Editorial: Opening doors to grad students

Two weeks ago, Terrace Club informed its current members that it would consider accepting graduate students as members. After a discussion between officers and the club’s graduate board, an online poll was conducted of club members, with the majority of respondents supporting the idea. Although there are a number of reasons why some clubs would choose to remain open only to undergraduates, it would be beneficial to both the clubs and the student community for the sign-in clubs to accept graduate student members, conditional on the support of the current membership.

Unlike the bicker clubs, the sign-in clubs must contend with both significantly lower alumni contributions and the possibility that member dues will not cover operating costs each year, problems noted in this year’s report by the Task Force on Relationships Between the University and the Eating Clubs. Over the past few years, most sign-in clubs have not filled during the first round, and others have not filled up or operated at capacity even after the second round. As such, several clubs have excess capacity, resulting in either higher fees for members or the clubs operating at a loss. Accepting a limited number of graduate students as members would not significantly increase costs to the clubs, while the decision would substantially increase revenues that could be used to cover fixed costs.

Beyond cost considerations, eating clubs should also consider how admitting graduate students would change the dynamic between undergraduate and graduate students on campus. Because of the dominance of the Street as a social outlet and the current status of the eating clubs as undergraduate-only institutions, graduate and undergraduate students rarely interact in social settings. In addition to those graduate students who choose to join an eating club, other graduate students may feel more comfortable frequenting the Street as a result of the new policy, leading to a more integrated campus social life.

Despite the advantages of graduate student membership in sign-in clubs, many would contend that this change to the clubs would significantly alter the unique place of the Street in Princeton’s social life. While the social incorporation of graduate students is a good that the clubs can help facilitate, eating clubs have traditionally existed first and foremost to serve undergraduates. Moreover, the clubs are undergraduate-only for a number of reasons, including the generally different nature of undergraduate and graduate educations. For many, accepting graduate students would undermine the sense of community within the clubs, degrading the experience for current undergraduates and making the clubs just another dining option rather than a social organization.

There are a number of reasons why this would not likely happen, however, including the cost of membership in the clubs, the nature of the clubs as social entities, and the availability of other options for those graduate students seeking a place to eat meals, such as the Graduate College, the residential colleges and the co-ops. In short, it is likely that those who choose to join would self-select in such a way as to preserve the clubs’ current atmosphere. Finally, clubs whose demand exceeds capacity — all the Bicker clubs and certain sign-in clubs — should remain closed to graduate students.

If implemented, Terrace’s proposal to allow graduate student membership is likely to benefit graduate students, the club’s financial situation and the University community. Current club members and their officers in each sign-in club should consider similar policies to improve the relationship between undergraduate and graduate students and to ensure financial solvency in the long term.