I would have been kicked out of school for parietals violation by the second week
Disclaimer: I lived on campus all four years (and graduated within the past five years fwiw).
First, in general, I don't like a university forcing its students to live on campus for any amount of time (even freshman year, though obviously "no one" who's not from the SB area/living at home would live off campus freshman year, even if they were allowed). It feels a bit like ND is babying its students and is trying to generate extra $$ which doesn't sit right with me.
However, this really doesn't impact many people. Only about 15% of ND students don't stay on through junior year (and the vast majority of that 15% stays on through sophomore year), so only about 300 kids in each class would be impacted. That's really not that many.
Plus, it might help ND self-select. There's a concern on this site that ND is losing its identity partly because students are choosing it because it's the best school they got into, and not for the overall balance of community, athletics, dorm life, Catholicism, etc. I don't think it's as dire as many on NDN think, particularly older alumni, but to the (in my opinion, small) extent students don't care about ND culture and choose the school just for its rank, this policy may cause those types of students to choose to go elsewhere (which does sound kind of bad, but it could be the best thing for both ND and that student).
And finally, anyone who chooses ND knows what they're getting themselves into, since it starts with next year's freshmen. It's not like current freshmen or sophomores were all of a sudden told they can't live off campus their junior year when they were planning on it. So overall, I'm not outraged.
I was back on campus Temple weekend, and on Friday afternoon, a few of us wandered our way into our old lovable home: The Cinderblock Palace of Stanford Hall.
That place is the same fucking shit hole it was fifteen some years ago when I arrived. I'm guessing the annual budget for capital improvements is somewhere in the tens of dollars range. Same janky ass no A/C having barracks it always was. Same beat fucking couch in the basement. Same wack TV that was purchased during a 1997 Circuit City close-out sale. Same morgue looking kitchen. There was a desk in the basement study lounge. It was lying on its side broken in three pieces.
I know living on campus at Notre Dame can be a unique and special experience and that many of us stayed the standard three years or even the duration. And I'm sure some of these newer dorms are palatial and updated and don't smell like concrete and virgin sweat. But if Stanford and Keenan residents are not exempt from this policy shift, I will happily file a class action lawsuit on their behalf. And before the school is allowed to solicit a single dime for new dorms, they should have to fully fund a 2-day crane and wrecking ball rental to free the prisoners of North Quad.
fund than Stanford's.
As of last year they redid Zaland (Food sales), had big projection TVs and other new amenities.
The cells, I mean rooms, still looked the same. Though they knocked out some walls in a few places.
My single is gone and, I'm sad to say, The Holtz Room no longer exists.
None of us did well enough in life to hold a room in a dorm for perpetuity.
on a building on campus: sponsoring dorm peripherals! Given the way they maintain Stanford, I'm sure naming rights would start in the low three figures.
The Potatohouse Basement Bathroom. The Icemaker brought to you by Potatohouse. 4 E/W: The Potatohouse Wing.
I'm going to send Father Jenkins an email. ND is leaving cash on the table. I can't imagine they'll be pleased to discover this.
squalor. Here is the math:
Room and Board(A): $14,358
Meal Plan(B): At most $3640 (cite here).
Room = A - B = $10,718 /yr, $893/mo
That means a quad in Caroll Hall is paying $3,572 per month to live in a 20x18 box with onerous rules, shared bathrooms, disgusting / noisy radiators, no parking, etc.
That's a joke and shameful.
Those are per semester costs.
...semester. Which works out to 14 meals a week, leaving you to buy a meal a day on your own (which makes sense, because these are all off-campus meal plans).
This is presumably not what's included in on-campus room and board, which almost undoubtedly is 21 meals a week or 14 meals a week PLUS some amount of Flex Points to enable you to actually eat a third meal a day. Meaning the plan you've labelled "platinum" is probably just about exactly what constitutes the basic on-campus meal plan you get with room and board.
So, $3,640 times 2 or $7,280 for board.
EDIT: I think I see where you got $2,600. The basic on-campus undergraduate meal plan appears to be the $2,145 one plus $500 flex points. So board is $5,290.
But it's around 10 per meal. Students get the flex plan and can opt into the 21 plan.
14x16x10 = 2240+500 flex points (though these usually cost <$1 per point)
If you use the faculty full freight of 12.5 you get 14x16x12.5 = 2800. 500 flex gets you to 3300.
