Review: Students on the Proposed Optional Fitness Fee

James Conwell, the driving force behind the optional fitness fee that was proposed by ASMSU, said that the feedback he received from his fellow students on the bill was "overwhelmingly positive."

He was right.

Regardless of whether or not students use the fitness centers on campus, they all seemed to respond enthusiastically and in support of the bill.

Not all of the students had heard about the bill, but once they learned its purpose they responded positively and in favor of the bill.

One student, who uses the fitness facilities but admitted he did not use the fitness center on-campus, said he wouldn’t opt out of the bill.

“Would I opt out of it? No,” said Matthew Somaiah. “If it’s included in the tuition I would definitely do that.”

The bill was passed unanimously by ASMSU, however it remains to be seen if Michigan State University will actually adopt the fee and incorporate it into tuition.

“I do want it to happen,” said Sara Stopchinski when asked what she thought about the possible fitness fee. “I think I’d be more inclined to go to the gym of it happened.”

“I think it will help the university’s image,” said Stopchinski. “Nowadays, the most important thing is overall wellness.”

Preview: MSU Students on the Proposed Optional Fitness Fee

James Conwell, the ASMSU member who proposed and is the driving force behind the fitness fee bill, says the feedback from students about the bill has been “overwhelmingly positive”.

Conwell says the bill is aimed to benefit the students by providing a cheaper option for fitness. The bill would allow students access to on-campus fitness facilities.

Many students work out using the on-campus fitness facilities, however the fee to use such facilities is $85/semester, and the fee would lower that price to $50/semester.

The fee would be included in Michigan State University’s tuition and fees, and students would be able to “opt out”.

In the limited number of students I have been able to survey about the bill, the ones who use the facilities on-campus now responded positively, citing the cheaper price to work out.

Will students who don’t work out on-campus choose to do so because of the cheaper price?

I think this is a reasonable assumption, but just because the opportunity is there doesn’t mean it will be taken advantage of.

I think the students will be optimistic and respond positively regardless of if they work out, and where they work out.

Previewing How IM Sports Are Viewed At MSU

After interviewing IM Coordinator Ross Winter and Piotr Pasik, it is difficult to determine if the changes in training and selecting officials will impact the intramural sports.
Officials go through an application and selection process, that includes completing certain tasks, both on the court/field of their respective sport and in the classroom to learn the rules, according to Winter.
Changes to officiating would most likely impact individual sports, and would be observed by other officials, and particularly the participants.
It is possible that while the changes to officiating are designed to promote better quality of officiating, actually little, or even negative changes, will be the result.

Recapping How IM Sports Are Viewed At MSU

After interviewing a couple more sources who participate in intramural sports, a senior and a freshman, there seems to be a consensus that there has been an improvement in the officiating, particularly in indoor and outdoor soccer.
The level of competition has increased, and the number of forfeits has decreased. According to Ross Winter, the IM Sports Coordinator, the number of teams in basketball, flag football, volleyball and softball has increased almost 20 percent from 2011-2012 to 2012-2013, or 641 teams to 780 teams.
While it is difficult to quantify the the level of competition and the quality of the officials, the number of teams increasing certainly means an increase in participation.