Remedy to self-segregation in Housing
~Published in the Daily Illini on April 17th, 2006.
Many people with diverse thoughts and cultures live on our campus, but rarely do we mix. We live in the same place, but we do not live together. Our instincts and our upbringing encourage us to self-segregate along racial, ethnic and religious lines.
We all quietly know the facts: Asians and Indians live at ISR, African-Americans and Latinos live at FAR-PAR, and the Six pack barely looks different than my white suburban high school.
"We have found through informal questionnaires that incoming freshmen research the residence halls," said Seema Kamath, multicultural advocate in Weston Hall. "Often their choice is influenced by an older sibling or friend already attending."
Kamath goes on to say, "I believe the residence halls definitely have different racial overtones and that people's reasons for applying to each residence hall are to a certain extent racially motivated."
Students try to self-segregate even before they arrive on campus. Incoming freshmen have a sense about the racial composition of the halls and they gravitate to places they will feel most comfortable.
Those who apply late for housing or who are admitted late usually get placed in FAR-PAR - its undesirable location means there are plenty of free spots. African-Americans and Latinos from poorer schools often do not have the benefit of college counselors encouraging them to apply early. They may also be admitted later in the admissions cycle for other reasons.
These factors, combined with the word-of-mouth effect, results in the unglamorous FAR-PAR housing a disproportionate number of minorities - a latent and unconscious form of institutionalized discrimination.
Housing claims to not consider race in their decisions. But many students believe that in randomly assigned rooms a suspiciously high percentage of minorities are placed together. Often, Six pack halls will have an all-white floor with the exceptions of two or three minorities "randomly" and "coincidentally" paired together. University Housing perpetuates an insidiously complicit promotion of self-segregation.
Our Student Senate, especially President Josh Rohrscheib, investigated the questionable and secretive nature of the Housing process. Last October they requested all data related to the racial makeup of the halls and the application process. After months of repeated excuses from Housing Director Jack Collins, some data was finally provided in February. Exact percentages on racial composition of the residence halls remains sealed. If Housing were concerned about issues of race they would have been equally eager to look into it.
I propose, along with Zenobia Ravji, chair of the Senate's Minority and Cultural Affairs Committee, a controversial and bold remedy. We should continue to allow freshmen to choose their roommates, but they should be randomly assigned to the halls they live in. It would apply only to freshman, but it would not apply to private, specialty or living-learning community halls.
We certainly cannot force diverse groups to interact, but we can have faith that when in close quarters they will discover common interests and explore diverse backgrounds. Such a policy would lead to a radically different campus. Can you imagine how much more exciting, intriguing and welcoming this place would become?
Many students rush fraternities and sororities with their dorm friends - this would potentially break down the extreme segregation within the Greek system. Students also choose their sophomore apartment roommates from among their dorm friends. They choose classes together. Diverse groups of friends would be introduced to each other and remain connected throughout life. Lunch tables would no longer be color-coded. Freshman housing would be fully integrated into the University's educational mission.
If the supposed educated elite of the country cannot break down the thick walls of self-segregation then we should not expect the rest of America to do so. We participate in a great experiment of whether disparate races can thrive together in a democracy. That experiment will be a success in the long run through the courage of individuals to breach racial walls. But we should do our best to hasten it. Challenge us and we will show you our generation's unique ability to learn from, tolerate and celebrate diversity.
Billy Joe Mills is a senior in LAS. It's scary, but true - he is a conservative who cares about issues of diversity and race in society. His columns appear on Monday. He can be reached at opinions@dailyillini.com.
Many people with diverse thoughts and cultures live on our campus, but rarely do we mix. We live in the same place, but we do not live together. Our instincts and our upbringing encourage us to self-segregate along racial, ethnic and religious lines.
We all quietly know the facts: Asians and Indians live at ISR, African-Americans and Latinos live at FAR-PAR, and the Six pack barely looks different than my white suburban high school.
"We have found through informal questionnaires that incoming freshmen research the residence halls," said Seema Kamath, multicultural advocate in Weston Hall. "Often their choice is influenced by an older sibling or friend already attending."
Kamath goes on to say, "I believe the residence halls definitely have different racial overtones and that people's reasons for applying to each residence hall are to a certain extent racially motivated."
Students try to self-segregate even before they arrive on campus. Incoming freshmen have a sense about the racial composition of the halls and they gravitate to places they will feel most comfortable.
