Top of the News

Chosen and ranked by Crosscut editors. Click date for previous days.

Mouse over headline for description.

more top of the news

Advertisement

Advertisement


Most Commented

Crosscut articles of the past 10 days with the most reader comments.

The mayor's block party weekend
(20 comments)

Crosscut's 2008 election predictions, UPDATED
(13 comments)

Death by a thousand (paper) cuts
(8 comments)

The post-partisan electorate
(8 comments)

Lake Union Park: a first assessment
(8 comments)

Extreme Seattle
(8 comments)

Election reflections
(6 comments)

The funny thing about Seattle ...
(6 comments)

A cure for congestion that's simple and cheap (and doomed)
(5 comments)

Top-two is a grim joke
(5 comments)

The Crosscut Blog »

Mar 31, 2008 3:00 PM | last updated Mar 31, 2008 4:25 PM
Advertisement
Advertisement

Washington's higher ed priority: posh dorms

By Lisa Albers

Officials at Washington State University announced last week that the school plans to build new dorms. On the face of it, the initiative seems long overdue: The school hasn't built dorms in 37 years. However, the $26 million dollar residence hall adds only 229 beds, at a cost of $113,537 per bed. The residence hall is part of a larger plan to upscale the dorm experience.

Instead of cafeterias, students will get meals cooked to order. Instead of dorms, they will enjoy apartment suites, high-tech infrastructure, and other amenities that sound more like condo living than dorm life.

Barry Johnston, WSU's associate vice president for business and finance, told the Spokesman Review, "Expectations are higher from our student population that come from middle class or upper-class families. They certainly have not had to share bathrooms in their 18 years of growth.”

Contrast Johnston's comment to the tale of one Stanford student who benefits from the school's effort to seek out economic diversity in their entering freshmen classes but nonetheless feels out of place amidst Stanford's wealthy student body. After the dorms closed and his financial aid ran out, the student lived out of his car for two weeks, showering in the school's gym, until he received a paycheck from his summer job.

The challenge for Stanford, by the way, is not to come up with the money to help such low-income students; it's getting them in the door. School officials struggle over how to judge the applications of students whose educational background naturally reflects fewer resources and opportunities of their more privileged competitors. Just because a few are able to beat the odds doesn't mean everyone should be expected to.

Would-be students from Washington state may not be able to pick up and move to a school like Stanford, or WSU, for that matter, even given the chance. In case you missed it, that University of Washington so-called "branch campus" that was all the talk last fall died a quiet death this spring. Say what you want about the efficacy and quality of our two existing branch campuses in Bothell and Tacoma; as I've written on Crosscut before, besides the compelling — at least in the case of Tacoma — possibility of using a branch campus as a catalyst for urban renewal, the real justification for opening a new university campus in the Snohomish County area is to adequately serve place-bound students. Place-bound student are those who, because of financial, work, or family obligations, cannot pick themselves up and relocate to a campus dorm, posh or not. Whether the branches offer such students an education on par with that offered by the main is debatable, but for many students, attending close to home is the only option.

WSU will pay for the ritzy new dorms through student fees and bond measures. Still, this is not the right priority for a state that ranks 36th in the nation for the number of students with bachelor's degrees we produce per capita (according to the National Science Foundation). We're catering to the comforts of a few instead of attending to educational needs that will best serve society as a whole.

Comments
Dormez Vous?
Report a violationPosted by: MukMan on Mar 31, 2008 3:56 PM
Sadly, as the cost of the traditional 4-year college has been sent to the stratosphere for the average household, it becomes a lesser possibility for the offspring of those below that threshhold and a challenge for those who are barely over it.

As one 'average' household with serial college payments for 8 years, I find that the amenities 'expected' by those from the middle class and above to be only a small part of the issues with the edifice complex and paying public university presidents huge salaries. The real cost is in the rest of the physical plant - where new engineering, performing arts, business and related schools and program need to show that theirs is 'bigger' - ergo, better. IT costs are skyrocketing as the need for connectivity, software titles, and bandwidth grow.

Perhaps we are headed toward a time when only the elite wannabees will be able to afford to send their children to public colleges and universities at $25/K a year (tuition, fees, breakfast in bed, maid service).
Comment from WSU staff member
Report a violationPosted by: lisa_albers on Apr 1, 2008 3:33 PM
Crosscut WriterA member of WSU staff who's been with the school for almost 30 years sent me an e-mail message today with this comment (she declined to give her name):

"There is even more to your story. All WSU freshmen are required to live in dorms (or sororities or frats). This means that WSU is, I feel, building these dorms to bring in more money from the wealthier freshmen that will be forced to live in dorms. WSU is very class conscious and want every buck they can get from the students. The concept of not being in direct competition with private industry has been lost along the way e.g. the new restaurant at the new golf course the proposed hotel that is in the works, and now the condos."
Movin' on up, to the east side
Report a violationPosted by: HeyCorey on Apr 3, 2008 11:22 PM
This comes on the heels of a University of Washington plan to spend $850 million on the same. I understand the value in rethinking living and education spaces based upon changes in the education environment that include online classes, online library resources and team-oriented, project-based class activities. In the end, however, I have to side with Lisa that we are doing a bad job of prioritizing the expenditures we make in higher ed. We seem to be spending more and more money on fewer and fewer students, even as we lament the lack of college graduates in our state. More at No Sno U blog
The UW too
Report a violationPosted by: sjenner on Apr 3, 2008 11:29 PM
The UW also recently announced some dorm plans.

Yes, these price increases do make college less affordable. On the other hand, residential living can be a great part of the college experience and the new dorms may still be less costly than living off campus. When I was at the UW (82-87), the dorms tended to be places where only first and second year students lived. The experience of having more 3rd and 4th year students living longer on campus would be very enriching for first and second year students. So, the value of having something nicer to live in could be a lot more than just the value of a larger room or different food choices.
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign up for Crosscut's free weekday newsletter e-mail.
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Crosscut »
Crosscut Seattle is an online newspaper for the Pacific Northwest, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia. It's a guide to local and regional news, a place to report and discuss news, and a platform for new tools to convey news.

• More about Crosscut

Contact Crosscut

Tools

Sign up for Crosscut's daily newsletter
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.
Advertisement