On the morning of April 25, 2008, the project $2.13 was performed in a Psychology of Learning class. Next to the professor, who was giving a lecture on how to run experiments in a computer program, was a PowerPoint slideshow tallying each penny of the students’ tuition money as it was spent during the class. The first minute contained 25 separate images (of two one-dollar bills, a dime, and three pennies), each shown for 2.4 seconds to depict the cost of the first minute of tuition for each student. Following that, a math lesson in the slideshow demonstrated a step-by-step computation of that amount. For the remainder of the lecture, new images were presented every minute, some showing the money spent during that minute, and others aggregating the money spent thus far during the class period and comparing it to the cost of earning that money or other ways it could be spent.
$2.13 was formulated as a reflection on one of the invisible, but highly important, characteristics of the Carleton classroom. Students, or at least most of them, attend classes on a regular basis and are aware of the classroom as a place of learning, of discussion, and of value, but few know the exact monetary cost of what they are getting. Based on the tuition fee of $11986 per term and 5640 classroom minutes per term with a regular course load, Carleton students are charged $2.13 for each minute of classroom time. Most students are quite unaware of this figure, and this project brought it to the classroom, pairing the dollar amount with the subjective value of the class, allowing students to decide for themselves if their education is worth the money.
By using PowerPoint and a projector, common elements of Carleton classrooms (and the lecturing method of choice for this particular professor), students in this lecture were faced with two potential targets of attention. The targets were similar in form, but very different in value. Upon glancing at this project, students were immediately reminded that their tuition dollars were intended to allow them to learn from the professor, rather than examine an art project. However, at a liberal arts school such as Carleton, this project could be considered a valuable and worthy source of education, which is, theoretically, what they are paying for.
Comments