Those who apply late for housing or who are admitted late usually get placed in FAR-PAR - its undesirable location means there are plenty of free spots. African-Americans and Latinos from poorer schools often do not have the benefit of college counselors encouraging them to apply early. They may also be admitted later in the admissions cycle for other reasons.
These factors, combined with the word-of-mouth effect, results in the unglamorous FAR-PAR housing a disproportionate number of minorities - a latent and unconscious form of institutionalized discrimination.
Housing claims to not consider race in their decisions. But many students believe that in randomly assigned rooms a suspiciously high percentage of minorities are placed together. Often, Six pack halls will have an all-white floor with the exceptions of two or three minorities "randomly" and "coincidentally" paired together. University Housing perpetuates an insidiously complicit promotion of self-segregation.
Our Student Senate, especially President Josh Rohrscheib, investigated the questionable and secretive nature of the Housing process. Last October they requested all data related to the racial makeup of the halls and the application process. After months of repeated excuses from Housing Director Jack Collins, some data was finally provided in February. Exact percentages on racial composition of the residence halls remains sealed. If Housing were concerned about issues of race they would have been equally eager to look into it.
I propose, along with Zenobia Ravji, chair of the Senate's Minority and Cultural Affairs Committee, a controversial and bold remedy. We should continue to allow freshmen to choose their roommates, but they should be randomly assigned to the halls they live in. It would apply only to freshman, but it would not apply to private, specialty or living-learning community halls.
We certainly cannot force diverse groups to interact, but we can have faith that when in close quarters they will discover common interests and explore diverse backgrounds. Such a policy would lead to a radically different campus. Can you imagine how much more exciting, intriguing and welcoming this place would become?
Many students rush fraternities and sororities with their dorm friends - this would potentially break down the extreme segregation within the Greek system. Students also choose their sophomore apartment roommates from among their dorm friends. They choose classes together. Diverse groups of friends would be introduced to each other and remain connected throughout life. Lunch tables would no longer be color-coded. Freshman housing would be fully integrated into the University's educational mission.
If the supposed educated elite of the country cannot break down the thick walls of self-segregation then we should not expect the rest of America to do so. We participate in a great experiment of whether disparate races can thrive together in a democracy. That experiment will be a success in the long run through the courage of individuals to breach racial walls. But we should do our best to hasten it. Challenge us and we will show you our generation's unique ability to learn from, tolerate and celebrate diversity.
Billy Joe Mills is a senior in LAS. It's scary, but true - he is a conservative who cares about issues of diversity and race in society. His columns appear on Monday. He can be reached at opinions@dailyillini.com.
posted by Billy Joe Mills at 1:12 AM
19 Comments:
My response to Yoshi's post:
Yoshi,
Thanks for the link and for some of the good vibes. I believe pretty strongly in this issue. The "radical" solution that I propose is meant to counter a radical problem. The proposal is far more interventionist than I am usually comfortable with, however, the solution to self-segregation can only be quickened through good policy. I reject other proposals like mandatory diversity workshops (like C.A.R.E.) or classes, because people won't appreciate diversity just because they are told to do so. You can't tell them, you must show them. The way to show them is by subtly placing them together and hoping that the proximity will encourage them to appreciate diversity on their own terms. Show, don't tell.
My proposal is just one solution. In the column I wrote earlier, which you alluded to, I said that individual courage is the only thing that can break down self-segregation. I still believe that. But we can facilitate the courage of our peers by giving them more opportunities to interact with people foreign to them.
We can stand idle and allow this problem to persist. We can allow my suburban white friends to never branch out and to never be uncomfortable. We can continue to say "hey look at us we're diverse," but to not learn from or take advantage of the diversity among us.
Or we can challenge ourselves. We can test our generation's ability to thrive amongst diversity. I believe that if put to that test we would dramatically change the culture and beauty of this campus.
Billy Joe, has the idea of leaving people the hell alone ever occurred to you?
On what basis do you assume that your idea that groups forced to live together leads to better relations?
We've had about 50 years of directed integration in the United States now. What has been the result?
People have a tendency to want to be around people who are like them.
I, for one, don't see anything wrong with this, particularly in a University setting. To me, it is important that the students involved have the minimum number of distractions to what they're really here for--to learn stuff in class. (You can argue that that's not the important thing, really, but that's what they're paying for. They can learn the out-of-class stuff in the Peace Corps, Vista, the military or on-the-job.)
