Changes

Anchor [[Category:History]] [[Category:Student Housing2.0]]''Some of the following content is considered, by some, to not have a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view neutral point of view]. Users who find a bias they believe is wrong or unhelpful are encouraged to excise unhelpful bias for fact, also known as or add their own counterbalancing point of view in the appropriate places.''Cluster Housing  '' or the 'Note:'Williams House System'', Anchor Housing is no longer the new upperclass housing residential system implemented at Williams; upperclassmen are no longer restricted to be one neighborhood. Anchor Housing was the residential system implemented in fall 2006under the official name "Neighborhood Housing." The system is covered here under the name it first bore before a significant series of [[#Etymology|name changes]].

Currently[[Image:clusterMap.jpg|right|thumbnail|Map of the four clusters.]]Before the start of "Neighborhood" housing in Fall 2006, Williams upperclass housing is was a "[[Free agency|free agent]]" system. Students form formed groups of 4 up to four and are were assigned lottery numbers within their class. They Individuals then choose chose rooms on campus in order of lottery number, from lowest to highest.

Anchor housing restricts the room draw to a small cluster of dorms. Houses on campus will be divided into five four clusters, each containing approximately six houses and one "anchor" house chosen to serve as the social hub of the cluster. Rising sophomores will form groups of six, and each group will be randomly assigned to a cluster. Upperclassmen will choose rooms in a lottery exclusive to their own cluster for the remainder of their Williams career. Students remain in the same clusterthroughout their time at Williams.

The housing system was formed with the following goals in mind, as presented by the CUl CUL at two informational forums in 2004:

There are big plans ideas for a "House Cup" and other interHouse IM teams, cluster-associated faculty and informal events with them, designated bulletin boards in the [[Paresky Center]], and cluster competitionsoutings, but we have heard no plans are not definite plans yet. This suggestion has caused some Some students to joke (and CUL members) joked about whether the [http://wso.williams.edu/discuss/comments.php?DiscussionID=140 clusters will be named after the houses in the Harry Potter books]. As it turned out, the clusters ended up being named after their anchor houses, though some other sets of four names were available for voting.

* '''[[Curriercluster|Currier]]''': [[Fitch]], [[Prospect]], [[East]], [[Fayerweather]]* '''[[Doddcluster|Dodd]]''':[[Hubbell]], [[Goodrich House]], [[Parsons]], [[Sewall]], [[Tyler]], [[Tyler Annex]], [[Thompson]], [[Lehman]]* '''[[Spencercluster|Spencer]]''':[[Morgan]], [[West]], [[Brooks]], [[Bryant]], [[Mark Hopkins]]* '''Tyler[[Wood cluster|Wood]]''':[[Perry]], [[Garfield]], [[Agard]], [[Gladden]], [[Carter]]* '''Wood''The houses [[Chadbourne House]], [[Doughty House]], [[Lambert House]], [[Milham House]], [[Poker Flats]], [[Rectory]], [[Susie Hopkins House]], and [[Woodbridge House]] will remain (or become) [[co-op|co-ops]]. [[Dodd Annex]] will become Economics faculty offices. For the CUL's complete description of anchor housing, see the [http://www.williams.edu/resources/committees/cul/reports/2005.pdf full proposal]. It is fairly detailed and includes a history of housing at Williams, though it perpetuates the misconception that the change from house affiliation to [[Free agency|free agency]] was driven by the administration and was "accidental." In fact, students were freely swapping rooms well before the official switch to Free Agency, thus a de facto free agency system existed at the end of the House Affiliation period.

Anchor housing was first proposed by the 1999-2000 [[Committee on Undergraduate Life]] (CUL) under the leadership of Professor Charles Dew, a Williams alum from the time when College housing was based around fraternities. The proposed system was a bit different back then, and was finally abandoned by the 2002 CUL in favor of making discrete changes to room draw procedures: decreasing the size of pick groups from 7 to 4, implementing a blind room draw, and instituting gender caps on individual houses. The reason There are a number of reasons given for this change varies depending on who you ask: 2005 CUL members claimed that the Committee of 2000 wanted to give their changes time to work, and allow time to see how the new [[House Coordinator]] system was faring; students who were on campus in 1999-2000 suggest that the student body protested the idea of anchor housing strongly enough to get convince the CUL to back down; and some student members of the 2000 CUL claim that it was their objections to anchor housing that kept the system from being implemented in spring 2003. In [[winter study|Winter Study]] 2004, news was leaked to the ''[http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6225 Record]'' that the 2004-2005 CUL (led by Professor Will Dudley, an alum from the days when students were affiliated with one house throughout their upperclass years) was going to propose the system again. The proposed system involved creating six clusters, with houses in each cluster scattered across campus but united by a centrally located [[anchor house]]. Each Freshman [[entry]] would be associated with a cluster, and rising sophomores would join the cluster of their entry. In the [http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6308 second article] breaking the story, [[Morton Owen Schapiro|Morty]] was quoted as saying, "It’s in the interests of the students, ultimately. The challenge is to explain why." Shortly thereafter, commentary surfaced in the ''Record'', saturated [[WSO Blogs]], and continued for some time after the initial announcement. Most of the commentary from students was very critical of the proposed change. A group of students dedicated to preventing the implementation of anchor housing and maintaining [[free agency]] housing formed the group [[Anchors Away]]. These students conducted surveys of students (in one case, they collected written opinions from almost 200 Williams students opposed to anchor housing), wrote letters to the CUL, ''Record'', and [[Trustees]], and compiled documents detailing student objections to the anchor housing proposal. Their efforts culminated in a failed campaign for the [[College Council]] co-presidency by two of their founding members.

