THIS YEAR, the University announced several changes to the on-Grounds housing application system for upperclassmen. These changes included moving up the application deadline to Nov. 1 and giving rising second years priority in housing choices over upperclassmen trying to get new room assignments. The goal for these changes was to make sure students could know what they were getting when trying to decide between on-Grounds and off-Grounds housing, to encourage more students to stay on-Grounds in general and to make sure housing is guaranteed for second years.
While these goals are great, the actual changes not only fail to meet those goals, but may actually set them back. First of all, the new deadline is ridiculously early. First years who wish to apply in groups will have had barely more than two months to meet people and find out who they think they can live with next year. This pressure will likely make more students choose off-Grounds housing or choose to live with people that they later discover they can no longer get along with.
While some off-Grounds lease dates may be approaching, the students who would move to those off-Grounds locations will likely have already decided not to live on-Grounds. This means the earlier deadline probably won't change anyone's mind in choosing on-Grounds or off-Grounds housing. However, where on-Grounds housing used to compete, with off-Grounds housing with later lease dates, students will now be locked in to their on-Grounds housing by the time those lease dates come around, and may in fact no longer have available to them the wide range of options the University was hoping for.
However, the worst part of this plan is the sudden change to give rising second years priority in selection. Before last year, upperclassmen always had priority in choosing on-Grounds housing. While this system was certainly imperfect, last year Housing came up with a good solution: all applications were treated equally. The Housing division should have kept that policy.
The problem with giving rising second years priority is that the University is now basically causing the housing decision made in November of a student's first year to affect that student's placement for the rest of his or her time at U.Va. This is because there's now a greatly increased chance that students wishing to change their housing after their second year won't be able to get what they want. First years should not be put in a position where they know that if they pick the wrong place to live or the wrong people to live with that they're practically stuck with that, or they'll have to move off Grounds.
Furthermore, many of this year's upperclassmen didn't receive their first choice last year but decided to stick with what they were given so that they could try again this year. Now they're in the position that a decision they made last year may practically force them to keep their same housing or move off Grounds since there's a much greater chance of not getting what they're looking for in new housing assignments. They didn't even have the luxury last year of knowing that this was a possibility.
Worst of all, however, these changes came without public discussion. The issue was never raised before the student body, and the idea of these changes was never publicly debated. Rather, according to Accommodations Director Jon Evans, this change was made as a result of a direct order from University President John T. Casteen, III. This decision was made by the administration without the input of the student body, and that is simply irresponsible. Had the idea been publicly discussed, perhaps the administration would have seen that many upperclassmen wish to move, and have legitimate reasons for this. Furthermore, they may not have blatantly ignored the fact that first years need to get to know people, the University and all the pros and cons of various on-Grounds housing areas, and that two months simply isn't enough time.
The new housing policy at the University is simply a bad plan. The early application deadline will put undue pressure on first years to make a decision that may affect the rest of their time at college. The change in priority also creates a situation in which upperclassmen may be practically stuck in the housing they chose their first year. Finally, the University was irresponsible in making this change without public discussion and debate. The University should re-adopt last year's housing application process, and should do so immediately.
Sam Leven's column appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at sleven@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