If you are suddenly thrust into a situation with someone from a different culture, mores, moral standard and economic status (to give examples), it is quite possible that you could be spending your time coping with those rather than with your studies.
Students are not lab rats, needing to be manipulated "for their own good". Neither you nor I know that. Let them decide--it's supposed to be a free country.
Tom
TC,
You wrote, "To me, it is important that the students involved have the minimum number of distractions to what they're really here for--to learn stuff in class..."
We are here not just to learn things in class, that is an incredibly myopic statement. We are also here to learn from each other. I have personally learned a great deal from those peers of mine who are much different than myself.
You wrote, "If you are suddenly thrust into a situation with someone from a different culture, mores, moral standard and economic status (to give examples), it is quite possible that you could be spending your time coping with those rather than with your studies."
What do you think happens in the real world? You think that corporations only hire and do business with white people? Employees are there "thrust into a situation" that is uncomfortable, but it will ONLY be uncomfortable if they do not learn to interact with people foreign to them while they are here. It is integral to our education, especially in a globalizing world. Coping with differences between your peers is part of the real world, we should be trained in those skills while here, rather than cowering in corners of people who look exactly like us, as you propose. Sure that's easy and that's nice, but it certainly is not best. Similar to Iraq, people here too seem to just want what's nicest and most pleasant...can we not say from history that the greatest fruits come from the greatest struggles and arduous challenges?
I agree that something needs to be done. But I can also understand why students and their parents would hate this. Students and parents who pay for housing want the choice of where their students can live. If we plan to randomly assign students into university housing, you're going to find a huge surge in the private housing demand.
Overall, I think this is one situation where the free market has failed, and intervention is necessary. Bravo!
One little side comment though. You never actually lived in University housing, did you?
You misunderstand me, Billy Joe and I think you are grossly understimating your peers.
What I am asking for is for you to retain freedom of choice for the students.
Your impression of the "real world" is also somewhat naive.
If someone goes to work in government as a lobbyist, they're probably going to be around other lawyers and polical science majors.
If someone goes into industry, they're probably going to be surrounded by blue-collar workers.
If they go into finance, they're probably going to be surrounded by MBAs.
If they're going to be working for Rockwell, they're going to be surrounded by engineers.
All of these groups are much more segregated in their own ways (mindset, lingo, approaches to problems) than the university will ever be. Your idea of the "real world" as a melting pot is a multicultural myth.
What you want to do is force YOUR concept of what's good for the student onto the student body *subtly* (which means sneaky, so the poor benighted students don't get on that they're being manipulated.)
Anytime ANYONE says they're going to do something "for my own good", I get ready for a good butt-reaming. With any luck, I'll also get kissed afterwards.
Stop worrying about the student's souls and help figure out a way to keep our TA budget from getting cut so that class sizes go up. That's a REAL problem.
Tom
TC,
I couldn't agree with Billy more on this. I don't know from where you get the idea that living in a free country means that each of us is free from having to endure any kind of sacrifice or hardship.
In any case, being exposed to different kinds of people HELPS the cause you and I agree we are here for--to learn. Look at any study ever conducted on decision making processes in group settings and you'll find that diverse backgrounds leads to diverse ideas leads to better ideas and better solutions. It's the opposite of groupthink.
Brian, let me get this straight.
You're saying that having to associate with people who are different than you is a sacrifice and hardship?
That sounds pretty racist to me.
I was merely saying that people should not be forced to live in places where they don't want to.
As far as the diversity in cultures leading to more creativity, let me tell you a story....
I was part of a research project about 15 years ago in which we were partnered with a Japanese University building particle detectors.
It was nearly impossible for us to brainstorm, because the Japanese researchers steadfastly refused to shoot down any of our ideas, NO MATTER HOW STUPID, because it was not polite. The diversity of the project probably added three months to the completion date.
Both of you should be ashamed of yourself. The INDIVIDUAL knows what's best for him or herself, not a bunch of administrators or people in student government.
You guys'd make great oligarchs.
Tom
Derek, I'm not a Conservative, and take umbrage with any inference in that direction. I'm also not a Liberal, and would take as much offense if you tried to imply that I was one of those.
Those are labels that divide us, much more so than anything like the color of one's skin or separate religions.