Though students thought that In January 2005, the Committee on Undergraduate Life made a series of substiantial changes to the anchor housing had disappeared, it turned up again, suddenly, proposal. Entries were detatched from clusters in fall 2004favor of randomly assigning rising sophomores. Additionally, when news was leaked to the Williams ''[[Record]]'' CUL determined that larger clusters would be more conducive to forming genuine communities and decreased the 2004-2005 CUL (led by Professor Will Dudley, an alum from the days when students were affiliated with one house throughout their upperclass years) was going number of clusters to propose the system againfive. The proposed system involved creating six clusterscluster boundaries were also redrawn to be geographically localized; each cluster, with instead of comprising houses in each cluster scattered across from all areas of campus but united by a centrally located [[anchor house]], would consist of nearby houses. Which freshman [[Entry]] a student belongs Also, the CUL began to refer to determines which the new housing proposal by the name ''cluster the student housing'' instead of ''anchor housing'', because they felt that "anchor housing" gave too much of an impression that students would be assigned stuck to as a rising sophomoresomething in their residential lives. In Finally, the original date of implementation was pushed back from fall 2005 to fall 2006. This move was [http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article breaking the story, [[Morty&section=news&id=6449 highly regarded]] was quoted as saying that anchor housing was in by the student body's best interest, and the only trick would be to convince them.

The immediate student reaction was strong oppositionCUL finally [http://www.williamsrecord. Commentary saturated com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6484 submitted] its proposal to the administration under the ''Record'' name "Williams House System" in late February 2005, and recieved the [[WSO blogsAdministration|Administration's]] for some time after the initial announcementapproval. A group The CUL declared that its mission in the 2005-2006 academic year would consist solely of students dedicated to preventing determining how exactly the implementation of anchor housing and maintaining transition from free agency to anchor housing formed the group [[Anchors Away]]would be carried out. These students conducted surveys of students (in one case, they collected written opinions from almost 200 Williams students opposed Asserting that the decision to anchor housing), wrote letters move to the CULnew system itself ought still to be at issue, ''Record'', and [[Trustees]], and compiled documents detailing student objections to the anchor housing proposal. Their efforts culminated students in a failed campaign for Anchors Away argued that the [[College Council]] co-presidency by Brian Hirschman '06 and Amarnath Santhanam administration was ignoring dissenting students'07opinion.

In January April 2005, the Committee on Undergraduate Life made College Council submitted a series [http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6706 letter of substiantial changes opposition] to the anchor housing proposal. Entries were detatched from clusters in favor of randomly assigning rising sophomores. This was generally regarded as an improvement by students. Additionally, the CUL determined that larger clusters would be more conducive to forming so-called genuine communities and decreased the number of clusters to fiveadminsitration. The cluster boundaries were also redrawn to be geographically localized; each cluster, instead of comprising houses from all areas of campus, would consist of nearby houses. Also, the CUL began to refer to letter makes explicit the new housing proposal by the name ''cluster housing'' instead of ''anchor housing'', because they felt point that "anchor housing" gave too much of an impression that students would cannot be stuck to something in their residential lives. Finally, the date of implementation was pushed back successful without support from fall 2005 to fall 2006. This move was highly regarded by the student bodystudents.

