[107] in UA Discuss
Re: Proposal to allow FSILG housing of second semester freshmen.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Liz A. Denys)
Sat Jan 2 16:15:53 2010
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2010 16:15:29 -0500
From: "Liz A. Denys" <lizdenys@MIT.EDU>
To: Brian Neltner <neltnerb@mit.edu>
CC: hwkns@mit.edu, Spencer Williams <spencer8@mit.edu>,
Ashley Nash <trashleynash@gmail.com>, Tim Stumbaugh <stum@mit.edu>,
UA Discuss <ua-discuss@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <1262465792.16639.201.camel@gibbs-duhem>
The issue is that it doesn't alleviate the housing problem until second
semester. This issue is a problem because it could be misconstrued as
saying that the current crowding situation (or even a more egregious
one) would be okay so long as it is resolved during the second semester.
As such, I'm not sure I agree with this reasoning as being in support of
this proposal.
While I think this would benefit the FSILG community, it leaves MIT,
under the current admissions policies, with the choice of overcrowding
first term or losing money on dormitories second term. As others have
mentioned, this is only viable if we start accepting more second
semester transfers or start accepting students for a February start
(like Middlebury and some others). It should be noted that implementing
either of these would be a very new addition to MIT's current admissions
operations. This would be a more significant change than changing the
housing policies and might not be in line with MIT's mission, such as by
possibly creating a "second-class" student.
Also, would this possibly hurt FSILGs who already fill their houses or
cause houses to intentionally "underfill" their house first term to
accommodate second semester freshman? I think data of some sort should
be examined to answer these two questions before presenting it to the
administration.
I do believe this could be valuable to FSILGs, but I feel it is
misconstruing the real motivation and the more powerful arguments in
support of the proposal to include the crowding issue. It might be a
more viable argument without the inclusion of this "side effect" because
as mentioned above, it may hurt MIT's income from dormitory housing.
2 cents,
Liz Denys
(Note: I am a member of a sorority. However, I doubt this policy will
affect sororities; at least mine would not change our housing policy
because we cannot have open spaces first semester.)
Brian Neltner wrote:
> Dear Daniel,
>
> Thank you so much for your reply, it's really helpful to get all manner
> of feedback. Is your concern about the actual proposal, or just the
> discussion on the email list?
>
> I would point out that the actual proposal has this as the introduction.
>
> "We, the undersigned members of the MIT community, urge the MIT
> administration to allow undergraduates to live off campus during the
> second semester of their freshman year. This proposal is made in
> consideration of:
>
> 1. The lifelong academic, leadership, and service opportunities provided
> to freshmen by residence-based advising such as is found in FSILGs.
>
> 2. The resolution of safety and risk management concerns which were the
> original justification for requiring freshmen to live in dormitories.
>
> 3. The improvements to mental health and academic outcomes that are the
> result of being allowed to live with one's chosen support community
> during the challenging experience of taking MIT courses on grades for
> the first time.
>
> 4. The superiority of utilizing existing housing capacity in FSILGs in
> the face of rising enrollment, particularly as compared to decreasing
> graduate housing, removing undergraduate housing guarantees, or building
> redundant housing."
>
> We very carefully put them in this order, and used the ability to ease
> crowding issues as a beneficial side effect of the main proposal only.
> We had discussions along those lines while drafting the letter, and
> decided similarly that focusing on the practical crowding issues not
> only would make MIT appear cynical if they supported it purely for that
> reason, but was not as strong of a case as the support system, Dean
> Colombo's new initiatives to focus on the freshman year, and the
> resolution of the original safety concerns.
>
> Sincerely,
> Brian Neltner
>
> On Sat, 2010-01-02 at 14:38 -0600, Daniel Hawkins wrote:
>> Brian (and anyone else chosen to represent this proposal):
>>
>> PLEASE do not make this about crowding and enrollment. First of all,
>> the enrollment issues only begin with housing - there are tons of
>> other (worse) problems with adding to the size of the freshman class.
>> And second, as others have pointed out, this proposal does not
>> actually alleviate crowding; it does not create the opportunity for a
>> responsible increase in enrollment.
>>
>> I know you're just the messenger, and I'm not attacking you
>> personally. I also agree that this is probably a good idea. But the
>> way it's presented should focus on the supportive community that will
>> benefit freshmen. I don't want to see a good idea become the
>> administration's justification for doing something stupid.
>>
>> -hwkns
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Spencer Williams <spencer8@mit.edu>
>> wrote:
>> I am in agreement that second-semester freshman should be
>> allowed to live off-campus. First semester provides freshman
>> with an opportunity to assimilate into MIT's culture and form
>> friendships outside of their respective FSILGs. However, by
>> second semester, many freshman, especially those in
>> fraternities, are ready to move off-campus, and frequently do
>> so despite MIT's policy. This places the FSILGs in the
>> uncomfortable position of having to choose between the desires
>> of their freshman members and those of MIT, while at the same
>> time the dorms are left with empty beds that could be used to
>> house actual bodies instead of just names.
