DIRECTIONS IN STUDENT HOUSING
by
STEPHEN GERARD KOPELSON
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
JUNE 1979
Signature of Author.-..
tudies and Planning, 14 May 1979
Department of Urban
Certified by..
Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by...
Chairman, Department Committee
Rotch
-
1 -
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE
OF TECHNOLOGY
JAN 12 1983
LIBRARIES
DIRECTIONS
IN STUDENT HOUSING
by
STEPHEN GERARD KOPELSON
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning
on 14 May 1979 in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science.
ABSTRACT
A
history
university
questions
college
housing
of
various
residence
of
antecedent
different
and
socialization
is
from
dining
ideas
reviewed
traditions,
one which
combine
process,
and
the
issues
with
pertaining
special
what makes
merely houses
with
formal
balance
regard
to
a residential
students,
education
between
to
free
in
how
the
choice
and
of view, and changing notions of the purpose of student
housing.
Attention
is
paid
to
different
residential
point
environments
whose
study
may
be
helpful
in
MIT's own housing system, and suggestions are
future direction of residential planning.
Thesis Supervisor:
thinking
offered
for
Robert M. Hollister, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor of Urban Studies and Planning
- 2 -
about
the
We may have much to learn about dormitories.
--Richard Cockburn Maclaurin
President of MIT, 1915
- 3 -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
5
INTRODUCTION AND PREFATORY REMARKS...........
II.
18
PRINCETON..................
a. Identifying the Issues:
Current Situatio n and
.....
Demographics........................
.18
b. Addressing the Issues....................
.22
c.
.25
Recommendations..........................
d. Comments on the Recommendations..........
III.
.28
.33
HARVARD...................
a. History of the Houses....................
.34
b. Problems and Suggestions................. .
.37
c.
.41
Housemasters, Tutors, and Students.......
.48
d. Education in the Houses..................
IV. GRADING AND HOUSING.........................
.51
V. MIT.........................................
.53
a. History to 1956........... .................
.53
b. The Ryer Report of 1956..................
.60
c. The Committee on Student Environment Repo rt
VI.
of 1963....................................
66
d. Legacy of the CSE Report................. .
73
e. Other Important Developments, 1963-1973..
76
f. The Graves Report of 1973................
82
g. Sorenson, Speck, and New House...........
90
h. Next House...............................
95
CLOSING COMMENTS............................
98
APPENDIX A..........
.
.
.
104
APPENDIX B..........
.
.
.
105
APPENDIX C..........
.
.
.
.
106
FOOTNOTES...........
.
.
BIBLIOGRAPHY........
.
- 4 -
......................
115
118
I.
INTRODUCTION AND PREFATORY REMARKS
the
If
of
matter
many
universities
world's
student
compelling
questions
be
it would
residence,
would
become
moot
and
disappear.
among
traditions
life dynamic.
residential
of what makes college
part
the
Too
unfortunate.
The plurality of traditions and compromises
is
on
agree
to
ever
were
The
disparity between the goals and objectives of student housing
to prompt
everywhere
and
serve
the
fundamental
in
role
residential life are
realities of
and the
its
traditions
questions
the
to question
universities
and the
of education
universities'
variety
of
today provide much of
the
The
implementation.
observable
everywhere evident
residential
richness
in
the student's choice of institutions and tell much about each
university's commitment to the student.
Lest
the
the
only
Princeton,
attest
today.
to
reader surmise from the
patterns
of
Harvard,
some
of
pages
residence worth
and
the
MIT,
let
other ways
studying are
the
of
that follow that
short
those
summary
thinking
of
below
about housing
There are two diametrically opposed schools of thought
about student housing that have evolved from nine centuries of
European experience and the monastic traditions which preceded
the new urban schools of the twelfth century.
represents
the
university's
recognition
of
Succinctly, one
an obligation
on
its part to house the students together as part of the effort
to create
a community
of scholars,
-
5 -
and
the other
£epresents
the university's recognition of no such obligation whatsoever.
extremes,
The two
universities,
represented
best
evolved slowly and
by Oxford
and
the German
leave a broad middle ground
for other solutions to the problem.
In
some
cities,
Vienna
Paris
for
take
themselves
authorities
metropolitan
and
the
example,
on
much
the
of
The
responsibility for building and operating student homes.
Universite
Cite
in
undertakings
in
the
is
Paris
one
world.
Western
the
of
In
such
largest
Scandinavian
the
countries the national student unions, modern counterparts of
the
of students
"Nations"
to coordinate student economic power in a system
were formed
where students
the
behind
which
universities
the medieval
in
had no political
of
construction
are
power,
the prime
extensive
With
housing.
student
movers
state support, they have over the past fifteen years achieved
some
plan
and
successes
great
construction in the future.
percent
of
the
for
even
In Sweden housing
more
for
university students had
country's
active
about 40
been built
In Finland the student union has
under student sponsorship.
become the single largest real estate developer in Helsinki.
Oxford,
so
often
acclaimed
as
an
ideal
among
ideals
1
by
American university planners is not without its problems, some
of them resulting from its tremendous growth in the twentieth
century.
In
founded
there
thirteenth
the
past
than
fifty
during
century. The
years
any
Report
- 6 -
of
more
other
colleges
period
have
been
since
the
the Commission of
Inquiry
the
autonomous
corporations
of
system
Oxford
describes
known as
and
legally
financially
the residential colleges as
follows:
"In
the
college
system,
the
of
life
Oxford
is
broken into small units, each endowed with powers of
initiative, decision, and management in educational
and social matters. In particular, the college takes
prime responsibility for undergraduate teaching, and
this is discharged through the tutorial system.
has thirty-one colleges of varying size,
almost all within the range 200-500 taking fellows
(the academic staff) and the students together.
men
(undergraduate and
for
are
Twenty-three
Oxford
postgraduate),
(undergraduate and
women
and
men
five are for women
two
postgraduate),
are
for
The remaining college, All
(postgraduate only).
Souls, is for men, but its membership is restricted
When we
it has no junior members.
to its fellows:
refer specifically to the twenty-eight colleges which
admit both undergraduates and postgraduates, we use
the term 'traditional' colleges."
The
Report
began
its
introduction
to
the
University's
problems with a harsh, terse paragraph:
"Oxford's
collegiate
system,
as
it
was
in
the
past, introduced an unfair distinction into academic
life between those who shared in it fully and those
who lacked college attachments. It has also been
argued that the college's preoccupation with undergraduate tuition has so upset the balance of
suffered.
academic activity that research has
Professor Darlington went so far as to state that the
were
corrupt
and
self-perpetuating
colleges
-
7 -
oligarchies
iniminical
to
original
extreme critics worried that
thought.
teaching staff
Oxford's
had too much security and that it was
In
the
absence
of
a
generally
Less
'in-bred.'"
accepted
and
2
appicable
theory on the purpose of university housing, the tendency to
to
attribute
such
housing
qualities
has
proved
justified
or
decried
viewpoints
about the
of student
life.
all
manner
irresistable.
according
role
Student
to
of the
of
a
conjectural
residences
stunning
variety
university and
the
the entire mode of education, but it
housing
nature
system
can
ever
b^
if not on
is much less clear that
held
accountable
for
problems of social interaction and formal instruction.
by projecting various fantasies of
to
be
onto
the
of
Clearly student housing bears strongly on
the type of community in which the students live,
a
are
programs
for
how the
student
the
Yet,
university ought
housing,
this
is what
many researchers and planners implicitly do.
There
is a certain deliciously professional
examine different
housing,
cases
analyze
data
produce a model.
are
form,
too
role
to be
regardless
often
of
excuses
original
design and
planning
for
student
from surveys and questionnaires,
and
The great fault of models is not that they
context-free
researchers
of
tendency to
but
that
they
appear
universally applicable
of
indigenous
for
an
thinking
local
abdication
and
simplistic
in their
conditions.
from
critical
- 8 -
to
the
idealized
They are
professional
analysis.
One
can
smell
the
abuse
like
an
overlong
of
a model
at play
prescription
wherever
or
a
a study
program
reads
for
new
construction on campus overflows with vacuities and truisms.
While
good
immediate
planning
requires
circumstances
and
both
an
a general
intimacy
with
comprehension
the
of
the
whole field of similar problems, research on student housing
is
often
overly
planning
latter
and
concerned
programming
extreme.
including
dictates
perhaps
that
basic
information
be
have
While
and
made
with
the
former
generally
integrity
in
most especially
assumptions
explicit,
this thorny requirement.
and
most
while
bent
all
the
toward
the
the
sciences,
social
pertinent
writers
campus
sciences,
background
shy
away
from
This monograph, if it accomplishes
nothing else, will at least try to be balanced and honest in
these regards.
Who
this
writes
tell
reports?
their
anything about
housing
the
the
authors
background.
The
Princeton
called
by
the
committee
attention
paragraph.3
freshman,
Of
there
female
and
to
five
were
own
student
one
are
female
one male junior.
and
anyway?
direction
Does
of
straightforward
report
which
its
studies,
content
Sometimes
approved
one
university
wrote
was
a
diversity
in
one
about
unanimously
it,
members,
body
a
which
special
woman
was
and one male sophomore,
The
the
two sophomores
a
and
ate at
Commons and the freshman at Wilson College, during the first
year
of
the
committee's existence.
-
9 -
The
freshman
i7
now
a
sophomore
Wilson
at
a member of
one
juniors,
and
College
the
and
club
an open
are
two
now
an
of
other
Of the two former juniors/current seniors
independent coop.
to a selective club and
one belongs
other
the
to Stevenson
the other
The five Princeton alumni of the thirteen faculty and
Hall.
all
administrators
The
undergraduates.
civil
geology,
literatures,
belonged
professors
studies, and religion.
partly
a
came
from
and
clubs
as
fields
of
the
and
languages
Slavic
engineering,
architecture
selective
to
planning,
Near
Eastern
The even-handedness of the report is
reflection
of
their
far-ranging
interests
and
backgrounds.
Harvard's researchers were two gentlemen working for the
Office
they
of
Instructional
don't
directly
professional
person
Research
roles,
plural
at
and
identify
one point
in discussing
Evaluation.
themselves
they lapse
the
faculty's
Although
by
their
into the
first
responsibilities
in faculty-student relations:
"What
single,
outstanding
improve
House
contact.
niously
respond
This
and
students'
students]
feature
life
--
is
an
not
is
want
that
we
--
the
would
greatly
more
faculty
simply
impossible
wholeheartedly
most
demand.
should
be
Ingeable
to
to them."
Perspectives
the
[the
they
reads
advocates
advocate/authors
throughout
in the
are
like
an
appeal
from
the
faculty to the administration, and
skillful
-
10 -
in
their
presentation
of
(largely) uninterpreted
The
Ryer
data
Committee's
to state
their case.
membership
was
almost
entirely
composed of successful MIT alumni, most of them still
associated
with
Housemaster
of
the
Institute
Burton,
three
or
on
the
graduate
faculty,
students,
closely
plus
a
the
senior
member of the Dormitory Council, and several others serving ex
officio.
The thirteen members to the CSE at the
Interim Report
or
living
attribute
were
group
the
not
time of
identified by rank or
affiliation,
report's
so
guarded
it
is
role or
not
liberalism
the
to
first
school
possible
anything
to
more
specific than the general mood of the times.
John Graves was a professor of philosphy during his tenure
as chairman of the CSE from 1971-2.
and,
the
as
noted,
he was
renovation.
Interim Report,
a dean
from
Graves's
the
also
Of the
four
sympathy
for
for
Senior Tutor
fourteen other
were
Dean
the
identified
the
broader
interest
recognized in his piece
MIT"
(see
the
report
appendix
are
C).
in
at Burton
signers
of
the
oppressed
office.
and
Second
Professor
isolated
the language of
educational
reform
at
and
his
the
report.
MIT
can
be
"The B.A. Degree: Gener&l Education at
The general boldness
concordant
with
the
and openness of
tenor
of
tumultous, soul-searching period in MIT's history.
Report
before
as professors and one as
Student Affairs
humanism are perfectly evident in
His
He is a Princeton alumnus
the
most
The Graves
is but one legacy of an era that also gave us the March
-
11
4,
Renewal
Commission
on MIT Education.
Wallman,
went
on
Wallman
President.
Report of the
in a Time of Crisis:
Creative
Association
Undergraduate
to
become
was
eventually
a
on
thesis
a
write
to
Steven
one,
named,
others
the
Of
and
protests
I-Lab
the
research,
on
moratorium
1970
study of undergraduate organization.
Sorenson
Richard
and Tutor
earlier
more
at
its
eventually found
Future
way into
This
men.
New House.
their
explain
to
well
do
in
mortar
brick and
would
researchers
MIT
that
is
choice of paradigms that
else explains the
than anything
fraternity
both
lives they were
revealing
More
respectively.
MacGregor
their
in
Residence
and Lawrence Speck were Dean of
backgrounds for the sake of objectivity.
in
Burton
the
House,
year
first
basically fending
and the second as a member of a medium-sized
between
the
last
Cambridge
regard
are
and
eight
three
years
five
for
rooted
have
I
options of
the
in
my own
who
opts
been
cooperative and
experience.
to
I
else
"total
Institutional environment"
to
For
coop.
coop.
independent
can well
live off-campus
anyone
myself
for
in
off-campus
living
as a small
regarded
a suite
(at various times
diversified
and
members),
what could be
in
years in
two undergraduate
I myself spent my first
My high
living
sympathize
be
of the campus.
away from
This
with
the
thesis
represents a synthesis of my own observations on residence and
the
analytical
tools
of
architecture
majirs here at MIT.
-
12 -
and
planning,
my
two
housing
Student
to do things
is
is
set of constrai.ts.
Indeed,
upon
and under
anyone ever
if
the acid test
theory or model of housing,
formulates a general
called
asked to do,
no other housing system is
a very different
it
intriguing because
so
of its universality would no doubt be its usefulness in aiding
campus
supposed
being
a
to
the
complement
retreat
it,
from
residential
forzal
it
of
experience
is
education
by
of
process
supportive
wholly integrated with it.
is
the
Somehow
planning.
to
some
or
extent,
residential experience
Somehow the
supposed to alter the student's expectation of the part of
his standard of living relating to housing
in
of his place
some
extent
conformity
experience
residential
students
see
environment by encouraging
an institutional
either
or
shape
a group
as
And
independence.
rust
somehow
themselves
and his perception
by
the
way
leaving
to
the
in
which
to
their
them
own devices and
relying on peer pressure, by exposing them to
the
more
influences
or
as
mature
has
integrating
been
the
of
the
resident
occasionally
student
into
the
proposed,
The
and administration
student
clientele
of
are
generally
held
range,
interests
socioeconomic
and
itse-f
most other
to
be
is
housing
completely
environment
graduates,
typically
systems.
more homogeneous
status,
creativity
tutors,
by
faculty,
together.
population
the
or
by
university
housing a cross-section of undergraduates,
staff,
faculty
ed.:-ational
than miost
-
with
distinct
Undergraduates
regard
achievement,
populations,
from
to age
social
although
the
13 -
_RTWOPP"
I V. -
...
.. I~.. '1.1Mr1:r1111_.r__
same
researchers
of
individuation
transient
than
frequently
moving
the
and
also
many
quick
general
place
to adopt
wider
this
range
to
homogeneous
simultaneously,
given
as
often
and
not
radical
well.
just
designer
Small
throw
to
"interaction,"
The
in
obvious nor
that
the
be
being
social,
to
symbolic
be
to
do
so
flexible
environmental
hands
in
despair
generalities
patterns
indisputable.
in
contradictory
able
also
that
such
education
to
are more apt
housing,
be
of
tasks
at
enough
any
to
of
At
of
student
the
whole
the most
programmers
and
as
"diversity," "homogeneity," and
notion
important
their
interpret
addition
in the style of student life over
wonder
up
while
these
must
but must
changes
more
it, must be more supportive of
serve
only
greater
also
changes
Student
tastes
must
period of history
accommodate
time
individual
group,
In
students
place,
outlook.
the
are
Students
as a class major
cultural
of
note
population.
responsive to those who inhabit
a
to
students.
from
than most others
political,
are
leave
the
"flexibility,"
"change."
residence
student
is
fundamental
may
be
neither
level
the
argument that residence should be taken seriously rests on the
assertion
that
"it
is
in...idle
hours
that
person becomes an educated person."5
There
subversion
to
such
It
unthinkable
to
structure
free
time.
Yet
we
a
statement.
must
a
university
realize
that
an
is
would
around
for
all
i
intelligent
faint air of
seem
the
the
knowledge gained from the modern academic workhouse,
- 14 -
almost
student's
valuable
it is the
playground which produces the
older tradition of the academic
a
London University, Kathryn
of
department
MIT a
at
Here
schoolwork.
no
spend
should
students
system
unit
a
"Warning"
the
by
have
would
indicative
the
of
on
for
an amount only slightly less than
of
expected
been
put
be
can
work
of
hours
Performance
Academic
on
at study, and,
of
subject,
on
spend
to
expected
be
number
week
per
hours
in lab, or
each
Committee
completing only 30 units -what
the
to
for
needed
be
to
expected
keyed
can
freshman
that
believes
way,
35
than
more
Tidrick's mentor and
older
the
in class,6
up to 60 hours per week
with
of
supporter
modern
rare
psychology
the
of
Chairman
The
Shelleys.
and
Byrons,
Einsteins,
our
culture,
our
to
contributions
seminal
truly
low regard
in
him
for private
More
London.
time at MIT is
idle
the lack of any upper limit on the number of working hours for
an
which
completing
have
spend
to
program
hours
45
in
student
typical
A
register.
degree
a bachelor's
would
years
may
upperclassman
standard
the
formal
at
week
per
four
schoolwork on average, while the not uncommon four year double
major
an average of
requires
60 hours per week.
"In
moments
of extreme discouragement," writes Tidrick, "I almost long for
the
anarchic
freedom
of
the
old
of
History,
doznens
of
inclined, as Byron was, to
Biographies,...all
English
and
French
-
"nglish
but
through Latin
schools, where boys were whipped
if they were so
unreformed
the
read
British
philosphers,
15 -
public
had time,
'huge amounts
poets,
4,000
French,
novels.'
Allowing
sound
for
like
some
a
bad
Byronic
exaggeration,
education."
many students is matched in
At
MIT
it
the
really
doesn't
discouragement
of
its extremity only by the abysmal
quality of their social life, their manifest apathy, and their
defensive,
masochistic
pride
in
the
ability
to
sacrifice
leisure time and all else in the effort to prove worthy of the
Institute's
requirements.
If there is any specter haunting our civilization today it
is
that
of
the
quit their
get
back
of
England schoolmaster
idle banter,
to
"idleness"
best
New
work.
that
limit
But
the
it
chance of success.
formal
and values,
rendering
passive
process
of
active
ones.
in
insight.
It
the
The
apart
young
is
from
spend
reevaluated
and
minds
only
in
classroom
is
role
invariably
the
has
most
into
idleness
given
of
housing,
of
their
redirected
(at
of
institutions
the
where
in
the
efforts
undergraduate
to
live.
make
itself
The
-
chance
a
only
the
perception
to
time,
of
yield
almost
can
be
a broader
rarely
run
by
honest soul-searching
better
Institute
16 -
its
knowledge
students
context
fortunately,
in
to
of
educatic,.
MIT has done its share of
long
and
temporarily)
the
non-classroom
only
are,
least
that
to
in the course
transfer
cold people.
its
these moments
individuation
readjustment of the structure of normal
Cold
in
is a sort of coercive institutionalization --
of
absorbed
precisely
What ordinarily occurs
instruction,
students
their extracurricular life,
is
fragile
telling
has
place
for
built
living
an
on campus
quarters
models
have
than
according
to a greater
variety
other
universities,
and
most
has
explored
But to better
in its different reports on housing.
many more
ideal
of
place the discussion of MIT housing in historical perspective,
other
Two
needed.
are
examples
universities'
other
universities, Princeton and Harvard, have recently committed a
good
of
amount
effort
most
The
systems.
their housing
investigation of
to the
comprehensive
recent
study
by
Harvard,
is a
Perspectives on the Houses at Harvard and Radcliffe,
general
progress
House system.
report on
fifty years of
experience
in the
The Princeton study more specifically examines
the role of eating patterns and group affiliations as keys to
the
problem
Neither
beyond
of
Harvard
all
being
social
nor
versus
cohesiveness
Princeton
very
highly selective
closely
schools,
segmentation.