The A suggestion by Dean [[Nancy Roseman]] took both the CUL submitted its proposal and student body by surprise in December 2005. Dean Roseman believed that there might not be enough dedicated students to fill the administration under number of leadership positions needed in a five-cluster system. The new idea reduced the vague name "Williams House System" in late February 2005, number of clusters to four and recieved changed the promised rubber-stamp approvaldistribution of dorms within clusters. Students in Anchors Away worried that In an effort to make each cluster's dorm space more equitable, the administration was ignoring their opinionnew plan turned [[Morgan]], [[Lehman]], [[East]], and [[Fayerweather]] into upper-class (likely sophomore) housing, but and moved the CUL determined that its mission freshman entries previously located in the 2005those dorms to [[Mission Park]]. The former first-2006 academic year dorms would consist solely recieve renovations to bolster the number of determining how exactly singles and availability of [[common room|common space]]. In general, students were encouraged by the reduction in number of clusters, but opinion on the transition relocation of freshmen was mixed. When students returned from free agency to anchor housing [[Dead Week]] 2006, they recieved letters signed by [[Morton Owen Schapiro|President Schapiro]] and Dean Roseman announcing that this four-cluster plan would be carried out. This is what they are deliberating nowadopted in fall 2006, and students would enter it through the Spring 2006 [[room draw]].

==Student OpinionEtymology ==

The Over the years, the system pushed forward to replace free agency has had many names, depending on the year and the discoursing parties. In its first Wiki entry for years, 2001-3, Anchor Housing consisted of or Anchor Affiliation was the name given the proposed system by the following:CUL and used by all discussants.

''When the CUL of 2004-5 gave the system a serious revision it decided to push new names for it as well.In Spring 2005, Professor Will Dudley, CUL chair, discussed the system under the name Cluster Housing or Cluster Affiliation in his visit then to [[College Council]]. He believed that the old name was part of what held back student acceptance of the system, that it carried the poor connotation of dead weight and being "tied down." The CUL report in late Spring of that year would refer to the system as "The Williams House System," but while "Cluster Housing" had been adopted somewhat by the community at large, "Williams House System" never entered common parlance.is actually NOT called anchor housing. It is cluster When the movement to affiliated housingand the debate over it resumed with the next academic year, built in neighborhoods around a central the 2005-6 CUL began referring to clusters as "anchor houseNeighborhoods."

But nonethelessHelped in part by [[Anchors Away]], it is still eeeeeevilwhose members refused to use the updated monikers probably partly due to counter-campaigning of their own, just many students continued to use the original name, "Anchor Housing." ''Record'' news articles covering the system used the official up-to-date terms as they arose, while usually also including old ones. In contrast, some disgruntled students went a step in case you were confused about the other direction and termed the residential system by derogatory names, one of the most widely caught-on being ''Clusterfuck'' -- from military slang, a disastrous situation thatresults from the cumulative errors of several people or groups. Also known as Charlie Foxtrot, in semi-polite company.''

* '''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 foor 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. The shift of first-year students to Mission Park will restore some of the benefits of the Mission "class living experience."

* '''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.

In its March 1, 2005 issue, the Williams ''Record'' [http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6491 conducted a poll ] of student opinion on anchor housing. The following results turned up:

College Council also conducted a poll, which was [http://www.williamsrecord.com/wr/?view=article&section=news&id=6578 reported ] in the ''Record'' on March 15, 2005:

However, the Committee on Undergraduate Life made statements to the effect that a student opinion poll would not affect their decision. The 2005-2006 CUL has singlemindedly dedicated intself itself to implementing anchor housing in fall 2006. == Current Status == Cluster housing, defined by the division of the campus as four different Neighborhoods, is fully in motion and began to function at the beginning of the 2006 fall semester.  Students elected leaders to fill four positions on each neighborhood board as well as electing to retain the existing names over such choices as nearby mountains and the Ninja Turtles. In addition to the elected students, each board will contain one [[HLC]] (basically an HC) who will also be on the board. These students will be arriving early to school for planning, team building and training in how to navigate the college's event regulations and budgets. Freshmen lived in entries loosely affiliated with Neighborhoods while all upperclassmen and most off-campus seniors picked into and are now living in one of the four neighborhoods.  The implementation [http://www.williams.edu/resources/committees/cul/members.html CUL website] currently contains a member list, links to previous CUL reports, and a feedback form. There are also minutes from some of the subcommittee meetings. In addition, there is a CUL listserv maintained by WSO: <email>cul@wso.williams.edu</email>. Students are encouraged to send feedback, comments, and suggestions to the CUL via the web form, this e-mail address, or by editing [[Stuff the CUL should do]].  [[Faculty Associates and Affiliates]]One of the assets of the anchor housing system is now considered increasing opportunities for student-faculty interaction. Though the neighborhoods will be largely student-run, they will also receive some assistance from a moot point (small number of faculty associates in factconjunction with the Office of Campus Life. In addition, indications are that anchor housing was destined to every faculty member on campus will be implemented right from affiliated with one of the beginningfour residential neighborhoods, when and have the administration voiced approval opportunity to it participate in its infancy), though some students push for a modified cluster system that preserves some elements of free agencyneighborhood activities.