Proposal for the MIT Residence System of the Optimizers Team

Contents:

I. Executive Summary
II. Introduction
III. Design Concepts
    A. Easing the Transition from High School to College for Freshmen
    B. Integrating All Freshmen on Campus
    C. Integrating the New Dormitory into the Residential System
    D. Sustaining FSILGs
    E. Orientation/Rush Schedule
    F. Returning Students
    G. Graduate Students
    H. Dining
    I. Faculty-Student Interaction
    J. Class Spirit
    K. Promote a Sense of Belonging to the MIT Community:
IV.Conclusion/Next Step

Presentation Graphics

I. Executive Summary

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology encompasses a wide variety of people: distinguished professors and faculty dedicated administrators, successful alumni and passionate students. The general goal of this proposal is to promote the unity of the MIT community using various educational, social and awareness programs, while taking heed of the current traditions and values that work. This redesign project is not limited to any one area of the MIT community; rather it aims for a positive makeover of nearly every aspect of Residential Life.

After assessing the problems that the MIT community has The Optimizers propose the following:

  • Integrate the entire freshmen community into the overall community of faculty, staff, alumni and upperclassmen
  • Sustain the FSILGs
  • Foster and promote faculty and student interactions
  • Develop a sense of overall MIT community

    The Optimizers expect that through the terms of these goals the MIT residential system will be vastly improved and it will provide for a sense of overall community.
                Top

    II. Introduction

    Since the Lewis Committee's Report in 1949 called for housing of the community on campus, MIT has been an organic and dynamic environment in its approach to housing. The latest in this tradition saw President Charles Vest proclaim in the summer of 1998 that all freshmen will be housed on campus beginning in the year 2001. This decision got the ball rolling, and currently the entire MIT residential system is up for the first major redesign in approximately 40 years. This redesign project is not limited to any one area of the MIT community; rather it aims for a positive makeover of nearly every aspect of Residential Life. The committee in charge of this significant project, the Steering Committee, has given faculty, staff, parents, alumni and especially students the unique opportunity to become actively involved in this process.

    Our team has designed a proposal that will promote the unity of the MIT community using various educational, social and awareness programs, while taking heed of the current tradition and values that work. Having this general purpose in mind, it is necessary to delineate the problems and needs of this community that is being redesigned. In order to better grasp the problems facing the MIT community, an exhaustive review of the cross section of the university was conducted. From these discussions several problems and needs emerged as follows:

  • Transition of freshmen from high school to college
  • Integrating all freshmen into the MIT community
  • Integrating the new dorm into the residential system
  • Sustaining FSILGs
  • Structuring orientation
  • Inadequate dining facilities
  • Faculty/Student interactions
  • Lack of class spirit
  • Lack of unity throughout MIT community
                Top

    III. Design Concepts

    As MIT progresses into the twentieth century it must embrace change, innovation, and new ideas without losing its fundamental traditions and values. This idea holds true not only for the ground-breaking research that defines this institution, but also for the residential system which houses the future of this university: its students.

    One of MIT's greatest weaknesses, in regards to residential life, is the lack of unity on campus. However, one of MIT's greatest strengths is the individuality and plethora of options that each student has. Therefore, the goal of this proposal is to describe a way to promote unity in the MIT community without sacrificing MIT's intrinsic tradition of choice. This goal is one that may seem too ideal to become a practical solution, but through subtle yet powerful changes, and innovative additions in conjunction with cooperation on all levels, it is not only possible, but also probable. The details of this proposal are outlined in the following sections; it is necessary to keep in mind that these elements all promote the aforementioned goal and are inherently consistent with this main idea.
                Top

    A. Easing the Transition from High School to College for Freshmen

    The first step in the process of creating a unified community is to make sure that the new people joining the community are excited to join with as little fear as possible. The new people in this MIT community are largely the freshmen that join every year. To ensure to some level of certainty that they have the tools to integrate themselves into the community there are several measures that the institution must take. In recent years the development of pre-orientation programs have allowed freshmen the opportunity to interact on an intimate level with others who share similar hopes and fears about college life. In addition, they get the chance to interact closely with upperclassmen, faculty and administration. These programs have been highly successful; expanding them to include more freshmen will virtually guarantee them a greater sense of belonging to the community as a whole.