MIT,
resembles
and
many of
the
recommendations may not be appropriate to the MIT environment,
but the
problems and methodologies
Princeton.
-
17 -
are
illustrative.
First,
II.
PRINCETON
The
campus
Princeton
dining
issues.
It
is
study
tied
asks
the
is
to
an
a
interesting
number
questions
of
of
example
more
how
the
of
complex
how
social
university
might
best reverse the seemingly innate tendency of college students
to
fragment
into
isolated
groups
the
university's
exact justifications for acting in this area are.
Princeton's
problems resemble MIT's
school
with
a
highly
and
what
insofar as Princeton
diversified
set
of
is also an elite
living
arrangements and with clear patterns of social
and
dining
isolation among
the living groups.
Identifying the Issues:
The
Second
Current Situation with Demographics
Interim
Report
of
the
Committee
on
Undergraduate Life confronts a complex series of issues with a
clearly
chosen
logically from
probably
the
viewpoint
and
its investigation.
widest
possible
residential
options
the various
eating clubs,
to the societies
those
and
environment
offers
other
date
for
its
solutions
which
follow
Presently Princeton
enjoys
range
of
undergraduates,
to dormitories,
to on- and off-campus
facilities
only
to
social,
relating
1960,
this variety is relatively new.
-
and
from
to
dining
Commons
others
to
residence halls
independence.
to
and
the
only
Many of
undergraduate
to
1968,
SO
Students have a great deal of
18 -
choice among
different options,
but there
is a traditionally
selective character to some of these options which gives rise
to great social
system.
distinctions among various components of the
Moreover,
underclassmen --
there
is
a
sharp
freshmen and sophomores --
split
between
and upperclassmen,
with regard to social grouping.
Freshmen currently8 eat on a dining contract which allows
them some choice of facilities.
half,
or 562 eat
at Commons,
eat at either of two
Of the 1138 freshmen, about
while most
(424)
of
the
others
residential colleges, the Princeton Inn
and Woodrow Wilson College, or the New South Society.
37 belong to Stevenson Hall's kosher dining plan.
Another
Sophnmores
are also on a dining contract but tend to choose from a wider
selection of
options.
There
are
contracts with 522 on Commons,
and
Wilson
College,
kosher facilities.
non-kosher
small
plan
number
26
sophomores on dining
236 between
New
South
and
the Princeton Inn
41
in
Stevenson's
But an additional 74 belong to Stevenson's
and
of
at
1031
132
belong
to
underclassmen
the
are
Madison
Society.
independent
and
A
an
insignificant number eat at Clubs. 9
There
is
an
obvious
underclass and upperclass
and
immediate
difference
between
choices with respect to the dining
contracts throughout the entire Dining Facility System.
13
upperclassmen
eat
at Commons,
138
at the
the Madison Society and a mere 2 at New South.
colleges,
Only
63 at
Although there
are more juniors and seniors combined at Stevenson/non-kosher
-
19 -
than there are sophomores, there are noticeably fewer members
from
each
of
the
than
the
74
sophomores
upperclass
years,
38
there.
and
58
respectively,
Upperclassmen
are
even
underrepresented in the kosher plan, where one would expect to
see the most consistency over
the
four
undergraduate
There are 14 juniors and seniors at Stevenson/kosher.
only
10
to
20
percent
of
upperclassmen
use
years.
In sum,
the
dining
facilities provided by the University. 1 0
A substantial portion of the upperclassmen choose to cook
for
themselves,
most
that
is,
to be "independent."
(601) choose to remain living
opt to
reside elsewhere
in town.
Of these 722,
on campus while
Together, the independents
make up 25 to 30 percent of all upperclassmen.
55 to 60 percent of juniors and
into two
groups,
and those which are "open."
also closed
clubs,
The remaining
seniors belong to Princeton's
non-university affiliated eating clubs.
loosely divided
only 121
The many clubs can be
those which
are
"selective"
A few of the selective clubs are
to women. Some
1235 upperclassmen belong to
with an almost even split between
the open
ones
the
(622)
and the selective ones (613).l1
This distribution with respect to class year
source
There
women,
of
are
distinctions
whites,
receiving
almcst
fragmentation
all
blacks,
different
within
between
and
the
other
amounts
facilities and
the
undergra'uate
distribution
minorities,
of financial
options.
-
20 -
is only one
aid,
of
and
or
As examples,
body.
men
11
and
students
no aid,
in
underclass
women are more likely than underclass men to eat independently
and
are
even
more
trend
continues for
women
are
much
likely
to
move
off
campus;
the upperclass years,
more
likely than
this
general
although upperclass
upperclass men
to move off.
While only 0.1 percent of underclass men join clubs, no women
at all do so.
selective
Women are significantly underrepresented in the
clubs
at
20.6
percent
of
their
memberships,
choosing open clubs more frequently than men.
form
33.8
percent
of
of
Princeton
the
membership
undergraduates,
while
For women, who
to
also
of the open clubs,
form
37.5
almost twice as
many women must perforce choose the open clubs than choose the
selective
ones.
differences
extreme,
At
between
but women
the
University
men's
do
and
tend
Dining
women's
Facilities,
choices
are
slightly more toward the
less
colleges
than Commons. 1 2
With
regard
to
race,
blacks
are
somewhat more
likely to
eat independently --
although they tend not to move off campus
--
and
than are
open
and
students
percent
whites,
selective
are
are grossly underrepresented
clubs.
black,
only
While
1 percent
to selective clubs.
Commons.
Wherever
are
minority groups,
that
ethnic
blacks
minorities
underrepresented
at
percent
belong
to
of
open,
Princeton
and
1.4
Blacks form a disproportionately
large percentage of users at all
other
7.6
in both
are
University facilities except
over-
only
other
less
than
Stevenson
-
21 -
or
so,
underrepresented,
with
blacks
the
are
so
exception
marginally
Hall/non-kosher
and
the
societies.
Princeton
lists
8.4
percent
of
its
students
as
members of "other minorities.',1 3
at
As
students
many
elite
no
receive
and
20.9
recipients
(those receiving
overrepresented
are
receive
percent)
14
more
percent
than
that
at
the
open
to
the
selective
the
undergraduates
are
both
as
by the
selective
and those
receiving
aid
Facilities
University
and
Those same groups also prefer
a whole,
in
financial
the
clubs
overrepresented
Both categories of
some
underrepresented at the clubs.
chosen
Some
all.
percent
to choose to eat independently.
lots)
(65.1
Those receiving the most aid are slightly more likely
amount.
aid
at
aid
financial
up to $4000
receive
most
universities,
to
about
while
the
those
clubs
clubs more
the
and
same
extent
as
receiving
no
aid
choose,
or
are
frequently than any other
demographic group on campus except the total male population.
Addressing the Issues
Clearly there are patterns of disproportionate representation
throughout
the dining
system, but
what standards of the
school does this violate?
What are the implications of things
like
And
club
Committee
membership?
on
what
other
Undergraduate Residential
Life
prclems
did
deal with
in
the
its
recommendations for reform?
The
ideals,
Committee
and
had
to
viewpoints.
consider
The
-
quite
patterns
22 -
of
a variety
of
facts,
fragmentation were
and
analyzed and criticized,
women
more
that
able to do
actually
also
noted,
to
join
the
liked
have
would
it was
than were
clubs
students often
Financially strapped
so.
example,
for
couldn't seriously consider many clubs because of their higher
option
regarded
One
facilities.
the
with
on
is
another
puts
great
words,
the
University Facilities does
erratic
and
expenditures
capital
are
the
system does
the
better
and
one
shared
parts
popularity
change
over
tidal
of
of
the
overcrowding
in
changes
of
system.
and the
time,
the
of
changes
at
of
best and
The endemic instability
any good.
Further
dormitories
the
In
planning
the
for the University difficult
one
of
clubs
the
makes
This
drastic.
no
lack
the
years for one set of options or
has forced the closing of some clubs.
of
and
of
the
a highly
scale
clubs,
because
on all
pressure
remained
smaller
choices,
the
general
clubs
the
of
that
upperclass
preferences over
be
their
problem
major
student
other
of
because
University,
constraints
can
the
rates. Generally, however,
board
points of
and
the
fact
unequal
distribution of public recreational and social space.
The
process
by
which
clubs
selective
the
choose
their
membership, known as the "bicker," has been a perennial source
of
and
tension
fraternities
at
contention
Princeton
President
since
in
1876
probably some time before that too.
as
an
banned
the
influence,
and
McCnsh
evil
Dean for Students William
D'O. Lippincott noted in his own report that the bicker had at
tims been
fairly
compared
to a slave market,14
-
23
-
and that yet,
because of a lack of social alternatives, it was often seen as
The bicker arose only because the clubs were so
compulsory.
--
popular
immensely
them --
in
ate
upperclassmen
in turn arose
clubs
the
and
At one point
Princeton's food was reported to be abominable.
in protest --
residence,
the
then
Hall,
burn down Nassau
to
in
Like other 19th century colleges,
answer to a very real need.
students attempted
all
of
percent
75
point
one
at
only
a move paralleling the famous Bread
and Butter Riots at Yale.
Dean
wrote
Lippincott
of
"the
plight
of
bicker
the
'failure,' and the dubious position of the bicker 'success' -with the latter's resultant self-imposed conformity or
of
loss
individuality; and finally, the paradox wherein the University
has the objective of an open society and the clubs operate as
closed,
the
issue
general
This
organizations." 15
selective
to
address
If
University.
a fragmented
of
begins
the
University is to contribute to the growth of a free citizenry
and if
have
the social
any value,
on
idealism any
necessary.
universities
have
itself
been written
would be difficult to surpass
it
of
It
these
here
treatises
is necessary though to
the university reports --
The
university
is to
then there must be a free exchange of ideas
individual
this theme;
the
Countless reports on the university in society
among equals.
and
experience of
Princeton
--
and
about
just
ii. eloquence
or
it shouldn't
be
realize the
ideals of
this is the planner's work.
careful,
was
Committee
-
24
-
before arriving
at
to
recommendations,
its
'optional'
approach
lie
note
that
mainly
in
"the
the
of
advantages
number
and
the
variety
of
choices it provides to students, and in the extent to which it
accommodates different styles of
self-selected
Committee
groups
took
to
go
view,
the
their
own
however,
plan
the
freedom
according
fulfill
its
possible
of
to
choice which
how
commitment
by making
the
students themselves.
of self-selection
from
the
group
as
those on
such
whole,
a
use
it
wrong
may
wherever
seem
--
they would
University
the
might
best-educated
the
diversity
was
decided
with
a
those
best
alumni
among
the
After
that
system
that
attendant
and
dislocation,
structural
be
the
special
perceived
by
carefully weighing
there
was
which
in
something
produced
reform,
would
itself apart
within
inevitably
as a barrier.
and
preferable
The
simply
than
a group sets
to
fragmentation,
pain
rather
"right"
the
of
boundary will
outside
structurally
produce
ways."16
A basic problem with the existing system
what
dichotomies
to
is that
simple
the
felt
allowing
and there are many things
"are
they
best
separate
that
doing what appeared to by "right" -about
life,
undergraduate
the
with
long
this
all
its
run
be
to shallower reform of the individual components of
the existing structure.
Recommendations
For
the
freshmen
and
sophomores
-
25 -
a
total
of
five
and
social
and
the
to be
assembled
college would have to be
Another
dormitories.
from existing
about
built to house a fifth group of 400-500. There would be
so
or
2,250
the
among
living
advisors
50-75
be
would
underclassmen,
for another two colleges,
center
recreational
Inn
Princeton
College
renovation,
some
with
become,
would
Commons
400-500
accommodate
to
some
expanded
The
Wilson
is,
it
as
essentially
remain
would
proposed. 1 7
were
colleges
residential
underclassmen.
The colleges were seen as a "coherent social environment" with
an
dorms
lack
which
program of
expanded
With
interaction.
scale,
to
follow
from
than
from
also
called
for
an
sports to encourage underclass
intramural
regard
to
rooms
game
Committee
The
both.
and
Individual
Commons.
likely
more
much
libraries
like
facilities
shared
is
interaction
group
than
ground
meeting
social
and
academic
and
altogether offered a better
and Faculty Fellows which
staffs,
their
Housemasters,
of
system
supportive
a
and
identity
the
all-important
question
of
a college of 400-500 was seen as being small enough to
support a range of close friendships and large enough to allow
for
an
expression
of
the
diversity
of
talents,
backgrounds,
and interests of all the students.
The two existing colleges, with all their advantages, have
been unable
emphasis
retain nay large
to
was
interaction
arrangements.
placed
by
on
encouraging
residential,
sharing
Instead
number
it
was
-
of upperclassmen.
upper
social,
emphasized
26 -
and
that
No
underclass
and
dining
with
tighter
control
become
over
sophomore
better
living
acquainted
arrangements,
with members
of
sophomores
would
preceding
class
the
year, their own year and the year after theirs by the end of a
two year residency in one of the colleges.
A second set of reforms serving the upperclassmen was also
outlined.
juniors
The system envisioned would be one where nearly all
and
seniors
belong
to
one
of
the
clubs
independent option would be greatly limited, i.e.
students,
Stevenson
primarily
Hall would
seniors.
The
clubs
serve about 1,900
of
be
grouped
cooking.
in
The
those
dormitories
more
important
with
together
with
to 2,200
independents would
decent
features
the
to about 300
the 2,150
upperclassmen, and the 155 or so on-campus
and
of
facilities
the
for
upperclass
reforms involve a new relationship between the University and
the clubs, which are independent legal entities.
Voluntary collaboration
clubs
would
enable
between
more efficient
Princeton
planning
and
and
the
eating
management
of
all dining services by guaranteeing a stable membership at the
eating
clubs
dining
system.
as
they become more
The
the
responsibility
the
clubs'
physical
of
an
University would
for
maintaining at
plants.
Since
integral
also
take over
least
there
part
the
would
of
the
part of
exteriors of
obviously
be
some conflict between the selective, exclusionary character of
some
clubs
and
the
University's
stated
goal
of
encouraging
mixing among diverse students, one of the conditions
for such
a collaboration would be that all clubs be equally accessible
-
27
-
to
all
students.
Apart
from
this
stricture,
both
parties
would have to agree to the essential independence of the clubs
in
matters
although
of
style,
internal
the University
of procedures
would
managemnt,
require
a
and
personnel,
"clear understanding"
at the various autonomous units.
Comments on the Recommendations
Thus
and
has
the
economic
Committee
imbalances
sought
by
to
correct
changing
the
certain
program
social
of
the
undergraduate
residential
experience.
With sound management,
planning,
expansion,
it
much
and
the new plan
Artificial
economic
should
really change
barriers
class
to
can be
social
social
be
qualities
mixing
eliminated,
easier,
such
and
of
as
but
will
student
race,
life?
sex,
apparently will
and
be
--
but simply juxtaposing all the different demographic groups is
not the
same as
them. 1 8
An
creating
entirely
automatic
new
set
of
bonds of
tensions
friendship among
and
patterns
self-selection and the formation of cliques may well
replace
the
further
saw
old
the
on students.
sharing
school
and
Yet
The
Committee
limitations of
forcing
The most they hope for
broader
removal of
ones.
the
of
ideas
possibility
impediments
some
in the
recognized
new
arise to
this
and
new acquaintanceships
is the chance for a new,
best sense
of
for
of a liberal
friendships,
arts
given
the
imported from the outside.
proposals
support
-
28
-
some
objectives
while
The
others.
contradicting
of
idea
a
for
system
two-tiered
under- and upperclassmen retains and enforces a different kind
of artificial
of
barrier between students.
somewhat higher
among
the
first
political
universities
Princeton,
in an era
awareness
not too
long ago,
to
a 4-1-4
calendar
adopt
was
with
the month of January set aside for the students' own political
activity.
This
Activities
Independent
We
Princeton Plan.
of
character
later
reform,
the
Period,
have
all
has
plan
adopted
was
seen
and
renamed
the
originally
called
the
by MIT
how
quickly
For
faded.
better
the
or
political
is shaped
many people's social and political outlook
worse,
for
in their
Assuming that the university wishes to
four years of college.
see some continuity between the processes of maturation of one
generation of students and the next, then an
important channel
to
that
be
kept
open
for
communication
would
be
between
Of all
oldest and the youngest, the seniors and the freshmen.
the
possible
difficult
other
paths,
this
the
seniors
with
and
the
juniors
become entirely
in
oblivious
one
would
seem
socializing
the
eating
to the
to
the
be
the
most
primarily
with
each
clubs.
nature of
Freshmen
the
may
campus life a
scant two years before their arrival.
Three other contradictions also stand out.
to
answer
club
the
might
membership
friends
to
need
have
of
for
125
great
members,
a typical
join
in
intimacy
a
MIT
or
three
fraternity)
retreat
-
(even
29 -
from
a
to
and
The clubs seem
though
a
typical
four
times
allow
groups
mass,
the
of
institutional
society, but even though in the future all students would have
remain.
access to all clubs, some problems
equal
There is no
reason to suspect that the patterns of self-imposed conformity
would
be
any
perceptions
less
of
oppressive
each
within
club from
outside
club
or
that
would
be
any less
dependent
on
societies
is not the same as the creation of an open one.
does
it
seem
maintaining
clubs
status.
the
each
for
the
that
a
Equal
to
Committee
has
closed
(from
system of
the
access
upperclassmen,
or
a
any
choice
great
each
about
of
the
closed
qualms
other)
the
Nor
about
autonomous
possible
negative
effects of effectively requiring upperclassmen to join one.
The
done
suggestion
by
without
the
having
ranking
the
will
of
applications
students
them by
selectivity,
groups
that
friends
but
submit
preference
the
for
a
list
may be
inevitability
pooling or
club
of
four
a way of
of
their
the
be
clubs
reducing
previously
coordinating
probably perpetuate at least some of
membership
formed
applications
cliquishness
of
the clubs.
If residential
underclass
colleges seem such an
education,
there
is
excellent matrix for
every good
reason to make them
available to all freshmen and sophomores, even to require them
to
live
that
in
once
them.
a
automatically
informal
student
switch
support
unmitigated
But
peer
from
there
enters
from
is
no
the
an
special
junior
attraction
re son
year
to
an
the Housemaster-Tutor
pressure.
-
The
30 -
his
program
to
assume
preferences
environment
system
for
to one
reform
of
of
at
capital construction
Princeton was designed with a minimum of
in mind, yet it still seems possible to expand the residential
enough
colleges
to
accommodate
upperclassmen who would
has taken
the Committee
of
an
to
something
impart
University to
each
of
the
the
cha-racter
question
Princeton
of
alumni by directing to
its
Finally
is evidently a perceived
There
of
on
stand
few
those
least
part of one.
remain
interesting
students' free choice.
the
need
wish to
at
some degree
their patterns of residence and group interaction, even at the
expense of
their not having learned to exercise much of their
own choice in these matters, informed or otherwise.
This need
is most apparent in the low regard for independent living held
by the Committee, in its image of
resort
last
of
of
severely
conundrum is
view.
It
is
limited
availability.
the conflict
a
independent living as a last
between
fascinating
Implicit
free choice
dichotomy
in
this
and
point
we
shall
to
which
of
recommendations
formidable
institutional,
return in the discussion on MIT housing.
The
based
Princeton
on
the
study
has
recognition
made
of
a
set
traditional, and financial constraints and social forces.
proposals set forth in the study seem
entirely appropriate to
those particular
local
The
for MIT planning will have to be
implications
criteria
as
elucidated
in the
carefully as were the original plans for Princeton.
Princeton
is
may bring
on
blind
to the
new problems
possibility
or
-
that
31 -
The
the
that the
report.
examined as
No one at
new proposals
simple maintenance
of
the status quo would not be without its advantages.
has
it
that
the
University
will
indeed
proceed
enactment of the new reforms beginning this fall.
interesting to follow the results.
-
32 -
Late news
with
the
It will be
III.
HARVARD
Harvard has a House system built upon certain
and
roles
which
have
been
borrowed
in
part
assumptions
by
MIT;
an
assessment of their successes and failures might well serve as
a guide
for
analyzing
their counterparts at MIT.
