<p>But you have to admit the reason the dorms are so first year oriented is because the upper classmen are allowed out. In contrast, the year I lived in one of the popular houses with an equal proportion of each class (people fought to hang on to their rooms in the lottery), things were much tamer. If you ran down the hall screaming at two in the morning, someone would come out and throw chemistry book at or flip you finger, and you would certainly get an email from the RA asking you to chill out. More positively speaking, there was a lot of substantive discussion about what classes to take, internships to apply to, relationship problems, and so on, which gives the College a more livable feel. </p>
<p>I just feel like its so massively different to be off campus for a sizable minority of students, that the university takes a reasonable interest in monitoring and intervening in the situation. Perhaps it was just me, but I knew a lot of people in apartments who frankly had five or six friends and otherwise limited their participation in university life to attending class. It so easy, especially at UChicago, to say one is only there to study and make high marks, and that such a life style therefore a constitutes a fulfilling college experience.</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly with uchicagoalum. My problem with having too many students live off campus at a place like Chicago mirrors alum's views. I found that the students who live in apartments had there set of a (generally small) group of friends, and they just came to campus for class. It made it seem like a certain percentage of undergrads were living like professional students - not college students. They came to school for a class or two, and otherwise hung out with their small group of friends.</p>
<p>Having attended grad school, I was struck by how similar the lives of grad students were to some of the undergrads I knew living in apts. I think having too many students live in apts - especially at an intense place like Chicago - takes away from the "college" experience that should separate that phase of life from the professional school life or working life. Indeed, I felt that many of my peers left the "college" experience when they moved off to their apartments. </p>
<p>I'd love to see more 2nd and 3rd years in campus housing as the Chicago dorm building plans progress.</p>
<p>Is anyone else put off by how Chicago is "in transition" or as some might argue newly changed. It sounds like in the recent past the school has made some great improvements in many different areas, but that scares me. I see it as likely that during my potential time there a transition back to less than stellar could occur. I guess I highly value a strong tradition of something, as long I can be sure of what that something is.</p>
<p>I wouldn't worry about that, Fastfood. Pretty much everyone connected to the University administration is an enthusiastic proponent of making undergraduate life better. It's been an important theme of their careers. And the University of Chicago has an unparalleled tradition of academic inquiry and debate and critical thinking. It's name is a by-word for that. What it doesn't have strong traditions around is undergraduate social life.</p>
<p>I concur with JHS. The Chicago commitment to inquiry, debate and critical thinking will not be deterred by a better undergraduate social community. It may even be enhanced.</p>
<p>I was thinking about this earlier... undergraduate life at the U of C probably does model graduate school life at other places. A lot of this has to do, I think, with the kind of person who tends to choose Chicago more than the physical setup of the school (or perhaps the two are related...). Anyway, at some of the other campuses I'm familiar with, there's a distinct vibe of "Summer Camp with Classes"-- lots of parties, lots of sports, lots of traditions, lots of lore. </p>
<p>I decided that for me, "Summer Camp" mentality was a bit of a turn-off. I didn't like the idea of having a school's culture the only thing available to me and I liked the idea of having a less omnipresent school culture in exchange for more interaction with a non-university community (Hyde Park) and more interaction with a big city (Chicago). Along those lines, I'm also not much of a "community" person-- I'd rather be independent-- so having an apartment appeals to people like me.</p>
<p>One of my hopes for the school is that we can build a little bit more of the community and college life that everybody who is familiar with the school is talking about. I am not really the person to make that happen, but I think it would be nice to see some of that kind of culture more apparent.</p>
<p>Unalove - your post summarizes my own thoughts about the U of C experience. I was surprised by how similar my grad school experience was with the experiences of many of my U of C friends. Outside of the first couple years, I think the U of C undergrad experience closely resembles life at a high-powered grad school. People tend to have their tight group of friends, many students come to campus only for classes, and the social fabric of the place wasn't always close knit. </p>
<p>Luckily for me, I stayed on campus for 4 years, and enjoyed a bit more of a more stereotypical college experience. Many of my friends who moved to apts cited independence and a desire to be more detached from school as a reason for moving. Having been in the grad school and professional world though, I think there is something valuable about the "college" phase of one's life. This doesn't mean that college kids need to be all "rah rah" about the school or always going to the big football game on Saturday, but I think its worthwhile for the college experience to remain distinct from what lies ahead. I hope the U of C improves on this front. Building a more centralized campus with more dormitory options is a promising start.</p>
<p>I also wish the U of C would perhaps see a resurgence of some of their old traditions. Scav Hunt of course remains popular, but what about the "Lascivious Costume Ball?" I think that would be fun to bring back. </p>
<p>On that front - here are some improvements the U of C needs to make for college life: </p>
<p>1.) Bigger Student Union (Hutch is too small)
2.) New Arts Center (when will this be completed?)
3.) More Dorms close to the heart of campus (where could these go?)
4.) Bringing back traditions like the Lascivious Costume Ball, maybe starting new traditions? (How about a May Ball on the Quads a few weeks before the end of the Spring Quarter? What about a "Senior Class Day" for the seniors before graduation? Invite an engaging speaker - someone like Tina Fey? - to speak just to the senior class.)
