<p>@ Mollie Nice summary. I would add to your list of reasons:</p>
<p>3a) The reason they see it as dangerous is in part due to the fact that MIT alumni donations are often restricted donations to their living groups. They want more Institute identity because they believe it will translate into more/better (unrestricted) donations. They are basically aiming to be more like Harvard in terms of alumni contributions and see this as a piece of that puzzle.</p>
<p>4) They argue that parents don’t like REX/rush. Parents are sometimes uncomfortable with not being able to see their student off in that student’s final room, and don’t like the idea of their student have to move twice. I have heard the concern that parents are sometimes not able to contact their student during Rush (owing to not having a permanent room), but that seems to make little sense in the age of cell phones.</p>
<p>5) They think Rush is the purview of the ‘crazier’ dorms, which they don’t like and would rather see gone. I have heard administrators say that only the East Side cares about these things, and it’s unfair of them to force an anachronistic moving procedure on the rest of campus. Maybe things have changed, but I have never noticed a difference in dedication to dorm culture and rush in the east versus west side. However, of course, as more people have binding RBA as the norm, this will become more and more true.</p>
<p>6) Some administrators just think moving twice is a hassle and dumb.</p>
<p>I would also note that due to the above concerns about moving twice, they are probably going to try to clamp down on dorm-based room assignment procedures, too, which is a critical part of community for many places that have strong hall culture. Or at least the RCO seems to indicate as such.</p>
It’s not always clear. Certainly not the admissions office, that’s for sure. I wasn’t involved in student government, so my conception of “the administration” is just of a bunch of faceless people in suits or something. I wish jessiehl were around to chime in – she’s an '07 and a former blogger, and the former vice president of the Undergraduate Association (the main student government group).</p>
<p>There is certainly a huge amount of student pushback on any movement toward a more “normal” housing process, and student/alum involvement and protest is probably the major reason that drastic changes haven’t been made. Actually, the preservation of dorm rush (now REX) in the aftermath of the Freshmen on Campus policy can be credited at least in part the student who was president of the Undergraduate Association at the time – a certain Matt McGann '00. I do think that students have been losing ground on the issue, but it’s been over the past fifteen years. The more glass-half-full view, after all, would be that students have retained a remarkable percentage of the former rush process.</p>
<p>
This is exactly it. And, of course, people have friends all over campus. But home, especially a home that you choose, is a really special place.</p>
<p>(I should admit, probably, that one of the few traits that unites most MIT students is sheer stubbornness and conservativism when it comes to preserving the MIT way of life. I am no different, and I am by no means an impartial voice when it comes to this issue.)</p>
<p>@sbjdorlo - you’re absolutely right! I chose to come to MIT over the other places I was admitted, back in the day, because of the strength of its awesome communities.</p>
<p>‘The administration’ is the group of people who are not faculty and not students. They are basically the managers of the Institute. Although most of them are good, well-meaning people, they usually are educated and have worked in more ‘normal’ colleges, and experience a bit of culture shock when they arrive at MIT. MIT students have traditionally had a lot more autonomy, freedom, and personal responsibility than at most places - even other elite schools (c.f. Harvard still sends home a report card freshman year). Many of them would rather see us more in line with other elite places in terms of how we run the campus, and would rather the student body be more placid because it is easier to make changes.</p>
<p>All that said - MIT is still unbelievably awesome! Your son made the right choice! The students here are amazing and will always be amazing, and that’s what matters most.</p>
<p>My son was on the plane ride home from Princeton Preview, having missed CPW, when he made his decision to come to MIT, and his reasons were threefold: he found there weren’t enough kids like him, he wanted a tech school after all, and he wanted the vibrancy of both MIT and the surrounding city. It just made sense to him.</p>
<p>I trust that he will be one to not back down and that he will stand on his principles if he doesn’t like what’s going on, and you can be sure that we, his parents, 3000 miles away, will be supporting him, making sure that our money is well spent and that he’s happy, thriving, and where he belongs.</p>
<p>If I were to pick a semi-popular dorm as my first choice and an unpopular dorm as my second choice, does that lower my chances of getting into the semi-popular dorm vs someone who put the semi popular dorm 1st and then another popular dorm 2nd?</p>
<p>Possibly, but it’s also possible that the algorithm tries to place everyone in his/her first choice, and only after all the first choices have been placed does it go to the second choices at all. That’s how the HASS-D lottery works (or worked – I think it is no more?), but I don’t recall whether that’s how the housing lottery works or not.</p>
<p>I had a friend that put a generally unpopular dorm as her forth choice and got put there. She switched into her first choice after REX. However, any dorms you put in your top four really should be dorms you want to live in.</p>
The students here are amazing and will always be amazing, and that’s what matters most.</p>