Only one year after the official opening of Oberlin’s new Science Center, it is already hard to imagine the College landscape without it or to remember what studying the sciences in Kettering was like.

The new center, encompassing over 210,000 square feet, involved renovations in the biology and neuroscience wings of Kettering and in the Wright Laboratory of Physics. It now provides the science faculty with lab space appropriate to their various research interests. Every faculty lab is also configured for alliance with several student assistants, enhancing opportunities for collaborative research.

“Doing serious research at the undergraduate level is what going to a small school like this is all about,” Debbie Mull, the center’s acting building manager said.

In Kettering, the biology department struggled with shortage of space as its biggest problem, according to Professor Yolanda Cruz. The building also lacked the research facilities necessary for modern biologists.

“Kettering was built in 1961, right around the time of Sputnik,” Cruz said. “It had outgrown its uses.”

Cruz believes the labs will keep Oberlin at the forefront of natural science educators.

“These labs are next to no one’s,” she said.

Neuroscience professor Denny Smith is equally pleased with the new facilities.

“I love the new audio-visual equipment,” he said. “I’ve put everything on power point.”

The modern AV equipment has helped improve classroom configurations as well, chemistry professor and department chair Albert Matlin said.

“The equipment has facilitated using tables instead of little desks in rows,” he said. “It’s created a better environment for working, and allowed for different teaching styles.”

Matlin also said that the atrium and David Love Lounge create a relaxing study environment not offered in Kettering.

“They’ve been fostering a sense of community among science people, as well as drawing people [who are] not from the science community to study,” said Matlin.

The center’s new library is also seeing increases in the number of its visitors, and many are staying longer.

“We were here long before construction finished, but since people found us our use has skyrocketed,” librarian Alison Ricker said. “Kettering was very utilitarian. People came in, got what they needed, and left as quickly as they could. Now people like to hang out. I know we’re even getting non-science majors because people have started asking for the MLA handbook, which no one ever used to do.”

Students are also taking advantage of the library’s group study rooms, Ricker said.

“In Kettering, you couldn’t even whisper to people without annoying someone,” she said. “Now we can offer many different kinds of study space.”

Students also voiced their approval of the building and its offerings.

“It’s a great place to study,” sophomore neuroscience major Dan Greif said. “I love the library and the big windows. It’s such a nice atmosphere.”

“I don’t miss Kettering,” College senior Jasmine McCammon said. McCammon, a biology major, is currently doing research with Cruz on mouse development, and spends most of her week in the building.

In addition to praising the building on academic grounds, Matlin emphasized the importance of its modern safety features.

“Chemistry is very fume-intensive, and our new, more efficient ventilation system has eliminated a lot of safety concerns [which used to] limit things we could do,” said Matlin.

Although construction is finished, the faculty continues to work out the kinks in the new system, Mull said.

“There are always small issues, but these are finishing details,“ Mull said. “The last three percent always takes the longest.”

She also said that everything in the building is up to code, to the extent of her knowledge.

One of the most significant issues in the building is its heating and cooling. The new ventilation system changes the air in the labs about ten times an hour, resulting in a significant amount of heat loss during the day and cold air being brought in at night, Mull said. For the time being, she has arranged for a gas furnace to augment heating in the building.

Many of the other issues are small, and reflect the amount of faculty involvement in the building process. Matlin has noticed smudged paint, and the sinks configured differently from what he expected.

“We spent years planning and thinking about this building,” Matlin said. “You can always find little things that don’t work out exactly as anticipated, but when you look at the whole thing, the overall picture is just fantastic.”

However, according to physics department chair John Scofield, many of the building’s problems are not so little. Although Scofield believes that the center is a great facility, he added that poor project management allowed for many mistakes and required much backtracking during construction.

“It’s the best fifty-five million dollar building that sixty-five million dollars could build,” he said.

Although Scofield acknowledged that increased energy usage in the building was the cost of education, he claims that the management could have done a better job.

“We can no longer measure how much energy is being used by each department,” he said. “Now there is no way to show the best places to cut usage.”

Scofield also criticized leaving the atrium lights on all night, and expressed disappointment in the college for not fully honoring their commitment to insulate the physics wing during renovation.

“Wright was not insulated, and initially there were no plans to do so,” he said. “President Dye agreed to insulate the walls and the roof, but never did the roof, which would be the most cost effective thing to insulate. The roof is where most heat is lost. Why do you think your mother always made you wear a hat when it was cold outside?”

Together with the costs of financing the project, construction of the center cost sixty-five million dollars, according to Vice President of Finance, Ron Watts. Forty-seven million dollars came from bond sales, and about eighteen-million from major gifts and other sources.

Most faculty believe that the building is worth the money.

“Science buildings are some of the most expensive buildings,” Matlin said. “We need a very sophisticated HVAC system, as well as gas lines, potable water, deionized water, nitrogen lines, and many other things. This is what it costs to build a science building of this caliber.”

Smith agreed with Matlin that the cost was necessary. “Denison has two new science buildings, both of which are spectacular. Oberlin needs this building to remain competitive in attracting science students. Oberlin has sent the most students on for PhDs, and we could have lost that position.”

Senior Associate Director of Admissions Leslie Braat said that the new building is helping at least to advertise Oberlin. She expects it will attract more science students, and says it has already helped increase the diversity of science students recruited. She also said it may help to marginally increase Oberlin’s ratings in US News, as the ratings consider how college presidents rank each other’s colleges.

“Other new science buildings pale in comparison,” said Braat.

Matlin pointed out that even some non-science faculty are currently able to take advantage of the center’s facilities by teaching classes there, and expressed the hope that there might be money left over to build new teaching spaces for departments in Rice and King in the future.

Smith agreed that other departments would benefit from new buildings but was less sympathetic.

“Severance was built in the 1900s. I spent half my career teaching neuroscience without sinks,” said Smith.