Since the budget cuts will affect programs and departments across the University, it is important to identify expenses that would not significantly impact Princeton’s academic life if removed. Redundantly printed materials — including rejection letters and individual student copies of publications like the Undergraduate Announcement and the course catalog — are the kind of expenses that should be the first to go.
Several peer institutions have stopped mailing rejection letters to applicants who have already viewed their decision online. Most applicants check a special admissions notification website to see whether they have been accepted to Princeton during the 72 hours after the decisions are released. In addition to posting decisions on the website, Princeton also mails acceptance and rejection letters to its applicants.
But it is a waste to send a letter to a student who has already found out that he has not been accepted, particularly because it is unlikely that he would have a meaningful attachment to this letter. Princeton should therefore implement the system Harvard uses, in which rejected students who do not check their decision within three days will still receive a paper rejection letter. If an applicant does want a tangible letter even if he is rejected, he should be able to opt out of this paperless policy by indicating this on his application and thus receive his letter without the added delay. The elimination of most letters, however, will substantially reduce the accompanied expenses of printing and mailing.
Princeton’s policy of supplying students with hard copies of course catalogs and the Undergraduate Announcement should also be re-evaluated. Though these materials are helpful, and many people use them, the information they contain is already available online. In the case of course catalogs, many students use the online versions and never touch the paper copies, particularly since they are made available after the courses are posted online. Moreover, the course catalogs become obsolete once printed because of changes in scheduling and the addition of new courses. Likewise, the Undergraduate Announcement, while useful for prospective students and freshmen, is unnecessary for upperclassmen.
To reduce costs, these publications should not be distributed to all students. Rather, some printed copies of the course catalog and the Undergraduate Announcement should be available in the Registrar’s office and the Office of Admission, respectively, so that interested students and applicants can pick them up.
As this year’s budget is re-evaluated, the University should emphasize simple solutions that do not significantly compromise the academic experience at Princeton. Eliminating the redundancy caused by the availability of both printed and online copies of the same materials would be a relatively painless change that the University is right to consider.