5.) An expanded Pub in Ida Noyes (maybe move the Maroon elsewhere?). Also, 21+ to drink is fine, but let underclassmen in for food specials - Monday night wing night should be available to all!
6.) Any other ideas?</p>
<p>I believe a "Lascivious Costume Ball" was actually held this year. </p>
<p>When I was at grad school at Chicago we would actually go to the football games and other activities, but I must admit the most fun was all the different colloquia and seminars held every week in the various departments, now that was real entertainment.</p>
<p>To be fair, there are a lot of events going on, and I have the e-mails to prove them, but I think it would be nice to have something for the whole University community.</p>
<p>I will note that my absolutely idyllic four-year undergraduate experience included almost none of Cue7's wish list: no arts center, no student center whatsoever, no on-campus pub (although, in those days of an 18 drinking age, official alcohol flowed like water). The formal prom-type events were regarded as a joke, even by those who attended (a relatively small percentage of the student body). I only remember one, but that's because I had to talk a very drunk, very strong gay faculty member out of ravishing my best friend, which definitely made it memorable. (The guy had picked up my friend and had him slung over his shoulder, ready to take home. They were buddies, and members of the same secret society, but not like that.) We had a nifty class day, and I have practically no memory of it whatsoever, despite having a role in it; we were all pretty distracted. The colloquia, etc., idad mentions were far more important to me.</p>
<p>As for dorms, Yale and Harvard have three conditions that Chicago would not be able to replicate without enormous cost: (1) Most of their dorms have a wide range of housing options within a single building, so that there is a strong incentive to stick around to get the really nifty rooms. My housing improved meaningfully each year. (2) The off-campus options are less copious, less attractive, and at Harvard more rather than less expensive. (3) They both have a zillion dining halls, not just three.</p>
<p>Just having a bunch of centrally located dorms hardly guarantees vibrant campus life. See, e.g., Columbia.</p>
<p>JHS - very good points. Just building more dorms won't help the situation, and I think the other items on my wish list hold more importance. The college system at Yale is a huge reason why so many Yale alums love their experience, but Chicago and most other schools cannot replicate that because of cost. </p>
<p>So, I think building the other more affordable options would serve the U of C well. Expanding the pub, finishing the arts center, and expanding or moving the Reynolds Club are all manageable options. </p>
<p>Also, to respond to the comparison to Columbia, I think, in comparison to Chicago's counterpart in nyc, many U of C students have more of a desire to be part of a more cohesive college community. From my time at Chicago, all the big campus events, like Blues and Ribs or scav hunt or whatever all saw great attendance. Monday night wing night was very well attended, and friends from other colleges would visit and remark how the entire college seemed to be at one place at one time. The main attractions of nyc are just closer to Columbia students, or at least Columbia undergrads seem more predisposed to independence and separating themselves from college life. </p>
<p>I think Chicago has a base of enthusiasm they can expand upon in the coming years. The colloquia, seminars, talks, etc. are all there, but the other areas could be improved.</p>
<p>Final note - JHS, great point about how attractive rooms for upperclassmen entice lowerclassmen to stay in the dormitories. On this matter, do you think Chicago would benefit from perhaps building a few more amenable dorms for say, strictly third and fourth years? It could allow students to make new friends while keeping old ones from their past college houses, and compel more upperclassmen to stay right on campus. Thoughts?</p>
<p>As I've written before, I think this is a really tough question. Hyde Park is a pretty delicate ecosystem; I don't know that sucking a couple thousand students out of it wouldn't do some serious damage. If that happened, Chicago would be a much less pleasant place, even if the students had nifty dorms to cower in. </p>
<p>I sort of like the idea that it's not necessarily a great idea for a university to engage in residential real estate development and management if it doesn't have to. Other people are willing to put up the capital, guarantee the loans, fix the toilets, and kick out the deadbeats. So if it were up to me, I would continue to try to house almost everyone for two years, and leave the rest to the market. I would use university resources to create places and events on campus that would make it the focus of students' lives, even if they lived in an apartment five blocks away. Much more bang for the buck.</p>
<p>The arts center is clearly a good idea, and that's already happening. I don't know about a pub -- isn't that what Jimmy's effectively is? That's another think I might leave to the market. But the coffee shops and Doc Films seem to work really well for creating indigenous student culture. And, you know, the, um, Library. And more could be done to foster vibrant student organizations that would keep people engaged with one another.</p>
<p>JHS - I agree, building housing may not be the way to go, I was just brainstorming on that point. I also definitely think that the bulk of the resources need to be spent on making campus activities and events a centerpiece in the lives of undergrads. The arts center, maybe expanding doc films (so you don't have to wait in line forever to see a show), a bigger student center, etc. would all be key.</p>
<p>I'd be in favor of expanding the pub to all undergrads because I found that, at least in my Chicago experience, life as a student was somewhat bisected. The First and Second years generally lived in dorms, did the frat thing, went to a bunch of events, etc., and the third and fourth years lived off campus, went drinking at bars and kinda did their own thing. I was looking for ways to make the college experience a bit more cohesive, and I think having an all-inclusive college pub could help on that front. </p>
<p>As of now, because of the city of Chicago's draconian drinking laws, a lot of undergrad life is split between those who are 21+ and those who are not. UPenn, for example, does not have those sorts of problems. Finding ways to bridge the gap could be useful.</p>