to a minimum the amount of 
time students were required to 
move back and forth between 
the two platforms. By the 
summer of 2016, 89 percent of 
courses used Canvas.

Sean 
DeMonner, 
ITS 

executive director of teaching 
and learning, was responsible 
for the internal team tasked 
with 
implementing 
the 

system. He said the switch to 
Canvas allows the University 
to move forward on a more 
efficient version of features 
like 
gradebook, 
assignment 

submission capabilities and a 
discussion board. Two thousand 
universities, school districts 
and 
institutions 
worldwide 

use Canvas, according to the 
Canvas website. CTools was the 
University’s own system.

“The ultimate goal is to take 

the resources, the dollars, that 
were going into the development 
of those capabilities in CTools 
and reinvest in next generation 
academic 
technologies,” 

DeMonner said.

He added that the transition 

is 
also 
the 
University’s 

response to new data analytic 
possibilities.

“We’re starting to see new 

things come into play like 
learning analytics — this idea 
that we can capture data from 
various places, analyze it and 
apply it to different kinds of 
support activities for students,” 
he said.

DeMonner 
said 
the 

University hasn’t been able to 
invest in these new support 
mechanisms to drive students’ 
success at the level that they’d 
like 
because 
they’ve 
been 

working with CTools.

Among faculty over the past 

week, opinions on the switch 
were 
mixed, 
with 
several 

expressing concerns. Initially, 
some faculty had discussed 
prolonging 
the 
transition 

process for another year to 
allow for a longer adjustment 
period.

However, 
the 
Digital 

Ecosystem Subcommittee of 
the Digital Innovation Advisory 
Group encouraged the provost 
to expedite the process. The 
faculty subcommittee no longer 
exists.

School of Public Health Prof. 

David 
Mendez, 
the 
former 

chair of the subcommittee, said 
it was important for students to 
not have to go back and forth 
between the platforms.

“What we recommended was 

a transition that could happen 
as fast as possible, but without 
rushing students or faculty,” he 
said.

Senate 
Assembly 
Chair 

Bill Schultz, an engineering 
professor, said though some 
faculty and students prefer the 
system, he is still adjusting.

“I find it is not as intuitive as 

I thought it would be,” Schultz 
said. “I think this might be 
better for students, and might 
take some transition time for 
faculty.”

American 
Culture 
Prof. 

Lisa Nakamura started using 
Canvas in winter of 2016. She 
said she would like to be able 
to make project sites through 
Canvas, such as for smaller 
reading groups within a class 
or clubs, and be able to make 
collaborative sites for students 
to make study guides on their 
own.

Overall, however, Nakamura 

said she likes Canvas better 
than CTools due to better 
interface and quickness.

“There are some annoying 

things about it, but I think 
those were also true of CTools,” 
she said.

Students 
also 
expressed 

a range of opinions about 
Canvas, but several said they 
were happy just to not need to 
switch back and forth between 
platforms.

LSA sophomore Clare Shafer 

said it was an inconvenience 
using both sites when she 
just wanted to double check 
something for a class.

“I had one class on CTools 

last semester and it was really 
annoying 
because 
I 
was 

constantly having to log in and 
then log back out,” she said. “I 
just wanted to be able to quickly 
access my classes and see if I 
had homework.”

Shafer also said she preferred 

Canvas because of its layout.

“I think how they have the 

grade tab and the calendar tab 
is more efficient than it was 
on CTools,” she said. “Canvas 
seems more modern.”

LSA junior Tad Conrado 

had a similar perspective. He 
said he preferred the style on 
Canvas and liked having to only 
access one platform.

LSA senior Evan David said 

he preferred CTools because 
it had a more obvious user 
interface, but is fine using 
Canvas.

“Personally, I liked CTools 

better in general,” he said. 
“I 
thought 
it 
was 
more 

streamlined and I thought the 
user interface was easier.”

In spite of the big adjustment, 

DeMonner said the support 
that Canvas has received has 
been very important for its 
integration at the University.