The Houses
represent the University's
essential agreement on purpose and
operation;
the
therefore
differences
in the factors
question
becomes,
"What
in the system and among
slight
the Houses
make life better or worse in a particular House?"
Harvard
is
another
institution
which
has
recently
sponsored a serious critical internal study of its residential
system.
Unlike Princeton, whose residential system represents
an amalgam of widely divergent traditions, the House system at
Harvard
is
Harvard has
a
single
coherent
for shaping
statement
of
the
intentions
the undergraduates' environment.
The
oldest Houses are now past their fiftieth year of service and
the
experiment
fact.
has been accepted
as an
essentially
immutable
The Harvard study is therefore much less concerned with
sweeping
structural
changes
or
in
the
redefinition
of
the
values and first assumptions behind undergraduate residence as
it
is
with
an
qualifications
explanation
--
and
of
distinguishing
and
applying
the
to
the
-
measures
with
for
the
certain
great
Emphasis is placed on isolating
characteristics
lessons
--
success
ameliorative
future success of the Houses.
the
past
33 -
of
whole
more
successful
system
of
Houses
Harvard
and
Radcliffe housing.*
Quoting
alike;
Leo
every
Tolstoi's
unhappy
"Happy
remark,
family
is
unhappy
families
in
its
own
are
all
way,"
the
study concentrates in a refreshingly innocent way on the basic
need
for
happiness
in
the
home.
In
its
determination
resolve the admittedly mild problems of House
life,
to
the study
lends as much insight into the workings of a College basically
at peace with
Universities
its
residential
lend
to the
objectives
understanding
as
of
studies
their
of
other
struggles
to
define their objectives in accordance with their own needs.
History of the Houses
Few
schools
residence
develop
as
the
have
stated
the
purpose
of
positively cogently as has Harvard
Houses
for
"the
pervasive
undergraduate
in seeking to
influence
on
looking to their' total competence as human beings."1
beginning
light.
Houses
Drawing
President
*The
the
Eliot
term Harvard
at Harvard
to be drawn
used to
and
on
for
were
proposed
the
earlier,
a
series
Houses
Radcliffe.
between
of
applies
an
almost
ill-received
college-like
generally to all
From the
visionary
ideas
of
residential
the
Houses
Wherever distinctions are intended
the two schools,
refer to those
in
9
students
the
term Quad Houses
is
in the Radcliffe Quad and River Houses
to stand for the Houses closer to Harvard Yard.
-
34 -
Houses,20 President
is
to
frame
variation
too
scholarly
system
much,
cohesion,
points
of
in
1909
which,
or
interests,
scholarly
and
a
Lowell
without
neglecting
shall
at
said,
contact
the
among
among
task
before
sacrificing
pursuit
produce
least
"The
an
large
them
individual
of
different
intellectual
groups
all."
us
of
and
students,
With
time
and
reflection additional interest in contact between students and
faculty and
vision was
Eliot's,
War
students and tutors were also included.
not
but
I the
much
his
new
better
Lowell's
ideas
of the
the importance
received
tenacity
needs
consider
Report
better
of
proved
by
the
greater.
a growing
ways
of
defining
began
to
find
as
than
after
prompted
Harvard
greater
College
When
school
Lowell's
a
was
World
people
to
community,
sympathy.
The
1926
Student Council Committee on Education stressed
of
introducing
the student
to. a wider
spectrum
of acquaintances and friends --
"men who are not duplicates of
ourselves"
far
--
and
even
went
so
as
to
say
that
center of the College would be the dining hall and
room"
Until
that
time
Harvard,
like
most
"the
real
the common
American
colleges,
adhered to the German anti-residential tradition, and the 1926
Report
was
a
bold
break
with
disillusionment with German
war
or
behind
the
the
the
effect
increasing
their
past.
intellectual
enrollments
sudden change
of
the
was
in attitudes
confluence
at
undeniable.
-
35 -
Whether
leadership after
the
greater
remains
that
American
point
influence
debatable,
in
the
history
but
is
good
As
provided
in
enough money
it,
have
would
fortune
Harkness,
Edward
first few
set into bricks and mortar, and construction on the
alumni
the
varsity team
weakened College and
about
in
opened
Dunster
and
Lowell
When
1928.21
however, there was still enough anxiety on
1929,
the
in
began
Houses
to be
dreams
idyllic
the
for
gifts
man,
one
part of
loyalties
that the administration was kept busy that year allaying those
A certain mythology has arisen about the decade of the
fears.
1930s in the Houses,
Houses
that this was the Golden Age.
acquire
did
selectivity
unique
their
this
during
and
reputations
--
period
images
Surely the
airs
are
which
generally agreed to have been outlived by the Houses -most
contemporary
accounts
undergraduate
life
of
seems
now
but by
to
have
despite the Houses and occasional amusing,
continued as usual,
heavy-handed experiments in demonstrating for the students the
excellent high manners of their cultured faculty.
the upperclassmen --
The Houses were built for
at Harvard
the term includes sophomores as well as juniors and seniors -freshmen
while
in
dormitories
built,
there
continued
no
be
exact
in
housed
Yard.
Harvard
was
to
the
When
idea
of
how
more
conventional
Houses
first
were
students
should
be
placed in them beyond a vague plan for matching "or rather not
mis-matching"
interests.
each
House
itself
an
In
had
students
the
personality,
of
absence
every
individual
by
clear
opportunity
persona, or
-
36 -
to
more
policy
invent
background,
in
or
this
matter,
acquire
accurately,
and
for
particular
vocal ninorities within the Houses appeared
in
Houses
year-
as
of
the
freshman
choices
composition
of
for
the
entering
next
classes
the entering freshmen of the class of 1968 were the
--
group
with
public high
House
influencing
Gradually,
chang4-.
first
the
to speak for their
more
--
schools
selection
than
half
the
process
of
its
intensity
diminished
members
of
and
coming
from-
the
elitism
in
other
factors
became
the
more ;portant to the freshmen.
Probl-.s and Suggestions
be
T(
sure,
there
Popularity
of
the
perpetclated
by
myth
friend§
direct
be
even
the. perceived
still
different
and
though
information.
are
the
these
Houses
shared
are
on
phenollbna.
among
the
not
the
freshmen,
of
groups
enforced
by
of
much
The criteria for House choice now seem to
popularity
perceived
a
differences
perceptions
often
of
the
where sine's friends want to live.
placed
huge
popularity
House,
its
location,
and
The irony of the importance
is
amply
demonstrated
by
two
The first is the discrepancy among the Houses with
regard
to the number of
twelvI
residential
first-choice freshman applicants.
Houses offered
as
choices
to
the
Of
freshmen
of tho class of 1976, the most popular House was listed by 80
percent
while
The
of the applicants to be among their first five choices
the
se"ond
least popular House was chosen by only 9 percent.
through
eleventh
most
-
37 -
popular
Houses
were
listed
22
among
12,
65,
the top five choices by 72,
between most
and
the
from
deviation
popular
least
of
mean
about
22
20,
26
The disparities
with
dramatic,
are
36,
54,
in order.
11 percent of the freshmen
and
56,
59,
average
an
Figures
percent.
like
these imply an exaggerated set of expectations and fears among.
the
students,
popularity
Students
to the
irony of House choice
given
by
fact contributing
The second
the
is
how
about
questions
indicates
body of data
in the Houses tend to be about equally happy.
that students
by
since a vast
especially
they
asked
were
answers
(1)
if
alternatives.
their
perceived
any other
to
upperclassmen
(River)
Harvard
23
House
would be worse or better than their present arrangements,
(2)
if any other Radcliffe House would be worse or better, and
(3)
if
after
answer
their
forms
strongest
sophomore
were
questions were
of
structured
possible
positive feeling.
negative
The
3.5,
achieved
having
they
year
so
wanted
that
feeling
a
and
to transfer.
indicated
"1"
a
The
the
"7"
the
strongest
students' average answers to the
three
indicating a general
sense
2.4,
the
and
best
2.9,
possible
world
or
at
least
an
noted
that
70
acclimatization to their environs.
To
qualify
percent
of
all
23 percent
to
these
answers
freshmen were
another of
it
should
assigned
their
top
to
be
their first choice,
five choices,
percent to a choice ranked lower than fifth.
in which
freshmen,
it
would not
the
study
be
possible
to
half-whimsically
-
38 -
satisfy
and
only
7
For a worse case
so many of
suggested
a
system
the
not
House
first choice applicants would get their first
fewest
the
with
the
where
teams
sports
by professional
that used
unlike
draft choice.
the
Satisfaction with
experience
itself and
the House
of
the contribution of the House to the appreciation of the
with
choice
more
that
than
others
has
it
for
criterion
important
location
of
selection
satisfied) to 7 (very frustrated),
that
fits
the
common
with
the
group
in
more
has
distinctions.
the
satisfaction with
than
Incoming House members soon
active
small,
House
each
reputation,
House
a
for
but
the
them
about
enthusiastic
were some first-choice residents.
discover
to
assignment
Some who were assigned to fourth or
were
Houses
on
much
depend
not
choice.
first
student's
fifth
do
experience
Harvard
to
Asked
their
Houses
--
a
on
rate
--
the
other
1
(very
of
scale
their
students gave a mean answer
of 2.6, and on a similarly phrased question recorded a mean of
3.3
for
their
with
satisfaction
the
contribution
House life to the experience of Harvard as a whole.
of
their
More than
a few students evidently agree with such quoted sentiments as,
"This
the
was
one wanted
wanted
of
to leave,"
to do was
it and
Feelings
no
House
to
one
and
try
wanted
to
enter,
"When I got here...the
to get
out
of
it.
now I couldn't think of a nicer
such
as
these
and
are
too
well
once
in,
no
first thing I
I couldn't get out
House
spoken
to be in. ,24
to
be
simple
rationalizations.
Lack
of distinctions
among
-
the Houses can
39 -
also bn seen
as
David Riesman and others would like to see Houses
a problem.
stronger
with
students with
special
their
possibly
identities,
individual
strengths
in
attracting
cultural
particular
The
fields, instead of the older status-oriented selectivity.
difficulty
bring
this
in
in and
is
proposal
the
need
the
for
retain star attractions. There are
Houses
to
few enough as
it is among the Masters and as the Committee commented, "there
are
There are
in each generation."25
Yo-Yo Ma's
so many
just
University policy of
also conflicts between this idea and the
exploiting the students' diversity to each student's gain.
Learning
that
happy
their
in
environment,
tells little about how the environment maintains that
though,
happiness and even
the
are
students
less
The
students'.
about views
of
Houses
Harvard
the
are
Houses
not
made
other
than
or
unique
successful by the satisfaction of the students alone.
President
conceived
system
is
colleges
of
an
Lowell
the
House
adapted
to
are
Oxbridge
passing
definite
of
the
Harvard's
In
model
many
in
Oxford-Cambridge
needs,
on
that
all
final
mind
respects
without
the
undergraduate College into
schools
grades
a
system.
outgrowth
ization of the whole
In the
had
is
required
examinations;
at
when
the
he
House
residential
decentral-
the Houses.26
for
graduation
Harvard
grades
are necessary, but another dimension of informal education, of
which House membership is the central part, is called for.
Oxbridge
students'
the
residential
education
experience
is
so
explicit mention
that no
-
40 -
central
to
At
most
need by made of
it;
--
research
laboratories,
and
lectures
instruction
formal
centralized
the University's
at Harvard
and
recitations
--
is
still the main focus of undergraduate education, and a special
an
maintain
to
required
is
effort
Houses'
the
of
awareness
role.
Housemasters, Tutors, and Students
as distinct
are
acquired
as
from each other
more
lavishly
and
have
facilities
cultural
the
activities
structure
Houses unique
better.
--
the
for
usually absent
of
Houses'.
faculty-tutor
Dorms
the
Houses
typical
dorms
True,
than
in-House
and
drama
other
in college housing, but
support
the
and mythologies
reputations
appointed
generally
elsewhere,
is
have
and
can
everywhere
tutors.
and
staff,
in
primarily
dormitories
Housemasters,
the
by
played
roles
from
differ
Houses
Harvard
makes
which
it
the
the cultural infrastructure merely makes them
There are some seminars offered in the Houses, and in
recent years it has even been possible for students to receive
regular academic credit
to
fully imitate
In-House
the
instruction
for them,
entirely
is
but
in-House
interesting
an
not
these are
teaching at
and
subject
intended
Oxbridge.
will
be
discussed later.
Rules,
regulations,
and
job
descriptions
tell
about what Housemasters and tutors do or how well
nothing
they do it,
The study of House dynamics can
for there are no such code-.
-
41 -
the
about
students
among
agreement
student relationship, the
in
students.
tutor-
the
of
aspects
still
less
and
tutors
the
of
many
describes
Perspectives
and
tutors
between
understanding
mutual
the
little
is
there
enough,
Interestingly
human components.
and feelings of
expectations,
from the attitudes,
only proceed
relationship, and the
student-tutor
problem of faculty contact.
are
Harvard
at
Students
as
lot
independent
an
college
students go and tend to expect relatively little help from the
tutors,
and to rate them as being of marginal importance,
because
they
expect
tutors
takes on a more
simple
perception
Tutors
are
less
a
sense
in
participants
of
they
for
important
who
as
community,
House
important
as
as friends,
in
participants
academic
as
activities,
to
the
as
leaders of
academic
slightly less
serious
to
counsellors,
as
pre-professional
Houses,
departments.28
On
programs,
the
in
and as links
tutors
average,
are
likely to be part of dining table conversations
than they could
the
in-House academic
and
agents
as
ropes,
the
know
needs.27
student
to
irrelevancy
their
counsellors, as providers of examples of different options
life,
the
negative tone than might arise from the
people
as
discussions,
appreciation
their
only marginally
as
seen
progressively
encourage
of
than
less
even
getting
support.
and
contact
in
as
themselves
see
but
be given
although
the ration of
they were highly
students
rated
by
to
the
tutors
in
students
for their willingness to share their academic and intellectual
-
42 -
opportunity
an
with
provided
when
interests
do
to
On
so.
average, slightly less than half the tutors were seen as being
sensitive
were
half
and
be
to
considered
also
exceptionally
being
slightly less than
the other hand
but on
open,
of
or
activities
House
several
of
part
to
or
invisible
usually
Of
capable of offering help only in their field of expertise.
various
the
was
suggestion
popular
tutors
the
ways
more
be
could
be
simply
should
that they
the
useful,
be
most
easier
to
meet.
on
Actually,
in the
role
of
ten
was
general
professional
more
in
to pick
to
share
activities,
of
help
and
a
sense
Only
9.6
percent
more
equality
favored
this
tutor
academic
improvement
followed by
help,
more
of
a
of
a
involvement
more
in
personal
and
tutors.
recommendation.
Another
between
last
tutors'
introduction
field,
own
the
two of a list
tutors,
the
more
interests,
House
the
help,
student's
the
improve
most preferred
introduced by
courses
tutorial
willingness
to
how
The second
suggestions.29
parties,
House
of
question
House, students were asked
more House
more
the
students
13.7 percent saw no need for improvement.
Of a separate list
of twenty-one things that might improve the general quality of
House life, such as reduced crowding, a higher ratio of women,
more
money, and
anything else
increase
in
better
libraries,
students favored
the opportunity for more
the
number
of
resident
more than
faculty contact and
faculty,
but
an
considered
more resident tutors to be of less value than any other change
-
43 -
except in food and security.
At
be
point
this
the
is
There
clarified.
of
composition
the
should
functioning
sorts
a hierarchy of
staffs
House
in
all the Houses extending down from the Master or Co-Masters of
a
who
House
are
of
ranks
the
from
drawn
faculty.
senior
te
Below them are the Senior Tutors, faculty members with a longto
commitment
term
a
most of
tutors
the
in
turn
time
in
them
some
Today
faculty.
the
from
came
At
tutors.
and non-resident
resident
below
and
House
the
are
the
77
past
percent
are graduate student Teaching Fellows, 5 percent are assistant
1 percent are associate professors, and 1 percent
professors,
are full professors. The rest are presumably graduate students
teaching
on
not
Seventy-seven
fellowships.
Seventy-two percent
previous connection to the House.
been
than two
Houses more
their
in
with
tutor
turnover
of
more
tutors
than
years'
two
exceeds
no
had not
and only 7 percent
Five of thirteen Houses had
had been there longer than four.
no
years
had
percent
even
The
experience.
the
predictable
rapid
one-third
annual turnover of the upperclassmen in the Houses.
Aggravating
these
problems
is
the
absence
of
an
orien-
tation or training period for new tutors.
It
their
is not at all surprising,
minimal
to
introduction
then,
the
life
that these tutors, with
of
the
House,
their
high transience, and their lack of enough time to become bette
acquainted
should
with either
be regarded
the
students or
the ways of
as of such low importance
-
44 -
by the
the House
students.
There
are
in the
to be
widely
separated
school-wide
the best
cynical,
using
of
extremes
averages.
Some
of
opinion
not
expressed
students find some tutors
friends and others find other
their posts as sinecures.
tutors to be
Tutors are not seen
as the first resource by students in trouble and the original
image
of
the
Houses
as
places
where
students
and
tutors
and
faculty could get together for "dinner table education" is yet
to become a reality.
What
attitude
is
surprising,
given
of
the
toward
roles. 30
They
providing
formal
the
students
tutors
tend
and
To
success
they
that
the
they
coordination
see
from
themselves
about
it,
the
the
between
of
and
the
acting
the
and
as
as
is
the
their
own
successful
a bridge
departments,
obstacles
enumerate,
House
views,
students
themselves
problems
the
students'
the
Houses,
judge
enthusiastic
As
it.
think
instruction
University.
quite
to
the
departments
are
and
their
between
and
their
they
system
in
to
in
the
greater
evidently
part
in
tutoring
include
poor
and
Houses,
poor
the
coordination among themselves, both student and senior faculty
apathy, the difficulty of responding to the students' sense of
isolation,
Other
that
problems
they
time
add a general
have
sense
a
listed
to
are
spread
lack
lack of appreciation
of
mutually
themselves
privacy.
seriously apply themselves to
in
a
House
they
will
have
-
for their work.
explanatory. Tutors
feel
too
It
thin and
follows
the assistance of
little
45 -
time
to
at
the
same
that
if
they
many students
themselves;
furthermore
even
distributed
among
still
only
tutor
for
ratio
while
if
they spend
all
benefit
an
from
amount
one
the
of
of
a huge
amount
any
students,
having
become
one
time
to
the
staff
coordinated
evenly
would
student
acquainted
time proportional
a well
of
with
the
tutor-student
of
tutors
will
have spent a vastly greater amount of time becoming acquainted
with
House as
the
Still
other
if
complaints,
both
not only reinforce each other but contradict the feeling
true,
of commitment
tutors
see
listing
evident from the other
some
among
separately
One
tutors.
this
a whole.
as
cannot
homogeneity,
their
a
number
as
complaint
if
it
Specifically,
just not
the
caring while
homogeneity
what was
be sure of
but
comments.
includes
of
the
originally meant by
attitudes,
tnen
the
and
the
tutors would appear to be making a veiled confession.
Tutors
Masters.
also
It
is
take
the
cues
from
Master's
the
senior
style
more
faculty
than
anything
else
which sets the pact and style of the House; nevertheless it is
through
the
tutors
that
the
students
most
directly
perceive
the House staff as a whole, and student-tutor contacts are too
few and
too
inconsequential for most people's fulfillment.
student
might
know seven
tutors by name
and
three
well
A
enough
to casually drop by and visit the dozen or so in each House.