    The new pre-orientations will be similar to those offered at the University of Maine, in that they will be described as wilderness orientations. At least three to five upperclassmen and at least one faculty/staff member will lead a moderately sized group of students, numbering approximately thirty to forty. These new programs will be held at the same time as the Freshman Leadership Program, the Freshman Service Program, and the Discovering Ocean Engineering Program. In time, prospective students will have a wide array of options among these different pre-orientation programs. The wilderness orientations could include but are in no way limited to canoeing trips, hiking/camping trips, rock-climbing trips and potentially spelunking trips. These types of activities build bonds between the students involved because they necessitate interaction and teamwork. Students will be allowed to rank order their choice of pre-orientation programs and almost definitely be placed in one of them, no matter the number enrolled.

    To further ease the transition from high school to college, freshmen will be assigned to an undergraduate resident advisor (RA) who would live in close proximity to the freshmen. The details of this RA system will be further explained in the section entitled "Integrating All Freshmen into Dormitories."
                Top

    B. Integrating All Freshmen on Campus

    Through a housing lottery system similar to the current one, and after dormitory rush, all freshmen will be housed in one of the 11 residence halls. To ease the transition from high school to college, freshmen should be grouped in clusters of nine or ten, each led by an undergraduate RA, most likely a junior or senior. This RA would, in a sense, serve as a "big sister/brother" to the freshmen, advising them both academically and non-academically and making sure that they are managing their first year well. Responsibilities would include scheduling regular meetings with the group of advisees, referring them to other sources if the student needs more help or information, attending regular training sessions throughout the year, and potentially organizing social activities with the advisees. RAs will be financially compensated for the time and effort by having their housing bills discounted. They can provide the close, intimate support that perhaps a graduate resident tutor would not be able to provide because RAs can handle small, everyday situations that they themselves have come across only two or three years ago. Through the use of RAs common problems may be detected and corrected weeks in advance.

    In an intimate group setting as such, freshmen will be able to find support in as well as grow closer to others in their cluster, which, on a small scale, fosters a sense of class unity. Ideally, class unity and spirit can be accomplished through housing all freshmen together in close quarters. However, MIT cannot physically and architecturally satisfy that objective, and segregating all freshmen from upperclassmen would strip away the long-cherished value of intermingling among the four classes. There are physical limitations in terms of distance, and distributions of rooms are different for every dorm. Baker House, for example, has distinct sections where only freshmen are housed in triples and quads, and McCormick has a separate section of singles exclusively for upperclassmen.

    Since every dormitory has a unique setup, every freshman cluster will have to be arranged according to the individual residence hall, whether that is suites, entries, floors, or wings. This allows minimal disruption of highly cherished values such as dormitory personalities and accessibility of upperclassmen, but students will still maintain a certain degree of choice, in keeping with MIT tradition. Overall, benefits along the way would include noise reduction in upperclassmen areas, class unity, and upperclassmen interaction.

    As yet another part of integrating freshmen into the college community, the continuation of the Freshman Advisor Seminar (FAS) program is vital in order to foster a connection between incoming freshmen and the faculty. However, these seminars should not only be offered during the first semester but during the second semester as well. If these second-term FAS courses are worth only three credits and meet every other week, they would complement the freshmen's schedules much more realistically than they currently do. Extending seminars for the entire year is important because it allows even more time for the student to get to know a faculty member and it allows freshmen the chance to converse with other freshmen with whom they may not normally socialize. These qualities of the freshmen advising seminars make freshmen more aware of the opportunities at MIT and beyond.
                Top

    C. Integrating the New Dormitory into the Residential System

    The new dormitory scheduled to open in August of 2001 will provide living space to approximately 320 undergraduate students and will be included in the housing lottery just like any other dorm. There will be five floors, two of which will be designated as freshman floors, and the other three for upperclassmen. For every cluster of approximately ten freshmen, an RA living on the same floor will be assigned, which is consistent with the rest of the residential system.