2740 per semester
You can't use 21x16x10 for the 21 plan because a student can't actually eat 21 meals a week (reduced hours on weekends, not open as much during two breaks, not open as much during finals)
I'll split difference above and say 3k per semester is a good guess. That leave 8358 for board.
That brings the quad to 2786 on an monthly basis assuming 365 days of occupancy.
In reality it's more like $ 4280 for days used. Again the university can use the form for other stuff during down time or at least maintain it less.
8358 x 100 is $835,800 to run Carroll.
...pretty quickly. Heat/utilities. Dorm staff. Maintenance. Janitorial. Etc.
These are purposely high:
$16k x 3 for ras
100k for rector
67k for ar
90k cleaning staff (we only had one at Carroll but assume 2)
80k for annual deferred maintenance (approx 10% receipts or huge renovation every 10-12 years. Again yeah right)
40k for outside maintenance (grounds)
80k electric water and heat (no ac) this is way high due to power plant and heat pumps.
330k left to cover events, furniture replacement (hah), internet, tv, phone
Per kid thats 3300
You could buy all new furniture, give each kid a cell phone, etc for that. Every. Year.
We housed 60 tenants in south bend up until 2 years ago. Our costs were no where this high per kid and we had a mortgage plus we furnished the houses and had to pay real estate taxes.
I have heard arguments about allocating police, fire, counseling etc to rooming costs but that seems inappropriate. At the very least those services should come more from tuition.
...an aged building that houses 100 people? I need to build a power plant.
At my school you'd owe a 12%-15% tax to the university on your $507K budget, the idea being that you use central university resources (e.g., HR had to hire the dorm staff, someone from IT has to troubleshoot network jacks, etc.) that do not show up in your direct costs. So assuming ND has a similar policy there's another $60K or so. I believe my center's budget also gets hit with the equivalent of a property insurance fee and a PILOTS (payment in lieu of property taxes) allocation, but I'm not 100% sure. I feel like there's other stuff we're probably missing here.
Carroll is around 50-75000 sq. ft., and I'm guessing it's 65k sq. ft.
It would be around 1 million BTUs to heat the dorm with degree days of around 6000. That puts the cost around $60,000 a year for heat.
EDIT: I ran some other numbers. The average office space uses 28 cubic feet of natural gas per year to heat and cool. It's around 16 Mcf. That puts costs around $27000. Again, I think your numbers are off. $60k for heat sounds incredibly expensive.
The electricity comes from the power plant. Figure $1.5 / sq. ft. for electricity and we're at around $105k so total utilities $165k.
If we're going to sharpen the pencil the cleaning services are probably around $75,000 and the grounds maintenance are around $25,000.
I'll add in your tax and $50,000 for insurance (though that seems high).
$16k x 3 for ras
100k for rector
67k for ar
75k cleaning staff (we only had one at Carroll but assume 2)
25k for outside maintenance (grounds)
165k utilities. this is way high due to power plant and heat pumps. Also the water in Carroll tasted like copper.
15% "tax": $72k
80k to build a maintenance fund to be used every 15 years for major renovations.
200k left to cover events, furniture replacement, internet, tv, phone
The sad thing is if we charged students that cost it would still be $6320 per student for housing.
Right now 25% of the costs are the staff.
If Room and board were $5k per year, the RAs would be $15k not $45k. That's $30k in savings right there.
An AR can be a grad student who gets $5k room and board plus $500 a month so figure $11k.
The Rector can be a younger alum or priest and be around $50-$75k.
Moving back to that would lop off $100-$150k.
I still think the heating and electricity numbers are high.
I think the latter part of your post is where you're more on target. It is likely the case that the university could be doing things more cost effectively. It seems ridiculous that my unionized staff's benefits cost me 67% of salary, but that is in fact the cost of what the university agreed to so it's right to hit my budget for that 67% even though it should be less.
But that's very different from saying that the university's cost to provide housing is X and they're charging 2X. My suspicion is that a more accurate assessment would be that the university's cost to provide housing is X and they're charging X, but that it's cost should be 80% of X.
Look, as noted below, particularly as someone employed by a university who has seen it all up close, I'm more or less on board with the idea that universities generally and Notre Dame specifically are greedy institutions. But the idea that requiring juniors to live on campus is a money grab or that the University is making a killing on room just doesn't add up when you really start digging into the numbers. I can tell that you're very knowledgable about this stuff, but even you don't seem to have been aware of things like the university "tax" common to most schools in my experience, PILOTS payments, etc. (Nor would I have been before I started working at one). There's a level of complexity here that I don't think lends itself to quick conclusions based on back of the envelope calculations.