In
an
discovering
here
informally
where
and
from Perspectives
defined
how
is
role
best
one
to
a
tutor
apply
conscientious
46 -
be
himself.
tion of how he faces a common daily problem:
-
must
tutor's
best
at
Excerpted
descrip-
"The
important
most
routine
decision
a
tutor
You
makes is simply where to sit down at every meal.
get
your
the
place
need
and
incomplete
contribution.
your
You
look
which
are
I look
for
people
of
constellations
certain
for
most.
can contribute
you
where
to spot
the dining hall
then scan
tray and
people eating alone, or in twos, or in any group with
I avoid couples who are
a conspicuously empty chair.
dating
each
lively
--
these
to
make
It
is
just
the
with
you.
already
sit
you
very
are
that
and
full
and
rich
Your
intrusion.
table
important
are
groups
your entry an
find
tables
or
other
would
rather,
aim,
is
rich and lively.
down at
to resist the temptation to sit down
people
find
you
to
easy or who contribute
In particular sit only rarely with other tutors
c. with crack students with whom it is most interesting to talk.
be
most
pleased with
hardest
teaching,
discipline
to
form,
your
presence
and who
Tutoring
may be
to get attention.
informal
then
It is the less articulate ones who will
but
in which
gain.
and
is
you aim
The
cheerful
it
still
first
obligation
interested,
find
the most
teaching,
to contribute
to
it
be
even
on
at
a
and
your
best
meals
when
other people can relax is certainly the greatest emotional
demand
the immediate
with
full
those
you
conception
tutoring
than
with
of
lot
the liveliness
of
the
into
reward
charity
satisfaction
peers.
themselves,
knowledge and life
in
Your
is
less
one of company, such as you would have
peers,
eat
makes.
of
the
in general,
that
in
You
At
making
evaluate
their
possibilities
of
and you take pleasure
results from that.
it.
of
this
There
informal
is
a
extreme,
teaching is mostly caring."31
To
encourage
caring
tutors
to
-
-
47
share
more
of
their
time
requirement that
it a
with the students, some Houses have made
there be no more than two tutors at any table at meals.
in the Houses
Education
Some
Houses.
of
War
students
students
--
Harvard
on
to
and
affairs.34
increase
that
34.7
85
resources
the Dean's
list
offered
List,
increased
Radcliffe
Another
for
were
of Harvard
of
in the
recent history of
tutorials
on
and
student-tutor
of
from the
Originally
for
II
problems
follow
relations
basis
the
of
trend
education
on
but
tutor-student
an
individual
as the
percentage
dramatically
in
1953-4
--
the
and
the
after
later
tutorials
following
in the
war
World
to 75.8 of
became
was
the
group
great
time professors spent on their own work.
enriching
personal
attention
diminished
The
while
the demand increased.
Moreover,
character
there
has
instruction
in
never
been
a
consensus
the Houses ought
to take.
on
what
Arguments
have been put forth for most or none of the teaching to be in
the
Houses,
and
more
moderate
proposals
have
included
House
sections
and
that the
departments should retain most of the responsibility
for
seminars.
education
while
The
the
students
tutors,
tend
just
as
to
feel
strongly,
strongly
tend
to
support a greater role for the Houses.
House
House
life
courses
and
have
Houses
by
now
usually
-
become
have
48 -
a
regular
several
feature
different
of
small
seminars
with
Students
tend
taken.
and
enrollment
to
regard
open
them
to
as
members
highly
of
as
other
Houses.
any other
subject
On questions about the educational value of the course
the
quality
of
the
professors,
guest
speakers,
the
inherent interest of the subject, and the accessibility of the
instructors,
responses were consistently quite positive.
The
atmosphere of the Houses provides a welcome alternative to the
physical
chance
discomfort of
for
active
the
student
lecture hall and offers more of
participation
after
class.
These
ample
evidence
of
the
to
the
successes.
did
not
discover
qualifications
House
courses
others
in
meals
the
with
courses
course,
classmates
did
students
benefits
not
and
lead
tutors
worth
nor
of
themselves
the
they
any
senior
may
discussion
be
But
seen
there
enrolled
closer
develop closer
associate
is
is
from
greater
frequency.
House
more
faculty.
contact
They
good,
other
Houses
did
ties with the House offering
the
more with classmates
a general
a
students
feeling
residing
in
that the experience of
productive
one
and
with
sharing
whole, students favored preference to House members
and
the
themselves
between
did
substantially increase the students' sense of community.
enrollment,
are
in
association
as
find
appreciably
or
good
Houses.
Students
any
did
with
to
by
and
a
that
there
not
As a
in course
not
tend
course
the House.
or
to
to
There
in-House education
ought
to
be
more
courses offered so that more students could enjoy the benefits
of the
small
scale and greater vitality of presentation.
- 49 -
The
is
problem
that
the
good
points
of
House
the
courses
are
enjoyed by the students individually rather than collectively.
So
center
for
committed
of
is Harvard
undergraduate
non-residents,
staff
of
tutors
and
to the
life that
Dudley House.
idea of
there
Dudley
maintains a sense of
is
the
50 -
as
the
even one designed
is
complete
with
community among
members comparable to the residential Houses.
-
House
a
its
IV. GRADING AND HOUSING
The Harvard study mentions only in passing that the House
system
to
appears
of
other measures
no
have
academic
a
on
effect
and
success,
the
Princeton
figures appear
point averages by living groups, none of these
similarly
Berkeley
of
University
comparison of
Residence
ignore
participants
arrangements,
with
no
Reports from Scandinavia
literature.
Delaware,33
hall
this
concludes
in an experimental
in
group
significnat
report
One
issue.
however,
control
a
report
Although MIT keeps figures on grade
mentions this not at all.
in Institute housing
or
grades
student's
on
in
a
Living-Learning
conventional
difference
the
after
that
to
grades
housing
appeared
between the two groups, although of those students who dropped
out,
fewer form the Living-Learning program did so because of
academic underachievement.
On
tended
school,
other
academic
to
better
be
concerned
with
their most
students
read,
and knew more
more
on
about
are
more
of the
good
recent
campus
Living-Learning
matters,
likely
to
go
on
residents
to
instructors by name.
grades
grades,
too
Living-Learning
and
but
felt more
also
intellectual."
students were
more
likely
felt
graduate
They were
dissatisfied
that
"too
many
As
a community the
to
share
problems,
help the faculty with errands and services, and were generally
more
relaxed about matters of
likely
than
the
control
group
-
propriety. They were
to
51 -
make a
also less
regular occasion of
gracious
the
dir.Ing,
evidence
key to ; cohesive
that
residential
-
Icqv"Tp FTVIPIIW
WW
dining
52 -
need
not
community.
necessarily
be
V. i'rT
To
this
we
background
may
now
add
history
the
and
objtectives of MIT's residential system.
purpose
MIT is a school still searching for that unity of
in 'ousing that Harvard has had for over half a century.
Each
new report or study of MIT housing raises different questions
and
addresses
represents
different
the
product
of
a different
way of thinking about problems.
that
might
several good
essays
purpose
is
equally
intontions
entire
Each
issues.
set
--
describe
prescription
--
"How well
has each
behind
as
to
system
of
it
on-campus
concerns
is
there
house
fair to ask,
it?"
of
too,
and
a
With no coherent statement of
accurately
at
dormitory,
ask,
housing,
life
been
at MIT,
all
well
its
it
the
house answered
"How
in
have
does
the
diversity,
answer the preeminent ideals of the system?"
Hist-ory to 1956
Since MIT moved
90g
through
hoL4sing
nearly
known
house/college,
coremplated
Tech,
either
MIT
at
from Boston
but
America
including
elsewhere.
entirely
home
or
a
in
Cambridge
conceivable
every
in
to
I,
short
some
its
commuter
nearby
-
stopgap
53 -
to
the
measures
with
it
has
student
residential
incarnation
school
rented
1916
approach
of
first
in
not
even
as
Boston
students
living
apartments.
The
first
fraternity was founded in 1882 and became the first of a large
system of MIT-affiliated independent living groups. Over fifty
such groups, mostly fraternities, have been founded since then
and
thirty-three
survive
today,
including
the
MIT
Student
House and the Women's Independent Living Group.
As
if
promised
conceived
some
was relocated
as
students
a
bad
sign
housing
in
of
things
Cambridge
to
when
to its new campus there in 1916.
come,
the
MIT
school
Unfortunately
there wasn't any dormitory open for residence until Fall 1917.
The
Institute
these
enough
is
students
for
a
not
usually one to renege
were
bed
provided,
and
trunk,
on a promise, and
barracks-style,
housing
on
the
first
completed
The
House,
in
time
L-shaped
then
for
called
the
building was
living
units
middle
units,
together
designed
from the start and
Ware,
originally
as
over
Holman,
dormitories
were
Faculty
new campus'
housing
Atkinson,
the
a set
220
for
end
floor
Houses,
academic
of
of
and
year.
The
four
Runkle
were
units,
fraternity
was
six separate
students.
Nichols,
the two
designed
second
space
34
Building 1, where they stayed for two semesters.
Senior
with
Crafts and
use.35
Re-
portedly the fraternities then housed more students than each
of the dorm units, although it is difficult to understand how
this possible
by
looking at
Senior
House
today. Each
of
the
four middle units now houses over forty students while the end
units
each
fraternities
house
found
only
the
about
twelve.
Cambridge
-
54 -
Nevertheless
arrangement
other
appealing,
so
that when East Campus --
much so
--
was
built,
applied
both
for
East
more
fraternities
space.
Campus
then called the Alumni Houses
The
and
than
Institute
Senior
could
judiciously
House
would
possibly
fit
decided
that
thenceforth
and
in
their entireties be dormitories.
The Boston Evening Transcript,
in a premature appraisal of
Senior House's success, had this to say on December 11, 1915:
"There will be a group of houses, four stories in
height,
so oriented and
arranged
that every sleeping
room will have the advantage of exposure to the
One
of the
interesting preliminary
connection
with
has
been
and
elevations
[sic]
the
the
accurate
the
of
investigations
the
computation
during
have hung
and lecture
planning
the
school
arrangement
sun.
new
in
Technology
of
sun
positions
year
and
upon
this
of the various study
rooms and the placing
of the president's
house and dormitories."
Under the sub-headline "Safety First -"One
be
the
will
important
absolute
be
of
feature
safety
reenforced
of
the
From Fire":
construction will
from
fire.
[sic]
concrete
The
whole
with
group
monolith
stairways also in concrete...The so-called 'stairway'
system
has
been
house
being
serves
only
chosen
clustered
the
over
are
corridors
different
selected
number
of
the
'hotel'
or
stairways
gives more
students
the
about
occupants
advantages
along
for
of
its
system,
be
house.
where
with
general
the aspect
will
stairway,
that
hallways
for
dormitories,
of
obliged
a
use.
to
which
It
The
has
rooms
number
The
a home;
each
of
type
a smaller
pass
a
given
door with whatever of disturbance this may imply, and
-
55 -
fire
against
safety
of
factor
greater
a
much
and
its
afford
said,
been
has
as
units,
small
the
consequent panics."
the
by
supplied
fraternity
the
Memorial,
houses,
having
for
this
will
away,
the
be
but
social
social
little
its
general
and
mess
own
their
addresses
piece
the
of
the
distance
a short
with
each
provided
rest
the
of
Most
Walker
be
will
company,
room,
living
no
be
will
there
dormitories
"in
how
describe
to
on
goes
article
The
hall."
architecture of
the building, and one reproduction of an architect's rendering
caption
the
bears
University
at
One
"Showing
Stroke --
and
Building
of
Advantages
Dormitories
There is,
Archicectural Harmony."
of the article, a note
the
Laboratories
a
in
almost in spite of the tone
may have
"'We
of warning at the end:
much to learn about dormitories,' says President Maclaurin. ,36
Indeed.
in' warm
so,
And
sunlight
the
fire,
of
fear
and
MIT
residential system is born.
Senior House was only capable of housing about a fifth of
the
undergraduates
at
time,
that
to
so
begin
match
to
the first
increasing demand for on-campus housing. Bemis Hall,
of the
East Campus group, was built
Four
1925).
Bemis
to
complete
by 1931 the
and
Wood,
years
Walcott
later
the
east
in
and
parallel
of
(and occupied in
1924
Goodale
the
finished
to
-
complete
56 -
the
added
were
Alumni
three units of the west parallel,
were
the
Houses
Munroe,
group.
to
and
Hayden,
With
the
Depression, off-campus housing became much cheaper and for the
only
time
space;
90
and
first
dormitory
were
Campus,
in
rooms,
at
unoccupied
one
or
about
one
point.
a
was
there
history
MIT
quarter
In
of
glut
answer
of
East
to
this
problem President Compton had first half, and then all of East.
When in
Campus converted into MIT's first graduate residence.
1938
Court,
Riverbank
House,
now Ashdown
renovated
was
more satisfactory graduate dorm, East Campus
as
a
reverted back to
an undergraduate house with a special reservation for seniors.
This
may
seem
odd
today
because
seniors
are
now
the
least
likely of the undergraduate classes to want to live on campus,
but MIT
does have
a tendency
to run
counter
to some
trends
in
housing.
East
house.
with
are
Campus
is
architecturally
equipped
with
concept
stairways
a
has
serving
single
sink
a
and
few
each
rooms
runs
on
little
each
distinctive
of
the
three
vertically, grouping
the
side.
else.
modifications
parallel, and a few genuine quirks,
which
least
Each parallel was designed as a double-loaded corridor
(originally) all
simple
MIT's
The
like
house
The
rooms
basically
the
separate
sections
of
a
such as the wiring system
rooms
in columns
instead
of horizontally on floors, built into it.
From
students
1943
in
influx
of
could
only
to
1945
the armed
new
students
be
met
the
dormitories
forces.
was
by
Immediately after
such
that
converting
-
were
57 -
the
demand
Building
reserved
for
the
war
for
housing
20
into
the
a
barracks/dormitory --
The Ryer report describes this arrangement as having
housing.
been "very satisfactory
from the
in
opened
use."37
weekend
study rooms had to
Riverside
Hotel,
in
Also
veterans.
in
children
with
students
a
newly
purchased
third
historic
components were
going
priority
with
1946,
to
dormitory, with 17
first women's
1946 the
as
service
Westgate was opened for married
the housing system.
to
a
in
House,
Burton
intervening years three more
In the
stopgap.
now
the
by
1951
in
replaced
until
in
remained
20
and
evening
for
buildings
educational
Building
dormitory
added
main
the
but
point of view,
financial
study conditions were so poor that special
be
in MIT
the second great stopgap measure
students and a House Mother, was opened in Boston.
The
of
achievement
heralded
most
Campus
years
ten
was
Baker
earlier,
was
period
the
As had been the case with
completion of Baker House in 1949.
East
the
so
that
popular
preference had to be allotted to seniors, juniors, sophomores,
and
in
freshmen
described in architectural
need
not
features,
More
in
marked
campus.
a
to
the
Baker
purpose
affordable
employ
books and magazines;38 the
praises
but
here,
comparison with other
important
House
for
recounted
be
been
order.
descending
the
commitment
the
by
houses will
hand,
MIT
the
to
when
than
merely
this
-
was
58 -
become
a
bought
after
its
later.
appear
opening
providing
not
of
discussion
some
first dorm built or
other
rents
at
study
has
Baker
of
Baker
residential
the war
shelter
available
in
at
the
surrounding area.
No major
House,
and
given to
reports or official
no
detailed
program
the architect.
Department
faculty
at
pronouncements preceded Baker
was
carefully
Alvar Aalto,
MIT
was
given
assembled
and
then on the Architecture
a
program
which
simply
called for housing for about 300 students and a central dining
hall.
39
of the
The year of
Lewis Committee's report on education at the
without
referring
Lewis Report
the
time)
(albeit
arts")
from
its opening, however, was also
student
to discuss MIT's
"polarized
This
new
earlier
around
humanistic
notions
of
a
or
"The
New Technology."*
of
1976
fondly
step
toward
Yale,
recalls
a
Oxford,
fully
and
actually pursued
*There
is
an
housing
future
science,
emphasis
the
suggestion
course in
soon
they'll
direct
way, the
1949
as
the
residential
Cambridge."
amusing anecdote
that
core
the
students
teaching
as a university
technology,
a
and
radical
Institute
year
campus,
The
the
departure
of
Technology
took
similar
to
the
to
dating
be
"and
Latin.
59 -
from
the
days
"first
Harvard,
which
is debateable, but the
Latin!"
-
MIT
extent
MIT
has
implicit
when
MIT
A professor in a discussion
curriculum
English composition,
be
role
The Baker House Client Team Report
these models
freshman
was
monolithic
called itself the New Technology.
of
in any
Institute.
(and other speeches and presidential addresses of
began
one
to
the year
angrily
required
if
In
to
this is
fact MIT
protested
take
a
required
now
does
the
basic
pretty
offer
important link between student residence and
is
there
the
an
in the
education
its housing system, then,
MIT and
the word.
fullest sense of
and
Report
that
definitely
was
1949,
around
discussions
Team
Client
the
both
in
found
understanding,
had to be mutually supportive if either was to flourish.
The Ryer Report of 1956
The
Report)
the
of
Report
was
1956
of
the
of
objectives
on
Committee
official
first
the
housing
Student
of
purpose
whether
education,
kindergarten or in university, is three-fold:
toward
competence,
the
toward
people
young
the
patterns of behavior,
best
their
foster
development
of
in
to aid
intellectual
personal
formation
and
of
and spirit which will
thought,
living
of
the
toward
and
responsibility,
social
attainment
happily
and
generously.
Systems of education, whether a kindergarten class or
a university graduate school of two thousand men, are
expressions of society's recognition of its duty thus
to aid its younger members in the earlier stages of
what is in actuality a life-long endeavor.
"In the
freshman
from matricula'ion as a
university years,
admission
to
together
curriculum
the
to
with
the
doctorate,
formal
enhancement
of
initiative through seminar, conference, research, and
thesis
is
the
first element
basic
of the
means
toward
threefold
- 60 -
accomplishing
the
reads
one
no
itself:
appendices, we read here from the Report
"The
of
statement
Since
system.
(the Ryer
Housing
the
purpose of education.
of
education
curricular
This
contributes
course
substantially, though less directly, to the other two
years,
the
and
in
resource
secondary
a
with
environment,
domestic
early
the
family
the
on
is
reliance
primary
in
these
of
nourishing
For the
elements.
In
the formal and informal programs of the schools.
the
a
of
because
university,
of
range
greater
facilities and a more nearly mature student body, the
informal
in
can
in
the
of which
MIT
program
informal
the
of
expected
be
general
greater contribution than
a
activities makes
extra-curricular
myriad
programs comprising
primary, intermediate, and secondary years.
institutions,
"At many educational
is
one,
can
be
and
to
used
rurpose
more
still
a
education
of
and
its
full
second
This agency is the residential
elements.
third
of
particularly
the
of
realization
facilitate
agency
non-curricular
powerful
system. [emphasis added]
differ
should
an
educational
Indeed,
it
university
and
can
school
full
potentialities
instrument
are
to
be
argued
so differ
and
can
university
of a secondary
from that
pronouncedly
a
in
system
residential
"The
it's
if
soundly
that
unless
a
the
of
realization
full
seek
realized.
be
about the difference
is prepared to bring
vigorously
as
potentialities, it had better relegate the housing of
students
to
a
corporation
concessionaire
which
will
operate utilitarian low-cost hotels for students on a
strictly
is
not
controlled
and
should
houses,
boarding
hotels,
or
undertake
commercial
not
be
A
operator
of
trailer
houses,
as
restaurants
to
an
basis.
such.
dormitories
operate
university
apartment
motels,
parks,
Nor
on
should
a
rigidly
proctored lights-out-when-the-bell-rings basis.
-
61 -
it
This
may be all
very well
senses
many
parental
a school for boys which
regimes;
the
is
in
extrapolation from
an
extension of or
an
home
in
time for
it
is
past when
the university has been reached.
"Time
is
too short, men are
too few, and money is
too scarce to permit diversion of
into mere
real-estate
A
the
that
courses
justified
have
"To
make
its
residential
assumption
it
any of
from
summarized.
been
It
is
do
so,
the
university
system
responsibility
for
self-governmnnt
other man's
desires),
must
and
its
by
self-respect
inherent
the
for
right
maintain
opportunities
students,
and
to be
development
for
in
for
the
and
let
live
respect
left
the
commensurate
students of the ability to
(including
the
[emphasis added]
of
growth among
live
debarred
is
of
it makes that system serve
purpose of education.
authority
a program
in undertaking the conduct of a residential
system only insofar as
in
into
ventures or
university
paternalism.
university energies
for
the
alone when he
of
students
the
capacity to understand strange or opposing points of
view, customs, and preferences, and for the fostering
in students of the kind of simple decorum expected in
the manners, dress, and speech of educated men.,
Speculation
on
how
sincerely
the
authors
of
40
the
report
expected any housing system to improve the manners, dress, and
speech of an MIT alumnus is certainly possible, but one cannot
miss
the
point
experience.
from the
of
residence
as
a
liberalizing,
humanistic
The vision outlined above is certainly a far cry
stopgap solutions or the coordination of dormitories
and
laboratories
The
great
virtue
in architectural
of
the
Ryer
harmony
Report
- 62 -
is
which
that
preceded
it
became
it.
the
of
statement
fundamental
residence
of
purpose
school
a
then responded
had hitherto lacked one, which had until
which
for
to needs primarily with ad hoc solutions.
