Posted on May 1, 2001
A key element of The Plan for Union, approved by the Board of Trustees at its meeting March 3, is the weaving together of the academic, social, and residential life of the Union community.
Acting on the recommendation of the College's U2K Steering Committee and a trustee Special Committee on Student Social Life and Housing, the Trustees endorsed the following:
– The College will establish a House System for students in which membership will be universal and randomly assigned.
– Greek social organizations may continue, although members, like all students, will live in randomly-assigned residence space.
– The College will create policies that will give all students the same rights and responsibilities for shaping social life. Alternative social spaces will be created, and a common alcohol policy will be established that is consistent with the spirit of the new social and residential life initiative.
Work on the new system will begin immediately, with the full House System in effect by the fall of 2004. Renovation and construction costs to implement the House System and create additional on-campus social spaces are projected at $20 million.
The House System will have nineteen houses, and every Union student will be assigned randomly to membership in one of them prior to arriving as a freshman. All houses will be expected to contribute intellectual, cultural, and social events to the campus; participate in orienting new students; sponsor community service projects; and field teams for intramural competition.
Each member of a house may simultaneously be a member of a Greek organization, a theme house, or both. Faculty members will have a house affiliation, and alumni and alumnae will be invited to join the House System. Although only some students will be resident members, every member will be able to participate in house governance and activities and will be able to use the common space, game tables, and kitchen facilities.
The plan calls for Alpha Delta Phi, Chi Psi, Phi Delta Theta, Psi Upsilon, and Sigma Phi fraternities, and Smith and Wells theme houses, to move from their current locations. In addition, academic programs will move out of Lamont House, administrative offices will leave Silliman Hall, and the house on Lenox Road occupied by the dean of students' family will also become part of the House System.
When fully implemented, the House System will consist of Chi Psi, Davidson North, Davidson South, Fero House, Fox North, Fox South, Lamont House, North College (two houses), Phi Delta Theta, Psi Upsilon, Sigma Phi, Smith House, South College (two houses), Wells House, Whitaker House, 27 North Terrace, and 1294 Lenox Rd.
A committee that includes faculty and students will develop a plan for distributing housing to the members of all Greek and theme houses. Proposed sites for Greek and theme groups are Bronner (part of North College), Chester Arthur (part of South College), Edwards, Hickok, McKean, Potter, Raymond, 708 Huron, 1480 Lenox, 207 Seward, 209 Seward, 215 Seward, and 233 Seward.
Greek social organizations may continue to remain selective, single-sex, and residential, and they may continue to engage in pledging. Rush and pledging are to be monitored closely by the Interfraternity and Panhellenic Councils, and the College will enforce a zero tolerance policy for hazing.
To complement the House System, which will make residence-based social spaces available to all students, the College will create non-residential social spaces available for general student use. A more centralized planning process will be created to ensure a variety of events.
The decision to establish a new residential and social system at the College is the culmination of a process that began in the fall of 1998, when President Hull appointed a special committee of students, faculty members, and administrators.
The committee's assignment to “propose a set of reforms that would preserve the traditions of Greek life that are consistent with an academic community that values inquiry, seriousness of purpose, diversity of opinion, and a broad and ample choice of residential and social options.”
The Union Two Thousand Committee — U2K, for short — delivered its preliminary report to the campus in February, 2000. The committee said its work was guided by three key principles:
– The Greek system needs to dissociate itself from groups that engage in regressive activities such as hazing and alcohol abuse.
– The College must rectify a system of unequal privilege in housing and access to social space and do whatever is necessary to make room for the growth of social initiatives.
– Faculty need to participate more in out-of-class intellectual life of the campus, and the administration needs to support initiatives that help faculty meet this goal.
The committee invited the Union community to share thoughts and opinions (the committee received fewer than100 responses to the invitation), and three months later it delivered its final report and recommendations, saying, “We believe our proposal represents a careful balancing that preserves the 175-year tradition of Greek letter societies while simultaneously offering a new model for residential and social life.”
The committee acknowledged that a recurring question during its deliberations was, “What's the problem?” The committee said it had identified four, each related to the key principles it had followed during its deliberations:
– “Union's reputation as a Greek-dominated campus discourages some students from applying and some faculty from accepting job offers — often those who are looking for campuses that are more intellectually and politically active.” The committee noted that the Princeton Review, a widely-read college guidebook, had placed Union on its list of top twenty party schools with the comment, “Frats, sororities, and lots of beer drinking dominate the social scene.”
– “The current allocation of prime real estate is unfair.” The committee noted that housing for Greek males had more common space than what was available in housing for Greek women, and far more than what was available to independent students.
– “We need to involve faculty more in the out-of-classroom lives of students and invigorate the intellectual life of the campus.” The committee said it repeatedly heard from students that faculty don't understand student social life and, because they don't attend events, are unaware of the good things students do; at the same time, the committee also heard that faculty often criticize students for not attending campus cultural events.