    One possible problem that MIT might encounter in the year 2001 would be providing enough incentive for upperclassmen to move into the new residence hall. Sure enough, the brand new facilities and comfortable living arrangements will attract a reasonable number of returning students. Less crowding, new dining hall, lower student-to-bathroom ratio, social dorm interaction, and possibly a new Athena cluster are all favorable aspects of this new addition to the MIT dorms. If, however, there is still a lack of upperclassmen, MIT could reduce the housing bill cost the first year, either by percentage or a flat rate, as an added incentive.

    Out of all the residence halls, the setup of this new dorm with entire floors of freshmen lends itself most easily to fostering a sense of class unity. In addition, being the only one with that large of a scale of freshmen living together, it may appeal to certain students and therefore add to the abundance of options that the Institute affords its people.
                Top

    D. Sustaining FSILGs

    Since a significant part of the FSILG community will be shifted to residential halls, there should be changes to the current FSILG system that will facilitate the three to five year transition period, at the end of which FSILGs will once again be financially stable. These changes would be made to rush week, individual pledging programs, and allocation of funds by MIT.

    Keeping Fall Rush:
    Like many other chapters of various FSILGs throughout the country, rush occurs in the fall of freshman year. Appealing to newly arrived freshmen over a period of one week will generate much better results than over a term or later in their college years. Freshmen are most willing to meet people at the beginning of the fall semester, and students tend to become too preoccupied with work during the term to worry about becoming part of an independent living group. If rush is not presented as an option at the very beginning of the college career, students, especially ones at MIT, will settle and never realize what opportunities lie out there for them. They end up never taking advantage of the closeness and support that an FSILG provides.

    The premium way to keep the best of both worlds is to have non-residential rush for first-year students. New pledges can benefit from utilizing the full year to meet the various members of the house and complete the pledge program. Though they would not pay for house bills, all pledges would be expected to pay for nationals, similar to how the sororities function on campus. By paying for their own membership fee, the pledges would help FSILGs offset their bill to their nationals.

    The final step to completion of the pledge program is moving into each respective house at the beginning of sophomore year. If a pledge decides after one year that (s)he still wants to be part of an FSILG, (s)he will be initiated upon completion of the pledge program. Any pledges that do not move into FSILGs will either have to depledge or continue paying dues as a pledge until they live in the house. This does not affect sorority houses though, as they are too small to accommodate all sisters. Requiring all pledges to move in their sophomore year will make sure that the number of students housed on campus is manageable and that there will be open slots for incoming freshmen every year.

    Houses would also be expected to rush harder than usual to account for both the fact that each house will mainly be supported financially by three classes instead of four from now on and that there will be potential depledges throughout the year. During this period of transition of three to five years, each individual FSILG will have to determine how best to manage the number of pledges versus brothers. In the long run, each class will be larger in number than it currently is.

    Allocation of funds:
    All throughout the transition period, MIT should grant subsidies to each FSILG to help offset some of the financial losses experienced by the houses. Without support from MIT, the FSILG community will not be able to survive; the result could eventually be gradual dying out of some fraternities and independent living groups. Each year, the FSILG will submit an application and financial report to MIT to request money. The amount that each house will receive from MIT should be determined by the number of freshmen that would have lived in the house, and the previous house bill. At the end of the school year in 2001, each house will file their house bill and how much each member paid for the house in the past five years. MIT will average the five and pay each fraternity accordingly to offset all potential losses. The allocation of funds would be short term, as the transition period for all houses will last only a couple of years.

    Spring rush:
    Spring rush should be open to any house that chooses to rush again in the spring. The best time to conduct this rush would be during IAP. Not all houses would be obligated to participate, only those houses that find it necessary to rush in order to sustain.


