Dartmouth takes great pride in hailing itself as a close-knit residential college, and much of the Student Life Initiative aims at improving the residential experience. Therefore, it comes as a great shock that, as reported in last Friday's issue of The Dartmouth, the Office of Residential Life decided to eliminate the blocking option. If the College is truly committed to enhancing residential life, this integral blocking option should remain intact.
Since arriving on the Hanover plain three and a half years ago, I have believed that one of Dartmouth's biggest problems is its residential system. The crux of the problem arose from the fact that, rather than amply prepare for coeducation, the College suddenly doubled the student population without adding more dormitories. Instead, in a move which would come to characterize the cheapness of the administration, the College instituted the D-plan as a Band-Aid solution to cramming so many students into so little space. The River dorms were erected in the 1960s, and no new construction took place until 1987 when the small East Wheelock cluster took shape.
So after 30 years of the Trustees twiddling their thumbs, here we are today, forced to be constantly on the move, oftentimes changing rooms every term, hardly feeling the sense of community and the family-like environment that a strong residential college should have. My sophomore year consisted of moving between the River, New York City, and Hitchcock, and it was not until the summer when I could move into my fraternity with a bunch of friends that I finally felt that I had found a home, and I have lived there ever since. I have many problems with the Greek system, but the biggest benefit that I have received from my house has been the sense of family and continuity that it provides. I imagine that many students are drawn to off-campus apartments for the same reason.
According to the above-mentioned article, Dean of Residential Life Martin Redman said that blocking was removed because many students abused the option, as some met their future roommates for the first time at room draw. If this is the case, it sounds as though it is room draw itself which is the problem, rather than blocking. As one of my friends put it, room draw was "more about beating the system than it was about living with your friends." For example, during room draw last year, five of my friends managed to secure five enormous singles in Topliff using the housing priority number of a class of 2000 student they barely knew. Before last year, students filled out a blocking form and submitted it to ORL without scrambling during room draw to find others with better housing priority numbers.
Redman also stated, according to the article, that a new "squatters' rights" option may give students the ability to live with their friends. However, unless one is lucky enough to already live near their friends in one of the few dorms in which this option is available, how will this be possible?
This new change will not affect my residential experience since I will be graduating all too soon. Nevertheless, I cannot comprehend the logic behind this newly-announced change. If you agree with me, I encourage you to contact ORL and let them know that you oppose this blockheaded move. I challenge ORL to improve room draw so that blocking cannot be abused, perhaps through the use of pre-approved blocking groups. If this is not possible, revert back to the old system of ORL-designated room selection. But for the sake of community and family, don't eliminate the one residential option which best brings people together in the dormitories.