My curiosity was piqued by the new requirement. I hadn't looked at room and board costs in about 5 years. When I saw it was nearly what I paid in tuition in 1998 I thought I'd dive into things more deeply.
My main gripe is that the value just isn't there in terms of the facilities themselves. Take Carroll: far from campus, ancient building that hasn't been renovated in a half century, no AC, low sq. ft. to student ratio, obsolete layouts, old furniture, disgusting plumbing that tastes like metals, excessively large common spaces that are outdated and gross, etc.
There are no depreciation or financing costs associated with these structures. As we can see the majority of the holding costs are personnel and "taxes."
On that last point, after talking with some female friends I have come to recall that women dorms have even more personnel that men dorms don't (e.g. security officers, etc.)
My numbers remain conservative and have assumptions that just aren't valid. ND certainly isn't allocating 80k a year to updating Carroll - the place looks the same since any one of us Vermin have lived. The only thing that has changed is someone finally got the FUCK YOU tile removed from one of the second floor quads.
ND would do well to evaluate the personnel costs in the dorm, examine maintenance costs, and decide whether all of the services included in the 'taxes' are necessary. ND gets away with paying no taxes but then has to provide fire, power, police, etc. Perhaps it can slim down those costs.
Perhaps it's silly to think that a dorm of Carroll's size should really pay over $75k a year for IT/staffing management/etc.
I wish I had more time to jump into this. Some things I'd like to determine:
1. What were utilities costs in 1998
2. What were personnel costs in 1998
3. How has the shift away from Priests changed costs
4. How have student quality of life requirements changed things? (we all had internet in 1998, what else has really changed?)
5. How have changes in security requirements effected costs?
6. If overhead is figured as a percentage of the budget, has that percentage stayed constant despite ballooning costs?
2/2 apartments at the Foundry apparently run about $1750 a month, or around $2 per square foot.
For $893 a month, with two roomies, you could easily get a brand new 3/3 that is essentially on campus, only without all of the bullshit. Honestly, I'm surprised more people aren't moving off campus after sophomore year with that kind of pricing. Especially since it's likely closer to your classes than Caroll is.
Right? At least mine did ("Clover Village").
in the summer for reunion, summer camps, summer school, etc.
10718/student x 100 students = $1,071,800. The dorm is only in use 34 weeks of the year, has been depreciated to nothing on the books and is lightly maintained.
I'd love to see the accounting on this.
When I saw the headline I thought it was ND saying that students could only live on campus for three years. As mentioned by others below, how times have changed.
but mandatory convenience charge.
but that's how we got tix back at CU during my era (not sure if it's still true)
a mandatory student activities charge - some of that went into athletics, speakers that were brought to campus, and cool stuff like the Hoodoo Gurus for the spring concert
i rather would have paid $100 or something for my tix - and gotten an actual seat (plus) digging into your pocket creates more value IMO - but that's just the marketing guy in me
I figured I had plenty of time to live in an appartment post ND and off campus housing was pretty shitty when I was there.
I spent a fair amount of time at my girlfriend's off campus place senior year and had the 3rd floor single then, but at least for me, the comradery of the dorms is a once in a lifetime experience...well, twice if you were in one in HS too, but with booze.
We also had hard alcohol then so I had a nice little bar in my room. Tried to add a touch of class to the joint.
As far as the policy, I don't care one way or the other.
If you live senior year in a complex made up mainly of ND/SMC Students, there is adequate comradery. More than adequate, if you are the outgoing type. If you can't experience the wonders of dorm life enough in three years, you probably won't in four.
I get it though, to each their own. The vibe overall is certainly completely different between the two options.
my freshman year. The kid that was supposed to be my roommate went to NYU at the last minute.
So we lived together for 3 years and by junior year all the other guys in the quad were Seniors. They graduated and I was odd man out.
I lucked out (still think I got some NBA draft style "luck") getting the overall #1 room pick. The booze rules were loser back then and I had a good balance of friend on and off campus.
Plus, the first two things I saw when I woke up in the single were the Dome and Heidi Klum. Not bad.
I had the rest of my life to live off-campus... might as well enjoy another year in Carroll.
The old St. Joes HS or on Holy Cross campus.
And more thoughts.
East of Dunne & Flaherty is problematic as it is getting further from the center of campus and the new McCourtney Hall already fills one of the areas to form a courtyard or small quad.
