<p>While many other schools are dealing with major budget cuts and problems Biddy has UW moving on the right track. I received a very upbeat letter from the head of one of the major schools on campus. Between this and other input the following seem to be happening:</p>
<p>In the last year only a handful of faculty (under 10) were lost to greener pastures
Donations are actually up from the prior year
The Madison Initiative will allow unprecedented new hiring in many areas
BM has brought new blood into key positions on campus including Provost and Admissions. They are currently working on an overhaul of the sometimes maligned advising for undergrads.
A new dorm wil virtually guarantee all freshman on campus housing if desired
Research money is flowing at all-time high levels and UW is competing well for it.</p>
<p>Of course all these advances could be reveresd if the citizens take out their anger on the current sttae admin and bring back the other party into control. I pray that does not happen as things are just recovering from the last times the Rs ran the state.</p>
<p>UW could currently house all freshmen if they wanted to and have had the capabilities to do so for almost 30 years since 1982. UW CHOOSES not to house all freshmen because they would rather house returning Sophomores and upperclassmen which causes an artificial shortage of housing allowing administrators to parade “homeless” freshmen every year in an attempt to demonstrate NEED for new dorms. Now they are going to get the new dorm at a ridiculous cost. </p>
<p>I’m a UW fan and always have been. If they want new buildings, great. Build new buildings. I just wish people would stop drinking the housing Kool-Aid and encourage such an outstanding institution to spend student and tax payer money (or both depending on the project) on more pressing needs.</p>
<p>You are wrong on so many counts.
UW does choose to allow some upperclass students to live in dorms as they provide some age and experience diversity in the dorms. Many also serve as RAs–did you deduct RA rooms out? You also have transfers who want to live in the dorms before going out into the market. For UW it is and educational policy choice which they have the right to make. They think freshman only dorms are not a good way to go. I’m fine with that. They also offer classes and other important university services in the dorms.<br>
I suggest you read the publication on UW dorms advantages for students.</p>
<p>They are spending ZERO tax dollars on dorms and as they do not require anyone to live in dorms they are not forcing any student to spend their money on dorms either. The dorms are financed through revenue bonds that are paid through student room charges. It’s an open and free market–just like America wants. UW housing rates are among the lowest of similar schools in the country. The cost of the dorm is hardly ridiculous. If yoyu want ridiculous see what Yale and Princeton and Michigan are spending per bed for new dorms. UW is spending half or less.</p>
<p>“For UW it is and educational policy choice which they have the right to make. They think freshman only dorms are not a good way to go. I’m fine with that.”</p>
<p>Scout’s point still stands, and you just reinforced it. I usually agree with you on here, Barrons, but it’s still incredibly deceitful the way UW Housing has continued to plea for more student housing “because they can’t house all of the freshman.” They are making a conscious choice. THAT is the point Scout was making. Correct me if I’m wrong.</p>
<p>As a student who would love to utilize the green space on Lakeshore where they are building a new, unnecessary dorm, it does affect me that they make the choice to house upperclassmen, who don’t need to live in the dorms, lie to legislators and the public, and then get their way, taking away the little space we have on the actual campus for outdoor recreation.</p>
<p>Moreover, it’s the tactics that are infuriating. So much about housing seems deceitful. I was a first-generation student, we had no idea there were options when I was signing. I ended up living in a horrible, crumbling dorm, with cockroaches and vomit in the bathrooms every morning–little did I know I could have lived in a private residence hall, paid less, and had a better experience. They made it seem like I didn’t have a choice and actually warned of the “dangers” of private housing. </p>
<p>That was a longer rant than I intended, but even other HF friends of mine agree. Housing comes off as pretty sketchy in most of one’s interactions with them.</p>
<p>How common is it for university dormitories to be able to house soph’s, junior etc…? I suspect it is common. Are all the residential college otions only for freshman? If one assumes housing more than just freshman is a good thing, then building another dorm to guarantee freshman rooms sounds like a good idea.</p>
<p>CC had posts a while ago where the mention of off campus landlords campaigned against more dorm housing was made. Dorms should be available for any undergrad, not just freshmen. The plans for lakeshore housing look good, the worst thing that happened in that area was the humongous boathouse that replaced the old one. There are some interesting supply and demand issues- back in the early 1970’s one tower of Witte was for grad students and there weren’t as many close to campus apt buildings. Currently there seems to be a culture of moving out of the dorms after freshman, or at least sophomore year- but that doesn’t mean students should be forced to leave dorm life.</p>
<p>Basically Steve Brown–owner of lucky and former owner of other private dorms blocked the new dorms. The uW has the lowest bed to student ratio of any Big 10 school. These days parents want that dorm room for freshman and many do not understand the private dorms idea. I just want uW to be able to guarantee any freshman a dorm room that wants one without forcing the dorms to be freshman only. Yes we could swing back to the 70’s where students did not want any part of the dorms but that’s a chance they can risk as they always could make more singles, add grad students back in etc. I don’t think there was any lying and that’s a strong term. UW is working hard to bring the dorms up to national standards and should be commended for doing so while keeping costs very reasonable.</p>
<p>Is my math wrong? Seems correct and fairly simple and although I did not deduct RA rooms I’m pretty confident there aren’t 1,500 of them….
