On April 10, The Dartmouth reported a decrease in applications to living learning communities from 844 to only 575 — a drop of more than 30 percent. We should question why there was such a precipitous decline in applications for a relatively new program. I suspect that some of the 575 applicants were first-time applicants — which raises the possibility that a sizeable number of students decided not to continue living in these communities.
This inability of the program to maintain application numbers warrants a broader look at residential programming at the College. Many elements of the LLCs are similar to the residential community program outlined in the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” plan, which is supposed to transform the student social experience on campus. One of the most insightful columns to run last term was professor emeritus of anthropology Hoyt Alverson’s March 30 “Rethinking Residential Life,” which correctly argued that some of the largest barriers to building true community in dorms remain unaddressed. Alverson wrote that students’ reports in his anthropology course “documented pervasive discontinuity in student life, much like that often found in backpackers’ hostels.” He ultimately identified the year-round calendar and the D-Plan as some of the biggest obstacles to a stable, continuous community.
Frankly, I couldn’t agree more. When the D-Plan was sold to me as a unique calendar system that allows students to bond with classmates more personally for a summer and find internships in less competitive times of the year, it sounded great. Yet this approach completely ignored the system’s many drawbacks, which hugely outweigh its benefits. The reality is that the D-Plan disrupts social life. Incompatible schedules may cause a friendship formed freshman year to be followed by an absence of more than two years. It also fails to open up many opportunities for internships — several companies tailor their internship programs to the traditional schedule used by the vast majority of other universities. Of course we won’t be competing with students for internships in the fall and spring, a time when many companies do not offer internships period. During sophomore summer, many academic departments not only reduce the number of courses they offer but also the number of classes taught by tenured faculty. Students are required to be in Hanover, but the majority of senior faculty seem to go elsewhere and leave summer classes to be taught by junior faculty or visiting professors.
If there is one winner of the D-Plan, it is the College. At a time of year when there should be almost zero demand for student housing, the College can charge all students electing to live on campus full rent — which equates to $900 per month for a small dorm room. The D-Plan, though it might be a boon to the College’s finances, comes at an extremely heavy cost to student life.
In my experience, Alverson’s criticisms of the centralization of student life on campus — namely, the College’s use of only one dining hall — are also accurate. Cornell University, where I spent my first year of college before transferring to Dartmouth, had created a west campus housing system with smaller dining halls in each of the houses. This arrangement definitely went a long way in creating a sense of community in some residential halls. If administrators want a sense of community to grow naturally in residential settings, they should also consider opening several smaller dining halls, rather than a mass-use centralized venue like the Class of 1953 Commons.
From a student perspective, I agree with Alverson’s assessment that the residential community plan fails to tackle systemic shortcomings of residential life. Instead of reaching for the easiest quick fix, the College needs to take a hard look at the broader structure on campus. It must consider doing away with the D-Plan if it is really serious about maintaining continuity and stability within these communities. Without more fundamental change, the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” residential initiative is bound to fail to create any substantial change in campus life, and it will not sustain student interest. We need look no further than the decline in applications to LLCs, despite strong publicity by the College, for a reminder that administratively-planned programs are not the solution.
