interesting piece

<p><a href="http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/10/13/opinion/16189.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/10/13/opinion/16189.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>any thoughts on how the university will respond to the issue of the eating clubs and financial aid? it seem clear that the administration would be happy to have the eating clubs disappear, and they are working hard to create alternative social options--as they should. but the eating clubs pervade campus life, so it seems they should also make them accessible to anyone who wants to join. situations such as those described by this writer, where a student wants to join a group in which 3/4ths of the students participate but cannot afford to do so, simply cannot be tolerated.</p>

<p>Not to be a curmudgeon, but I am not sure it is anyone's constitutional right to "enroll into a good law school debt-free" after graduation. My own d, who is not on financial aid, will certainly graduate with some debt, and we will not be paying for her law school if she goes. </p>

<p>The most expensive eating clubs cost $2,000 more per year than the basic Princeton meal plan, and the total cost of Princeton including any eating club is no more than the tuition, room and board at other Ivies, because Princeton's basic fees are the lowest in the Ivy League. This $2,000 includes all sorts of social activities in addition to 3 meals. </p>

<p>At least one of the clubs offers students the opportunity to work onsite in order to defray some of that excess. Others offer their own financial aid. I think a student who is eager to join and who does a little digging can find ways to afford it. </p>

<p>And the administration's offer of low-cost loans for this purpose is definitely not "dubious." You join an eating club for 2 years,which means you might graduate from Princeton with $4,000 in debt, a small amount by most standards, in light of the fact that Princeton does not require financial aid students to take out loans in order to pay the basic fees but gives them grants instead.</p>

<p>Last, a student who doesn't join is far from alone. Many students who bicker the eating clubs don't get in, because the classes have grown and yet the clubs' meal serving facilities have not. Students who remain independent often frequent the clubs on weekends. And with the advent of the four-year residential colleges, the percentage of students involved in the clubs will decrease.</p>

<p>generally agreed, aparent. i don't think it's unreasonable at all for the university to pay (with grants) only the meal portion of students' eating club tabs. the excess amount on those tabs is mostly going toward kegs of beast and DJ bob, anyway, and these are hardly necessary educational expenses. it's actually pretty generous of princeton to offer their students loans to meet these extra expenses, anyway. after all, it's not like other schools pay or even lend their students their fraternity and sorority dues, which end up being put to similar uses. </p>

<p>the problem is, in spite of this apparent reasonableness, the prospect of a couple thousand in loans still drives a good number of low-income students away from the clubs, as it always has. so if the university really wants to avoid social divisions, especially ones along class lines, it's probably going to have to agree to cover full eating club fees for all who need it, with grants. it's sort of like early decision: ED was a class-neutral policy in the abstract, especially when backed by the university's extraordinary financial aid, but in practice it only aggravated class disparities. recognizing this a decade later, the administration finally did the right thing and did away with it. i'd like to see them make the same realization with club fees (that they aggravate disparities), and make the right decision once again, cost be damned.</p>

<p>From what I hear, the question of whether the university would pay full freight for finaid students to join the clubs is fraught with controversy, and it's not about the money. It's about control. The university doesn't want to be responsible for paying fees it can't determine. And the clubs worry that if the university has any role in controlling them, that will be a first step toward shutting them down. </p>

<p>One solution is for the clubs themselves to raise enough funds from their alumni to guarantee 100 percent financial aid to any student who is admitted. (Right now in their letters they do make oblique references to available help for any student who needs it, but it all seems very mysterious.) Of course, this would open another can of worms as people will speculate that financial need will impact acceptance. And many clubs would have trouble affording this, since the costs of maintaining those old mansions is formidable. </p>

<p>Another solution is for the university to find a way to cover the full club fees with grants but consult with the clubs about costs without attempting to control them or shut them down.</p>

<p>i don't doubt the administration would want some "concessions" in exchange for any additional generosity. from what i understand, it made dropping bicker a condition for bailing out several of the current sign-in clubs back in the day. i'm sure it would press for a similar concession today, especially in light of president tilghman's recently expressed distaste for bicker policies.</p>

<p>True. Of course, the bicker process varies dramatically from club to club, and the members themselves seem to find it painful not to be able to accept more people than they do (a fact that doesn't come across in some accounts that make it sound as though they are gleeful about it all), especially as the student body grows. </p>

<p>Doesn't it seem likely that the eating clubs will eventually be more like Harvard's finals clubs, on the margins of the four-year colleges and therefore less important on campus but essentially more or less unchanged from what they are today?</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>that's certainly possible, but i don't think it's likely. to be like harvard's final clubs, princeton's eating clubs would have to drop their food service function. for that to be even possible, the university would first have to build about half a dozen new dining halls. then, upperclassmen would have to decide they prefer institutional fare taken in the company of a couple hundred strangers, to chef-prepped stuff in the company of several dozen upperclass peers. i don't see this happening without substantial administrative "prodding." and even then, if the clubs retained their social side, they'd still be quite unlike harvard's final clubs, in that they'd still involve the vast majority of upperclassmen as members, and the overwhelming majority of all students in their weekend parties. they wouldn't, then, be "on the margins" like their harvard counterparts.</p>

<p>what's more possible, i think, is that the clubs retain their eating component, but as more and more sophomores divert to the cheaper residential-college option, the sign-in clubs die off one by one for lack of demand. the remaining bicker clubs would then involve a smaller, and far less representative fraction of the student body. in this respect, they would be more like harvard's final clubs and yale's secret societies, which tend to punch or tap only a particular "kind" of student. this is the fear of a lot of students as the four-year system approaches its debut.</p>