Two weeks ago, upperclassmen participated in the draw for housing in Spelman. Spelman apartments —which each have four singles, a common room, a bathroom and a kitchen —are one of the most popular housing options for upperclassmen who have decided to go Independent, as it gives them much-needed access to a place to privately prepare food.
For independent students, access to a kitchen is of utmost importance as it is often their primary source of food. While independent-designated rooms in upperclass housing are supposed to have easy access to kitchens, they often do not and many students aren’t comfortable sharing a kitchen with other students due to dietary restrictions, concerns regarding cleanliness and security of food. Monica Wei ’17, who unsuccessfully drew for Spelman and will now be living in independent housing next year, said “Going independent outside Spelman can be very inconvenient, as our room next year isn’t on the same floor as the kitchen. I am also anxious about the idea of sharing a kitchen with people I don’t know.”
Thus, many independent students find that Spelman is the only conducive housing option. If it is any indication, more students drew for Spelman this year than for independent housing (both draws require at least half of the group to pledge independent). In fact, many students opt not to go independent if they aren’t able to get a Spelman quad during room draw. Neeta Patel ’16, who was unsuccessful in Spelman draw, enrolled in a meal plan instead. She comments, “Going independent without a Spelman room is not really an option. None of the independent options are conducive to cooking. One has to look to alternate options.” Danny Waldroop ’17, who was also unsuccessful in Spelman draw and intends on joining an Eating Club next year comments, “I knew immediately after we found out that we weren’t getting a Spelman Room that I didn’t want to be independent next year. Not having the Spelman community or a personal kitchen made me decide so.”
The University should make more options available for independent housing, and more importantly, improve existing options so as to make going independent easier. Currently, many students are forced to adopt one of the more expensive dining options, usually an Eating Club or a residential college dining plan, due to the lack of suitable options. Maya Rosen ’17, independent, said "The University should construct more apartment style housing." Another alternative might be to adapt existing rooms to accommodate kitchens. Some of the larger quads, triples and even some doubles are big enough to house a small kitchen. Independent students would appreciate the small kitchen over available common space.
Further, though Housing Services recognizes lack of independent housing spaces and the importance of Spelman for independents and awards them priority in the Spelman draw, they don’t do enough. Because of an outstanding demand for Spelman rooms, many fully independent groups failed to get a room this year. In light of this, I propose that Housing Services should give more points to independent students so that they can secure a living space conducive to being independent for the entire year.
The Spelman draw is ranked based on the average number of points of the group drawing. An individual gets two additional points if they are independent, in addition to the two for rising juniors and three for rising seniors. In previous years, almost all groups with four or more points got a room; thus, a fully independent group almost always got a room. This year, however, not even one four point group full of independent juniors was able to get a Spelman room.
The rising number of applicants is indicative of the increasing demand for independent housing: according to the Housing Services website, 359 students drew Spelman this year for 52 available quads, compared to 308 last year, 256 in 2011 and 168 in 2006. In previous years, this meant that students were assured a Spelman quad if all students in the group were independent; this is no longer true. On the other hand, due to the way the point system works, some groups with as many as three non-independent students (in a group of eight) were able to get Spelman quads, as they were all seniors. Gaining three, or even four, points instead of just two for pledging independent would help fully independent groups get Spelman rooms over groups with non-independent students.
This disadvantage towards independents is bolstered by the ability to draw in groups larger than four. This enables seniors to leverage their points and enable non-independents to draw with them. Also, this means that juniors drawing with seniors have an advantage over other juniors, even if they have fewer independents. This holds even if the seniors don’t choose a room given the option to do so. This year, a group of seven mysteriously participated in the draw, and though they couldn’t have drawn two rooms, their large number of points due to seniors meant that some could draw into a quad. Restricting the size of groups to four would help ensure that Spelman rooms go to the independent students for whom they were designed.
The needs of independent students should be given preference over the fact that a draw group is composed of seniors. The administration has repeatedly made efforts to cater to the large proportion of independent students, and this would help in doing so. This has been made even more relevant as the number of independent students is rapidly increasing every year. Without some tangible change, choosing alternative eating options at Princeton will become harder than ever.
Avaneesh Narla is a sophomore from Calcutta, India. He can be reached at avaneesh.narla@princeton.edu.
Read More
Princeton must move towards a world-changing curriculum
Luqmaan Bamba“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
Statement of solidarity with Columbia University students from Princeton faculty and staff
Guest ContributorsIn an open letter, Princeton University faculty and staff express solidarity with Columbia University and Barnard College student protestors by boycotting the universities until their demands are met.
In an open letter, Princeton University faculty and staff express solidarity with Columbia University and Barnard College student protestors by boycotting the universities until their demands are met.
Princetonians want political change. Why don’t more of us take action?
Frances Brogan“Understanding that this is how activism works — collectively — can empower people to go to protests and meetings because it undermines the stereotype that being an “activist” is an undesirable individual identity and the misconception that only people with that “identity” label can contribute.”
“Understanding that this is how activism works — collectively — can empower people to go to protests and meetings because it undermines the stereotype that being an “activist” is an undesirable individual identity and the misconception that only people with that “identity” label can contribute.”