If I see people of the same ethnic type sitting in a cafeteria together, it makes no impression on me one way or another because, to me, RACE IS MEANINGLESS.
(Brian, I'm serious about this, I ended up getting a near-total non-racist score on that silly test you linked to on your blog.)
There are no one but individuals sitting together. Period. I hold that if you notice their race and it means anything to you, you are a racist, you just may not be willing to admit that fact.
The case of Brown vs the Board of Education was a suit brought against a GOVERNMENT BODY. I believe that, like so many other things, that no government body (including the University of Illinois) has any right to make ANY decisions involving a student (or any other person) while taking their race into account.
Remember, I hold that the government is at best, a necessary nuisance and at worst, the enemy. The sooner we can get it out of our lives, the better.
Leave people the hell alone.
Tom
TC,
Your completely misunderstanding what racism is and is not. Not being racist does not mean thinking that "RACE IS MEANINGLESS." That ignores all of American history and the myriad cultural differences that go along with race in this country. Do you think it is a mere coincidence that tables in a cafeteria segregate themselves, because if RACE IS MEANINGLESS, it would have to be. But of course it isn't. These are choices we are making, sometimes conscious and sometimes not, and they do adversely effect our environment, regardless of what personal experiences you've had with the Japanese.
Learning about different people and discovering their worlds is what going to college is all about. That's why we have all sorts of curriculum requirements that say students must take classes that expose them to non-western cultures, etc.
If a student doesn't want to be exposed to that kind of thing, he or she can choose to not leave their hometown, not go to a university, and not learn about other people. They are free to make that choice. Otherwise, I see no problem with the university enacting policies that aim to enhance the lives of the students who pay them to do just that.
Ok, Brian, we simply disagree on this.
I hold that the evil done by a government organization FORCING students to do something "for their own good" outweighs the benefits.
Prohibiting alcohol consumption by students would probably be in their best interests, too. There would be a massive outcry if the university tried to do this, however.
If the first is acceptible and the second is not, where do you draw the line in how much you want to allow the government body to run your life?
Leave people the hell alone.
Tom
I'd like to second everything that Brian said. Ignoring the history of race in America is a form of soft racism.
The University absolutely has the right to direct the education of its students. They mandate that we take specific courses like non-western or logic reasoning, even majors mandate specific courses. Our education is directed by the mission of the University. Part of that mission is learning from the diverse thoughts and cultures that we each bring to campus.
TC, you write, "If the first is acceptible and the second is not, where do you draw the line in how much you want to allow the government body to run your life?"
Does this mean there should be no line? And each student should be free to craft their own curriculum? Certainly not. We should not go too far, but that does not mean there should be no line and we should implement your naive libertarian philosophy here.
I am libertarian when it comes to many issues such as Gay Marriage, but the government, especially a University that we willingly attend, absolutely has the right, rather the obligation to direct our education. After all, we are the ones being educated and they are the educators.
Ok, Billy Joe, since you believe that to be true, where *is* the line?
Can you provide some kind of guideline for what the university has a right/obligation to do to make a student's education more than the Chemical Engineering that his/her parents are paying for?
If you can give me a definite position that separates what you believe the university should do and what it should not do, we can debate it.
Part of the reason I am in favor of homeschooling is because I believe that the public schools have crossed that line far beyond what the Founders would have believed possible.
Where is the line? I think we've established that it's somewhere between forced integration and prohibition of alcohol. That's a lot of space.
Tom
TC--
This isn't gonna please you, but I draw the line based on what seems reasonable to me. That may seem like tautology (I say this is reasonable, therefore it is), and it kind of is, but there's not really a better answer I can give you.
I don't like drawing bright lines between things and saying anything that meets THIS standard is a good idea and anything that doesn't is a bad idea. I think that's generally a bad way to evaluate the issues before us and a bad way to think in general. I'm not a big fan of analogies, I'm not a big fan of slippery slope arguments, I'm not a big fan of considering precedents. I'm not a big fan of any line of thinking that doesn't give me and everybody else the right to evaluate whether a proposal like Billy's is a good idea or a bad one based solely on its own merits, and evaluate a proposal to prohibit alcohol based solely on ITS own merits.
