Housing debacle sparks student anger

The College is exploring options for expanding the number of student rooms on campus in the wake of this year’s contentious super block process.

No final decisions have been made about where these new housing options would be, but the outcome may change where the 2010-2011 super blocks will be housed and the overall room draw process.

Administrators involved in the housing deliberations hope to finalize plans for next year by the time students return from spring break, according to Dean of Students Gus Jordan. By waiting to announce these new housing plans until after break, the College may hope to minimize any backlash that might occur in response, especially considering student reaction to the super block assignments for next year.

The super block process this year has been protracted and has inspired much debate, revolving around where the College preliminarily placed some super blocks.

Among the main targets of controversy are the assignment of the substance-free Potluck super block to Palmer House and the assignment of several quieter groups to the Mods.

Residential Life staff say that the process is being revisited because of disagreements over super block placement, and therefore staff were unable to comment on the assignments at this time.

Sasha Rivera ’12, who applied as the head of a potential Radio Theater super block, was one of several students belonging to groups not satisfied with the initial proposed assignment given by Residential Life.

“We decided not to take the super block we were offered, a seven-person mod,” wrote Rivera in an e-mail.

Not only did the assignment offer fewer residents than the 10 requested by Radio Theater, but the group was “concerned about our placement based on the Mods’ reputation for their ‘Mod-a-Palooza’ atmosphere that’s not really our scene.”

Residential Life responded to Rivera by insisting that, in Rivera’s words, “other ‘low-key’ super blocks had been placed in the Mods, that only one Mod would be available for open draw, and that they were trying to get away from that Mod-a-Palooza reputation.”

Although Residential Life is not yet offering official comments on motivations for the assignments, the speculated motivation of a top-down reform of the Middlebury culture by Residential Life has many students speaking out.

The awarding of Palmer House to the Potluck super block has become a prominent lightning rod for these speculations. Under Potluck, whose main mission is to host potluck dinners for students and the larger Middlebury community, Palmer would be a substance-free living space.

Daniel Chan ’11.5, leader of the Potluck super block, explained that he’s heard many “very positive [and] excited” reactions to the Potluck group.

Chan emphasized how Potluck’s mission of celebrating members of the Middlebury community through food is not at all “exclusive,” and instead seeks to “include not only a lot of students, but community members as well.”

Chan hopes that the diversity of the house — with students from many different ethnic backgrounds on campus — will add to the feel of this inclusive atmosphere and promote variety within the “celebration of food.”

This potentially significant change to the atmosphere of Palmer has angered many students, particularly the applicants for the Life Skills super block, who had hoped to be awarded the house instead.

In a series of e-mails to Residential Life Staff and leaders of the Potluck super block, Life Skills applicants expressed several concerns with the assignment of Palmer to the Potluck group.

Foremost, many Life Skills applicants argue that the change in the Palmer atmosphere would pose a significant setback to the Middlebury social scene. The Life Skills group claims that Palmer caters to a more diverse group of students than some of the other social houses, which are sometimes criticized for catering to more limited demographics of specific sports teams or member-only events. By making the house substance-free, Life Skills says Palmer would exclude a large percentage of the college community.

In specifically targeting the mission of the Potluck group, many Life Skills applicants claim that their ambitions would be better suited to pre-existing spaces. Substance-free housing already exists in the social house Xenia and in other substance-free halls on campus.

In addition, super block groups were required to submit the names of potential residents in their applications.

Whether or not Potluck has 30 formally committed individuals to completely fill Palmer has been called into question, while the Life Skills super block has enough people to completely fill the house.

While he’s found it “difficult to respond” to the negative reactions of others, Chan asks the student body “not to judge [the group] now, [but] to bear with us while we give it a try.” Chan also urged skeptics to “join in on the experiment and join in on the food.”