Earlier this year, the Board of Trustees issued an unexpected set of five principles that would "characterize the future residential and social life of students at the College." Most students took this to mean that the precious Greek system was to go, and nearly every major national newspaper concurred. Headlines all over the nation hailed the end of fraternities at one of the country's oldest Greek institutions. Despite all the controversy over the future of Dartmouth's Greek system, the five principles addressed an equally important problem, one that could have more long-lasting effects than any other issue - that of residential life.
The issue of housing is one that must not be overlooked. Until this week, I did not fully realize the importance of Dartmouth's residential life situation. But this week I was also put on the wait list for on-campus housing for next fall. While I'm not concerned that I will arrive next September without a place to live, I do see a problem with this process. Consider that Dartmouth currently enrolls 4,023 students, which is small in comparison to the majority of the schools in the nation. Fifteen percent of these students live off campus, not including the many students who live in Greek houses or senior societies. Those residential spaces take away another 400 to 500 students, which means that the College must only house three-quarters of its students. That does not even take into consideration the many students who travel abroad on foreign study programs! I find it absurd, therefore, that over three percent of the student body is put on a wait list. James Madison University, a school of 13,000 students, houses every single person who requests to live on campus. Can you imagine if a school of that size put three percent of its students on a wait list? A wait list of that size would entail 400 students. Twenty years ago, when Dartmouth enrolled a little over 3,000 students, every student got a bed every single term. One would think that before the College expands its student body any more, which we have seen in recent years, that it would develop more residential space.
In the wake of the controversial decision about the future of our school's fraternities and sororities, the Trustees must not overlook the decision they made this winter to create more on-campus beds. The process of determining housing for next year has rendered more injustice than any other single policy the College has set forth. One of my friends will be living in Mass Row for the second straight year, while another friend plans to look for off-campus housing immediately because he is so low on the wait list. When I spoke with the receptionist at the office of residential life, she told me that most years the majority of students are taken off the wait list and receive housing. Should we really believe them? This is the same administration that won't even tell us the fate of our Greek houses. Honestly, I don't blame anyone for not wanting to risk waiting until this August to find out where they are living. Naturally, we cannot all live in Mass Row two years in a row like my friend. But none of us should have to be subjected to the River dorms for two years in a row either, or worse, no dorm at all. There must be a better solution than giving over one hundred students no more assurance than a number on a list.
I am not suggesting that the College should create more housing options at the expense of the fraternities and sororities. No, ORL can do better than that. With the amount of money that President Wright has allocated for the installation of the five principles, the College can surely find options other than using Greek houses to accommodate unaffiliated students, which was suggested at last Tuesday's Student Assembly meeting. He has spoken frequently about the changes that will take place as a result of the Five Principles. If President Wright really wants to create new housing options, I challenge him to do so immediately and without threatening the school's fraternities and sororities in the process. As the steering committee moves to set forth these changes, I hope that they will do so with the utmost care and responsibility for all of the changes that the trustees have proposed. Only if the College touches upon all of the improvements it hopes to make, especially the problem of housing, can the Five Principles be a success.
