Members of Duke Student Government continued to discuss potential developments for next year’s house model at their meeting Wednesday.
DSG representatives met with University administrators last Thursday about the group’s revised model suggested in a town hall meeting Oct. 5. The revisions included the concept of “continued communities”—the idea that students would continue living with students from their freshman residence halls throughout their four years at Duke if they choose to remain unaffiliated from selective living groups on campus. Since its introduction last week, members of the Senate said some students were confused about the implications of this revised model, particularly in the long term.
When asked about the probability of the new program’s implementation, members of the DSG executive board said although the structure of the new model for next year has already been decided, year two is open to revision.
“Basically, the room assignment process for next year has already been implemented on the programming side of [Housing, Dining and Residence Life], which makes changing things for next year complicated,” said DSG President Pete Schork, a senior. “When we originally made the proposal [for revisions to the house model], we thought it would be for year one, but beyond year one there is a lot of leeway in terms of what happens. Now we’re working on possibilities for year two and beyond, and we’re still in dialogue with students about whether [these changes] are something that people really agree with.”
Some senators expressed concern regarding the possibility of following through with continued community model, since many advocates of this model will graduate before it can be implemented. Members of the executive board noted, however, that although a housing committee has not yet been created, it will include primarily sophomore and junior students to ensure DSG’s ability to follow through with its revisions.
Schork said he was pleased with the administration’s response to the new suggestions.
“[The administrators] were pretty open to considering the new house model and were pleased that we put time and energy into creating it, so the response was definitely positive,” Schork said.
In other business:
Members of the Senate also discussed the future of Football Gameday. Although DSG hoped to reach an agreement with the administration about appropriate Gameday celebrations in time for this year’s season, disagreements regarding the propriety and location of Gameday activities has turned DSG’s focus to next year.
“The response we’ve gotten from administrators is overall [skeptical]. We’re working on [Gameday] but the timeline has not worked out in our favor,” Schork said.
Executive representatives also responded to questions about the upcoming West Union renovations and relocation of some student groups. Since Vice President for Student Affairs Larry Moneta’s presentation of the plans to the student body last week, the board discussed how many students have expressed disappointment about the relocation of certain organizations such as the Center for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Life and the Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture.
Senior Kaveh Danesh, vice president for academic affairs, said details about the West Union renovation plans and where student groups will be relocated are not yet finalized, adding that it is important for students to maintain an open mind.
“All ideas for the building are purely conceptual,” Danesh said. “There has been a fair amount of cynicism from students who think that the plan has already been decided, but contrary to popular belief, everything is still in progress.”
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.