Using the campus map, here are some other possibilities:
1) North of Flanner & Grace, south of Holy Cross Dr. - not much room, but you could enclose that new quad - albeit with 2 high rise office buildings in the midst
2) Replace Fisher & Pangborn - some discussion has already occured on this path - not sure you could build 2 new larger dorms there that would give you the additional capacity
3) Encroach on Burke even more - would have to redesign golf course to keep 9 holes
4) Sports fields west of Ryan Hall, northwest of Bookstore. Since Ryan already started a new "quad" or at least row of dorms, this might be logical
5) Tear down old ROTC and build there and in Lake parking lot - dorms would have a great view of the lake and actually bring Carroll into the campus
being renovated. I assume when they are all done fixing the other dorms, they will blow Pangborn sky-high and put something else there. I can't speak for Fisher.
A Violence alum
Some would argue that's not a change
Font could make up names at this point and I wouldn't know if he's screwing with us or not.
Built close to where Juniper used to be
1255 & 1256 if you look on campus map
I was a junior when they announced the last booze ban. I had to con my parents into letting me move off ("forgot" to send in my rooming form) but I sent my dad a spreadsheet of the cost savings and he never said another word.
Whilst hosting a party the fall of senior year, the clock struck 3:00 and my gf, my roomie's gf, and all their girlfriends were noted as having a fun time at our place without any worries about an RA to come break up the fun.
Funny enough, no one got sick, no one got arrested, and no one drove drunk. But hey, gotta keep it in the dorms.
Wonder what they'll do about kids who get the boot off campus for disciplinary issues, or if that becomes a full on boot now.
University owned Dorms? I know at Texas and Texas A&M they have been dry for quite awhile. Just too much liability I would assume.
I suppose smaller schools it is less common to prohibit liquor
Edit - or Vanderbilt, except grain alcohol. So, maybe not just by size of school, but an institutional viewpoint.
U. of Alabama: "The consumption of any alcohol stronger than 80 proof is not permitted on campus"
Auburn is an alcohol-free campus except the president's house.
Include married student housing.
with a $67k pricetag. Although I considered moving off early, I lived on campus three years and immensely enjoyed it. And I'm sure I would have also enjoyed junior year from off campus.
But more importantly, one of the draws of moving off campus is its significant discount to room and board fees. My rent senior year was under $400. Living off campus can be a way for students to offset ballooning tuition costs. Instead, Notre Dame charges them prime real estate prices for shoeboxes (at least in my case) and more meals than almost anyone uses.
As others have noted, if Notre Dame wants more upperclassmen present on campus, they should create policies to attract them, not treat them like children.
in a 5BR with 5 other guys.
Burrowed in and set up pilings and walls. Coal is an excellent insulator and if you seal it with plastic sheeting it keeps the dust down.
Does the 6 semester minimum mean that all transfers would have to stay on campus during their entire time at ND?
Five of us lived at Lafayette #17 in '07/'08. I think our rent was sub $400 and we were able to splurge on HD cable/DVR because we split utilities five ways.
It was great and all saved money was spent on kegs. All of it.
A mortgage on a 3-BR house a mile from campus can be had for < $400/mth.
SB real estate has incredibly low value, which is why it is shocking that ND's room and board is more than Columbia University in New fricking York City.
I couldn't remember if it was 290 or 390.
is buried under line items like Yocream and funded through dorm rooms at crazy $/sq foot prices
the pentagon are amateurs at this sort of stuff in comparison
I moved off campus as a junior and loved it. Let the students decide what they want to do.
5-6 paragraphs talking about how they want to attract seniors to live on-campus and the improvements they're making to be more competitive.
1 paragraph at the end about a new rule/law/draconian measure they are implementing which is only tangentially related to the previous 5-6 paragraphs.
That kind of communication can only mean they're well aware that what they're doing is bull-shit.
Congratulations to all the parents who invested money in buying a condo for their domer kids to live in as they rotate through every couple of years. You just lost half of the utility for your purchase.
I would hope that this policy was crafted with little or no thought to parents who purchased second and third homes for their children. They'll be just fine.
Like anything with ND, part of this is a money grab. But I do think this is also a sincere effort by the Administration to preserve and enhance ND's residential atmosphere, which, like it or not, is unique.
Are making quite an assumption that all their kids will get admitted or want to go to ND in the first place, no?
Those are their assumptions when they make the financial commitment.
The reality that a new rule would reduce their utility probably wasn't in the equation.
but unless ND was a financial participant in those condos and/or made statements about the market for student rentals, I dont see where ND needs to consider the impact on these condos in NDs decision making.
