By Beacon Editorial Board
There was once a time when hard work was rewarded. The fastest horse got the wreath of roses, the early bird got the worm, the candidate with the most votes won the election, that type of thing. The reap-what-you've-sown doctrine will all change here at the University if the Office of Residence Life follows through with its plan to change the current point-based system of assigning dormitory housing to a lottery system.
Even though the housing assignment process could stand to be streamlined a bit, the proposed change is probably not the best way to go about doing it.
While the proposed system would still allot some seniority to students who have been living on campus for a longer period of time, it places no distinction between a senior that has been taking 18 credits every semester with a B-average and a senior that has been skating by with twelve credits barely pulling C's. Quality of work should be rewarded over quantity of time spent on campus.
In a truly forthright system, the preferential housing that those with a higher amount of points can choose to live in would be dictated by the amount of work that they have contributed over the years.
In essence, a student who has invested more time, effort and energy into their academic career at the University would be rewarded with first choice of housing.
In addition to limiting the effect a loyal dorm dweller can have on the housing system, the new lottery system runs the risk of destroying the dorm camaraderie built by returning sophomores. One of the great advantages of the old point system was that students who returned to the dorms earned additional points for coming back to the same dorm after their freshman year.
The incentive of additional points help build a base of returning students to the dorm, forming stable communities within each dormitory. With the lottery system, much more randomization is likely to emerge in the traditional residence halls, disrupting the communities that form and want to stay together in the same hall for more than one year.
If, as the Office of Residence Life says, there will no longer be a housing crunch after the new dorms are built, then why should a randomizing factor be introduced into the system? Rather than force an unfair lottery system upon the students, Residence Life needs to keep the old point system for the existing dorms and enact a voluntary lottery system for eligibility to live in the new halls.
With a voluntary lottery system, those who value the community of their old homes can stay where they feel comfortable, and those who want a new living space can sign on for a chance to join this community. With one fell swoop, Res Life can eliminate the competition for a spot in the new dormitories and maintain the vibrant spirit of community that envelopes dorm life.
By removing the points system, according to Residence Life, the housing process will be streamlined. The plan, however, might hinder the office's goals of increasing the number of upperclassmen who stay on campus.
What motivation will upperclassmen have to stay on campus if the chances they have of getting the room they want reduced even further? Finding housing for the following school year is already enough of a gamble, what with the crunch to find off-campus housing. Adding more guesswork with a lottery system will make a stressful, confusing process even more of a pain.
Ultimately, if a system isn't broken there is no real cause to fix it. In this case, we believe that the pros of the new lottery system do not outweigh the cons.
