NU’s residential college system: isolating, not unifying
There are two kinds of people that live in the Public Affairs Residential College: the few who genuinely wanted to live here to discuss public affairs and everybody else.
As the name states, the Public Affairs Residential College, or PARC to those few who have heard of it, is a residential college. About 113 people live there each year, and I say about 113 because in my time living in PARC, I’ve seen empty rooms, people moving out and many more expressing the fervent desire to move out.
So why do so few people want to live here? Apart from the small rooms and even smaller bathrooms, PARC is an okay place to live; PARC has a prime location right by downtown Evanston (for those who have never heard of PARC, it’s across from the arch and next to Shepard and Allison), has a huge flat-screen TV with TiVo, and offers suite-style living, which is definitely a plus. Sure, no one really seems to know what exactly the ‘Public Affairs’ part of our name has to do with, well, anything, but people seem to enjoy it here.
Yet PARC fails, not as a dorm, but as a residential college. With a theme as unfocused as Public Affairs (I still haven’t found someone in my dorm who defines that less broadly than current events) but not so broad as Willard and Shepard (the multi-thematic dorms), PARC is left even further behind in a system that is losing its relevance to the Northwestern student. Instead of a system serving students and providing them with a forum to express their interests, residential colleges have turned into plain dorms that happen to be held back by a theme. So instead of randomly assigning themes, every dorm on campus should have the benefits of a residential college (an RC), without the label or a theme.
The advantages of the residential college system have slowly been diminished over the years. According to the housing Web site, “Northwestern’s residential college system was developed in the early 1970s in response to a report by a faculty committee that urged the formation of smaller intellectual communities within the larger University community.” In response, five RCs were created, of which only two have remained the same. My own RC, PARC, is the youngest by a long shot, created in 1991, and housed in what used to be the Ayers College of Commerce and Industry.
The RC system was created decades ago, at a time when social networking sites like Facebook were nonexistent and there were fewer ways on campus to meet people (Norris was built in 1972, so it was new when the first RCs opened) and they have since become unnecessary.
On a campus where almost everyone seems to have at least six different areas of interest, it seems silly to pigeonhole students into just one area. Themed residential colleges were originally meant, not just for people majoring in those areas, but for anyone with extracurricular interest in them. Yet for most, the theme either gets lost in the dorm or the same kids end up there each year, which earns a dorm a bad or antisocial reputation. And with the plethora of clubs that Northwestern offers — anywhere from the Triathlon Club to the Outing Club — students can now join as many groups as they like, eliminating the need to live in a dorm geared towards one theme.
In addition to fencing people in with themes, the RC system also fails in another extremely important aspect: A significant number of people who were placed in residential colleges generally don’t want to live there in the first place. Neither my roommate nor I placed PARC in our top five; but the way the numbers were crunched this year, it seemed as though only a lucky few got their first housing choice, and everyone else was left to the mercy of Undergraduate Housing. A snafu like this hardly raises morale in a dorm where few are even enthusiastic in the first place.
Weinberg junior Thomas Rousse, the president of Chapin, the Humanities Residential College, said that tutorials at his RC, which is humanities-themed, have been declining. “Residential colleges were more successful in the ‘90s in general,” he says. “There’s a general trend of students moving off-campus.” This quarter PARC is offering two tutorials in conjunction with CRC – though none were planned here in the fall, nor are any planned for the spring. And while other residential colleges might hold events more often, without a standardized system of how many events each RC has, the system fails to provide each student currently living in a residential college the same experience.
Communication sophomore Mike Medford, the president of Shepard Residential College, explained that the benefits of the RC system are numerous in a multi-thematic RC. “The purpose of the residential college is for people who didn’t want to be grouped in a specific area of study … to be part of two communities,” he says, referencing the larger Northwestern community and the smaller RC community. This is the aspect of PARC that appeals most to me: the community of friends that naturally arises.
Of course, residential colleges offer things to students that a regular dorm, even a small dorm, cannot. In a residential college, Rousse said, “Everyone knows everyone else in a 70-person residence,” and that creates a community identity. And residential colleges pass on traditions; Willard and Shepard have a rivalry that’s been going on for decades. And an RC can help connect a student with more faculty, especially the master of that RC, and have faculty be a part of their day-to-day life. So why can’t all dorms offer these benefits of an RC, without isolating themselves into one theme?
Yale University’s Residential College system is campus-wide; each and every freshman is assigned to live in one of twelve of them. Normally, students remain a member of the same residential college throughout their time on-campus. The RCs don’t have a particular theme; they are just another community for support for students within a large campus. Let’s make Northwestern’s RC system the same way. Residential colleges can be a community within a larger community, offer extra faculty support and host events in Chicago: These all sound like benefits that every student should have. If Northwestern restructured its entire housing system to resemble Yale’s, all students would end up with the benefits of a residential college without the restrictions that a theme places on them — the best of both worlds.
