Anonymous

Changes

Anchor housing

28 bytes removed, 19:25, December 1, 2005
Student Opinion: more NPOV. Although this section is on opinions, it has to say "some believe that" or something to the effect, not just present opinions as fact
* '''Loss of freedoms and choices.''' Any housing system that restricts the number of houses students can live in restricts students' choices. Given the great variety of dorms on this campus, many students believe it essential that they be at least given a chance to choose from some of the best dorms on campus. Clusters drawn by the CUL have rarely included equal numbers of "desirable" and "undesirable" houses, leaving students wondering whether members of classes after 2009 will find themselves randomly assigned to a "sucky cluster." Students also worry that they will be unable to form a housing pick group with their friends, especially with friends they make after cluster assignments have been made in their freshman spring.
* '''Social engineering.''' The attitude of the CUL and administration has been seen as very paternalistic by many students. Students are wary of attempts to ensure "diversity" in all dorms on campus. The phrase "genuine communities" has been particularly contentious among students, as some believe it suggests that existing communities were judged by the CUL and determined to be "not genuine."
* '''Freshman affiliations.''' The assignment of entries to particular clusters was met with strong disapproval by students worried that new students' housing choices would be determined entirely by their entry assignment, before they even set foot on campus. FortunatelyHowever, the CUL altered this aspect of the plan.
* '''Loss of "class" living experiences.''' Sophomores will no longer be able to live as a class in [[Mission Park]], and juniors will no longer be able to live together in the [[Greylock Quad]]. Some credit the Mission Park renovations in the summer of 2003 as dramatically improving the Williams sophomore experience, and are concerned that anchor housing will take away the benefits of living as a class with all the people who got to know one another as entrymates during freshman year.
* '''Disregard of suite affiliations.''' Many Williams students live with the same (or a similar) set of friends in a suite throughout their career. Students believe that the CUL did not take into account strong "suite identity" and the smaller, more tightly knit communities of two or three nearby suites, often composed of good friends who enjoy each others' company.
* '''Differences in social behavior.''' The drinking culture on this campus appeals to some and not to others. Some of the less party-prone students worried that anchor housing would spread them thinly around campus, sandwiching them between students more interested in trashing common rooms with [[beirut]] refuse than using the common room for a quiet gathering, board game, impromptu poker night, or movie viewing.
* '''The Odd Quad.''' Members of the [[Odd quad | Odd Quad]] (officially known as the Berkshire Quad to the uninitiated and CUL members) community use the dorms Currier and Fitch as a social hub. These students, self-described [[deviants]], are often set apart from the rest of campus culture. Without a physical social base, they worry that their way of life will be severely disrupted. Anchor housing will randomly spread these students around the entire campus, effectively destroying the Odd Quad as a cohesive community. CUL members responded that the Odd Quad is a perfect example of "theme housing" and should not, in fact, exist as a residential community.
* '''Failure of clusters at Middlebury.''' Middlebury College [http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6393 recently implemented a cluster-model housing system], and students there have a low opinion of it. In fact, their objections are very similar to Williams students' objections to anchor housing: social engineering, preventing them from living with friends, et cetera.
10
edits