Its not ND's job to worry about a few real estate investors, and if those investors didnt consider that ND might change its policy, they werent very smart investors. Hardly an earth shattering move by ND, many colleges have residency requirements. ND adjusted theirs as I am sure many colleges do from time to time.
I was just pointing out that if this had happened to some of my friend's parents they'd screwed.
It's not uncommon. One of my buddies bought and lived there junior and senior year and then his little sister did the same behind him. If she wasn't able to do so it wouldn't have been as good of a situation for him.
And just as much inventory. Bad news for them either way.
that treats 20 or 21 year old students like children by mandating certain behavior.
There are hosts of reasons someone might live off campus before their senior year. My wife did, and she was not a trouble maker or anything. She just didn't like the bullshit policies enforced by her dorm rector.
Or close to all of them
But there is the other side of the coin.
Consider any dorm at IU, for instance. Or so I've been told. Or your basic Penn State frat.
with IU dorms or Penn State frats, no?
I'm speaking as a parent.
I don't think I need elaborate. And if my kids went to either school it would have been their choice. But I'd be glad (am glad) it wasn't.
Now, once a kid is 21, the law considers said kid an adult and I most certainly do think he/she should be treated that way, whether in a dorm or out. For example, Indiana law allows 21 year olds to consume hard liquor. But it doesn't mean the liquor has to be consumed in the dorm. Go to a freaking bar!
I just wonder if the ND Administration sees things as getting out of control (or maybe more aptly, out of ITS control) and veering toward large state university norms. I wouldn't be surprised if there was that conservative perception within the university leadership, the collars, ResLife, etc. Which, of course, would be ridiculous.
from their web page.
Vanderbilt has a residency requirement for all undergraduate students, meaning they must live in university housing. Seniors may apply for off-campus housing, but most seniors will continue their fourth year of school in campus housing. There are multiple reasons for the residency requirement, but simply put: we believe on-campus living increases academic and social success.
Years of academic research results point to higher retention rates and higher cumulative GPAs for those who choose to live in university housing. Furthermore, academic research suggests that greater social engagement directly ties to academic success. All of this is an authoritative way of saying it is a good idea to live and learn in the same place.
The George Washington University requires all first-, second-, and third-year students to reside on campus unless they are approved for a Residency Exemption.
Collectively, GW's residency requirement is intended to foster community development and best support the undergraduate experience at GW.
comparable to live on campus at GW as it is to live off campus. Or at least the difference is negligible.
Both my son (class of '08) and daughter (class of '11) attended and graduated from ND. Both had great experiences. My son lived in his dorm for 3 years then moved off campus. He did it for the experience and because most of his dorm friends moved off for senior year. He had no complaints about living in the dorm when he did. My daughter's experience was different. While she enjoyed the friends she made in her dorm, she moved off campus for her junior and senior years, although one semester junior year she was abroad. She moved off because of the stifling atmosphere of her dorm. Most of her friends felt the same way. There is a double standard at ND re men's and women's dorms. The men are treated as adults more and enjoy more freedom while the women are living in a much stricter atmosphere, which drives some of them off campus earlier. Women's dorms are not as much fun.
I had lots of fun in the women's dorms!
People went off campus because there was a superior product at a better price. This is in spite of the fact that most people love their dorm and fondly remember their time there.
Instead of competing, ND pulls this.
of just about every dorm on campus, and I think you'd have a different opinion if you visited Dunn or Flaherty Halls as prime examples of the new dorms they're building.
My daughter lived in Ryan Hall, beginning the year it opened, and I can tell you the rooms there are as good as any off campus room I've seen, including in the new apartments where the daughters of friends have been in the last couple of years. And those apartments are nice.
They're going to be renovating Morrissey next year. It will be interesting to see what they can do with that place.
Now, Keenan and Stanford can be improved most by implosion, so it's not to say there won't be challenges.
Now, relaxing the alcohol rules and parietals would be truly competing, but we know that ain't happening.
for the same $ off campus. We already have had these debates and the value in on campus isn't there. You stay because you like the lifestyle. But it's expensive.
I was thinking this while reading the announcement. There's not a whole lot you can do to dramatically improve Carroll's experience. Most of the rooms are already either singles or doubles, and the triples/quads are decent sized to begin with.
I guess maybe upgrade the kitchen and recreation facilities?
Yeah, I get the reason why the residents are called Vermin.