“A change like this, even 

though it has happened over a 
period of two years, is hugely 
impactful 
for 
campus,” 
he 

said. “It touches pretty much 
every student, all the faculty, 
with very few exceptions. We 
have received a lot of support 
in partnership from different 
constituencies around campus. 
I appreciate that, and I thank 
folks for going with us on the 
journey.”

3-News

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, September 7, 2016 — 3A

student ratio. Some categories 
impacted the rankings more 
than others, with academics 
being most influential quality.

The University has improved 

its ranking on this list from 

the 2015-2016 year in which 
it placed 30th. This year, it is 
the only public university to 
rank in the top 25. In the past 
five years, the University has 
ranked in the top 25 four times.

The 
University 
has 
also 

steadily improved in national 
and international rankings lists 
from other publications. In July 

2016, the University jumped 16 
spots in Money Magazine’s list 
of best value universities to the 
number two spot. However, the 
University’s standing has fallen 
slightly in U.S. News rankings 
in the past few years. Currently 
it ranks the University at 29th, 
but was ranked 26th in 2009 
and 24th in 2006.

RANKINGS
From Page 1A

off-campus 
student 
housing 

building near South University 
— is $1,200 per person per 
month for a four-bedroom. Rent 
is $2,100 per month for a two-
bedroom at University Towers, 
which is also located in the 
area.

Chang 
Yang, 
an 
LSA 

sophomore, said she supports 
the 
expansion 
of 
students’ 

living options, but emphasized 
the 
inaccessibility 
of 
safe, 

affordable housing for students 
close to campus. She added 
that she worries students are 
expected to sacrifice safety, 
security and convenience when 
searching for apartments.

“More student housing in 

this area is good, especially 
because most concerns about 
housing 
involve 
safety,” 

Yang said. “It’s good that the 

apartments will be so close to 
the Diag and Central Campus, 
but, on the other hand, places 
in these areas charge a lot for 
housing. This is frustrating 
because it implies that safety 
comes only with wealth.”

LSA 
sophomore 
Tara 

Jayaram 
echoed 
Yang’s 

sentiment.

“It depends on the price,” 

she said. “If it’s affordable off-
campus housing, then I’d be 
really happy about it. But if it’s 
something like Zaragon Place, 
I just feel like it wouldn’t be 
worth living there.”

However 
LSA 
sophomore 

Jessica 
Bleiweis, 
a 
current 

Landmark resident, said she 
believes the cost of rent at 
high-rises like hers reflects 
the quality and convenience of 
her experience. She added that 
she appreciates the amenities 
provided by the complex, which 
offer her a more comfortable 
living arrangement than that in 

dorms.

“I feel like (the new building) 

would be a really good idea,” 
Bleiweis said. “I know that there 
are people who are struggling 
with finding housing, and, if it’s 
as nice as Landmark, I’m sure 
they’ll get a bunch of people 
who want to live there.”

Ron Hughes, a developer at 

Hughes Properties, declined 
to 
comment 
about 
future 

development plans and the 
completion date when contacted 
by The Michigan Daily Tuesday. 
However, to move forward, the 
project will first need to be 
reviewed by the city’s Design 
Review Board and the city’s 
Planning 
Commission, 
and 

then approved by City Council, 
a process which usually takes at 
least several months. Specific 
dates for design review board or 
planning commission meetings 
that would include a review of 
the project were not available 
Tuesday. 

APARTMENTS
From Page 1A

a focus for the body’s future 
goals. These directives include 
an increase of student input on 
University 
decision-making, 

fostering a more inclusive campus 
environment, 
an 
expanding 

student 
access 
to 
resources, 

conducting 
more 
sustained 

CSG 
outreach, 
enhancing 

student 
opportunities 
and 

promoting greater collaboration 
among students and student 
organizations.

As 
well, 
the 
body 
will 

commission 
a 
demographic 

report 
of 
the 
organization 

for the first time to be more 
transparent about the diversity 
on the assembly. A Michigan 

Daily 
report 
conducted 
last 

March 
found 
a 
trend 
in 

hegemonic practices after the 
presidential slot was filled by a 
man for the seventh consecutive 
year. In a comparison of CSG 
presidential and vice presidential 
representation to the student 
population, 
disparities 
were 

discovered across the board in 
almost all categories but white 
students.