>>
>> The problem I foresee, then, is how MIT plans to accommodate
>> the increased enrollment first semester when all freshman
>> would be living on campus? One possibility is to allow
>> freshman to move off campus during their first semester,
>> though this option is likely to be strongly opposed.
>> Another possibility that has been mentioned before is to no
>> longer guarantee housing for juniors and seniors,
>> however, this is an option, like the first, that is likely to
>> be widely contested.
>>
>> Either way, if MIT plans on increasing enrollment, allowing
>> freshman to move off-campus second semester is a step in the
>> right direction.
>>
>> -Spencer Williams
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Ashley Nash
>> <trashleynash@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think that letting freshman live off campus for the
>> second semester is helpful even though it doesn't
>> address the first semester problem. As you pointed
>> out, some freshmen move into their FSILG anyway either
>> during the first term or for the second term, and this
>> is somewhat problematic for the dorm and the FSILG.
>> Some dorms have empty slots that they cannot fill
>> because MIT believes that they are already full, so
>> other dorms are crowded while some dorms have empty
>> beds.
>>
>>
>> Also, the FSILGs can't collect as much revenue as they
>> otherwise would, and some of them are hurting
>> financially since they cannot fill all of their slots.
>> Letting freshman move off campus would help the
>> crowding problem a little bit, even if it is only
>> legitimizing something that already happens. That
>> being said, saying it happens anyway and we may as
>> well legitimize it is a bad idea.
>>
>>
>> Ashley
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Tim Stumbaugh
>> <stum@mit.edu> wrote:
>> This has been floating around the dorm lists,
>> so I thought I'd bring it up here.
>>
>> My thoughts on this are that while it is a
>> good idea, it doesn't really address the issue
>> of crowding since freshmen will still live on
>> campus their first semester. MIT will probably
>> not go back to freshmen being allowed to live
>> in FSILGs first semester for a /very/ long
>> time, if ever, but I think that this is a good
>> thing, since it's important for freshmen to
>> have a community outside of an FSILG.
>> This ... sort of happens already, just
>> unofficially (and with an empty/underoccupied
>> room as the result).
>>
>> UA types (including Senate members), what are
>> your thoughts on this?
>>
>> Brian, have you talked with the FSILG
>> office/other members of RLA, the AILG or
>> IFC/Panhel/LGC about this?
>>
>> [For full disclosure, Brian was a member of
>> TEP while an undergraduate]
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Proposal to allow FSILG housing of
>> second semester freshmen.
>> Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2010 12:14:50 -0500
>> From: Brian Neltner <neltnerb@MIT.EDU>
>> To: bc-talk@mit.edu
>>
>> Dear Burton Conner Residents,
>>
>> A group of alumni has put together a proposal
>> to ask MIT to allow
>> second-semester freshmen to live in FSILGs
>> (Fraternities, Sororities,
>> and Independent Living Groups). I know that to
>> many of you this will
>> feel irrelevant to your lives, but it *does*
>> affect dorm residents.
>>
>> The full proposal can be found at:
>> http://fsilg-housing.org/
>>
>> MIT is considering increasing enrollment,
>> which will unquestionably
>> result in overcrowding (even more than is
>> currently in place). By
>> allowing freshmen to live in FSILGs, MIT can
>> increase enrollment without
>> increasing crowding -- and overcrowding
>> negatively effects the quality
>> of life of anyone in a dorm.
>>
>> From a more philosophical point of view, it's
>> not very reasonable for
>> freshmen -- adults -- to be prevented from
>> living with their support
>> community. I'm sure many of you understand how
>> difficult the first
>> semester on grades is, and understand how
>> awful it would be/is to be
>> going through that without being able to live
>> with your emotional and
>> social support community, whether that
>> community is a particular suite,
>> a dorm hall, a fraternity, sorority, an ILG,
>> or even an apartment.
>>
>> With that in mind, I hope that you will
>> consider signing this proposal,
>> as well as forwarding it to your alumni list,
>> if you have one, or invite
>> your friends on facebook to join our advocacy
>> group "Allow FSILGs to
>> house second-semester freshmen."
>>
>> The proposal can be found at:
>> http://fsilg-housing.org/
>>
>> Thank you for your time, and I hope everyone
>> has a wonderful IAP!
>> Brian Neltner
>> Class of 2005 -- Course 3 and 8
>> Current PhD -- Course 3
>>
>>
>> --
>> -Tim
>> "It's a picture of perfection."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Massachusetts Institute of Technology Class of 2011
>> Department of Economics | Sloan School of Management
>>
>
>