Ultimately, I’m glad I was placed in a residential college. Living in PARC gave me great friendships – within the first few weeks of school, we all bonded over how much we didn’t want to live in PARC – and the irony of it is, most of my friends here plan on living here again next year. Let’s take that strength of the residential college system and apply it everywhere – a community that can thrive without a forced theme.
Full disclosure: Thomas Rousse has contributed to North by Northwestern.
| Print
Want to get out of your res college? Our housing guide shows you which dorms are best. Or you can return home.
I think that the problems Amanda addresses fail to look beyond her own narrow experience at her residential college. There are certainly ebbs and flows, and worthy criticisms, but to entirely neglect the students who absolutely love where they live misses a huge part of this discussion. As president of CRC (the Communications Residential College), I’ve absolutely loved living in a themed res college (though my major has little to do with communications in the traditional sense), and I can honestly say that if I had not been placed in this dorm, I would not be at Northwestern today.
Perhaps some research into VP for Student Affairs Bill Banis’ new Northwestern Residential Experience plan (that he presented last week)
would have been appropriate in guiding the closing note of this opinion piece. Amanda got it right in assessing the greatest value of the res college system as its sense of community, and the University has aimed to reach for this in more broadly themed residential communities in the future. However, to trivialize an entire institution based purely on a living situation in an unfortunately stigmatized dorm ignores a lot of good that other students have seen, and I hope this single opinion is taken with a grain of salt.
Nathalie
March 3, 2009 at 3:19 pm
This piece is fairly PARC-centered because it’s an opinion piece (it says so at the top!), and one primarily forms opinions from personal experience.
While res colleges continue to be great places to live, labeling the dorms by “common interest” results in stereotyping and nothing else.
RC Resident
March 3, 2009 at 3:52 pm
I have a friend who goes to Yale who loves their residential college system. I’d love to see something like that here.
Kat
March 3, 2009 at 5:46 pm
There are two kinds of people: the few who genuinely try to make the best out of the situations they are put in and then the rest who spend much of their time being bitter because life happened, so they didn’t get exactly what they wanted. I’m president of WRC (Hobart House), another RC who is unfortunately stigmatized. As a result of that, I have had to deal with residents who come in fuming about being placed in an all girls residence (or whatever their issues may be), but they’re usually able to step away from their elementary notions of getting whatever they want, and try to make the best of where they’ve been placed. Of course, there will always be those residents who refuse to even make an attempt at seeing the good (God forbid) in their RC, but I’m hoping you’re not one of them. Giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you’re not of ‘those’ residents, I’d suggest dropping some of that bitterness. You will be surprised by what a difference that’ll make.
Atiya
March 3, 2009 at 5:57 pm
The problem does not lie completely in the RC system as Amanda claims. The larger issue is that people aren’t being placed in dorms they list on their Top 5. The bad attitudes of people placed into RCs are the cause of the unfocused programming. As a former Exec Board member of PARC, I can testify that the largest obstacle was not the broad theme of PARC, but instead that people came into the dorm with a negative attitude and only bonded over that negativeness instead of taking advantages of the opportunities that PARC or any RC offers. Every community takes effort on the part of its residents and for the author to blame a system she has been a part of for fewer that two quarters is irresponsible. Before condemning RCs, take the effort to get involved. Lack of programming is not the fault of the system, it is the fault of the residents who, after not getting their first choice of dorm, both refuse to participate in activities and complain that there aren’t enough activities. Instead of trying to overhaul a system, the author would do better by making the effort to support the activities that her peers do put on in PARC. If individuals don’t make the effort to care, then programming and ultimately the RCs will fail, but not because of the system, because of people like the author who refuse to care.
Former PARC Exec Member
March 3, 2009 at 5:57 pm
I am an admitted student, and although I haven’t gotten to Northwestern yet, I like to read NBN to see what’s going on. In response to/agreement with “Former PARC Exec,” I’d like to say that the cost of my college education has been a source of enormous stress and concern for my family. If I’m going to pay $50,000 a year to go to Northwestern (which I will, as I didn’t qualify for aid) I want to know that I’m going to get one of my top 5 dorm choices. I’m not shelling out full tuition to make the best of a bad situation.
Sarah
March 3, 2009 at 10:06 pm
I think the criticisms of Amanda’s opinion are a little short-sided and reek of self-entitlement from personal experiences.
