Anchors Away - Williams College

Anchor housing news and announcements:

10 November 2005: "Anchors Away sinks like a rock"

An article by this title appeared in this week's Williams Record, in which Jake Gorelov interviewed several members of Anchors Away and the CUL and determined that the organization has died. An excerpt:

Members of the group Anchors Away, which last year was the central opponent of cluster housing, have essentially given up fighting for wholesale changes to the residential life proposals of the Committee on Undergraduate Life. With its most outspoken members studying abroad or burdened by theses or grad school applications, the group has not been nearly as vocal this year. Many of its members also charge that the College refuses to consider student opinion on the matter.

This is slightly biased, in the sense that the reason Anchors Away has been inactive is because we did all that we could when Anchor Housing was an issue under debate, and now that everything has been decided, there is little to do. Anchors Away collected written opinions from 200 students, spoke to the administration, and sent an extensive document detailing the problems with anchor housing to the trustees. These efforts -- the latter of which was not even acknowledged -- met with no recognition whatsoever with the administration. Joe Shoer expresses it well in Jake's article:

“There really is no course of action left to us at all,” said Joe Shoer ’06, who last year helped to spearhead the anti-cluster movement. “Since the committee and administration are not interested in hearing students’ suggestions for structuring the new system, Anchors Away is powerless – after all, even College Council’s letter of opposition to anchor housing went ignored last year. I suspect that even a petition signed by 70 or 80 percent of the student body wouldn’t affect anchor housing in the slightest.”

This page has not been updated since April since little has occurred worth noting. As Diana Davis '07 told Jake, this page has consistently averaged about five hits a day. However, anytime anything having to do with Anchor Housing occurs and this site is advertised, many people visit it and, we hope, become more educated about Anchor Housing.

8 November 2005: Vote on Jose

There is currently a vote for the method under which picks for clusters and rooms within those clusters will be assigned. To vote, go to Jose. The issue at stake:

The CUL is looking for input for this year's room draw algorithm, and wants student input in designing its transition scheme. It is very likely that there will be two draws, one held in March to determine cluster affiliation, and one draw in April to determine rooms within that cluster. Please indicate which of the following two transition options you would prefer. The first option is to give each student two random numbers, one for cluster pick and one for room pick within the cluster. The second option is to give each student one random number, and students with bad cluster picks will be guaranteed good room picks within the clusters. Under the first system, there is the possibility that a student could end up with both a first-choice cluster and a first-choice room, but it may be possible to end up with an undesirable room in a last-choice cluster. Under the second system, one is guaranteed a good cluster or a good room, but it is unlikely that a student will be able to get both. Please indicate which of the two options you would prefer: YES--CHOICE 1 -- Two independent, unrelated random numbers NO--CHOICE 2 -- One random number, room and cluster numbers inversely related

Voting closes on Thursday night, November 10.

5 April 2005: A new report

Over spring break, members of the Williams community -- students, alumni, and several members of Anchors Away -- composed a thoughtful and thorough review of the questions that must be asked before the current "Williams House System" proposal goes into effect. Here is the abstract:

The recent College Council elections featured a question on the anchor housing plan proposed by the Committee on Undergraduate Life (CUL). Fewer than 20% of the polled students were in favor. More than 3 times as many were opposed. Why? Why are students at Williams overwhelmingly against a policy change whose purpose is to improve their lives? We believe that the opposition arises from misgivings about the process. CUL, despite the best of intentions, has failed to provide a thorough summary of the important issues surrounding anchor housing. In particular, it failed to provide any discussion of housing policy at peer institutions, ignored the special role of the Berkshire Quad at Williams, and declined to provide any metrics by which to measure the success or failure of anchor housing five years from now.
We respectfully ask the Trustees, acting on behalf of the entire Williams community, to seek answers to these questions.Please request that President Schapiro and Dean Roseman task CUL with spending another few months on anchor housing. We do not seek to prejudge what CUL will find, but we are certain that Williams will be better off if a search is done. Anchor housing is too important a change to rush into. There are many reasons why students are overwhelmingly against it. CUL has no hope of convincing them unless and until it provides a thorough discussion of their concerns. Moreover, anchor housing itself, should it be implemented, is much more likely to be successful if the students are behind it. Help us to allay their concerns. Students deserve to have their questions answered.

