The big crowd in front of Hodgdon on Thursday afternoon was not because there was suddenly beer available for takeout downstairs. Instead, many juniors-to-be were crying. You may think that juniors cry every year when they are denied on campus housing, but this year the tears flowed much earlier than expected.
Why did this happen and what can be done to ensure this does not happen in the future? Had Residential Life been more forthcoming with information earlier in the year, perhaps this sad scene could have been avoided.
What's the difference between a weather forecast and the ResLife housing forecast? At least you can plan for the weather, since it has some chance of being correct. ResLife should learn the difference between a "possibility" and a "probability." If it knew that there were more freshmen admitted for the following year, that should lead it to the obvious conclusion that there will be less housing for the rest of us. Instead, year after year, current undergraduates receive the same vague information.
This year's housing forecast states, "However, based on present class sizes and our experience of the last several years, it is unlikely we will be able to house all juniors-to-be who would like to reside on campus." This statement is meaningless. How many members of the class of 2004 who would have liked to live on campus were scared away and forced to sign leases ahead of time? ResLife statistics never account for this mass of people when they release their forecast.
Equally disturbing, however, is the fact that on the night of Tuesday, April 9, after seniors-to-be chose their rooms, ResLife knew exactly how many rooms would be left for juniors-to-be. The answer: about 70 beds, for a class of 1200. But did members of the class of 2004 receive this crucial information in a timely manner? Of course not. Welcome to the world of ResLife.
In previous years, up to 300 beds were allotted to juniors-to-be. A small waitlist would form, and everyone would be accommodated in the end. This year, as juniors-to-be scrambled to write last minute Metcalf Bridge applications, they added their names on a seemingly endless waitlist and wondered what had gone wrong. Why was this information about a bed shortage not released earlier?
Even the RAs working the lottery were left in the dark and gave students conflicting messages about availability and the process, furthering the confusion of housing selection. The two dominant themes of this year's lottery were misinformation and no information. We need to work to make next year's theme early, detailed, true, and useful information. Here's how.
1. Earlier release of lottery numbers
ResLife and Student Services use the argument that earlier in the year they do not have an accurate list of students' class standing and thus cannot put students in the correct class lottery. Last we checked, they seemed to be able to issue registration times in November just fine. The obvious solution is to run the lottery numbers at the same time as registration. Administration argues that some students do not progress along with their class from semester to semester. We say and we know that the vast majority of students do.All that needs to be done is to issue your number contingent on you continuing with your class, as most students do. Under this system, students will know in the fall if they are near the top of the list or the bottom of the list. If we have the second worst number in our class, we know we'd better start calling some landlords. This would avoid some of the tears of this past Thursday.
2. Build a new dorm
While an earlier release of lottery numbers would help students know their chances of getting an on-campus room, this system would still not provide any extra beds. Ground for a new dorm is slated to be broken in the summer of 2002, but this facility is not likely to meet demand for on-campus housing. Originally this dorm was going to have 300 beds, with a significant number of those being singles. Recently, when the new dorm has been discussed, the number of beds has dropped to 70 doubles.Obviously there is a need for junior year housing on campus, so why does the design plan no longer include singles, which is where juniors would live? Perhaps it is because doubles are more conducive to the administration's master plan of a "living and learning" residential experience. However, Tufts needs to make sure it is building a dorm that will satisfy the most pressing needs of students, which is the lack of guaranteed housing. The new dorm should be enlarged back to its original plan of 300 beds, in order to house as many students as possible.
3. Stop increasing enrollment
Tufts has been accepting larger and larger freshmen classes while knowing that there is not enough housing as it is. When South Hall was constructed in the early 1990s, 380 new beds were added, but the enrollment increased by nearly the same amount. A new dorm will not help the housing situation if more freshmen are admitted that will then occupy the new beds, as this defeats the purpose of alleviating housing shortage The top priority should be meeting the needs of current students.Cure-all solutions to the housing problem will not appear overnight, but Residential Life would do well to heed these three demands in order to provide housing for all students who require it.
Josh Belkin is a sophomore majoring in economics and a Tufts Community Union (TCU) senator. Alison Clark is a junior majoring in Spanish and psychology and vice chair of the TCU Judiciary.