The report made numerous specific recommendations based on
the
conclusions
the
split
with special
and
Senior
House41
the
rejecting
for
housing
on-campus
reserved
after
idea
of
the
ever
Nothing
a
of
and
Campus
those
reserving
Noting the
100
East
expanding
Committee
at
house
apartment
for women.42
the
women,
clusters as
East
in
Center
Graduate
a separate freshman center.
houses for
section
a
creating
Campus
and
upgrading
saw
impositions on the
unnecessary
proposed
It
undergraduates.
and
housing
campus
It
problems.
then-current
and West
East
between
evil
general
drew about
it
absence of
that
proposed
Memorial
a
be
Drive
either proposal.
came of
East Campus was ultimately only partially remodeled to provide
more
lounge
space,
and
not
expanded
at
all.
It
remains
a
second-rate physical plant compared to most other dormitories.
McCormick provided, in two stages of construction, most of the
space required for women's housing on campus.
The Report's projections for easing overcrowding in Burton
House
the
later
revised
recommendation
House
both
were
be
separated
parts
of
the
that
and
for
the
a
the
1970
renovations,
Burton and Conner
dining
single
building was
hall
ultimately
although
Fides of
built
Burton
to
incorporated
serve
into
idea of separating Burton and Conner was tied
the design.
The
in with the
idea of appropriate scale.
- 63 -
The Committee thought
that
the optimum population
a dorm
floor
should
be
about
and that any new dorm should not have more than about 200
40,
it.
in
students
from
then-current
its
site
report
the
Furthermore
the
Right
where
200
about
ideal
this
beginning
of
590
down
a
new
west
campus
was
built,
ultimately
460.
dorm,
for
400
on
men.
a pair of undergraduate dorms
to become
the
within
each
men
to
capacity
envisaged
MacGregor
proposed
Ashdown was
the
from
Burton, it was thought, should only be remodeled
compromised.
of
for
the
once
building
single
graduate students were moved to the new Graduate Center on the
east side of campus.
ru
one
that
thought
all
either
effort
only
accompli
in
of
MIT's
urged
the
history
for
the
Ryer
to
report
At most
the
with
individual
for
not
the
of, that
report
as many non-fraternity men
cooperation
space
was
a virtue
make
ever
Committee
dormitory
provide
Committee's
the. fraternities.
on-campus housing
and
and
undergraduates;
since
or should
could
MIT
or
before
fait
called
as
for
possible
fraternities
which
expressed a wish to relocate to the Cambridge campus.
In
support
of
on an additional
campuS
student
be made
house
to
required
residential
center
part
to
its
take
only Baker had
own
meals
renewed.43
of house
dining
in
the
Second,
life.
hall
their
own
its own dining hall,
-
life
report
touched
First, the call for a new west
three topics.
a central
have
campus
64 -
that
dining
should
The goal was for each
and
for
houses.44
so the
students
At
report
the
to
be
time,
recommended
Commons
mandatory
that
completed.
were
Of
Burton-Conner
and
Ashdown
the
until
residents
halls
dining
many
1956
since
years
the
in
course,
non-Baker
all
for
eliminated
be
dormitory living not
students have become attached to modes of
dependent upon or centered around in-house Commons dining, and
the advisability of a return to such mandatory Commons in any
reconsidered
best
is
form
these
of
value
the
of
light
in
lifestyles.
Third on the list was the matter of Faculty Residents. The
plan
Housemaster-tutor
the
each of
its
in
following
and Burton,
really had
one and
have
that
designs enough
chosen
for
to say was
for
the Faculty
arising
problems
it
that
By
East Campus, Baker,
all had one.
the lead of Ashdown,
future dormitories
space
The
space.
guest
were
for a Faculty Resident.
original design
the Ryer Report, Senior House,
the time of
report
--
Housemasters
the
Baker was the last house built without a
the houses.
provision
the
for
used
then
term
evolved
MIT
Faculty Residents --
the early 1950s,
Starting in
gradually.
at
exists
now
that
idea
was a good
should
All
to
in their
include
Resident
with
additional
from the
lack
of
earlier
consideration of a Faculty Resident system, to say nothing of
the
expansion
Residents)
the
and
of
that
Senior
to
system
Tutors
are
include
evident
tutors
from
the
(Graduate
figures
on
amount of space available for each of them in the various
dorms.
Baker
tutors
and
and
Baker
East
and
Campus
Senior
-
provide
House
65 -
had
the
least
the
lowest
space
ratio
for
of
tutors
even
students
to
the
before
of
period
latest
overcrowding began in 1976.45
It
of
for
1963
a
on
discussion
expansive
more
Student
the
for Undergraduate
An Interim Report on Housing
Environment's
Men at MIT
on
Committee
the
until
remained
the
Housemaster-Tutor plan.
The Committee on Student Environment Report of
1963
from that
The CSE examined a situation not very different
paraphrase
or
the
by
Ryer
than
Rather
ideals.
report's
in the Institute's checkered history
the
housing,
undergraduate
raised
Ryer
the
in a new square
coloring
of
those
from
different
noticeably
in the earlier report, even where it didn't actually
expressed
quote
not
were
objectives
and
Its visions
earlier.
Ryer Committee seven years
seen by the
CSE
Committee,
up
took
added
banner
the
facts,
first
figures,
and
during
the
specific suggestions to aid future planning.
The
two
between
period
changes
major
1956
and
in
1963
on-campus
were
the
housing
conversion
into and undergraduate men's dorm for about
the
growth
CSE's
knuw
first
a
grafted
It
of
was
the
Interim
stopgap
onto
Housemaster-Tutor plan.
Report,
measure
the
calculated
when
housing
that
Institute
they
system
the 90
-
saw
By the
with
no
one,
and
time of
had
come
Bexley
illusions
to be made
Bexley
residents and
planners
spaces
66 -
140
of
the
to
was
attached.
available
in
the
following
the
added
be
At
demand.
the short-term housing
answer
would
fall
to
more
50
the
and
1963
of
fall
time
the
it was neither Institute policy nor within the capabilities of
the
Institute
more
23
students
84
another
and
housing
temporary
transfer
31
also
were
There
1962.
of
fall
the
the
or
freshmen
commuter
Boston-area
the 11
for either
on-campus housing
provide
to
students
of,
freshmen
in
dormitory
the
on
waiting list, for a total of 149 undergraduates in need of oncampus housing.
an
With
the
plans,
construction
future
major
toward
eye
CSE accepted Bexley as a short-term solution to what were seen
a
sixteen years, or
attempt
to
advisable
be
apartment-style
located
requirements" 47
of
objectives
in
however,
of
the
dwelling
remodel
to
There
Report.
this view of Bexley when
it
comparison
some
with
other
housing,
as
not have
"believe
it
poorly
this
old,
our
longer
according
term
the
to
contradictions,
are
is compared
facts and lines of reasoning in the report.
in
not
meet
students
housing
Ryer
to
remaining
more, must
CSE did
The
any serious discussion.
entered
would
for
residence
student
idea of Bexley Hall
The
as short-term problems.
to other
Bexley may be old
but
Senior
House
is
older and Ashdown older still. Bexley's age at the time of its
annexation
rates
in the
fact,
is a lesser point, since one might presume similar
of degradation
absence
all
three
of
for
the
any major
three
buildings
renovation applied
eventually were renovated
-
just mentioned,
67 -
--
to
Ashdown
them.
in
In
1972,
Senior House
in
1973, and Bexley
in 1976.
Reversing the policy proposals of the Ryer Report, the CSE
east
and
sides
west
both
the
made
reference
to the
area
following
the
wishful
patently
undergraduates on
idea of maintaining groups of
supported the
campus was
of
Technology Square. 4 8
opening of
reasons.
can
Square
Technology
Bexley's
location,
as
itself
recommend
scarcely
the
in
be
counted
among
and
of
itself,
of
a
small
site
to live,
the
style
windows
in
of
its
the
building,
the
well-articulated
more
to
undergraduate
As to the
scale
human
facade
better
does
dormitory than most other available spaces at MIT.
apartment
and
then
the eastern end of campus a tolerable place
may make
is
Whatever else
today a desert and a blighted eyesore.
remains
Square
This
was
Square
Kendall
thinking.
the Kendall
quality of
improved
the CSE
defended,
and
of
its
arrangements have not gone unnoticed by other reports,
49
the
suite
which
have noted the symbolic ties between the physical form to the
reputed individualism of the residents and the cohesiveness of
small
groups
consideration
decisions
virtues
campus
of
of
residents
Bexley's
within.
If
come
future
from
the
other
involving the west campus as a whole,
as
well
planning
replacement.
as
the
should
obstacles
both
be
it
offers
considered
overriding
then Bexley's
with
in
planning
its
regard
to
eventual
If the present site and overall structure of the
Hall are deemed adequate to the task of housing students, then
much
greater
attention
should
-
be
68 -
paid
to the
physical
plant.
decay
steady
and
Time
decisions
for
substitutes
not
are
in
planning.
By 1963 the tutoring system had expanded to include Senior
and
and
as
houses
fraternity
eight
system
dormitory
the
throughout
Houses
Senior
and
Baker,
Burton,
Tutors
Resident
graduate
in
in
members)
(faculty
Tutors
To
well.
by
judge
the
recorded history, the system just evolved that way because of
the obviously heavy demands placed upon one Housemaster by 300
or so students in a dorm.
of
tradition
The
dormitories
for
facts
certain
of
borne
of
years
all
not
and
contemplation
posed
residence
unsupervised
the
in
self-government
and
autonomy
The
ones.
bad
resultant definition of the Housemaster's role after the CSE's
was
recommendations
directive,
was
There
cooperative
for
descriptions
in
those
such
any
of
experience,
aspects
and
of
roles were
and
understanding
the
called
to
allow
Rather,
upon to
exhibit
friendship,
the
benefits
this
example to become available through only informal
and
association,
sake. 5 1
by
just
"being
there"
job
system.
maturity,
as
character
specific
avoid
in
actors
the
resident advisory
laudable
to
effort
"non-
a
students.
with
working
of
in
example
mature
effort"50
strenuous
a
a
of
that
for
the
of
contact
students'
Faculty entrusted with the responsibility to informal
guicance were themselves advised to dissociate themselves from
the
affairs
former
task
of
was
house
to
discipline
remain
the
-
and
formal
province
69 -
of
education.
the
House
The
student
Judicial
Committees
and
jurisdiction
or
the
Dean's
and
severity,
instruction
in
the Houses,
The
idea,
contact
in the
the
twin
as
described,
problems
of
the
only
softly
informal
seemed good
ratio
of
mature
an
those maturer minds
providing
enough
of
except
for
minds
to
older
and
of
suggested
enough
to be
necessity
remain
student-faculty
students, by which the latter were supposed
the
to
in them.
of
Institute houses
was
on
The CSE strongly advised
and
the possibility of holding seminars
depending
latter
the
strictly the job of the departments.
against
Office,
stimulated,
incentive
for
to want to live among undergraduates.
At
the time of the report East Campus and Bexley had no space for
Senior
serving
Tutors.
as
They
tutors
undergraduates,
and
galleys
tutelage.
were
desire
The
to
for
see
was
to
the
spaces
undergraduates.52
comforts
were
attract
With
Tutor plan
the
so
tutors
facilities
even
for
30
have
sharing
Tutors
(at
most)
despite
couples
the
among
the
in
living
the
houses,
the
way
the
students
exactly
students
support
of the
as
bathrooms
under
their
and
Tutors
the
among
of
CSE's
the
creature
turnover
Housemasters.
rate
After
Housemaster-
the CSE hoped that married Senior Tutors would be
willing to stay for two to five years, and
only
almost
Senior
little
to
live
for
married
understandably high,
reviewing
men
graduate
rooms and
approximately
reserved
The
to
single
single
more
don't.
expected
in regular
with
suitable
still
to
be
chosen
"on
time scales
-
70 -
Housemasters would
approximating
decades
rather
years"53 given
than
some
improvements
in
the
living
Tutors were expected to continue to serve for
arrangements.
only one or two years and under the same type of conditions as
(See appendix A for comparison of
they had known before 1963.
living quarters with other schools.)
The
standards
for Masters'
quarters
proposed by the
CSE
included the general attributes of an upper-middle class home
with a large living room, dining room, and kitchen, a garden,
a library, about
four bedrooms,
and large social gatherings.
4,000 square feet.
be
a
more
with
for
children
All this to fit into 21,500 to
Senior Tutors' quarters were proposed to
moderate-sized
environment
and provisions
perhaps
version
two
of
the
same
bedrooms.
family-style
Graduate
student
Tutors were to be given nothing special beyond a double room
to themselves.
0-f
Harvard
idea was
One good recommendation, based on the examples
and
Yale,
to support
put
has never been
a
program of
side of campus --
practice.
"visiting" faculty with
specific connection to living groups.
two-bedroom apartments --
into
The
no
There were to be four
two on the east and two on the west
for faculty members wishing to spend a year
or two among the students.
Long-range planning was a matter of concern to the CSE as
much as
the
its
housing
recommendations for the
system.
The
report
remodeling of all of MIT's permanent
immediate
called
improvement of
for
massive
(thus excluding Bexley)
men's houses with the resultant loss of 185 beds.
- 71 -
a
(The Com-
mittee
under
was working
to
remodeled
house
460
students
545,
and
as
population of
These
360.)
assumption
the
opposed
the
plus
185
instead
to
the
of
would
be
current
then
new capacity of
actual
Bexley
in
housed
temporarily
140
Burton
that
plus a projected annual growth rate for the undergraduate body
of 5 to 10 percent by 1975 ---
lower
housing
led
call
student
new
extended
its own idea about the scale
In
take.
should
residence
of
construction
for 650 students over an
in the pages of the
articulated
the
for
The CSE also had
period of time.
future
to
west campus
the
on
CSE
the
rate was much
the actual growth
not
manner
committee arrived
the
report,
a
at the conclusion that the ideal size of a dormitory should be
between 250 and 300 beds.
to
important
More
guesswork
future
the
other general
were the
MIT
of
planning guidelines.
from the points already mentioned about
refusing
housing
students,
called
freshmen be
effort
to
for
required
be
the
for
to live on campus,
to
made
bring
as
to
attract
almost
campus
as
a
matter
of
toward
East
and
Campus
redesign
of
this
the
dining
all
followed,
modification
of
facilities
in
-
72 -
nonfraternity
called
for
every
up
to
"such
upperclassmen
individual
end
all
and
transfer
and
housing
on-campus
quality
suggestions
that
requirement
Apart
to the MIT policy of
residents
Boston-area
this
the Housemaster-Tutor
for the ultimate end
the CSE called
plan,
than
housing
to
live
preference."
including
its
long
Walker
to
Many
additions
corridors,
serve
on
to
the
more
specifically
and
dormitories,
the
all
improvements in the physical plants of
small
House, a host of
Senior
and
Campus
East
for
dining
Commons
as
financing
for
creative
schemes
report
ultimately
it
all.
Legacy of
the CSE Report
the
of
ideals
The
CSE
into the program for MacGregor House.
their
found
way
By August 1965, the MIT
Planning Office had compiled A Program for Undergraduate Men's
first of four 300-bed west campus dormitories.
Housing for the
By
Several
make
of
1970
features
apart
fall
the
among
unique
it
from its
high-rise design
distinctive
undergraduate
MIT's
occupancy.
for
ready
was
MacGregor
Perhaps
houses.
because of the great emphasis on the Housemaster-Tutor plan in
more tutors
report, MacGregor was designed to support
the CSE
for a given number of students than any previously built men's
dorm
or
McCormick,
of
Tower
West
the
which
already
was
the time
the CSE report was published.
The ratio of tutors to students
in the New West Campus Houses
designed
and
built by
completed in 1975 was to be even greater.
square
other
space
feet of
house,
Tutor as well.
been built,
Tutor.
has
and
or
MacGregor has 5,475
for the Housemaster, vastly more than any
considerably more
To date
is
it
only the
for
space
fourth
renovated, with any space at all
MacGregor
allots
an
-
average
73 -
of
418
its
house
for
square
Senior
to have
a Senior
feet
per
tutor,
more
than
most
Burton, or New House.
In
to
to
individual
room,
room
were
designed
more
than
any
as
other
area.
MacGregor
any
other
provide
room
as
of
unit
directions
other
All
but
that
1970-1 would
it
was
living
perhaps
in
--
The
per
student
the
Burton
provide
bedroom-study
system
to
the
will
main
be
in
the
connected
reception
to
desk
the
television
to
Consideration
possibility
central
building-wide
should
of
(library).
for
the
an
the
Program's
by
in
a
the
outlet
for
antenna.
long
range
bedroom-study
that
he
would
to
a
reproduction
(books) ,
Hardware,
as
and
such
like
to
other
has
not
hear
audiobeen
designed but the likely components are a receiver and
cable
connections.
advisable
to
(electrical)
For
combine
into
a
this
known
single
-
74
reason
system
conduit
-
it
might
be
requirements
with
to
of the
It may be possible for the student
microcards
material.
to
storage-retrieval
lectures
(tapes) ,
given
connecting
information
'dial'
be
more
came
importance
accentuated
rooms
few
House
connection
visual
and
per student than
have
again
the
only
bedroom-study will
to
house,
only New
1975.
best
the
subsequently
men's dorm
opened
emphasizes
area
--
year
to entry
a very
House....Each
center
Bexley,
for Communications Systems:
"Each
call
of
design
also had more commons area
when
than
from house
any
with more
dorm
contemporary
more
than
than most.55
men's
renovations
House's
strongly
singles,
House
less
social groupings
MacGregor
strongly
more
but
54
the hierarchy of
suite
entry
dormitories
sufficient
room
for
additional
lines.
The
conduit
should
be
located close to the desk area." 5 6
While
in
one may forgive
multisyllabic
by
implicitly
detachment
series
from human contact
of
ten
several
scholars."
scale
entry-wide
MacGregor
--
one
for
playing
cards
lounges
parties
or
the
room
measures
of
is too clear to be missed.
the
These
in his single
extra
lines,
lounges
(words),
in favor of dependence on one or
each
reinforce the thirty students' sense of
of
its overindulgence
constructions
encouraging
opposite
for
isolating the student
another electronic medium -Along
program
periphrastic
danger of completely
--
the
are
and
program
excellent
gatherings,
ping-pong
seem
undifferentiated vastness of the
--
entry
being
to
"an
but
There
a
somehow
association
spaces
for
four
utterly
room.
included
full
persons
lost
in
the
is also a House
Common Room, complete with fireplace, piano, seating for about
fifty
people,
provide
an
and
magazine
atmosphere
racks.
for
57
The
small
especially before and after meals.
intention
informal
was
to
gatherings,
Perhaps what
the
program
envisioned was an MIT version of the piano area at Adams House
at
the
Harvard.
However
preciousness
precious
Furnished
sobriqet
Lounge.
House Common
a high-rise
intended,
the
of
the
gesture
for
the
room,
In
another
complex
with
the
place
Room/TFL might have
students
their
TFL
or
have
--
at
been better
reacted
own
for
another
to
equally
Tastefully
time
received,
but
the
in
(with many of the usual problems of high-
-
75 -
rise living) of single rooms with relatively isolated entries,
and
sections
the
only
hall
dining
as
social
a
living of
to the gracious
aspires
the lounge
the
magnet,
As a component of
lounge is a mere token and a misplaced one.
the program,
low-rise
and
high-
between
distinctions
inescapable
the
the
salon, a archetype simple not associated with the archetype of
the
The
tower.
high-rise
examples of wrong
may
TFL
be
one
leading
MIT's
of
MacGregor's
turns in architectural syntax.
disappointments are balanced in part by its better attributes.
