College houses in name only

What is it about Harnwell College House that makes it a "college house" and not just another apartment building? Save for maybe a computer lab, not all that much. Such is the nature of the College House system at Penn.

While other universities established college houses decades ago -- Yale pioneered what they call residential colleges in 1932 -- Penn did not jump on the bandwagon until 1998.

While Harvard instituted a community house system in the 1930s and proceeded to build houses with it in mind, Penn has attempted to impose residential arrangements on existing buildings that were never designed for community living.

What has resulted from Penn's giddy implementation of its college house initiative seven years ago is the system we have today -- 11 dormitories with a few added benefits. It's a far cry from the "intellectually dynamic, varied and rich living experience" the working group for 21st century college houses envisioned in 1997.

To be fair, the state of housing at present is a marked improvement from the disorganized mess that existed in the mid 1990s and that prompted the University to seek change in the system. And a number of changes over the past few years have been for the better, namely adding faculty masters and other academic officials who form relationships with students in the houses.

But these modifications do not a college house system make.

For one thing, dining is not a community affair at Penn outside of Hill and King's Court/English college houses, which have their own facilities. Asking Quad or high-rise residents to form a "community" by eating on a designated side of 1920 Commons is just not going to be effective. What's worse is to expect Spruce College House residents to trek from the Quad to King's Court for dinner.

There is also a cultural desire for apartment-style living among students. Many choose to live off campus for the independence and to get away from the structured environment of on-campus living.

Graduate associates and residential advisers have also been hit or miss. One of the biggest factors that shape the experience for residents, some of these individuals do a number of these things for their students, while, unfortunately, others do not.

But the biggest roadblock to a thriving house system is the less-than-desirable condition of residential facilities. In light of the wide availability of off-campus alternatives, campus housing is not attractive enough for most people to form loyalties that last four years. And in some cases, today's seniors who spent their freshman year in Goldberg have been here through not one but two name changes to their former home.

If houses were designed with community living in mind and were maintained in such a way that they were an attractive place to live in addition to providing the services students demand, then maybe a stronger college house environment would form on this campus.

Penn will have an opportunity with the development of the postal lands in the coming decade to create from the ground up residences that fit this model if it so desires.

Until then, however, what Penn has for residences is not a college house system. It's a workable scheme, but Penn should not get caught up in calling it something it is not.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.