                Top

    E. Orientation/Rush Schedule

    Orientation will basically be the same as previous years, starting and end on the same days, with some slight structural modifications:

    1) Since freshmen will be obligated to live on campus, rush must start solely with dormitory rush. In previous years, dormitory rush has been drowned out by the excitement of FSILG rush; therefore, not many freshmen have the opportunity to make a well-informed decision about their residence hall for the following year. To avoid that problem, an entire day must be devoted to visiting the different residence halls only; FSILG rush will start the next day.
    2) FSILG rush will be the same as previous years, but the number of days until FSILGs give a bid to a given freshman will be extended by one day. This gives the chance to both the prospective pledges and the brothers of a house to get to know each other better and to make more accurate judgments when offering and accepting bids. Increasing this period decreases the chances of houses giving bids to the "wrong" freshmen, and freshmen rashly accepting bids from potentially "wrong" houses. Certainty in choosing FSILGs will ultimately ensure survival of the house.
    3) The dorm lottery will occur at the end of the week, after bids are given out and after most bids have been accepted. This gives freshmen and new pledges an opportunity to live together with new friends that they may have acquired during rush.
    4) In order to maintain the same number of days for Orientation and to compensate for the additional rush day, "Dead Week" will be one day shorter.

                Top

    F. Returning Students

    This proposal does not recommend that any changes be made to the current methods for housing returning students; dormitories should continue with their existing policies and procedures regarding non-first year students. This allows the dormitories to preserve their identities and the sovereignty of their internal governments. In the new dormitory, whichever body is initially in charge will be responsible for deciding how to house returning students that choose to move into the new dormitory.

    G. Graduate Students

    This proposal enthusiastically supports the current plans for the construction of a new residence hall for graduate students, planned for completion in 2002. It is well recognized that there is not currently enough graduate housing; increasing the availability of graduate housing has been one of MIT's goals for a long time.
                Top

    H. Dining

    Over the years, the Institute has conducted many studies on dining that come to a very similar conclusion: "the dining system at MIT has always been viewed as an important part of the educational experience of the student." (Institute Dining Review Final Report). Dining should not be merely viewed in terms of physical health; the social and educational aspects of dining should be considered along with the nutritional. Currently, the system of dining does not allow for the building of communities because it is far too dependent on "operational and financial issues" (Institute Dining Review Final Report).

    The Institute Dining Review Committee's Final Report states that residential dining must be greatly strengthened in order for dining to support "the educational mission of MIT and provide opportunities for development of socialization, citizenship, and leadership skills." The recommendation by the committee addresses the issue of building a residential community through dining. This is in perfect accordance with the main goal of this proposal, which is to promote unity in the MIT community while keeping the best traditions and values of the current system alive. The dining system that would optimize interaction of all facets of the MIT community would be one in which the emphasis would be placed on residence hall dining; that is what both this proposal and the Institute Dining Review Committee's final report explicitly state.

    "Gracious, pleasant, and relaxed dining in a house dining room can be a significant part of the educational experience. Very few other occasions can so profitably be utilized for the interchange of ideas and information between students and between students and elders. At present, at hurried and noisy meals, this benefit is not being realized. This is a serious loss. In an atmosphere of pleasant communal dining, great strides can be taken toward creation of patterns of happy, productive, and generous life." (Institute Dining Review Final Report)

    The Committee on Student Housing noted this in 1956, and it still very much applies to the MIT community today.

    In order to remedy this problem, all residence dining hall facilities should be reopened, as recommended by the Food Service Working Group in the Institute Dining Review final report. Such an increase in the availability of nearby dining to students would make it easier for students to eat as parts of communities and give students more opportunities to grow and learn from his/her surrounding community. In addition to being able to eat in one's own residence hall, students will have the option of eating in many other distinct communities. This option is ideal because it allows students the choice of where to eat, and it guarantees a social, educational, nutritional, and, preferably, tasteful experience.