Read the full report (PDF) or in HTML format

10 March 2005: Hang this poster!

42K JPEG version, PDF version

Please hang this poster in your window to show your opposition to anchor housing. This would be especially helpful if you are on the first floor in a high-traffic area. Please affix it to the window with the graphic facing to the outside. If you prefer not to hang it in your window but you would like to show support for the cause in another way, print out a few copies and hang them up in the entryway to your dorm -- every poster helps spread the word! Thanks a lot.

21 February 2005: Objections to Anchor Housing

Joe Shoer '06 has created a list of specific objections to the anchor house system, which you can read here or on his blog. The main points are:

(1) Divisions
(2) Dorm equitability
(3) Entry affiliations
(4) Sophomore 'Mission experience'
(5) Suites and 'serendipity'
(6) Opt-out
(7) Economics
(8) Manner of proposal

16 February 2005: Send your thoughts to the CUL

We would like to call your attention to a feature on the CUL's new site that allows students to submit input. If you have an opinion on anchor housing, we encourage you to share it with the CUL. Specific comments, such as criticisms of features that you think would adversely affect the campus, or parts of the proposal that you think would work especially well, would probably be most helpful. You can feel free to submit multiple comments if you think of something later.

Click here to share your thoughts with the CUL.

Transcript of last night's debate provided by Amarnath Santhanam

CUL answers CC's questions

In an effort to further inform the student body with the specifics of the Committee on Undergraduate Life (CUL) Cluster House Proposal, College Council compiled a list of question which was submitted to the CUL on Friday, February 11th and to which they have promptly responded.

Click here to read the questions and answers.

This update is from Ilunga Kalala '05

15 February 2005: BREAKING NEWS

The Williams House System [Anchor Housing] will not be implemented next fall, a result of the consensus reached by senior staff and Committee on Undergraduate Life chair Will Dudley '89 at a meeting on Tuesday. The College is instead setting its sights on fall 2006, with details of the system's structure to be worked out this spring.

Full story available on the Record Web site: click here. Excerpts from the article by Steven Myers:

"We looked at the proposal, and the facts spoke for themselves," Roseman said. "To give you an example, there are very specific recommendations about co-ops, which would require us to do work in some of our buildings, and it's too late to schedule any of that." "As time went by and we realized how much would be involved, more and more of us started to think that we couldn't do an excellent implementation by the fall," Dudley said. He cited physical upgrades for dormitories and the creation of a cluster governance system as issues still waiting to be worked out. Roseman also said that it would be a helpful exercise to simulate a year of programming under the cluster system and determine how much money would be needed. "Each cluster is going to need money, and we don't know how much that is yet."

For her part, Roseman was quite impressed with the draft of the proposal that she saw yesterday. "No one on the senior staff has had anything but positive things to say about the proposal," she said. "I haven't heard a compelling argument not to do it."

"Next year, the CUL and the student body as a whole can focus on making the system a success, instead of revisiting some of the issues we've talked about this year," Dudley said. "I think it's important that when we introduce an innovation like this we do it right and get the students on board," said Charles Dew '58, CUL member and professor of history. "When we implement the Williams House System, we want to do it right."

This update is from Ainsley O'Connell '05

CUL launches Web site

The Committee on Undergraduate Life (CUL) has launched a website that presents the most up-to-date information on the Williams House System Initiative. The site also includes a section where you can submit feedback--as always, the CUL welcomes your suggestions.

Please visit the site at: http://www.williams.edu/resources/committees/cul.

This update is from the CUL

Also, a reminder that the debate is this evening at 9:00 in Bronfman auditorium.

Pro:
Professor Cruz (Philosophy)
David Seligman '05, All Campus CC Rep, former JA

Con:
Professor Bailey (Computer Science)
Jonathon Landsman '05, Class of '05 CC Rep, former Secretary

This update is from Matthew Kugler '05

14 February 2005: Anchor housing debate on Wednesday

The Williams College Debate Union will be hosting an event on the Cluster Housing Proposal put forth by the CUL. The debate is at 9:00 PM on Wednesday, January 16 in Bronfman Auditorium.