The views from most of the tower rooms are truly spectacular,
and the house has a full complement of activity spaces.
There
others
about
is
a
of
division
whether
toward
or
too
not
achieving
much
residents
among
opinion
of
esthetic
and
architect's
the
distinction
went
attention
instead
of
addressing
the objectives of community and interaction.
Other Important Developments, 1963-1973
MacGregor
was
not
the
in
designed
had
the
two
stages
along
fairly
rooms
major
accomplishment
in
1963 and
1968.
conventional
collected
into
The
lines
suites,
first
and
about
-he
two
to
was
that made
the Harvard and Yale houses possible and
planners
dream
possible
about.
the
by
It
is
-
the
sort of
distinguished
76 -
tower was
second
McCormick
made
of
McCormick Hall, already mentioned, was
period from 1963-1970.
opened
only
large,
a
one
floor.
free gift
that other
chiefly
by
its
53
space and
feet of living
With 275 square
luxury.
square
feet of commons space per student, McCormick leads every other
dormitory in these categories. 58
During this period East Campus and Burton-Conner were both
own
MIT's
by
renovated
dorm
latter
The
Goody.
Marvin
renovated far more extensively than the f ormer.
In 1968
was
East
Campus was remodeled from its earlier 417 bed capacity with no
to
space
lounge
of about
capacity
current
its
Burton
renovation
represented
than
MacGregor
but
heralded
nevertheless.
a
after
full
an
When Burton was
year
of
life.
form of on-campus residential
a
contribution
equ ally
in
reopened
construction,
with
the
along the hallways.
difference going toward new lounge space
The
380,
MIT
less
important
the
had
fall
an
of
entirely
one
1971
new
The new Burton House was
divided, unevenly, between the Burton side and the Conner side
with
the Housemaster's suite on the first floor of the
side.
Senior Tutor's on the
the
side and
Floors
in
Burton
are
House
floor of
first
numbered
in
the
the
Conner
Burton
European
style, with a street level floor and the first floor above it.
At
square
3,052
Senior
There
Tutor,
are
through
feet
Burton
spaces
fifth
for
floors
square
feet allotted
Bexley
and
second
for
ranks
second
graduate
on
only
to
tutor,
New
for
1,442
the
today
only
to
MacGregor.
on
each
of
the
tutors
both sides
to each
and
Housemaster
the
of
the building;
Burton
House.
The
is
on
real
a
second
with
par
504
with
difference,
however, only begins to become apparent in the large allotment
-
77 -
of living
and common space
student.
When these
per
aggregated,
any
than
student
per
space
space are
of
categories
two
more
provides
Burton
(exclusive of the dining hall)
other
dormitory except McCormick.59
But these
figures tell only a small part of the story. The
important difference
is
residents of Burton have
not that the
more space, but that the organization of the space was planned
so
as to support small group interplay at a level
any other
similar
McCormick
is
experiment at
grouped
into
MIT.
Although one
and groups of
suites,
rooms in MacGregor are nominally designated as
House
is
a
suites
can
actually be
MacGregor
cannot.
Throughout
the first six years after
the
House
opposed
each
of
were
to
an
entire
entire House.
kitchens
with
cooperative
also coops
of
the
most
of
the
of
form
three
the
courtyards,
to
side
of
more
Burton
those
for
at
in
least
the social units
in
eleven
as
students,
of
rooms around
House,
the
or
the
Key to the success of most suites are the full
adjacent
dining
for
many
areas,
residents.
which
facilitate
Although
in other west campus dorms, no other
cooking
Burton's
and
and
dining
no
other
properly,
were
--
-
the
78 -
there
of
house
claim
number
can
a
are
residence has
facilities
fostered its uniquely cooperative spirit.
(or,
of
to eight
while
dorm,
collections
a
six
group.
outside
the renovation,
floor,
lifestyle
decentralized
quality
suites
four
the
to
locked
tower
suites, Burton
living
suite-oriented
distinctly
better than
quite
to
the
have
While the coops are
and
size
of
Burton
coops
seems
confined
members
to
to
of
the
a
particular
have
decreased
members
suite,
of
they
Coops
suite.
in
a
recent
suite,
are
or
years)
inclusive
invariably
frequently
by
n
of
all
identified
extend
to
with
cover
other
daily matters besides cooking and dining,
Coops
offer
constraints
taste
of
of the
a
measure
of
institutional
real-world
schedules
real-world problems and
the sharing of work and
freedom
such as
from
the
Commons and
benefits that come
least for the more independent residents.
from
groups --
living space among small
a
at
The time and effort
that go into shopping, cooking, eating, cleaning, coordinating
chores,
splitting
bills
for
the
telephone,
newspapers
subscriptions, and the innumerable other aspects of living are
in
themselves
an
education
in
social
maturation
too
completely
lost in our atomized society.
solution
the
often
postponed
until
form
after
and
graduation,
who
or
The coops provide a
to the needs of many students who wish
dorm but
personal
find themselves alienated
in
to
remain
in
the context of
an undifferentiated mass of several hundred other students in
a
dorm,
or
the
Commons dining
facilities.
The
economies
of
scale in institutional dining at MIT dictate that dining halls
be built to serve 300 or more students, or most of the Commons
subscribers
temoting
two
economic
comparison
provided
from
with
members
full-sized
benefits
Commons.
with a wider
The
members,
Well-managed
-
-XF
for
dorms.
OWN-
offer
especially
coops
variety of better
79 -
coops
can
food
and
in
have
for one-
third
the per
the
While
cost of Commons.
capita
balance
best
in groups of
between economy and social cohesion can be found
six to nine members, both smaller and larger groups have been
Coop members debate the optimal coop size as
known to thrive.
actively and endlessly as Baker residents debate the qualities
of
Burton
rooms.
individual
rooms too,
argue over
residents
but this is another matter.
in Burton are
The casualties of the cooperative style
the
introverted and the shy who can be found eating by themselves,
often
in
suite
lounge.
own
their
to
are
They
be
instead
of
the
caught
in
a
the
outside
simultaneously
outside
rooms
cliquish
very
which
coops,
can
by
bind
double
in
area
dining
being
appear
from
and
without
associations,
the
the
a
sizeable number of friends from the dorm with whom to go down
to Commons together.
In
size,
recent
number
filiation
to
the
as
years,
and
room choice
have
other
and
importance
identity and
coops
mentioned,
tension
patterns
arisen.
have
always been present
decreased
have
of groups
af-
relating
Issues
to some
in
degree.
In
a sine qua
earlier days when coop membership was more of
non of Burton life the haggling over room assignments was more
controllable,
upperclassman
suite but
another
based
due
to
a
could
be
assured
found
suite.
coops,
of
priorities
a
of
better
whereby
room
in
his
it more difficult to move to a better room
While
it
system
also
this
system
bred
some
-
80 -
lent
stability
resentment
on
the
to
an
own
in
suitepart
of
residents who moved
into
less desirable
suites
in
their
first
year and found themselves more or lessstuck there for the next
three.
The abolition of
suite priority on most
floors
(room
assignments in Burton have always been a floor affair, and the
number
of
compared
moves between
to
the
floors
number
of
has always
room
changes
been
insignificant
within
a
floor)
not
only preceded the decline of the coops but brought on a more
anarchic
room
assignments
process.
The
relationship
between
the abolition of suite priority and coop decline may not have
been one of cause and effect, and the ensuing anarchy
assignments
is not all bad, but altogether they can be seen as
symptoms of a less purposeful floor life.
assuned
an
residents
strong
entries
where
in
the
is
source
dorm
these
unimportant,
now
for
find
association
to
are
rarely
two
examples
assignments
of
only
a
nor
strong
of
group
home
with
lottery
identity,
suites
are
the
unknown
and
floor
a
of
the
most
a
This
House,
where
active
annual
entire
floors
neither
identity
an
House's
most
ties.
group
base
and
with
MacGregor
Baker
where
identity has
floors,
themselves
that
the
Floor
few
only occasionally exhibit
suites
room
role
comparable
also
Compare
wide
important
suite/coop
situation
in room
House
are
and
coop.
Houseis
the
relatively
individuals
not
on
Commons have not formed coops.
The
lesson
to
be
learned
from
Burton
House
is
that
the
physical structure of a living group can be very supportive of
a
particular
style
of
on-campus
-
81 -
independent
living
with
at
least
as
social
much
potential
to
as
maturation
qualifications
to
for
this
fostering
of
that
assertion
seem
other
infrastructure on
sources
strong
been
has
floor,
The
a predisposition
and
if
the
informal,
absence
The
affiliation.
group
and
of
erstwhile
of community shared by five to ten members of a
intense sense
coop
for
to be
a supportive,
the
growth
dininq.
communal
independent cooperative living,
governmental
individual
replaced
by
a
tepid
and
sense
diluted
of
community among the thirty to fifty members of a floor.
MIT
went
including
for
in
women's
opened,
its
the
into
before
way
the
of
system
East
and
a
number
Tower
Random Hall
from
the
1977
producing
of
a number
of
inconveniences
(since the fall of
service),
for
actions
the
four years
dormitory
spring of 1971
pressed
repertoire of
renovations,
period,
of
non-directed
housing
a few
in-exile
annex
its
of
years,
stopgaps
McCormick
of
the
was
Burton-
functioning as an
fall
of
1967
to
the
it has once again been
a
fair
number
of
minor
committee reports and theses.
The Graves Report of 1973
While
the
other
studies
of
its participants in general and
asked how well
the
lives
concepts
MIT
discussed
the
system
and
ideal terms, the Graves Report
the housing system works when seen in terms of
of
the
such
as
individuals and small
groups
the
plan
Housemaster-Tutor
- 82 -
in
and
it.
Dining
Broad
were
explained
with
individual
distinctions
Philosophically,
Undergraduate
time
is
also
its
of
enough,
had
effects
ieap
on Student
.n
March,
chair-an
the
Grave:,
J"'hn
a new sensitivity
groups
in
guiding
already
establish
become
of
the
came
with
of
for
the
1973.
the
who,
CSE
There
at
the
interestingly
The Graves Report
life
of
minorities
and
the residewces and a new sense of pluralism
principle
more
and
Second Interim Report
--
Et,'/ironmen:
after
forward
was a Senior Tutor at Burton Hrlse.
isolated
the
great
th- 1970's
publication,
articulated
as
nexi
in
called
l_-al
their
among the actor-.
the
Housing
of the Committee
report
to
regard
a
i
of
housing
manifest
a quality
zystem whose
fact.
It
(if voluntarism
also
in
diversity
sought
answer
to
to
the
equally manifest disaffection with certain mandatory features
of
the
system.
affairs
was
Interim
anathema
Report
toward
the
Report
sought
complement
that
The
the
to
of
administrative
the Committee.
its
enhance
report
indistinguishabloe
the
was
--
with
that
a
to
the
make
eye
Graves
The
in
student
an
the
them.
services
meant
student
1963 first
houses,
among
support
thoutjght
in
Where the
among
diversity
and
force
recommendations
uniformity
facilities
earlier
sufficiently
to
of
introduced
goal
of
use
same
houses
the
house
could
spend
all his residential and recreitional time in one house and not
feel
the need
report
for
an
to move
to another
opposite
purpose.
--
was endorsed
Consider
the
in
following
criteria for the success of the residertiLal system:
-
83 -
the later
as
then
student
individual
each
where
be
must
these
way
non-compulsory
and
free,
open,
an
in
offered
well
aL
styles,
Furthermore,
contact.
personal
as
living
social and
for
opportunities
and
facilities
of
range
possible
broadest
the
provide
must
we
this
achieve
to
order
"In
what
decides
response is most appropriate for him or her. Students
should have ample information about these facilities
and ample opportunity to use them, but should never
Under these circumstances a stu-
be forced to do so.
is valuable only to a minority.
it
[emphasis added]
the Housemaster-Tutor
little
added
Report
Graves
The
60
facilities was
Included among these
system.
thus
of any part of the system if
not a failure
is
it
and
to ignore many of them,
dent may be content
structural
the
to
guidelines beyond the reaffirmation that the senior and junior
committee
itemized
be given
Senior
to Housemaster,
Tutor,
their
should not
and Tutor)
duties
or
the
by
job
specific
it offered a hierarchical ordering of
Instead
descriptions.
of
checklists
preferred
terms
(the
residents
graduate
and
faculty
the functions of the system, in order to clarify the roles and
avoid the misconception that "tutors" were meant to help solve
The
used
four
to
coach the
problems or
homework
functional
include
of the
missions
Tutors
Senior
described as academic, social,
first
remains
should
is
the
an
not
narrowest
important
be
too
sense
one,
academically weaker
it
-
(the term
tutors
and Housemasters
is here
as well)
were
education, and advisory. 6 1
of
was
84 -
and
tutoring,
stressed
matched,
closely
students.
in
that
their
although
the
own
The
it
tutors
or
the
eyes,
students'
to
community
or
of
consists
into
in
as
theirs,
articulating
a
good
third
his
share
to
to provoke
interests and
cultural
The
suite/coops.
responsibility
tutor's
the
and
intellectual
like
communities
closer
smaller
when
integration like Commons
force for social
is no larger
there
of
feeling
a
especially
unit,
floor-sized
entryor
an
and
sparking
in
lend
which
activities
those
all
coordinating
role
tutor's
the
entails
second
The
strengths.
scholastic
particular
their
with
bull
students
session.
Education here differs from the narrower matter of academics
by
the
of
connotation
borrowed
attention
individual
and
students.
troubled
problems
of
students,
women
caring
Chinese,
blacks,
living
as
for
The
the
special
committee
and
Indian,
minorities
discussions
and
The fourth
arts atmosphere.
from a liberal
personal
questions
open-ended
in
felt
is the
needs
of
that
other
the
foreign
predominantly
male
groups, gays, and others would best be addressed by an advisor
of
minority
similar
status.
Therefore
the
Graves
Report
recommended better coordination between the Housemaster-Tutor
system and the Freshman Advisory Committee and various other
special interest support groups and counselling counselling.
Wherever
precedence
the
over
Graves
even the
possible,
individual
administrative
Report
counselled
requirement that all
the fraternities,
arguing
fiat
free
of
against
choicr'
peer
should
group
mandatory
take
pressure;
Commons
freshmen live on campus or
that freshmen
- 85 -
should have
and
in
the same
rights
as
campus
that
to
upperclassmen,
escape
freshmen
MIT's
would
anyway.
priorities
housing
attention,
students,
followed
persons
thereby
and
then
the
wish
the
few
good
report
students,
temporarily
forfeit
move
and
to
a
freshmen
withdraw
in,
environment,"
move
getting
from
privileges,
dropping
and,
off
hierarchy
upperclassmen,
housing
back
off
reasons
with
by continuing
to
move
proposed
dormitories without
to
right
Institutional
The
who
temporarily
move out of
"total
find
independently,
for
including
of
first
transfer
school
and
persons
who
out
as
finally,
students
fifth-year
undergraduates.
The
Graves
Report
appropriate scale
shared
the
general
concern
about
the
for student housing.
The committee thought
that a house of roughly 300 was too big
for some needs and too
small
for
housing
of
30
others.
be
to
of
the
50.
It
ended
order of
The
up
by
recommending
that
future
broken down
into
groups
150 beds,
committee's
data,
however,
show no
clear
Institute-wide consensus among students on the optimal size of
living
groups
with
which
it
is
possible
spoke
to
the
to
identify
(see
appendix B for statistics).
The
Graves
Report
problem
of
identity,
including class and school identity as well as that associated
with
It
the
local
dutifully
school spirit,
how,
in
the
living
noted
group, but
the
lack
of
not
in
a conventional
graduating
class
way.
identity,
and community in most dorms, and it duly noted
past,
institutions
- 86 -
like
Field
Day,
the
Junior
Prom,
and
active
seek
to
revive
seeking
to
But,
qualities.
house
shake
to
activities,
up
some
the
living.
Taking
Graves
Committee
disinterest
students'
62
house politics,
political
energies to work
than treating
of
that
larger
student
government
busy --
to be weak
assignments, and
pointless
identity
--
have
as
even
did not
1963
MIT
report,
the
sharing
as
most
"sandbox"
laboratory microcosm
a
Graves
for
Report
found
two
the
the house as microcosm and
to
student
keep
its own
stone,
an
This
individuals
politicians
sake and
annual
plan,
birds
lack of
school
Institute-wide
never
or groups of
two
put
friends
into
room
effect,
reassigned
new residences arbitrarily.
In support of this proposal,
committee
the
choice
in
a
information,
from
other
argued
very
and,
living
that
short
once
period
settled,
groups by
freshman
of
time
becomes
inertia
and
own house
largely by simple habituation.
education
means
growth
--
issues of the day
Most of house politics concerns room
lottery.63
also
in
of
patterns
report found a way of killing
one
these
further
parochial,
on the large
something
government
had
of
encouraging students to put their
The
ones.
the
with
assignments
would
petty,
for house government --
rationales
--
record
the dormitory as
world.
the
of
on
the
in
issues of
rather
tack
itself
went
entrenched
other
opposite
put
and
much
committee
the
credit,
its eternal
these
supplied
government
and
growth
-
87 -
means
makes
and
on
his
effectively
It was
change,
the
housing
very
integrated
to
little
isolated
into
his
argued that
and
that
a
possibility of
a social
this supports one of the
report's
the
change of domicile might open up
All
change.
or attitudinal
main theses, that
potential
highest
similar
have
others
diverse
only
needs
and
to
tolerate,
a
while
at
community where
Secondly,
rights.
such
through
f-om
learn
to
to
come
will
we
these
among
that
finally
and
appreciate,
his
reach
person,
students
interaction
meaningful
in
hope
the
in
students,
life style
to
him
interaction
social
the
maximize
must
this
the
temperament,
own
as a scholar and
time doing
same
the
student
enable
will
and
goals,
and
needs,
each
his
to
suited
best
be
will
that
are
individual
maximum opportunity to find an
both
which
to give
are
feasible
desirable and
goals
social
main
"...the
64
the individual peculiarities of each other."
must
and
to
values,
report
also
higher
goals
or
an
(or
where
to
his
physical
its
decoration)
the
housing
such
system.
as
the
dependent
individual
environment
allowing
The Graves
-
88 -
for
case
the
where
and
coherent
on
a
has
after
become
a
physical
especially
spending
was
housing
life of
special
"squatter's
Committee
where
instances
in
The
harmony.
in
always
established
unit
environment
attached
in
as
disrupt the
living
not
the
inertia. These are
social
compromises
some
conflict,
other
are
they
suggested
lottery might
coop
but
education
without
choice,
free
impositions of petty regulations or
majestic
students
that
is
then,
a cosmopolitan
gain
of
right
developed
fully
Report,
Graves
the
every chance
given
be
a
of
essence
The
time
rights"
stronger
in
in
than
it
at
study
only major
the
was
support of
its
in
since
before or
any other
Bexley,
that
recognize
MIT to
diversity;
campus
like the other dorms, answered a particular group's own needs,
Interim Report was MacGregor House
report
--
of
sort
perverse
child
the
then
closest
be
to
retrospect
in
way,
House.
of
units
to
or
hypothesized.
a
although
kitchens,
of
the
of
ideas
The
Graves
of
100
living
without
having
--
to
move
the contradiction with
especially
change
of
the
was
rank for
to allow for a maximum
"could
to
other
en'ourage
-
change
to another
Institute-wide
residence
beds
totalling
restaurant
nearby
point sounds more like the voice of the
and
the new
No mention was made of
The floorplan was
so that students
of flexibility,
a
the smaller units was to have a Tutor
Each of
students.
1963
Report
150
about
and there would be a faculty resident of unspecified
each
was
in
Report,
houses
such
two
300 beds, with no central dining hall.
suites
first
least MacGregor
house
a
or
50,
in de-
the discussion
to
was
outline
interested
Interim
New
it
30
the
was
What
of
to
second
dorm.
composed
at
the
relatively little space
did
--
of
devoted
design
If the child of the
signing and building some housing.
seen
also
is
else
someone
unless
right
housing
to
how
tell
which
studies
long
writes
one
uses.
a pretext to convert Bexley to other
construction as
No
any new housing
using
against
counsel
study to
the only
and
89 -
points
dorm."65
first
in
This last
Interim Report,
the Graves Report
lottery and
personal
style of
their
the
growth
emphasis on
--
is
not
explained.
