Recent proposals to further concentrate freshmen in certain dormitories could damage a system that was 20 years in the making, according to people who helped create it.
Pamela Robinson, the associate dean of College Houses and Academic Services, and Bob Lucid, Gregory College House faculty master, say that the proposal by an Undergraduate Assembly Steering subcommittee could weaken the overall residential community.
The proposal by the UA Steering subcommittee calls for an increased proportion of freshman rooms in dorms like the Quadrangle and Hill College House, which already cater principally to freshmen.
According to UA Vice Chairman Zack Rosenblum, the increased concentration of freshmen would prevent new students from being placed in an undesired location.
"We want to give freshmen the ability to freely choose a place where they would like to live," Rosenblum said.
The committee -- made up of groups like the UA Housing Committee and Residential Advisory Board members -- presented the plan earlier this month to the provost and several College House officials.
But Robinson and Lucid would prefer just the opposite -- an increased effort to bring upperclassmen into the already freshman-dominated communities.
The say that the proposal could defeat the purpose of a carefully designed system.
And the pair know plenty about housing at Penn. Between them, they have almost 50 years of experience with the college houses.
Prior to 1996, the College House system consisted of college houses, freshman houses and upperclassmen apartments.
But Lucid said that system was not effective. Freshmen would arrive not knowing exactly what living arrangements would suit them best, he said, adding that the current model guides their placement.
"A rising freshman coming into college isn't really in a position to make an informed choice," he said.
When given a choice, freshmen will always revert to a "herd" mentality and choose to live with a large concentration of other freshmen, Lucid said.
The system was changed in 1996 to the College House system that stands today, in which every house includes students from each class.
"The philosophy was moving away from the fact that students were coming home just to sleep, socialize and prepare for class," Robinson said.
Lucid added that when the changes were made, most students hailed it as a success.
But the excitement did not last very long, he said.
The first classes of students in the college houses "were a happy crowd," Lucid said. "But as the memory [of the old system] faded and as new students came in, students were like, 'What have you done for me lately?'"
He added that when it comes to freshmen, the original idea behind the College House system was to immediately draw them away from the first-year "herd," rather than allowing them to become attached solely to their own class.
Robinson believes that one of the reasons that the system is being heavily criticized is because there are still houses with a large population of freshmen.
"If we had more space available, ... we would have a broader integration of people living in all houses across all four classes," Robinson said.
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
DonatePlease note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.