Never did I mean to imply that every dorm is going to be as nice as off campus apartments. There's only so much you can do with what you've got. Carroll first became a dorm while I was at ND (I can't remember who lived there before, priests?). I pitied the poor souls.
I know from lousy rooms in a decrepit setting at ND, by the way. First semester freshman year I lived in the old, no longer extant St. Ed's annex. I also don't think the entire dorm had been renovated at that time since it was built. In 1882. It sure didn't look like it. The most lasting memory of I have of St. Ed's is the smell of roach powder.
of off-campus moves. Community pride in my experience had little to do with that. Edit: although with the flurry of construction of off-campus options lately, that could have changed.
then they wouldn't need new policies/rules like this
Nephew lived in a room in the basement freshman year that was shockingly small, even in the '60's at Texas I had more personal space.
My son was in the basement of Sorin last year and didn't get a good enough pick to stay there.
He loves Sorin, and the basement.
He lived in one of the new dorms this summer while working on campus.
He still loves Sorin.
I was shocked at the size of the room he loved. It was smaller than his room at our house and had a whole other guy in there with him.
The biggest problem is sticking too many people into the rooms.
When I was in Dillon in the 70's we had 3 rooms for 4 guys (or 2 rooms for 3). That meant you had a "party room" with the beds, lockers and desks in the side room or rooms. There were also 3 massive quints, one on each floor. It was great. In recent years it's been two guys in each of those rooms. It's like living in a shoebox. Enduring it freshman year is one thing. For four years is quite another.
I'm told in Dillon it's finally back to the way it was since new dorms were constructed, starting with Duncan (is that true? Enquiring minds want to know).
They try not to have anyone else do that, but overcrowding my sophomore year meant that I had to do it again. But usually sophomores have three-room quads. My junior year some sophomores even had singles.
There were two freshman in a room starting my sophomore year, but it was only freshman, and they're to be seen and not heard anyway.
My freshman room was 339, a one room triple at the end of the ghetto with sloping ceilings. What. A. Dump.
I've been told the fight song has also been resurrected. Which is awesome.
I recall seeing some cave drawings in there. Must have been yours.
I can't imagine 3 dudes in that space. That room was miserable in the winter- no insulation between those sloped ceilings and the roof.
at least 20 years-until all the dorms are renovated. The new ones are palaces, but the old ones are bad.
I'd take my Turtle Creek apartment over that. A shoebox is a shoebox regardless of how nice the facade is. I'll take a full size bed and more elbow room for studying.
Beyond the old places like TC, the new construction is nicer than the dorm construction. I've seen in-laws at 3 different off campus facilities built in the past 7 years, all are considerably nicer to live in than Ryan.
And yes, partying is a big part of it for many people, but we're not talking about anything outlandish. It gets old to sneak beer across campus, kick friends or girlfriends out at midnight, etc.
If they brought back true SYRs, that would be a way to compete.
I doubt there's any college in the country with dorms with rooms like what you had at Turtle Creek.
ND's not going to change the rules, and with 17,000 applicants a year now (or is it more?) they don't need to.
What class year was your wife and what floor did she live on? Maybe my daughter knows her.
Villanova, among many others, has such apartments on campus. FOG is basically the same thing as TC.
My wife was '10 and on the first floor with a bunch of Lewis transplants.
My daughter was also a Lewis transplant on the first floor (at least I think she was on the first floor that year), class of '11. Could you shoot me an email? Attached above.
This policy impacts about 340-350 students per year.
now than in the 1970's and 1980's.
More students have cars now than in the old days which gives them more options on where to live. I think maybe 10% of the students had cars in the late 1970's.
Don't a lot of football players move off campus by junior year?
Many schools keep seniors on campus by having really nice "senior dorms" with kitchens and bathrooms in the unit - essentially apartments owned by the university. That cuts against the ND model of staying in the same dorm 4 years.
This also might be a money thing for ND. They have built all of these new dorms and if there is a possibility they might have empty dorm rooms, that will hurt revenue. I think we have all learned that most things at ND are about maximizing revenue.
As you of course recall, athletes on scholarship had to live in the dorms back when we were there.
But then there was the reality. The room was paid for, so . . .
Put it this way - I never once saw Billy Paterno in Dillon Hall in the year and a half when our "tenures" overlapped, and for a year I was one section over from his "room" on the third floor.
That's not to say most of the athletes did really live in the dorms as juniors and seniors, mind you, because they did. But there were some who basically kept the rooms as a mailing address, which was nice for the roommates who actually did live in the rooms. It was in the tradition of George Gipp (and maybe Paul Hornung too?), so why not?
