:

Cost: Option A (lease payment plan) will charge the student the selling price divided

equally over the span of four or eight semesters depending on the student’s preference.

This will cost the student between $249.75 to $624.75 for four semesters (plus tax) and

$124.89 to $312.36 for eight semesters (plus tax). If the student decides to quit or transfer

he or she will be given the option to either buy the laptop in full or to return it without a

refund. As for Option B (rental) the student will pay for 1/6th the value of the laptop plus

15% of that payment for repairs to the laptop. For the student this will amount to $172.31

to $440.65 per semester. (Carrel, 2009)

Staff: The IT department has the existing experience and training associated with

computers and the various technology and software that USU currently utilizes. In

addition to this, the cost of additional training the staff would be far less than developing

a whole new department and hiring new staff, which would save the school funding.

(Funk, 2009).

Integrated Infrastructure: Option A (lease to own) would best be hosted by the IT

department for reasons previously mentioned. Option B (semester rental) can be added

into the Library's current program. They already have a cataloging system, keep records

of who has each computer, have current software choices, and the technical support to fix

any problems that arise, which makes them a potential host for the semester rental option.

Results:

The criteria we chose were then analyzed against both options. Both options met the

criteria we have for the program. The first one (the lease to own) was the overall best option

because it would be the least expensive for the student and the school. Also, the risk to the school

is lower when we are dealing with long term lease. The shorter term rental is still viable but the

school runs a higher risk of problems such as storage, repairs and expense of the computers not

being paid for by the students

Criteria Option A (Lease-to-Own) Option B (Semester Rental)

Cost Yes No

Staffing Yes No

Current Infrastructure Yes Yes

Recommendation:

For this program, Option A is the best choice for the student and poses the least financial

obligation to the school. Option B fell short of the criteria in the cost and staffing areas. In

addition to this, the financial risks were higher than Option A for the university. To hold the

Students responsible for a laptop for at least a full semester, and by having to pay a slightly

higher fee with Option B than with Option A would make the students choose to be more

responsible. Laptops that are leased with the intent to own are more likely to be taken better care-

of, have fewer viruses, and undergo less physical abuse. For these reasons, the lease-to-own

solution is recommended.

Conclusion:

Each option has the potential of being implemented into the university's current

infrastructure, but cost being the main concern for the program, the decision was to for the lease

with an Option A. This option poses the least risk financially to all stakeholders in this program

and could be easily implemented into the current infrastructure of the school.

Bibliography

Carrel, P. (5 October 2009). Technology Buyer. (M. Fowkes, Interviewer)

Funk, S. (7 October 2009). IT Service Desk Manager. (D. Huggins, Interviewer)

Jenkins, S. (5 October 2009).

Enrollment Growth + Budget Cuts = Critical Tipping Point for Utah's Public Colleges

and Universities. Retrieved from http://utahsbr.edu/

Utah State University (2009).

Utah State Computer Labs. Retrieved from http://usu.edu/computerlabs/