(Note: this is not the original time, so some signs around campus may be wrong.)

This update is from Matthew Kugler '05

13 February 2005: Three more changes to the proposal

(1) Currently the CUL is leaning towards a 5-cluster model rather than a 6-cluster model. The advantages following from this move include: (a) greatly enhanced geographic unity [Mission is now connected to Dodd and Tyler, and not across campus to the row houses; and Greylock is connected to the Wood and Spencer, the two row-house clusters]; (b) greatly enhanced class-year mixing [instead of Mission being all sophomores and Greylock being all juniors, both Mission and Greylock will be full of sophomores and juniors]; (c) enhanced choice for students [each cluster now has 275 members, up from 240, increasing possibilities for suitemate combinations and choices of rooms]; (d) enhanced dining possibilities [the geographic unity of the clusters now means that all members of each cluster live in close proximity to the same dining hall, making it much more likely that clustermates will eat together on a regular basis, as well as on special occasions].
(2) The provision of an opt-out mechanism. Students will become members of clusters in small groups around Spring Weekend of the first-year (not at Winter Carnival, which the CUL agrees is too early). As described at the forum, these groups will have a maximum size of at least six, and can be composed of first-years from any combination of entries. Groups in which all members share a social affiliation may choose to become members of that cluster; other groups will be assigned a random cluster membership. Recognizing, however, that some students meet their closest friends after the first year who may be in other clusters, the CUL will recommend that students at the end of the sophomore or junior year have the opportunity to form groups of up to three and receive a new random cluster membership together. This gives students the flexibility they deserve, while also making it likely that most students will choose to retain their cluster membership over time, which is a key to generating the cluster identity on which the benefits of the system ultimately depend.
3) The CUL is recommending the immediate creation of at least 10 new high-quality singles, as well as a net gain of 2 co-op beds. The CUL will also recommend immediate renovation of the residences most in need of it, as well as future attention to the addition of more high-quality singles through the conversion of small houses that are currently in use as offices (but no longer will be after the new Stetson complex is completed).

10 February 2005: Two major changes to the proposal:

(1) Entries will no longer feed directly into clusters. When you arrive at Williams, you will be "socially affiliated" with your house. At some point in the year (probably around spring time), students would form pick-in groups of 6 or more students, groups that could extend across entries or social affiliations. These groups would then be randomly assigned to a cluster, and these frosh would become House members (and be welcomed into their house possibly during Winter Carnival or Spring Fling). Students would have the option of remaining in the housing cluster that they were socially affiliated in Frosh year rather than being randomly assigned. After House Affiliation is determined, houses will have each have their own separate room draws. Pick size in these room draws would be increased from how it is currently, probably to 6 (possibly even 7 or 8 in certain cases).
(2) Co-ops, which were initially discussed as included within housing clusters (ie: Dodd cluster would have Parsons co-op), will no longer be included in such a manner. Students in co-ops would still remain members of their House (just as students living off-campus would), but would not be restricted in their building choice by their House membership.

20 January 2005: Anchor housing, as presented at the CUL forum:

The campus will be divided into six clusters, centered around an anchor house with a large social space. The clusters are roughly geographic, but the Mission and Greylock houses have been split up (see this week's Record for the current plan). Each cluster has entries associated with it. After freshman year in an entr, students enter a cluster-wide room draw for each successive year. You may ONLY pick into a house in your cluster, as determined by your placement in a freshman entry. Pick size within the cluster room lotteries will go up to about six. ONCE AND ONLY ONCE during your Williams career, you may form a group of students regardless of cluster affiliation and opt to be randomly reassigned to a cluster together. They are looking to implement the system THIS SPRING, in such a way that we have a campuswide room draw as usual but after that room draw, you're limited to your cluster in the future.

Please note: These updates were originally posted by Noah Smith-Drelich '07, a member of the CUL, on his blog.