Sorenson, Speck and New House
New
the
House were
alluded
Graves Report
which
in
occupancy
desiA
The
thesis
fall
the
was
itself
first
The
1975.)
Report,
opened
most
of
second.
the
program
from
briefly
summarized
item,
second
The
of
because
objectives,
goals,
its
and
its
general
for
essentially a
was
supported by a minimum of historical
takes
third
of
Report
Sorenson-Speck
Graves
the
Undergraduate Housing, West
House
(New
1973.
July
of
to which
thesis,
the
after
shortly
the MIT Planning Office's Program:
Campus
the
at one point,
1973
in
appeared
Speck
Lawrence
1971
design of
for the
The documents most directly responsible
analysis.
building
and
can
turn,
in
naivete
and
be
the
simplicity of its salient points.
Sorenson and Speck had some quite ambitious dreams for the
the
future of
just talks
have seen
west campus area.
about
of Cambridgeport
is
things
their
report
they would have liked
to
in a commercial zone of the order of Harvard Saure,
Kenmore Square,
report
the sort of
A fair part of
an
or
Coolidge Corner
particular
sector
on MIT-owned land.66 Most of the rest of the
program
architectural
square footages
in that
for specific
complete
with
estimated
spaces, based on Speck's earlier
thesis and a loose reading of the Graves Report.
The
two
authors
to
seem
-
90 -
have
only
remembered
the
selections from Graves which agreed with
Graves,
to
found the magic numbers 30 to
they
develop
the
rest
of
the
program
for
own aims.
their
50,
New
In
and proceeded
House
based
on
a
Their proposal developed the idea of
module of about 50 beds.
a series of independent modules in the shell of a larger dorm..
Each
regard
to
to be entirely self-governing with
modules was
of these
all
affairs,
internal
including
assignments.
room
to be clustered kitchens for reasons of efficiency
There were
and sharing
dining among
the social experience of cooking and
a group of residents larger than a suite, but not necessarily
Rooms were to be arranged so that
including an entire module.
each resident would find it equally easy to casually meet each
other
of the
easy
to
of
residents
into
separate
a module
suite-sized
would not
but
fragments.
find
Taking
it so
a
cue
from a poll which recorded that 31 percent of the freshmen who
got singles
in MacGregor would have preferred a roommate, the
report called for a mixture of doubles and singles.
a minor
(which
suggestion
failed
apartment
from
when
tower)
that
it
the Graves
was
tried
a
housing
Report
one
Speck
proposed
that one
and single undergraduate
came of
New
module
Adapting
that an experiment
year
in
cross-section
MIT community together be given a second
67
the
of
chance,
be designed
to
the
entire
Sorenson and
house
and graduate students;
Eastgate
married
nothing ever
it.
House
itself
is
difficult
to
assess
because
of
the
great differences in the quality of the residential experience
-
91 -
among
and
the
From the point of view that MIT needed
six modules.
for
place
a
needs
about
groups of
atmosphere
an
30 with
distinct from a fraternity's, some parts do seem to work well.
The living groups with a distinct unifying theme -Russian,
their
dorm modules
meet
to
programmed
a comfortable
House
of New
find
to
appear
size and adequately
group.
a
as
needs
their
contingent
large
another
to be of
--
Houses
German
and
French,
City,
Chocolate
--
is
there
But
--
nearly half
who
have no strong theme to their living groups, and they suffer a
identity,
group
found
some
their
living
short
story
Three
Stooges
alternately
--
3
House
New
(in
the
called
are
modules
New
the
and
by their addresses and their number, as the names
But
of the major contributors do not seem to be catching on).
these
for
(after Woody Allen's
Papers")
Gossage-Vardebedian
names
humorous
such
adopting
groups as Vardebedian House
"The
a few have
in the dorm. True,
life
certain disaffection with
non-theme-affiliated
Social
community.
House
module.
house
units
The
level
ground
functions
largely
is
interaction
arcade
a
like
more
no
share
residents
to
the
the
six
confined
connecting
land
no-man's
of
sense
real
be
to
traversed quickly than an interior street where residents from
different living groups can casually meet.
Kitchens
are
non-theme
living
circles.
The
voice
in
the
sometimes
groups
successful
together,
in
drawing
especially
language houses,
who,
unlike
process,
have
some
planning
-
92 -
the
the
in
others
kitchens
of
members
kosher
had
above
a
the
enhancing
street
level,
dorm.
Lounges
in
decks
a
are
the
from
rest
of
the
are conveniently located
living groups
the
roof
and New House's
isolation
their
feature
which
living
other
groups might do well to adopt.
In sum, the New West Campus Houses do some
others
poorly.
quite
designed
for
students
--
--
The
is achieved
benefit
staff.
house,
purpose
since
Report may be
affiliated
students
and
however,
runs
30
or
One
to
to
50
already have
who
even
can
counter
Ryer Report.
the
of
living groups do
government
coexistence,
Mere
apartment
house
specifically
community
those groups
for
The different
a
of
it was
objective
a separate
supporting
strong central theme.
without
one
things well and
coexist
a house desk
found
be
every
assertion
a
in
any
statement
of
the
of
Graves
tested against the experience of the non-theme-
students -will
that three
find
the
autonomous
larger
groups
150-men
of
living
fifty
group
sufficiently large to encompass a good cross-section of MIT's
The assertion fails miserably for three
diverse student body.
reasons.
First,
there
is
no
magic
automatically serve
as
non-theme
lacks,
tighter,
more
module.
design
New House
cohesive
Third,
to
the optimal
by
the
of
size
intention,
living
everything
segment
number
groups
imaginable
modules
from
students
which
can
for a house. Second,
physical
smaller
was
each
support
than
a
included
other,
for
whole
in
the
including
separate mailboxes and separate mailing addresses, ro inviting
-
93 -
a
and
area,
commons
overall
capacity
entries
with
true
identity.
that
Bexley
This
may
a
retains
much
and
courtyard
a central
image
and,
entire
the
of
is
it
etc.,
stronger
orientation
the
to
due
be
areas,
four
into
divided
mailbox
addresses,
separate
around
building
a dorm of a similar
House
New
non-theme
to
While
facilities.
house-wide
is also true of Bexley,
this description
also
of
minimum
quasi-suite plan
the
as much as to the general flamboyance of life there.
scale
any small
--
a
a floor or
of
fraternal
lifestyle.
The
larger
secondary
source
structure of New House offers no
members
somewhat
benefit
the
Even
identity.
of
such
individual
secondary
the
from
a
cooperative
a
or
brotherhood,
or
solidarity,
racial
sharing
German,
commitment
fraternities'
fifty --
in the absence of some unifying force, such as
speaking
everybody
identity --
group of
fact of
in the
collective identity
if weaker, competing source of
a whole dorm --
entry of
an
three or
a suite of
their
can only maintain
larger,
living
probable that a strongly identified
It is
identity derived from also being part of a fraternity system.
The
eventually
interest
filling
groups
the structure
larger
like
House-wide
other
the
Spanish
supportive
temporary
modules
House;
their
of
source
secondary
interest or language dorm.
House's
best assured by
New House would be
success of
future
these
needs,
of
with
grois
and
special
more
might
would
find
find
that
identity as the special
Besides, the experience of Russian
arrangement
-
on
94 -
the
second
floor
of
Conner
was
generally
considered
to
have
been
unsatisfactory
for
with
the
for
the
though
the
has not yet been prepared
and
Russian House's neighbors.
Next House
the
for
MIT Program Planning Grouv.
of
compendium
of
to the group.
the
resourcs
plus
group
planning
from
the
and
varie's
students,
and
three
submitted
residents,
dorm
parts of the
from all
which has no elected
Conference,
undergraduate
program
representatives
of
faculty
(and Bexley,
InterFraternity
the
and materials
politicians
dorm system except McCormi.k
the
of
a
is
turn
in
deliberations
opinions
sketchy
distillation
a
is
which
Fact Pack
a
A Report from the
document
Cnsultants,
and other stud:t
officers),
postponed,68
group consisted
The plannini
administration
presidents
been
This
incomprehenisible
nearly
the
have
Even
from Next House --
discerned
be
can
outline
constructicon
expanded
greatly
House.
Next
for
for the arcl-itect
program
plans
was
:ouse
New
process
planning
current
final
and
houses
language
began
that
planning
of
democratization
The
without
two
graduate
any
official
cachets.
It
would
House
before
politicians
be
it
the
impossi','.a
is
to
built and occupied
dubious
the
discuss
.esponsibility
--
planners
of
describe how something wiK work and then why
- 95 -
of
quality
share with
having
it
next
didn't
first
the
--
but
some
ideas
lessons
will
do
learned
house
from
about
MIT's
300
rooms also clustered
flexible;
total.
The
a
with
the
Dining
for
heights
doubles
that
clusters
so
--
facilities
Hall,
will
enough
the
the
office,
the
the
social
with
on
lounge
floor
be
the
sjake
of
singles will
and
not
will
be
oilet,
69
a
include
the Dining
the
Hall.
the house,
-
96 -
"link"
qu arters,
by the
to the one
each
area,
flocir
large
lountges
for
government/manageament
is
and
smaller
government
office,
Perhaps
for
:nfght
of a desk/communications
government
center
for e ight to
Housemaster's
addition
house
A strong
storage.
Next House will be
as
half
in
one
by the provision
recreational
living
the entryway socia.1
the
area,
desk
include
also
clusters.
anticipated
manager's
to New House,
Social areas
to accommodate
room
basic
lounge
features of the entire house will
and Amherst Alley.
entrance
It
The rooms wilJL be of
room.
purposes
common
of
connections
area
hou'n>g.
example,
circulation, and the graduate resident tutor.
Central
of
Floor segments will be be c:entered
composition.
core
for
singles,
clustered,
in
synrt-f:3is
the room clustercs will
House,
ceiling
similar
for
arbitrarily
duplicated
a
in
in
Senior
and
shapes
and
diversity,
about
in
adjacent
two
of
variety
be
students
be
experience
into a double and living
converted
a
long
will
into suite-like arrangements
As
twelve students.
be
House
half of a floor of 60 to 80 resider.t:,,
be one
group will
Next
emerge.
most
It
office,
significant
is intended
secondarily
center,
fo-
part
and
of
p-imarily
:some New
House
residents,
feeling
dining,
that
MIT
if
even
the dorms.
campus
final
its
published
it
proposals,
will
place
does
not
Committee
there
but
to
mandatory
has
not
widespread
a
is
on
emphasis
greater
return
Dining
on
dining
campus
west
a general
Commons
Commons
for
The planning group recognized a need for more west
dining
facilities
the
this writing
of
As
center.
and finally as
facilities,
operating
at
even
full
with
the
capacity,
MacGregor
and
the
and
Baker
reopening
of
events
and
the Burton kitchen.
At
ideas,
the
end
of
this
chronological
survey
there are questions still unanswered.
few.
- 97 -
of
Let us examine a
VI.
CLOSING COMMENTS
One
of
the
great
open
questions
is
-he
matter
of
tutor
Throughout the housing system there are those who,
selection.
in spite of the warnings of the Graves Report, use their jobs
as sinecures, care little about student welfare, and interact
with them only when invited or required to do so.
is
an
match
result
unfortunate
tutors
to
living
of
a selection
groups
more
by
This group
process
the
geared
qualities
to
they
already share than by the potential academic/social/educational/advisory contributions of the candidate for the job.
are
too
few
genuinely
stimulating
Students should be encouraged to look
tutors that perhaps
their
peers.
The
they might
selection
tutors
in
the
for qualities
not have already
process
is,
not
There
system.
in their
found among
unjustifiably,
viewed as a game from the point of view of the tutors as well
as the students in the living groups.
feature article of
the Graduate
Excerpted below is the
Student Council magazine The
Graduate issue on "Playing the Resident Tutor Game."
"...The fat man facing me took a deep drag on the
cigarette dangling precariously from his mouth and
said, 'Are you sure you want to become a house
tutor?'
"Heavy beads of sweat broke out on my forehead.
One particularly active drop rolled down my nose.
reached for a tissue. He continued to speak.
"'The
kids
like
you.
tutor...'
-
98 -
They
want
you
to
I
be
"I
my
had
made
in
interest
Seelinger
in
She
had
The
students
Months
it!
the
the
provided
had
with
me
invited
the all-important
Student
for
the
me
and
Office.
the
house
a
expressed
Affairs
facts
to
had
system to Alice
resident
graduate
Dean
I
before,
forms.
meeting
for
to find half
the
'interview.'
you speak physics?'
"'Do
"'What do you think of Velikovsky?'
"'What
if
you woke up at 4 A.M.
dorm dying of food poisoning?'
Years of
"They liked my answers.
chloroform and
pyridine had not dulled my higher senses.
Lost in my thoughts I had
"'Plotkin?'
failed to
notice the fat man's growing impatience.
"'What
is your answer?'
"'Yes,
I'll
it.'
take
It was
time
first
the
f
saw him smile.
no
"There's
resident.
Each
to
mystery
some
year
a
becoming
seventy
graduate
live
graduates
in
dormitories and fraternities at MIT, sharing food and
thought
with
undergraduates
less
experienced
at
the
game.
requirement that you must
"There's no exceptional
in order
fulfill
to be
a graduate
resident;
and marrieds are
equally acceptable.
your
and
enthusiasm
advice,
you
In
receive
singles
return
for
room
and
board and a chance to learn about yourself from a few
hundred
able teachers.
"Not
Chem
Eng
an
Einstein?
and
problem.
limitations,
don't
You
know
created
Barth
from
Just
like
the
rest
and
there
are
always
fill in your bare spaces.
has
you're
say
new
pathways
-
majoring
Barthelme?
of
us
people
you
in
No
have
around
to
In fact the dean's office
between
99 -
grad
students
and
the tutorial services
if you don't
does..."
know
in specific departments.
remember:
something,
So,
somebody
Freedom of choice and point of view are antagonistic goals
in
a diverse,
The
variety
of
pluralistic
options
residential
available
to
system such as MIT's.
undergraduates
here
is
Each new addition to the style contributes to the
remarkable.
variety because each follows a different set of precepts about
the
role
role.
of
residence
in
education and how best
to act the
But each time a new statement on the residential system
is published, it is as if to say here is the point of view of
MIT.
view
The cumulative effect over time of these many points of
lack of any point of view for
is the
the whole system.
It is not that this lack is a bad thing, in and of itself, but
the
inescapable impression one discovers from the history of
MIT
housing
is
that
best
residential
style
beyond
horizon.
the
MIT
is
forever
chasing
after
its educational
suited
to
Again,
there
is
nothing
that
one
aims,
just
wrong
with
It is more than the price of education;
perpetual searching.
it is the essence of it.
Trouble
begins
with
the
realization
that
doesn't know what it want in the way of housing.
MIT
really
Since the
Graves Report, and for a long time before it as well, no one
has
really sought to breed a "rah,
Institute,
let
agent toward
alone
this end,
sought
to
rah" school spirit at the
make
the
housing
system
an
and yet there remains an unspoken de-
100 -
sire to
make
the
residential
experience here
as
distinctly
an
MIT experience as the life of the Harvard Houses is distinctly
a Harvard
experience.
MIT
has
consciously
borrowed
some
of
the aspects of the Houses that make them work, without wishing
to
import
housing,
good
the whole system.
MIT will
thing
to
do
Without a unifying
it
wishes
particular point of view -particular
point
willing
say
to
of
view
or
for
to develop new options --
either continue
if
paradigm
to
abandon
the
pursuit
a
of
a
it may develop and adhere to a
--
a
good
unequivocably that
thing
to
it values
do
if
it
something
is
called
an MIT education over the education of individual MIT students
in
their
freely
chosen
and
variegated
residential
environments.
One way or
another MIT will have to
whom will the next house be built?"
s-tudying
serve
the
any
more
basic
student?"
question,
--
and
fact the question "For
This question develops by
"How
then
well
can
recalling
previous experiment in housing has served
any
how
housing
well
each
each previous group
of students, which is what this thesis has been doing for most
of its length.
Since MIT
Way
housing
in
student
would
like
those
least
to
recommend
well
served
is not
before
that
likely to
it
it
builds
seek
by existing
to
find
the
the One True
next
provide
housing.
house,
housing
Many
I
for
students
who move out of the housing system do so for the simple reason
that
they
do
not
wish
to
see
only
MIT
faces
about MIT problems at home or on the trip home.
-
101
-
and
hear
only
Their effect
on
the
private
housing
market
has
been
studied
at
length,
7
1
and MIT recognizes as one of its reasons for providing its own
housing the need
to keep as many students as possible off
private
market
housing
problem or
At
so
antagonize the
the
same
as
not
to
exacerbate
the
the
rent
local community.
time,
neither
the
cities
of
Boston
and
Cambridge nor the federal or state governments nor any student
union
is
likely
to
sponsor
its
own
independently-controlled
student
housing.
schools
in the area suggests a different answer.
within
five
contribute,
student
The
miles
in
students
of
in
turn
would
style
or
so
be
on
the
the
number
of
area
would
enrolled
Universite
the
proportionally to
housing
fund
they
But
in
a
the
build
any
of
and
the
Charles
their
Latin
and
the
of
Quarter,
university
in
the
abilities,
of
of
many
The schools
Basic
to
any
the
could
a fund
for
one
school.
administer housing
open to
member
colleges.
community
Paris,
because
housing in the metropolitan center.
true
River
independent
cosmopolitan
outskirts
proximity
but
of
like
with
the
Together
the
Cite
more
of
the
location
of
the
MIT itself may never be a
sense of giving
equal
emphasis
to all
fields of learning, but an MIT-enrolled student should be able
to enjoy
a more
truly
studying
at the
school
benefits of
move off
and
residential
campus
alone
amplified by the
universal
residential
"polarized
around
e, perience
science."
The
while
full
education, so often lost by those who
or
in
small
groups,
would
be
retained
contribution of each student's different
-
102 -
school
background
college.
Students
options at all
other,
a
sort
of
constrained
unaffiliated
by
the
residential
existing
schools doubtless have much
range
to share with each
a new concept
wording.
Many
is
necessarily simple
problems
nevertheless
and
utopian
suggest
one
go
different
even
in
schools
the
concept
parallel
the
independence
housing
mixing
the
before
independent
the
mixture
of a metropolitan
separate
system
of
students
becomes
in
themselves
even before the details of the plan can be filled in.
can
of
if only they had the chance.
Such
its
in
of
How far
some
very
dissonant?
Does
student housing system to
the
colleges
obviate
the
sought by the students who leave their colleges'
in the
first place?
Can
such
really be a community unto itself, and,
an
independent
system
if so, will this sense
of community entirely replace the student's sense of community
with his classmates?
erode a particular
for
those of
Will this new system act
school's sense of
its students who
in any way to
unity and
purpose,
remain on-campus?
All one can
do at present is to realize that possible detractions
a
system do
exist
while
planning
it
to
meet
its
even
to such
attractive
merits.
The waste of such invaluable resources when they could
shared
proposed
is
an
expensive
meeting of
error
for
indepeindent
any
university.
minds would be
spirit and tradition of the University.
-
one
103 -
in
be
The
the highest
APPENDIX A
MIT's
facilities
were
compared
with
Winthrop,
Kirkland,
Eliot, Leverett, and Quincy Houses at Harvard, two colleges at
Yale, and dorms at Boston and Tufts Universities on the matter
of
space
allocations
MIT's Burton,
far,
for
Baker,
the
for
Masters,
Senior
Tutors,
and
Tutors.
and Senior Houses each had less space, by
Housemaster
than
the
Harvard
and
Yale
units.
Yale colleges had 5,000 square feet of space for their Masters
Harvard Houses between 8,000 and 10,000 while the MIT
and the
houses
B.U.
had
between
offered
1,350
only 1,250
dormitory had no Master
2,150
and
square
square
feet
set
feet per Master and
in residence at all.
aside.
the Tufts
MIT houses also
consistently had tighter quarters for Senior Tutors and Tutors
in comparison
that the
those
at
with
the
other
schools'
housing
units,
except
Burton Tutors' quarters had slightly more space than
the
Yale
colleges.
graduate
tutor
(Source:
CSE Report, p. 25)
system
and
B.U.