I'd be very surprised if this new thing changes anything at all for today's players.
I think the biggest reason by far for people moving off have compared to the olden days is that off campus housing is vastly superior to what it used to be. Night and day, in fact. It's not like people used to like the dorm rules any better then than now. Far from it. But it really was pretty rare for juniors to move off - maybe 10% did - and if there were even a hundred sophomores off campus who weren't South Bend natives, I'd be very surprised. I'd bet it was closer to 50.
But I'm sure this will go over with the current student body like a lead zeppelin. Looking forward to reaction when the levee breaks on this one.
I'm neutral, have no dog in the fight. I lived 4 years on campus and would again.
Then I truly don't care. Applicants will know what they're getting into, and it's not like ND is hurting for applicants.
But man, 2 new dorms will still mean less football parking.
I think the shift towards more juniors moving off happened while I was there, 00-04. Probably went from 20% to 40%.
You really don't need some study here. Nice things about off campus:
- Girlfriend can stay the night.
- Free to have a party, liquor etc.
- Can smoke weed etc.
- Much more privacy.
- No RA/rector crap.
- Can park right by your house/apartment vs. dealing with gate guy to get on campus.
- Better options to cook etc.
There, ND please send me the $50K study fee.
my sample may be skewed as I was in Morrissey which was a dump.
Either way I'd say whatever the rate started at it doubled from 2000 to 2005. So if it was only 10% then I think it was 20% by 2005 or so.
I'd agree that the number of juniors moving off increased significantly, but was still a substantial minority around '04-'05.
From last spring's Scholastic: "Currently 63 percent of seniors live off campus, and only 28.5 percent of senior non-RAs live on campus." That was up from November 2003, according to "Scott Kachmarik, associate director of residence life, [who] said about 52 percent of current Notre Dame seniors live off campus. (http://ndsmcobserver.com/2003/11/nd-students-move-off-campus/). That said, the junior class number has never been as high as you suggest, though it certainly has increased. Keep in mind, perception gets skewed because of so many juniors that go abroad.
...I lived in my dorm (Morrissey) all 4 years. A lot of seniors went OC, but rather few juniors. I can't even remember one.
If lots of juniors (or sophs) went off campus each year, you could construe this as a forced-placing of room and board fees on students; and I'm sure, at any rate, that they have run the various numbers. One underlying thought must be: we've spent $$$$ building new dorms and renovating existing ones--we don't want a bunch of vacancies. But unless there have been significant numbers of juniors moving off campus, this seems like no big deal.
...constitutional right to live wherever they wish? I'll have to re-read the Constitution and have one of my brothers scan Westlaw to find the basis for that.
Or maybe it's a human rights violation.
Don't faux lawyer.
Needed parental permission to move off campus senior year. I did and, at the end of the day, regretted it. Big ideas ended up be huge disappointment. Lost touch with too many classmates, etc.
It was tough to have a vehicle living on campus too.
What percentage of people actually moved off-campus junior year? 10% on the high end? Especially if you're going abroad, no sense in signing a year lease when you're gone half the year.
This is much ado about nothing.
about 300 cats.
2% of sophs were living off campus ... about 40 cats.
room and board is about 15000. Let's say this increases marginal revenue by 10000 per additional student ... increased university revenue of 3.4MM. Though there are real costs of these students living on campus. New dorms will have to be built with real maintenance and operating expenses. Food will have to be purchased by dining halls and cooked...real costs.
guess is that they make more food than necessary for most meals.
If they have empty dorm rooms because kids are living off campus then the room costs are all lost revenue.
Even if your calculations are correct, ND would do a lot to add $3.4 million per year in revenue net of costs.
move off campus live?
Will they force more seniors off campus?
Build another dorm?
I bet it's even higher now. They wouldn't need to make it a requirement if it wouldn't have some meaningful impact.
they want. Nobody is requiring the 2018 and beyond admittees to come to ND.
I *am* curious if the admissions person coming to our HS in the coming weeks will be mentioning this policy change at all at all.
I like this idea. Pelt away.
this move, too. I'll take some of the empties for ya, John.
I would have been there Junior Year, too, but I went on two programs abroad.
Wait. that didnt come out right.
oh well too late.
I loved it, but I can definitely see how it was not for everybody.
