Resident evil?
Frustrations arise with housing process
By: Samantha Silver
Issue date: 4/30/09 Section: Opinion
When it comes to housing, many students feel that the housing system at Mount Holyoke could use some renovations. The randomness of the lottery system is both what makes and breaks where students will live with every coming year. I think our current housing system lacks structure. Not only are class quotas varying from dorm to dorm, there is also no way of ranking a dorm. Each dorm's percentage of singles, doubles and triples affects its desirability for classes, though it is obvious which dorms are in highest demand.
I've been lucky. I spent my first year in Porter, spent half my sophomore year in Porter again and then lived in South Rocky. Unfortunately, the randomness of the housing lottery can allow some students to live on the green for all four years, and others to spend their four years on the outskirts of campus. I am spending junior year in Abbey and will be in Pearsons next year. I have had a friend who spent two years in Safford and two in Porter. But other students aren't as lucky, and spend all four years between 1837, Ham, MacGregor and the Delles.
And while we all complain and moan and freak out every time room choosing season rolls around, perhaps we should consider how our neighbors in Amherst and Northampton decide where to call dorm sweet dorm.
UMass, with so many students and buildings, is completely computerized. No one meets with you so you can tell them what you want and do not want. Living off campus is a lot easier, and sometimes even encouraged.
Smith has a notoriously different housing system from ours. This difference is crucial when prospective students are selecting between Mount Holyoke and Smith. Smith places students in houses, and students stay in the same house for all four years, allowing room choice to be decided amongst those living within the house.
Hampshire's housing process is based on a system of points, depending on a student's class year, and where on campus they have lived before. But when room choosing is like this, students are pretty much required to pick dorms in moving groups rather than on their own. A lot of rooms are not doubles, but living in small common spaces with people who get a little on your nerves does not make for a fun way to spend a year.
I propose that the lottery finally take into account where people have lived in the past.
Dorms should be ranked by number based on how recently they've been renovated and on other factors of desirability. Rooms on the green, especially newly renovated dorms, should be given in higher priority to students who have lived in lower ranked dorms in the past. Quotas are great for mixing up the classes within dorms, and lottery numbers help prevent the green from being only students with a trust fund. New Dorm, new college president. Maybe its time we take a look around and give Residential Life a face lift as well.
I've been lucky. I spent my first year in Porter, spent half my sophomore year in Porter again and then lived in South Rocky. Unfortunately, the randomness of the housing lottery can allow some students to live on the green for all four years, and others to spend their four years on the outskirts of campus. I am spending junior year in Abbey and will be in Pearsons next year. I have had a friend who spent two years in Safford and two in Porter. But other students aren't as lucky, and spend all four years between 1837, Ham, MacGregor and the Delles.
And while we all complain and moan and freak out every time room choosing season rolls around, perhaps we should consider how our neighbors in Amherst and Northampton decide where to call dorm sweet dorm.
UMass, with so many students and buildings, is completely computerized. No one meets with you so you can tell them what you want and do not want. Living off campus is a lot easier, and sometimes even encouraged.
Smith has a notoriously different housing system from ours. This difference is crucial when prospective students are selecting between Mount Holyoke and Smith. Smith places students in houses, and students stay in the same house for all four years, allowing room choice to be decided amongst those living within the house.
Hampshire's housing process is based on a system of points, depending on a student's class year, and where on campus they have lived before. But when room choosing is like this, students are pretty much required to pick dorms in moving groups rather than on their own. A lot of rooms are not doubles, but living in small common spaces with people who get a little on your nerves does not make for a fun way to spend a year.
I propose that the lottery finally take into account where people have lived in the past.
Dorms should be ranked by number based on how recently they've been renovated and on other factors of desirability. Rooms on the green, especially newly renovated dorms, should be given in higher priority to students who have lived in lower ranked dorms in the past. Quotas are great for mixing up the classes within dorms, and lottery numbers help prevent the green from being only students with a trust fund. New Dorm, new college president. Maybe its time we take a look around and give Residential Life a face lift as well.