B.U.
-
and
also
104 -
Tufts
lacked
both
Senior
lacked
a
Tutors.
APPENDIX B
Percentage of students registering a clear identification with
a particular subgrouping of their living groups:
1% identifying 1% identifying
Iwith floor or Iwith smaller
lunit
lentry
living
group
1% identifying
Iwith entire
(house
----------------------------------------+---------------126.4 (floor
Senior
(entry) lin an entry)
House
152.0
|-East
1- 119.2 (part
Campus (1)
(floor) lof a floor)
175.3
Baker
House (2)
177.8 (part
lof a floor)
I
Burton
House
-
118.2
McCormick
Hall
(East Tower)
(West Tower)
189.3
153.8 (suite)
114.7 (part
lof a floor)
(floor)
(floor)
|-191.1 (suite)
- -- - - - -
2--5
-----MacGregor
House
|8.4
152.5
135.6
I (entr y)
(3)
|(suite)
I- ---
|-|-- I
(4)
1--
(1) little inter-floor mixing, less between parallels
(2)
residents
of the
east end have more ties with other
floors
(3) especially in the tower entries
(4)
especially
Bexley
in the low-rise
residents'
entries
identification
were
apparently
solicited.
(Source:
Undergraduate Housing in the 1970's, page 66)
-
105 -
not
APPENDIX C
from thursday, Vol.
1969
at
MIT"
Graves, Ad Hoc Committee
the
Since
set
of
needs
of
defeat
degree
of
a
CEP
the
it has
can
--
diverse
to
proposals
requirements
growingly
John C.
Prof.
by
for the B.A.
Institute Requirements,
General
single
Education
General
B.A. Degree:
"The
I, No. 2, April 24,
modify
become clearer
no
albeit
longer
the
that
fulfill
science-oriented
a
the
--
student body.
While there
"mean
is a valid desire that the BS degree from MIT
something,"
and
that
that
something
be
rigorous
professional training, there are increasingly more students at
MIT whose educational object is simply broad education and not
professional training.
requirements
within
may
the
serve
is
same
only
For those students a different set
needed,
and
curriculum
to
dilute
as
the
these
students
pre-professional
students
try
to
the
of
to
fit
professional
training
of
MIT
without ever fully satisfying those other students who are not
pre-professional.
We
the
our
proposed
alternative
path
the
Bachelor
of
It might allow MIT to retain the strong characteristics
Arts.
of
call
its
pre-professional
non-professional
degree
while
programs
-
106 -
by
actually
giving
strengthening
them
needed
flexibility.
Let two points be immediately clear:
--
The
openness and
other on
general
and
thrives on rigid academic discipline, but the
One
education.
and
Science
between
not
pre-professional
between
but
Humanities,
is
here
conflict
On
flexibility.
basis,
this
in
fact,
the science departments might themselves opt to continue their
BS programs, as in course 21.
--
this proposal does not intend to make MIT less
Second,
This
science.
departments
importance
of
all students.
that
MIT
study
programs,
the
science.
can
the
retaining
in
take
current
is
wrong
to
MIT
and
even
are
basically
think
that
the
criteria
for
largest
step
who
those
that
elect
conversant
unwanted
of
stress
we
admissions
new
use
efficient
are the surest
insuring
at
more
rather
of
creation
envisage
Additionally,
These criteria
humanities
It
but
facilities.
existing
already
not
does
proposal
and
in fact better polarized around
science, but
polarized around
to
in
requirements
which teach unwanted and isolated skills are what will further
In too many cases,
that polarization.
they only alienate the
student.
What
mentioned
kind
of
above,
student
would
he may even be a
seek
a
BA
from
science major who
in his major but only as an academic involvement
his possible career.
MIT?
is
As
intent
unrelated
to
He may want to go far enough to get some
sense of the excitement and possibilities of his major
-
107 -
field,
b,: see no need
to
fill
every gap that might be
professional.
ar- active
He
a
develop
may
important
coherent
for
program
er"odying his special interest which cannot be fitted into any
wrnt
a
set
er-cation
to be
him.
to
valuable
e;cationally
at least
be
will
that
courses
of
meaningful
personally
wants
He
partially
an
may simply
he
Or
program.
departmental
recognized
Presently
undergraduate
his
end
in
and
itself,
even
if
this hurts his graduate school chances.
The
Pth,
requirements
demands,
it.
remain
requirements
to
reflect
insofar
as
alternative
essentially
unchanged.
combine
both graduate
one
this
given
degree,
Science
should
and
could
Departmental
will
of
Bachelor
can
with
the
school
anticipate
Institute
and professional
what
the
profession
require when our present students are actively engaged in
Students
would
be
advised
well
follow
to
them
closely
even if they were not required.
the
For
requirements
bickaround
into
him
a
play a valuable dual
from
variety
against
student,
pre-professional
any
which
of
a
student
can
and
departments
excessive
role:
Institute
the
They provide a solid
move
quickly
careers,
while
which
specification
and
easily
protecting
might
reduce
loter flexibility.
The
curriculum
for
the
proposed
BA
degree
would
be
tAilored to the needs and interests of the individual student,
nt
to
the
external
demands
of
the
f( I lows:
-
108 -
field.
It would
work as
would
subjects
particular
No
be
would
there
and
required
attempt to specify programs in detail, though a student
be no
A student's freshman advisor might stay with
time.
period of
long
a
over
program
student's
the
of
development
the
follow
least one advisor, who would
with at
very closely
would work
he
Instead
exist.
already
that
follow some
might
certainly
him throughout his full four years.
program
overall
should
committee
to
expected
even
before
If
department.
that
it
interdepartmental,
committee
the
department,
particular
were
he
If
would
be
appointed
a
by
essentially
were
the
by
directly
appointed
be
would
within
concentrating
program
his
his program
of
value
perhaps
and
invited
be
educational
the
defend
committee.
this
would
student
The
members.
faculty
two other
advisor and
student's
the
include
This
committee.
a
by
reviewed
be
would
student's
a
year,
senior
his
of
term
first
the
During
Committee on Academic Performance.
This
it
committee
could
accept
could
the
it
as
program
one of
take
then
three actions:
(1)
of
a BA
stands
as worthy
degree, provided the student's grades are satisfactory;
specific
could
set
could
be
could
reject
least
have
passed
completed
to
before
In order
the
additional
during
program,
stay
an
he could
the
student's
which
in
additional
recieve
case
year
presumably
which
requirements,
last
term;
the
student
and
have
a
(2) it
or
new
(3)
would
at
program
the PA degree.
to avoid such rejections, general guidelines
-
it
109 -
(as
opposed
to
advance,
be
well
publicized
Three
main
factors
and
advisors.
be
would
requirements)
specific
students
to
be
should
down
laid
and
their
in
included
in
any
legitimate program:
Concentration
--
a
interest and explore it
subjects.
The
amount
student
should
some
field
of
including several advanced
in depth,
of
select
concentration might
depend
on
the
depth of the field.
Diversity --
the student should expose himself
to a wide
variety of disciplines to broaden his knowledge and interests,
including
at
least
36-48
hours
of
both
scientific
and
humanistic subjects outside his field of concentration.
Independent
work
--
the
student
should
be
required
to
write a thesis, as the culmination of original research in his
field of concentration.
that
he
should
In order to do this, it is reasonable
have
some
prior
laboratory
"laboratory" is taken in a broad sense.
tailored
his
to
the
individual,
mastery of
the
tools
if
Since the program
this opportunity
and
work,
techniques
of
to
the
is
demonstrate
field
on
a
problem relevant to him should be especially valuable.
Finally,
the
requirement
of
360
units
overall
maintained, as well as any requirements on grades.
would
be
Since the
subjects taken would be the same as those for BS stulents, and
the
grading
probation
and
standards
would
be
disqualifications
the
before
same,
the
overall program would remain as they are now.
-
110 -
procedures
for
review
the
of
Suitable
--
depth
board,
and
grounds
the
student
taking
rejection
has
just
would
spread
introductory subjects
deeply
going
never
for
--
specialization
the
then
be
all
himself
in
(1)
effort
has
just
to broaden
into
any
one.
student
has
taken
taken
subjects
achieved by others,
his
own.
himself,
With
in
(2)
advisory
anticipated and avoided well
be
closely
reason
MIT
radically
appropriate
professional
education
all
his
and has made
--
the
learns
program, all
student
the
results
these
could
be
in advance.
to
the
should
subject
use
different
basis
for
matter,
the
perpetuate the myth that the arts
are
Excessive
reason why the names of the two degrees should
related
why
the
instead of trying to come up with some of
a good
There is no
he
of
fashion,
almost
(3) Passiveness
which
over
a dilletante
subjects from a particular department or school,
no
Lack
nor
two-degree
is
there
mechanism
any
to
(or humanities) and sciences
disciplines
distinction
or
cultures.
should
be
The
between
training aimed at mastery of a field and liberal
directed
toward
the
needs
of
individual
students.
This distinction can be made within any department.
There is
no reason why any of the existing BS programs should be given
up if a new BA were created.
There
degree
away
will
from
present
is no
reason to believe that the creation of such a
lead
the
to
a noticeable
natural
sciences
admission policy,
and
one can
-
shift
111 -
in
student
engineering.
safely assume
interests
Given
the
that entering
will
freshmen
bias
or
interest
strong
have
to
continue
in
a
high
very
of
favor
is
It
sciences.
the
and
competence
required science subjects that engender this interest.
contrary,
against
which
many
it
do
they
students
so
because
found
who
they
leave
a
having
science
required
were
uninteresting
from
them
prevented
here
and
or
to
take
irrelevant,
The
tuirn
cour-es.
and
which
things
other
learn
to
chance
ot
On
even
a
which might have been worthwhile.
In
more,
any case,
and get
a student
more of
has freely chosen
If
anvthing,
creatively
in
is
lasting
likely
value
than out of one
it
may
the
sciences
produce
to do
out of
he has
more
rather
more
learn
a course that
been
students
than
work,
forced
who
to tae.
can
mechanically
he
think
cranking
out problem sets.
There
is
programs.
no
reason
Candidates
The
each
is
program
rigor.
worry
about
the
quality
of
the
RA
for each degree will be enrolled in rhe
thus subject to the
same subjects, and
demands.
to
degree
guidelines
demanding,
can
and cannot
same specific acadernic
be
used
to
ensure
that
be used as a haven
fi-om
The point is that the demands be tailored to the necdas
of the individual so that they challenge him and bring out hijs
creative abilities.
In any case, the quality of the BS degime
will not be affected in the slightest.
In fact,
it should be
strengthened.
The
identity
BA degree
in
may
take
some
time
before
the academic a.id outside worlds.
-
112
-
achieving
proL-er
But any student
who
may
be
worried
about
the
professional
value
of
the
BA
degree can always remain in the BS program.
It
is
worth
noting
first
the
the
Bachelor
half
of
the
nineteenth
colleges developed a standardized and
certain
Science
degree
subjects,
most
American
century,
tightly defined program
leading to the Bachelor of Arts degree.
that
of
in a revolt against overly rigid curricula.
itself originated
During
that
notably
It reflected a belief
Latin
and
Greek,
had
an
intrinsic cultural value which made them necessary for any man
who dared call himself fully educated.
first
it
programs
was
in
argued
classical
that
studies
students
degree
by
new
BS
the
time
college
consuming
new curricula.
granting
degree,
technology were developed,
"general
that era
required courses.
a
the
were
following
establishment of
BA
science and
During the 1850's the
refused
it
to
requirements"
and
students
who
down
had
from
the old
for
the academic
the
not
The compromise reached was the
free
in
irrelevant
However,
to water
and
requirements,
precious
taken
the
creation of
at
colleges
like MIT and RPI, which concentrated on the new programs.
some time afterwards the BS was still
degree,
and
subject
to
However,
in
at
places
social
as
like
Yale
well
regarded as an
and
as
Harvard
academic
time the degree acquired
full
indeed
role
if the
of
conservaties,
-
or
113 -
if
MIT
were
discrimination.
and
there
is
It would be ironic
defenders of the BS were now to
academic
inferior
students
status,
no real distinction between the two today.
For
be cast
were
te
in the
miss
an
to take
opportunity
where
group,
an
has
BA
The
the
The
in
again
lead
innovative
serving
of
advantage
side
education.
a
as
proving
propos.is for new BA programs can be tried out on
experimental
to include
before deciding whether
bas.s
them
permanently.
with
confused
be
not
should
above
proposal
The
the
suggestion
that MIT should move toward abolishing the General
Institute
requireients
where
autonomy,
departments
ultimately
It
departmental
would
multiversity
wholly
requirements.
cre;ate
not
of
independent
of
of
sense
students
to
commit
had
an
opportunity
intersts
and
would
of
remains
themselves
to
make
It
at
harder
their
be
to
change
a disaster.
sort,
but
a
together
but
break
down
It would
force
long
real
schools
admission and
would
MIT.
academically
discover
it
any
least
physically
other.
each
community
whatever
have
schools,
cc:apeting
at
or
This would
university
a
departmental
greater
for undergraduate
might set their own standards
4-year
of
favor
in
before
abilities
later.
they
and
There
would also be a natural tendency for departmental curricula to
become increasingly rigid.
Our proposal keeps a common set of
standards but a plurality of opportunities in each department.
-
114 -
FOOTNOTES
1 -
Housing Students
2 -
Report of Commission of Inquiry, Introduction
3 -
Committee on Undergraduate Residential Life Report,
in Scandinavia,
page 8
part
V
4 -
Perspectives on the Houses at Harvard
and Radcliffe, page
79
5 -
K. Tidrick, New York Times, April 1, 1979
6 -
based on MIT Bulletin, degree requirements
7 -
Tidrick
8 - Committee
Specific
on Undergraduate
figures
are
for
Residential
fall
1977.
Life
Rough
Report.
percentages
refer to typical recent years.
9 -
ibidem, Table A-2
10 -
ibidem, Table A-3
11 -
ibidem, Table A-6
12 -
ibidem, Table A-4
13 -
ibidem, Table A-5
14 -
ibidem, Appendix B
15 -
ibidem, Appendix B
16 -
ibidem, Part
II
17 -
ibidem, Part
III
18 - Princeton Alumni Weekly (see Appendix A)
19 -
Perspectives on the Houses at Harvard and Radcliffe,
page 43
20 -
ibidem, page 4
21 -
ibidem, page 5
22 -
ioidem, page 58-9
-
ibidem, page
59
24 -
ibidem, page
58
25 -
ibidem, page
54
26 -
ibidem, page 44
23
-
115 -
27 -
ibidem,
28 -
ibidem, page 61-2
29 -
ibidem, page 64
30 -
ibidem, page 69
31 -
ibidem, page 71
32 -
ibidem, page 22
33 -
An Evaluation of a Living-Learning Residence
page 46
Program,
Pemberton
34 -
Ryer Report,
35 -
ibidem, page 17
36 37 -
Boston Evening Transcript, December 11,
Ryer Report, page 18
38 -
e.g.
page 16
Architecture
Plus,
July
1973,
1915, page 4
and
Experiencing
Architecture by Steen Eiler, reprinted as appendices in
the Baker House Client Team Rep't.
39 -
Baker House Client Team Report
40 -
Ryer Report,
41 -
ibidem, page 10
42 -
ibidem, page 12
43 -
ibidem, page 43
44 -
ibidem, page 44
45 -
Baker house Client Team Report
page 19
46 - CSE Report, page 9
47 -
ibidem, page 8
48 -
ibidem, page 44
49 - Sorenson-Speck Report, page 38
50 - CSE Report, page 22
51 -
ibidem, page 20
52 -
ibidem, page 23
53 -
ibidem, page 24
54 -
Fact Pack, page 60
55 -
CSE Report,
Importance
56 -
page
35,
"Individual
Rooms
--
of Privacy"
A Program for Undergraduate Men's Housing, page 83
-
116 -
The
57 -
ibidem, page 69
58 -
Fact Pack, page 60
59 -
ibidem
60 -
Undergraduate Housing in the 1970's, page 22
61 -
ibidem, pages 43-48
62 -
ibidem, page 65
63 -
ibidem, page 85
64 -
ibidem, page 21
65 -
ibidem, page 117
66 -
Sorenson-Speck Report, page 25
67 -
ibidem, page 55
68 -
The Tech, May 1, 1979, page 1
69 -
Next House,
70 -
The Graduate, November 1977, page 6
71 -
University
pages 8-9
Impact
on Housing Supply and Rental Levels
in the City of Boston
-
117 -
BIBLIOGRAPHY
General Background:
Impact
University
of
City
Levels
Urban
and
Levin
Melvin R.
Papers,
Rental
University
Boston
Boston,
Occasional
Supply and
on Housing
in
the
Institute
Norman Abend;
B.U.
Urban Institute, February 1970
Student Housing,
Laboratory
Facilities
Educational
Report;
EFL, September 1972
Campus
Planning
in
an
Area
Urban
A
--
Master
Doxiadis
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Plan
for
Associates,
Inc.; Praeger, 1971
College Students Live Here --
Study of College Housing, EFL,
A
Harold Riker and Frank Lopez;
EFL, 1961
A Graduate College for MIT, Bush-Brown Committee;
MIT Planning
Office, 1961
Dorms at Berkeley,
Sym van der
Ryn;
University
of California,
1968
When
MIT
Was Boston Tech,
Samuel
C.
Prescott;
Technology
Press, 1954
Housing
Program:
Residential
Location
of
MIT
Students,
Fall
Term, MIT Planning Office, 1971
Material more specifically germane to this thesis:
Housing Students in Scandinavia, John Hands and Roger Bingham;
-
118 -
London Student Cooperative Dwellings, 1973
Creative
in
Renewal
of Commission
of
on Student
the Committe
University
two);
(of
I
Vol.
of Oxford, Oxford University Press,
Report
1970
November,
of Inquiry,
the
of
Report
--
Time of Crisis
MIT Education,
Commission on
Report
a
1966
Housing,
Ryer,
Edwin
chairman; MIT, June, 1956
Report
of
the Committee
Edwin
Student Housing,
on
Ryer,
chairman; MIT, June, 1956
An Interim Report
Committee
on
for
on housing
Student
Envir
Undergraduate
John
anment,
Men
Graves,
at
MIT,
chairman;
MIT, March, 1973
Sorensen-Speck Report,
.
Sorenson
Richard
and
Speck;
Lawrence
MIT, 1973
Fact Pack,
Dorm
New
Group
Planning
1978-79,
with
Dober
and
Assocaites, 1979
Next House
--
A
Report
the
from
MIT
Program
Planning
Group;
Dober and Associates, 1979
Program:
Undergraduate Housing, West Campus;
MIT
Planning
MIT
Planning
Office, July, 1973
Baker House Client Team Report;
March,
1976
A Program for Undergraduate Men's Housing;
Office, August, 1965
-
119 -
The Beds of Academe, Howard Adelman;
An Evaluation
Impact
of
a
Study,
(undated, ca.
Praxis Books,
Living-Learning
Residence
of
University
Hall
Carol
Delaware,
Program,
Pemberton
1969-70)
Committee on Undergraduate Residential
Report,
1969
Princeton
Weekly
Second
Interim
Special
Issue;
Life:
Bulletin,
Princeton University, 12 December 1978
Dean
Perspectives on the Houses at Harvard and Radcliffe,
Whitla and Dan C. Pinck;
Office of
K.
Instructional Research
and Education, Harvard University, September, 1974
Articles:
"Ground
Down
by
U.S.
Kathryn
Schools,"
Times, Sunday, April 1, 1979
Tidrick;
the
Resident
author
Tutor
not credited;
Game,"
York
(Op-Ed page)
"The Cold Hard Facts of Graduate Residency:
Inside Dope,"
'ew
Vol.
4,
Confessions of an
The Graduate,
No.
2,
"Playing
November
1977,
page 6
"Corporation
Postpones
Building
of
'Next
by
Steven
Home";
Boston
House'"
Solnick; The Tech, Tuesday, May 1, 1979, page 1
"Technology
Builds
Its
First
Real
Hearth
and
Evening Transcript, Saturday, December 11,
"The
B.A. Degree:
Graves;
General
thursday, Vol.
Education
I, No.
-
at MIT"
2, April 24,
120 -
1915, page 4
by Prof.
1969
John
C.