Clearly just a money grab, as I'm sure they'll police it as vigorously as they policed the football team "having to live on campus" when I was a student (i.e. not at all). Just another mandatory student service fee to tax the wealthy parents, whether their kids use it or not. I'm sure the parents buying the $400k townhomes across the street from campus are going to make their poor kids suffer through sharing a monk's cell with another student for any longer than they want to rough it.
is the same as it once was. If I went to ND now, I would move off.
We already mostly were off.
But I did leave Keenan senior year with 3 other Keenanites. It certainly was different off campus - I loved both.
And this policy shift will still allow that.
Hope you are well!
allowing some junior to move off campus and encouraged (required) some portion of seniors due to shortage of dorm space. I moved off senior year and don't think it was a particularly smart decision. Housing options in those days were pretty awful. It is certainly better now. But requiring students to live on campus for 3 years is fine. The ND dorm life experience separates it from most other universities, for the better.
Not everyone did. And the spineless reactionary nature of RAs, dorm rules, and ResLife alike mean that if one person in your hall doesn't like you or your roommates, they can easily create huge hassles.
Not everyone can afford the $10k a year proce tag either.
You can get a very nice apartment east of the tennis center with your own room for much less.
But, the nice places require well over a year notice. I heard from a dad a couple of years ago at Christmas that he just signed a lease for his sophomore to live in an apartment his senior year.
Brother Bonaventure was vocal in recommending seniors with the exception of necessary RAs, should move off campus.
So unless you were an RA, you are a dork. But you were a Keenan dork, so you're still okay.
I am certain I'd heard BroBo say that once sometime in 1992. For what it's worth, despite my past conflicts in the 3 years in Keenan, I made peace with him so much so that I made certain to attend his funeral in Baltimore just about one year ago.
I would have moved off anyhow but Bonny made it easy. Fr. Gerrick was a little overmatched for the job (I'll never forget the stunned look on his face during his first Revue Party) but I preferred him over Fr. Scully. And yes, I know he came out years later.
we had lots of lively discussions over a drink or when he'd ask me to drive him around to run errands. He even let me borrow his car a time or two when I didn't have transportation.
Somehow wish I had seen him between 1994 and 2016. A classmate from 93 and Keenan would meet with him for lunch somewhere near Takoma Park, MD where he had been residing and doing his social justice. I never got to it. While I still am far from him on the political spectrum, I do see things different in the world and he probably would be pleased at some of my "growth." His wake was very good in reconnecting with others from Keenan in the early 90s and of course his extended family. Truly did put me at peace with someone who I had confrontations and irritations with though over time in Keenan, I redeemed myself to be one of the lower level rabble rousers he and his minion hall staff had to contend with.
so worked up about football games. He could never understand how 60,000 people could get together and spend all that time, effort, and money to watch a game, when taking those same 60,000 people and having them do some good in the world for 4 hours instead could make much more of a difference.
He once suggested that ND have a canned food drive at the stadium for the home game closest to Thanksgiving. I actually wrote Fr. Jenkins about it a few years ago, but never got a response.
my 3 roommates were awful.
...undertaken by universities generally and ND specifically, but per font's math above I don't think it's the case here. The net amounts are likely negligible.
This is a step backward that:
- Further limits interaction among the sexes
- Indirectly manages university risk re: substance use/abuse
- Undercuts South Bend property owners/landlords and general town-gown goodwill
It does little for student independence and decision-mkaing, engagement with the local community or generally students encountering realities beyond the bubble.
I'd be curious to see how many of the other, oh...top 100 universities...impose such byzantine rules.
...else when it suits their purpose and at other times want us to be like everybody else when it suits their purpose.
I agree with everything you said about the benefits of living off campus. I also agree with ND's position that having a critical mass of upperclassmen (especially non-RA upperclassmen) in dorms is a good thing. Requiring people to live on campus for junior year while leaving them completely free to move off senior year strikes me as a reasonable way to meet both objectives.
just speaking in generalities, but I am rarely on the "pearl-clutching, oh my God a jumbotron strips away Notre Dame's Catholic identity" side of things. I think they should abolish parietals...and single-sex dorms, for that matter. I am not resistant to modernity like the university (or Church) is, and I am fine with bench-marking the school's residential policies with other leading institutions. There's still plenty of crushing Catholic guilt to go around.
"That's not how it works, Tracy. Even though there is the whole confession thing, that's no free pass, because there is a crushing guilt that comes with being a Catholic. Whether things are good or bad or you're simply... eating tacos in the park, there is always the crushing guilt."
(I will concede that the field turf was an unnecessary choice, but that's pretty low on the list of grievances for me.)