“We are all really committed 

to 
ensuring 
that 
CSG 
is 

more 
inclusive, 
diverse 
and 

representative in the year ahead,” 
Schafer said. “I think it’s not only 
going to hold us more accountable 
as an organization to improve our 
diversity in the long term, but it’s 
also going to allow us to possibly 
set objectives and measures going 
forward and benchmarks that we 

can apply for our future now and 
in the long term.”

After the data is collected, 

Schafer said a report about the 
findings will be published.

In 
accordance 
with 
the 

directives, 
Schafer 
also 

discussed the launch of an 
executive order calling for an 
internal improvement taskforce 
within the body to improve its 
demographics and address their 
diversity as an organization, 
such as looking into methods of 
guaranteeing first-year student 
representation on the body. The 
taskforce would be staffed by the 
newly elected Student General 
Counsel as well as the Chief 
Justice and Student Judiciary, 
a member of the CSG Rules 
Committee and another member 
of the body.

CANVAS
From Page 1A

CSG
From Page 1A

As council discussed the 

issue for the final time, City 
Councilmembers 
Jack 
Eaton 

(D–Ward 4), Jane Lumm (I–
Ward 2) and Sumi Kailasapathy 
(D–Ward 1) — who typically 
dissent against the approval of 
large construction projects — 
all made clear they would vote 
in opposition to approving the 
Woodbury project.

Eaton 
argued 
the 

fundamental 
environmental 

and 
infrastructural 
issues 

surrounding the project have 
not been adequately addressed 
in 
explaining 
his 
vote 
in 

opposition.

“We 
can 
pretend 
this 

development 
isn’t 
going 
to 

impact traffic on the roads,” 
Eaton said. “We can pretend 
this project isn’t going to impact 
flooding in the surrounding 
areas, we can pretend this 
project isn’t going to impact 
nearby natural features. I don’t 
believe we should rezone this 
property and I don’t believe we 
should approve the site plan.”

Eaton’s 
sentiments 
were 

echoed by Lumm, who also 
made clear she believes the 
project would fundamentally 
hurt surrounding residents and 
the environment.

“In the city’s desire to add 

density citywide, we allow these 
projects to proceed without 
their 
own 
infrastructure 

support,” Lumm said. “Both 
these projects will exacerbate 
traffic 
problems 
in 
already 

problematic areas … our job is to 
accept that reality.”

Kailasapathy 
was 
also 

outspoken against approving 
the project. She argued the 
Woodbury apartment project is 
emblematic of a broader issue 

of City Council pushing for 
development projects without 
adequate concern for existing 
residents.

“I like to face facts, I prefer 

to live in reality … a couple of 
weeks ago after rain we got 
photographs from neighbors (of 
flooding),” Kailasapathy said. 
“This project is going to add 500 
parking spaces — imagine the 
runoff; there’s a big disconnect 

between the projects we’re 
approving and the people who 
are living there.”

Despite the opposition, all 

eight remaining members of 
the council — including Mayor 
Christopher Taylor — voted 
in favor of rezoning the Nixon 
Road land parcel to residential 
and approving the Woodbury 
construction plan.

City Councilmember Zachary 

Ackerman (D–Ward 3) — who 
voted in favor of the project 
— 
argued 
the 
development 

is necessary to increase the 
local housing supply to meet 
growing demand. Ackerman’s 
points were echoed by the other 
council 
members 
voting 
in 

favor.

“This piece of land is fewer 

than two miles from (North 
Campus 
Research 
Complex) 

and 
Googleplex,” 
Ackerman 

said, referring to the site of the 
proposed apartments. “We are 
in need of more diverse housing 
in more diverse locations.”

The ultimate goal is 
to take the resources, 

the dollars, that 

were going into the 
development of those 
capabilities in CTools 
and reinvest in next 
generation academic 

technologies.

COUNCIL
From Page 1A

I don’t believe 

we should 
rezone this 

property and I 
don’t believe we 
should approve 

the site plan.