    Students, with this proposed system, would not only be able to dine in a more intellectually stimulating and social setting, but they would also have the potential to dine more frequently with faculty. With the faculty representative system in place, whereby approximately 26 faculty are assigned to each residence hall, faculty could get in greater touch with the students by voluntarily dining with them at any point of the year. This idea would not only nurture a better dining atmosphere, but it would also increase the amount of faculty/student interaction and inevitably enhance the educational experience of the student body.
                Top

    I. Faculty-Student Interaction

    Finally, MIT should address the problems that lie within the academic aspect of college, mainly, faculty-student interaction. Under the current system, there are not enough opportunities for students to meet members of faculty, especially those outside of their major. One solution would be to introduce a program whereby one faculty member from each department will assigned to each dormitory to become part of that dormitory's community. Small dormitories such as Bexley and Random can be considered one dorm community, and the individual FSILGs can be grouped into communities of similar size: East Boston, West Boston, and Cambridge. These faculty members would each make a very small portion of their time available for interacting with residents in their designated dormitory, in such ways as setting aside an extra office hour for members of their designated dormitory, attending study breaks or eating dinners in the dormitory. Faculty mixers and dinners in dormitories would be extended to take place in all dormitories; in dormitories where faculty mixers and dinners already exist, they would be preserved.

    An immediate link between the two communities would be formed if the Institute could introduce a system in which students and faculty could informally meet and socialize on a daily basis. Each faculty member would, on his assigned day depending on his/her department, meet potentially seven or eight undergraduates on a rotating cycle of lunch meetings. These would be open to all students, but announced primarily to the dorms to which the faculty member is assigned. The following figure explains in more detail how this would work:

    Schedule	Sun	Mon	Tues	Wed	Thurs	Fri	Sat
    Day 	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
    Course #	--	8	9	10	11	12	--
    
    In all, the aforementioned faculty would actually only host about 3 informal lunch meetings per semester. The idea behind this is that everyone has to set aside some time each day to eat lunch. Informal lunch meetings in a dining hall would allow students and faculty members to get to know each other in a relaxed setting without going out of their way or disrupting the rest of their daily schedule. Students would be able to attend these meetings at their leisure, but they would sign up ahead of time to avoid the possibility of having lunch sessions with no attendees.

    Faculty assigned to the dorm, and their families, would be invited on, and encouraged to attend, dorm field trips such as apple picking, skiing, and the like. The cost for the faculty member attending, and potentially their family, would be subsidized by the dorm hosting the field trip. Again, this would permit faculty and students to get to know one another better in a more relaxed environment. They would also find they have common interests outside of academia, which is an important realization in order for well- balanced relationships between the faculty and students. In addition to having faculty attend dorm trips, the faculty members in general could be encouraged to host field trips of their own. The faculty-sponsored field trips would be to points of interest in that faculty member's field. As well as providing a good means of meeting students, this also provides hands-on insight into particular fields. Implementing this idea will aid in recruiting students to undersubscribed majors.
                Top

    J. Class Spirit

    Fostering a sense of class spirit is yet another beneficial feature of a college community. In addition to the loyalty one would have to a specific living group, feelings of class pride can only shed a positive light on the "MIT experience." Pre-orientation programs and freshman clusters are only freshly planted seeds to bring freshmen into a world of camaraderie and friendship. Preserving existing programs, such as Freshmen Advising Seminars, Concourse, ISP, and ESG, is a crucial step in bringing each class closer together. MIT should encourage class events planned by each class council such as formals, trips, and other social events.

    Instilling this sense of pride in such a divided community will indeed be difficult at first, but through an intricate web of connections and acquaintances within each class, a more dynamic community will eventually, though gradually, result.
                Top

    K. Promote a Sense of Belonging to the MIT Community:

    The MIT community is one that constitutes a wide array of backgrounds, personalities, ages, and most other categories. In a community as diverse as this one, it may at times seem daunting to acquire a sense of belonging to this community as a whole, and not just to a small faction. The best way to greater foster this sense of togetherness and cohesiveness in the MIT community, taking the physical limitations under consideration, is to attack this problem programmatically.