First, having spent an extra few semesters at school doesn’t make you wise old men. Pretending that being “veterans” of the institution does nothing to evaluate Amanda’s argument, but simply makes you come off as pompus at bet, and naive at worst. It is by no means irresponsible to criticize policies and policy-makers simply because the dissenter is younger or less experienced; what is irresponsible is taking a side without the facts, and by all accounts, it seems Amanda is well researched in the actual policies, as well as the cultural responses to these policies within the school.
I’m sure some of you have had great experiences. Congrats. Many have not, and to tell them that it’s their fault for not making the best of what’s around doesn’t solve the problem, but merely attempts to sweep it under the rug. When people are placed in living situations with themes they have no interest in, it puts them at a disadvantage by adding a factor for making friends contigent on participation. Oh, but Amanda’s only 18. When she becomes 19 or 20 like you all, I bet she will see the light and realize that she loves the largely irrelevant theme of her dorm. Yeah right.
I am all for expanding your horizons, taking classes in things you never thought you would be interested in, but forcing these themes on people in their living situations is too much. The answer doesn’t have to be Amanda’s solution, although it’s a perfectly acceptable one. Another course of action would be to keep some dorms theme-based for the themes that garner sufficient demand by people who actively want to be part of that living arrangement. The themes that clearly would not, such as Public Affairs, should be eliminated and replaced with other outlets to get involved, such as a Public Affairs Club, classes directed toward the field, etc. This way, if you don’t get your choice of a popular theme, the worst that happens is you are thrown into a plain old regular dorm, not made to endure at least a year of what you may believe is nonsense.
Nowhere have I seen Amanda attack her peers for getting involved and trying to make the most of the situation. Clearly Amanda has reached out to her dorm despite the drawbacks of the structure in place. Working well within the system is a sign of an efficient follower; trying to change the system for the better is a sign of a future leader. Well done Amanda.
Zach
March 3, 2009 at 10:12 pm
First off, I’d like to point out a factual error. PARC doesn’t have TiVo.
Now, as a member of PARC’s current exec board, I have mixed feelings about this article. I think we do a lot of public affairs related things in PARC. I agree that public affairs is a broad subject, but I think it can be loosely defined into the realm of public policy. It doesn’t really define what we talk about, just how we talk about it. Every issue comes back to public policy.
Now, regarding the “fervent desire to move out,” I don’t think there’s anyone here to blame but those who leave. For the ‘08-09 year, we a few more than 30 students return to PARC. That means over two thirds of the dorm is freshmen. With that majority, the identity of PARC is, in my mind, heavily defined by that group.
Finally, I think the programming of the RC system has been heavily misrepresented here. By no means is it the job of the dorm’s members or exec board to come up with tutorials. Seeing as they’re full credit classes, there needs to be a professor to teach it. I’ve taken two tutorials, and they are some of, if not the, best classes I’ve taken here at Northwestern.
I agree with the Former Exec member’s post above (though I’m not saying Amanda doesn’t care) that it isn’t a failing system. It’s the apathy towards the system that makes it fail.
Trevor Seela
March 4, 2009 at 2:46 am
Has anyone thought about the isolating nature of the Greek system at Northwestern?
Parent of 2012
March 4, 2009 at 10:11 am
As a former resident of PARC I have to disagree. PARC barely on my list (Sarah, you probably won’t get your top picks, especially if it includes Bobb and Allison, even if you, like everyone else, are paying 50 grand a year). However, the Res college system did bring us together. Everyone who lives in PARC pretty much agrees that our Master, Lane Fenrich, is awesome. Monday lunches with the fellows are great (I still go occasionally), and C&C is nice. My group of friends from PARC all returned their Sophomore year. We formed a bond (and took on other RCs in intramurals and snowball fights). Yeah, the facilities sucked, but what made PARC great was the people, brought together by our events.
AK
March 5, 2009 at 8:28 pm
CCS, the Cultural and Community Studies Residential College, has a size comprobable to that of PARC. However, CCS only provides enrichment by being themed but the residents are more easily able to explore the city!
Many of the current CCS freshmen did not choose to live here; however, after enjoying these past two quarters a majority of the freshmen want to return.
There is no way to generalize the res college experience. So many factors go into the mood of the overall living experience.
Overall, the res college experience is brilliant; regardless if it is themed or not. Not only do the students get to live in a community with a structured community, but also the students are able to learn about Chicago and its issues through different means.
CCS EXEC
March 9, 2009 at 9:15 pm
screw RC’s. GREEN HOUSE
kit
March 9, 2009 at 11:10 pm
this article is dead on. wish I had seen it when it came out last quarter so I could have shown all my friends in Res- they all agree with the sentiments that Amanda expresses.
dash
January 24, 2010 at 10:35 pm
this article is dead on. wish I had seen it when it came out last quarter so I could have shown all my friends in Res- they all agree with the sentiments that Amanda expresses.
dash
January 24, 2010 at 10:35 pm