Residential Life publicly claims that it will guarantee housing for students for all four years that they attend Washington University. But Residential Life’s understanding of its promise to guarantee housing differs from what students reasonably expect when they hear this guarantee.

When Residential Life has a housing crunch, students wind up in situations that are far different from their expectations.

Students find themselves legitimately angry with Residential Life for misleading them. As a result, the promise of guaranteed housing feels very empty, even if technically Residential Life provides students with some housing option.

In order to be fair, Residential Life should reconsider what it means when it promises students housing for four years.

If it is impossible to meet students’ expectations of what that promise means, Residential Life should reconsider making that promise or clarifying what that promise tangibly entails.

This spring, Residential Life has dealt with a housing crunch caused in part by the larger-than-usual sophomore class. Because of this crunch, many students have been told that they will need to wait until the summer to know which housing options they will be offered. It is possible that many of these students will not be offered options on campus or with the individuals listed on their petitions. The way this promise is framed makes it seem like students will be guaranteed housing on campus.

Residential Life could also place students in housing they can’t afford while still claiming that it has offered students housing. There is a significant price difference between the cheapest housing and the most expensive.

For example, a traditional dorm double room costs $8,140 while a one-bedroom in Greenway costs $10,366. Many students who can barely work to afford cheaper housing may not be able to pay for the more expensive options. And while the financial aid office claims it will help students meet their needs to attend school and pay for housing, this could just mean that the financial id office will meet the students’ needs by offering them loans. Asking students to take out loans to live in a type of housing that will allow them to live on campus seems like a stretch of students’ understanding of a four-year housing guarantee.

Finally, Residential Life punishes students who originally enter the system but choose to seek out housing on their own because of the type of housing they are offered. Students nervous about where Residential Life will eventually place them and how much that will cost often choose to seek housing off campus even though this is not their preferred choice. The next year, instead of being rewarded in the lottery for getting forced into a less desirable housing alternative, students are penalized and receive lottery numbers far lower than the rest of their class. This system makes it significantly harder for them to find roommates and move back onto campus.

At best, Residential Life’s current method of housing stretches the meaning of guaranteed four-year housing, but at worst, and in reality, it is deceptive.

When students choose to attend a university, one of their top concerns is what their life will be like at that institution. An important part of lifestyle is where one lives, and living on campus offers a drastically-different experience from living off campus.

Students need to be able to foresee this possibility and take account of it when they apply to the University. This means Residential Life needs to better explain what it means by guaranteed housing for four years or it needs to find a way to make its offerings meet what students believe that promise means.

Popularity: 1% [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Friday, April 11th, 2008 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Forum. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.