    One major way to cause the community to come together is to increase large event funding for campus wide events. Currently, MIT devotes $50,000 annually to large event funding; this includes both the fall and spring term and all events occurring during this time. The spring term has seen the allocation of $30,100 to the spring fling and $1,900 to MIT Live. We need to increase this amount. Campus wide events bring all facets of MIT together, including undergraduate students, graduate students, faculty, staff, alumni and in some instances parents. In order for events such as the Fall and Spring Flings to become more successful, the events need to have a premier band that will have a large drawing power; this requires money. Funding for these student activities needs to come from the institute but also the students themselves. One way to receive money from students is to charge a student activities fee in the amount of $10 per semester to all undergraduate students. This would create a sum of approximately $80,000 per year; if the institute were to match that amount and add that to the current $200,000 allocation to student activities there would be a total of $360,000 towards all student activities. This would allow the institute to give more money to large event funding and all other student activities.

    A promotion of the Fine Arts is something that has the potential to bring the entire community together. Events such as a capella concerts in actual performance areas, choral performances, and other musical performances would give faculty and students a reason to interact. In addition, bringing in highly talented professional performers, such as world class pianists and violinists, will cause a stir on campus. Universities such as Yale and Harvard have done this very successfully, and with such a well-informed population at MIT there is every reason to believe that the results will be the same at this institution. Another way to promote a sense of belonging is to have campus wide barbecues in fair weather along. All of this will be made possible by inducing an effort on both the students and administration's part to supply more funding.

    A further sense of undergraduate community is inherent to the freshman pre-orientations and "cluster" programs that are elements of our design. By creating a strong freshman class, that feeling of togetherness will after a period of three to five years spread throughout the entire undergraduate group. The resident advisors that are present will have meetings and training programs that will bring all the unique dormitories together through these representatives. The faculty/student interaction proposals will bring the students and faculty closer together, thereby further connecting the community.

    The main element in bringing the MIT community together is through all of the programs and initiatives that are described above. When all these ideas are put in motion, the MIT community will gradually but powerfully become a cohesive unit of which the members will be proud to be a part.
                Top

    IV. Conclusion/Next Step

    This proposal is one of interwoven programs that serve not for one purpose but for many. To see the visual representation of this idea please see table in Appendix C. This graph is an overview of the proposal and it shows which programs (on the x-axis) help to solve which problems (y-axis). As one can see, the network of programs creates a web through which the community is deeply connected. This connection is what will create the type of unified community that would benefit the students, the faculty and the Institution itself. Students will leave the institution with a feeling of belonging and could possibly return that feeling in the manner of alumni funds and donations.

    In order to get this system up and running there are many programs and ideas that will start well before the new dorm is built and the freshmen move on campus in the 2001-02 school year. (please see Appendix D: Timeline). Starting in the fall of 1999 the Residential Advisor selection process followed by training will occur. In addition, Faculty will be polled and requests for faculty to join the dormitory communities will go out. By the end of the year, the faculty system must be organized. The following year, 2000-2001, the new pre-orientation programs will begin. The freshman-clustering program will start, with the freshmen that live on campus, and the RAs will take effect. In addition, most if not all the faculty programs outlined will commence and FSILGs will apply for Institute subsidies. This year will be one of the most important in the implementation because all of the major programs will begin. The final step of the implementation procedure will be the incorporation of all freshmen on campus and the introduction of the new dorm. This will also begin the first year of the new Rush and Pledge programs.

    Any time that a change is in order all parties involved must do the necessary work to ensure success. The subtle changes that are introduced by this proposal, coupled with the more aggressive ideas, will create an intriguingly powerful system of programs that will undoubtedly shape MIT's residential life into a more inviting and endearing community.
                Top