Last week, Duke’s administration reiterated its plan to alter the current housing model for selective living groups and greek life by instituting a mandated 30 percent upperclassmen section quota. While this new rule was made three years ago, many students—most of who didn’t even attend Duke at the time—were shocked and frustrated to learn that their living experience would be fundamentally altered.
As a rising senior whose living situation is now jeopardized, count me among them. Duke Student Government vice president for residential life Zach Gorwitz described campus reaction as “just a vocal minority who are extremely unhappy about it.” However, he and the administration are seemingly blind to the overwhelmingly negative reaction this has drawn from affected student demographics.
As The Chronicle’s Editorial Board eloquently articulated, this policy threatens to dramatically disrupt a housing model that students have shown a longstanding affinity for. What’s worse, the only articulated reason for its implementation has been, according to Dean of Residential Life Joe Gonzalez, that “upperclassmen bring a level of maturity to the houses and their presence is important.”
There’s no question that interaction between classes, and upperclassmen with underclassmen, enhances student life and the Duke community at large. In fact, that level of interaction is one of the biggest appeals of SLG and greek life in the first place. The opportunity to socialize with and learn from your peers is tremendous, and the familial environments those groups produce stand as one of their greatest assets. However, imposing those relationships through a regressive housing measure will not enhance those relationships. This policy’s assumption that greek life and SLGs are lacking inter-class interaction is unsubstantiated. The thriving membership rates of these organizations should be enough to illustrate that they offer a wealth of relationships, many of which stretch between classes.
For sophomores in SLGs and greek life, one of the fundamental fixtures of the second year living experience is the opportunity to live in section with your entire pledge class. On many levels, it’s the physical manifestation of embodying your SLG, sorority or fraternity, and is the year to genuinely and socially bond with your classmates. Sophomore year represents the transition away from East as well as the growing investment in academics and extracurricular activities. In carving out a path at Duke, section becomes a constant—a place students rely on to find their pledge class and the people they chose to live with. More often than not, upperclassmen find their way into section. However, in the case of a large incoming pledge class, instituting a quota may prevent sophomores from living in section in favor or juniors or seniors who have already lived there. While housing sections aren’t built to cater specifically to sophomores, it remains most integral to that class, and it would be a travesty to deny some sophomores that experience.
Moreover, the new policy would have a direct effect on upperclassmen that wish to travel abroad. For most juniors, particularly those in greek life and SLGs, fall semester represents the perfect time in their academic calendar to travel abroad. Sandwiched between the conclusion of sophomore year and the junior spring, studying abroad has proven itself a fantastic and unique way to experience the world outside Duke, and learn a lot about yourself in the process. Instituting this quota would mean that if too many juniors wanted to study abroad, they would be jeopardizing the existence of their housing section. It seems unfair and nonsensical to punish SLGs and greek life members for wanting to study abroad, an opportunity that should never be infringed upon.
Yet, the most belabored point with the new policy is perhaps that seniors must now comprise 10 percent of each section. In much the same way that rooming in section positively defines the sophomore living experience, off-campus housing stands as a long awaited opportunity for seniors. The privilege of choosing where you want to live, how you want to live and with whom you want to live all combine to make the independence of senior year unique and memorable. Factor that in with the fact that a small group of seniors would be isolated away from their own pledge class in section, and this quota quickly represents a punishment.
Additionally, off-campus housing offers a higher standard of living at a discounted price—Durham hosts a bevy of brand-new and established apartments and homes, many of which boast amenities and privacy not found on campus. The fact that these options are predominately cheaper than on-campus housing means the new policy affects both students’ wallets and their living situations.
The more scrutiny this housing policy faces, the more it appears to be a punishment. The interaction between classes is intrinsic to SLGs and greek organizations, and defines itself beyond any housing model. Foisting a policy that attempts to splice and institute those relationships—at the expense of some of most integral parts of the student living experience—will likely stir more resentment than anything else.
Instead of deciding what’s best for its students, the administration should allow its students to articulate what’s best for them. If Housing, Dining, and Residential Life is convinced that opposition to this policy belongs only to a “vocal minority,” then they should put their money where their mouth is. Rather, they should put it to a referendum.
SLGs and greek life make up more than half the student body, and their voices should be a factor when a stringent new policy specifically targets them. Why not let them vote on it? On one hand, it may reaffirm HDRL’s suspicions that a change is needed. However—and this seems far more likely—it may illustrate that HDRL’s quest to refine the housing system is a poorly constructed foray into the section system, a facet of student life that remains beloved in its current form.
This is an opportunity to for Duke’s administration to let students know that it hears them. The new housing policy is out of touch, out of place, and out of whack. Instead of confirming a growing suspicion that the administration lacks empathy for its students, they should seize this opportunity to listen. This is our housing, Duke, so please put it to our vote.
Caleb Ellis is a Trinity junior. His column runs every other Tuesday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.