Is my OPINION that the cost is ridiculous wrong? My opinion is neither correct nor incorrect. By definition, it’s an opinion. I think the cost is ridiculous and unnecessary and though it remains to be seen, I’ll be shocked if the cost stays anywhere near advertised. Review the Union South project for more on that.
I made no statement regarding how the dorm project was being paid for. I simply suggested that student and taxpayer money could be spent in more appropriate ways.
Am I wrong that UW, through matters of policy that you describe in your own post, CHOOSES to not provide housing to all first-year students? It seems to me that allowing transfers, upperclassmen and preferring not establish more freshman only dorms are all choices made by administration. Maybe I am wrong on that one too.
The UW CAN guarantee freshmen housing without making freshmen only dorms. They will need to modify the manner in which they do housing assignments but the beds are there. They don’t NEED more to simply house freshmen. </p>
<p>Look, I’m not opposed to new dorms. I think the UW housing stock needs to be upgraded in order to compete with other top-notch universities. I think replacing what’s already there is more important than adding more but whatever. I’m just tired of hearing the little lost freshmen argument. If UW wants more dorms so they can house more of their population for whatever reason, fine. Say you want to build more dorms so that you can serve more of your population. Just give the “we HAVE to have more housing because poor freshmen are left out every single year” song and dance routine a rest. It’s getting kind of pathetic and anyone being even remotely objective should be able to see that the freshmen are being intentionally left out of the game so that they can be used as leverage in the fight for more dorms. Those of us that support the UW deserve to be regarded as more intelligent than that and anyone who buys into that argument and perpetuates it needs a new soap box and a head check.</p>
<p>If private housing can take up the slack, then there is no reason to build a new dorm. The only reason is to avoid competition. If they can build enough dorms to house all the freshmen and a good percentage of the upper classmen, then UW can make it mandatory for freshmen to live in the dorms. At that point, they can drop the quality of the dorms while still keeping the price high. Freshmen would not have the option to go to cheaper higher quality private housing.</p>
<p>Note: It would be very bad PR to force upper classmen out of the dorms.</p>
<p>Then why have University housing at all? Let the private market house all the students. The market has already spoken and a number of private dorms have high vacancy rates. As Barrons stated, local owners effectively stopped new dorm const for some time. Who’s avoiding competition?</p>
<p>Tax dollars shouldn’t be used to compete against private business if private business is meeting the need.</p>
<p>It could be cheaper for the University to lease the private buildings than to build it themselves. A high vacancy rate for private housing could mean either: 1) student housing is overbuilt (in which case, why build more); or 2) Private student housing is “premium”, and kids are not willing to pay for it. If the latter, then the private housing will eventually downgrade the buildings to be competitive.</p>
<p>Just because a University “wants” to control its own building doesn’t mean it is prudent expenditure of public funds.</p>
<p>OperaDad–what about no state funds are used for UW dorms do you not understand? They dorms are completely self-funded by revenues from room and board. As a matter of fact the state came in and STOLE some of the maintenance reserves the dorms had accumulated for future renovations. The University believes having their own dorms allows them to provide important educational functions as well as more control over the behavior of students. That’s an educational decision and should be made by the educators.</p>