Too often we get in the habit of conflating everything to the point where it looks like everything else all in a big jumbled effort not to look hypocritical. Prohibiting alcohol and not letting students choose what dorm to live in are two different things. Where do I draw the line between them? I don't. I evaluate the issues that come before me. Billy's proposal seems like a good idea for the reasons I listed, prohibiting alcohol seems like a bad idea for an entirely different set of reasons. In a democratic society, each of us is entitled to evaluate those issues one-by-one, and vote for our leaders based on our collective assessments of those issues.
To quote my favorite poet of all time, Walt Whitman:
Do I contradict myself?
Very well, then I contradict myself.
I am large, I contain multitudes.
I am glad to see that you don’t believe in banging diversity over the head of students (ala CARE as you mentioned).
While your solution is a good compromise between the very radical and the meek, I don’t really believe that students will branch out toward those that are different than them because of mere proximity.
I lived in ISR for the course of my freshman and sophomore year. During my freshman year, I rarely ventured outside of my dorm (yes, bring on the nerd jokes that goes with ISR) and there were many people on my floor of many ethnic backgrounds that I didn’t associate with at all. And while my sophomore year was much more social, there were still student who did not socialize with the rest of the floor.
In otherwords, people will still make conscious decisions about what they will make of their college experience. Time for the old cliche: “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink.”
Yes, the University can in theory do this proposed practice, but it cannot increase the probability of interaction significantly. And what hasn’t been considered about your idea is the cost of doing such a practice. As always, there are financial matters that come with change.
I’m not against your idea, but I just don’t think that the benefits will have a sizable impact.
I worked as a Resident Advisor for 2 years in FAR. I did notice black-black pairings, and also adjacent rooms that had black residents. Of course, this doesn’t prove anything, but I know a great deal about the philosophy of Housing / residential life, and it fits the model.
Other things such as time of admission and major can affect room assignments too - it might not just be race.
The real segregation in the dorms is the black student union. It’s a “separate but equal” hall council for black students. Of course, this would not be self-segregation, but segregation on the part of Housing.
Mr. Mills: You are such a Rohrscheib apologist it drives me crazy. Has he turned you anti-chief too? What happened to the conservative Billy Joe Mills?
Sure, Rohrscheib was brilliant and inspired, but he's gone now. Time to learn to find your own issues, and dare I say learn to think for yourself again.
hahahaha, ok Mookie...this isn't his issue, it has always been mine. He investigated related issues within Housing, but not self-segregation precisely. If you look at my columns, three have now related to self-segregation. Also, simply given that you were able to spell the name Rohrscheib correctly leads me to believe that you are Rohrscheib himself...hahahaha.
Hey Billy,
I just wanted to commend you on your 4/17/06 column. I think
you hit the nail right on the head. I am a freshmen and I
noticed that with a name like Amber Davis, most people think
that I am white. I live in the Six Pac and I am the only
person of color. I noticed that people do gravitate towards
the familiar, but a lot of the girls on my extolled me, for
whatever reasons. But I do think the lack of diversity in the
dorms is an issues, especially since the University promotes
diversity so much. I enjoyed the column and keep up the good
work.
Amber Davis
History Major
African American Program Chair
While Billy Joe Mills' statements about self-segregation in his recent column are outwardly true, the reasons for this situation differ and his proposed 'solution' would prove both inefficient and extremely aggravating to anyone unlucky enough to be in University housing when the plan was implemented. He seems to have forgotten why most people in University housing choose a particular dorm, and playing racial games is not usually one of them.
Perhaps the most salient issue on a campus as large as ours is location. Most of the dorms are relatively convenient to the main quad, but ISR is really the only University dorm remotely close to the engineering quad. The vast majority of ISR residents, including myself, are engineering students; this is not a coincidence. It's true that there are a lot of Asians in ISR, but since nearly all of them are also engineering students all this really proves is that people tend to live near their classes. I can only assume this holds true for the other halls as well. A prospective student may not be so keen on attending the University if he's basically guaranteed a 45 minute walk between classes and his dorm because he isn't allowed to pick one that's closer.
Additionally, not all dorms are created equal. For example, currently only ISR, FAR and Busey-Evans are air conditioned, and it’s hardly fair to dictate whether a student may enjoy this luxury based on random chance. Each hall offers its own set of amenities, and students often choose based on which one best fits their needs. Granted, discerning students could opt for private certified housing or an apartment, but this is easier said than done for out of state and international students. If all the halls were in one place and had identical features Mills' suggestion might be viable, but it breaks down due to the inherent differences between the various residence halls.
Stuart Warren
Post a Comment
<< Home