In 2007, HDRL and students came together to develop a student-driven assessment for Selective Living Groups. The end result was the first iteration of the Residential Group Assessment Committee (RGAC) and its accompanying scoring rubric. Its premise was simple: a supposedly unbiased scoring system to ensure that living groups maintain their sections and add value to the Duke community. Perhaps more importantly, RGAC helped establish the principle that housing for SLGs on Duke’s campus was not a right but a privilege.
Quickly, though, RGAC devolved into an ineffective tool with no power to effect change. Complaints ranged from unsubstantial guidelines for the rubric,to thelack of information provided to poorly represented groups, to the scoring guidelines being unfairly tailored to certain selective-living groups.
Ultimately, with such a disorganized system, any potential RGAC once had disappeared, and it was disbanded shortly before after the development of the new housing model that would be implemented in 2012. Now we, the DSG committee for residential life, present our rationale and methodology behind the new RGAC as well as our vision for Duke Housing in the future.
Two key issues guided our creation of the new RGAC. First, following the miscommunication and dismay regarding the 30/10 guidelines earlier this year and the subsequent 20/Exec Compromise, the need for clear and detailed RGA guidelines became increasingly apparent. We also sought to address the fact that, until now, there has been no opportunity for new living groups to gain housing through the assessment of current living groups.
There is nothing more detrimental or wasteful than history repeating itself. In the past, consistent lack of communication between HDRL and students has led to both unpopular policy changes and a general disconnect regarding housing conditions. Consequently, in rebuilding RGA guidelines, DSG has made a point to address the consistent miscommunication between HDRL and students.
Throughout RGAC’s redevelopment, senators met with twelve representatives from non-Greek selective houses, fraternities and sororities to explain changes, the new process, ask for feedback and make adjustments accordingly. There were also presentations and subsequent workshops on the guidelines with both the PanHellenic and Interfraternity Councils. We made sure to include details and specifics in the guidelines themselves to further limit confusion. Furthermore, DSG facilitated the opportunity for interested Selective-Groups to switch sections amongst one another after learning of these new guidelines to provide them with further flexibility.
After that fact-finding, we moved forward with crafting the guidelines to address the lack of access for new SLGs to come onto campus. Because the number of selective living group sections on campus is fixed, a new living group can only gain housing space when another living group loses their section. That said, the goal of this committee should never be to force groups out of their space. Instead, we sought to ensure that groups that enjoy the privilege of having living space are upholding themselves to a standard that benefits both its members and the Duke community.
These guidelines are necessary because there exist selective living groups that are waiting to create communities on campus, which can only be fully realized through having a section. Without guidelines to assess current groups, new groups will have no chance of coming on campus or contributing to Duke’s social scene and climate.
This RGAC overhaul is only one of the projects that the Residential Life Committee is working on and will continue to require effective communication. Going forward, HDRL and DSG hope to continue this trend through information sessions, workshops and presentations. Specifically, we are currently conducting an online Q&A, where students can submit questions and view past questions. Additionally, while RGAC will convene to assess current and new groups in the Spring of 2016, this first semester will be a trial run with consequences not starting until the Fall of 2016. Through publication of information as well as subsequent evaluation of the RGAC rubric and process, we hope to ensure that the best interests of students and the concerns of HDRL continue to be addressed.
We intend for our work with the rebuilding of RGAC to go beyond the status quo of housing and to represent our vision for the future of Duke Housing. In the future, we hope that SLGs will continue to understand that housing on this campus is a privilege granted to them and that their communities will continue to reflect their responsibility to Duke’s social culture and campus. Finally, our effort to continue working on the effectiveness of Duke’s current housing model reflects our faith in HDRL and the current residential system. It is our hope that these rules by students for students reflect this faith as well and help to facilitate the process of making this housing model live up to its full potential.
George Mellgard, DSG V.P. for Residential Life,
Edward Bartlett, DSG Senator for Residential Life
Kevin Bhimani, DSG Senator for Residential Life
Robert Rappleye, DSG Senator for Residential Life
Marc Siegal, DSG Senator for Residential Life
Elizabeth Speed, DSG Senator for Residential Life
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.