|
|
'My Dorm Is Nicer Than Your Dorm'The proliferation of new dormitories that offer students luxury features — plasma televisions, fitness facilities, cleaning services — has become the academic equivalent of an arms race among institutions, a New York University professor says in an essay published this week in The Providence Journal.
Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor of education and history, writes that “students have nicer facilities and services than any previous generation could have imagined.” He cites as proof Ball State University’s dining service, which accepts online orders for take-out, and a Tufts University student’s comment that moving into Sophia Gordon Hall (right) was “like going from AmeriSuites to the Ritz-Carlton.” Mr. Zimmerman sees several dangers in the luxury-dorm trend. For one thing, he says, high-end dorms emphasize materialism rather than the life of the mind and teach students “to expect such goodies as their due.” For another, he says, “More and more colleges now price their dorms at different rates, depending on how many bells and whistles are included. So you see rich kids in the fancier residence halls and poorer students in the older ones.” But a college that lets the trend pass it by, he recognizes, gives its competitors a considerable recruiting advantage. So for the time being, he says, colleges are trapped in a spiral of “mutually assured consumption.” (Sophia Gordon Hall image by Robert Benson Photography) Lawrence Biemiller | Thursday November 1, 2007 | Permalink | Contact usComments
Previous: U. of Virginia Plans a Renovation for Jefferson's Rotunda
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Maybe the underlying problems are that we have far too many colleges, both state and private ~ church.
— Joseph F Foster Nov 1, 09:38 AM #
Maybe the underlying problem is that we are reinforcing an entitlement mentality by putting college (and the life after) on a pedestal.
— Catherine Nov 1, 11:03 AM #
For the most part being the best translates to having the best. It’s been the subject of research, which has documented that institutional wealth can explain the vast majority of higher education rankings. This goes along with a shift in thinking about why people go to college. Founders of schools like Harvard, Yale and Princeton were clear about the desired virtues of higher education. As recently as the 1970s a majority of students maintained that they “developing a philosophy of life” was among their highest aims. Now that figure has dropped to 42%, while making money is cited by over 70% of college freshmen as one of their main goals in life. For many people the principal measure of excellence in life is what they have. That translates to what one observer referred to as “Club Med” college facilities. We even have a converted 5-star resort that’s now recruiting high-end students with its on-campus spa and haute cuisine (Founder’s College). Whatever else we might say about it, the trend is unmistakable.
— Jerry Nov 1, 04:28 PM #
I fail to see why we expect students to live in cells with four bare walls. I have no problem with providing comfort and services to students in campus housing. Maybe students have it nicer than previous generations could have imagined, but until recently many dorms have been little nicer than monk’s cells. If colleges want to offer tiers of housing with convenience and prices to match, good for them. We’are already pricing college so that the don’t-haves can’t attend, so the question is not whether we’re discriminating based on income, just how we’re doing it.
— Al Nov 1, 04:32 PM #
5. Institutions of higher education, like any other business remain viable by offering a quality product (degree) and services that cater to customer preferences. Great customer service is giving the customer what the customer desires.
— Mike Nov 9, 04:32 PM #