– “Union, like most of higher education and society at large, is often too balkanized — men separate from women, one race from another, international from domestic, athletic team members from non-members, etc.” The College should make more of an effort, said the committee, to engage people across lines “that seem to divide us all too often.”
Announcing its proposal for a House System, the U2K Committee said, “We believe membership in a house should be a source of connection to the College as well as a source of friendship, learning, motivation to get involved in extracurricular life, and, perhaps above all, an enjoyable and vibrant social life.”
Acknowledging that the plan would have some significant costs and would require careful implementation, the committee recommended that the system go into place no later than the fall term, 2004.
The committee rejected the suggestions made by some faculty and administrators that the Greek system be required to go coeducational or that it be moved off campus or abolished. Instead, the committee said, the Greek system should be allowed to continue as selective, single-sex, and residential, and it should be allowed to continue to have pledging. A committee including the director of residence life, two faculty, and four students would be given the assignment of developing a plan for distributing housing to both the Greeks and Theme groups.
The U2K Committee said that the College must enforce a zero-tolerance policy for acts of hazing that are dangerous, coercive, or that interfere with teaching and learning.
In addition, the committee recommended:
– that a new committee be formed to draft a policy that could be applied to all College groups that want to host a social event with alcohol;
– that the College create desirable non-residential social spaces available for general student use;
– that a more centralized, efficient, and effective mechanism be created to plan and fund campus social events.
In the fall of 2000, President Hull sent his recommendations to the Board of Trustees, saying, “If Union is to move to the next level of excellence, we must change the social culture at the College. Although many might argue that fraternities should be eliminated, as have several colleges with which we compete, I believe it is not the existence of fraternities that harms Union, but their dominance.”
He strongly endorsed the proposal to establish a House System and agreed that the Greek organizations could continue to remain selective, single-sex, and residential and that they be permitted to engage in pledging while the College enforces a zero tolerance policy for hazing. He differed with the committee on a proposed alcohol policy, however.
“I cannot support any longer — given the academic aspirations of this institution — an alcohol policy that permits drinking parties in residences, however responsible students might be,” he said. “For this reason, I believe that we should prohibit alcohol at parties in all residences — houses, theme houses, fraternities, or sororities — once we have provided appropriate spaces on campus for such parties.”
He suggested creating four additional spaces on campus where alcohol could be served (in addition to Chet's in the Reamer Campus Center).
At its October meeting, the Board of Trustees directed Board Chairman David B. Chapnick '59 to appoint a Special Committee on Student Social Life and Housing to review the entire issue and make recommendations to the full board for consideration at its March meeting. The nine members of the special committee were all alumni (and five had been members of a fraternity).
In its report, the Special Committee came to much the same conclusion about social and residential life as did the U2K Committee. It made several judgments:
– There is substantial inequity in access to prime, center-of-campus housing and social space, especially for women but also for men who do not join fraternities;
– The College is able to house only about seventy-five percent of its students, and Union's housing is deficient compared to its competition and the expectations of the times;
– The College's reputation has suffered because of the culture that has evolved, hurting its ability to attract high-end students and faculty;
– There is “considerable evidence” that the party scene interferes with intellectual pursuit and academic achievement of many students;
– Many students indicate they wish that the social scene were different but do not mobilize (or do not know how to mobilize) to change it.
– Most faculty are essentially removed from campus life and social relationships after 5 p.m. and on weekends, and faculty, in general, are not sufficiently demanding of students academically, “sending a message, however, inadvertently, … that a substantial party scene is consistent with their standards and expectations.”
– The advising system is weak and varies on consistency. Efforts are underway to make improvements, “… an extremely important initiative … in creating the cultural change envisioned by this report.”
– While reform of the Greek system is clearly called for, fraternities and sororities “are not the root cause of the problems we must address.” The committee said that the “experiential opportunities so important to those who choose and support Greek life should remain available, while the unfairness in housing, social space, and social alternatives must be remedied.”
The committee made a number of recommendations related to housing and social space, the social scene, and the College's overall culture. It said that exisitng housing stock should be renovated, a variety of new social spaces be created, and faculty and the administration should raise academic expectations and standards.
The committee said that all constituencies of the College — administration, students, faculty, parents, alumni, and trustees — must work to build and project cultural values that are “wholly consistent with Union's fundamental mission as an academic institution preparing young men and women for active involvement and leadership throughout their lives.”
The committee concluded, “Whatever shortcomings our College may have, it remains one of a very limited number of extraordinary small liberal arts institutions that are unique to America and envied throughout the world.”
The entire texts of reports referred to in this article are available on the College's web site at www.union.edu.
Read More
