As a second-semester senior, I am in an experienced position to comment on the current housing issues.
As a townhouse resident for both this year and last, I have seen the hypocrisy and stringency that has come with living on campus. However, the issue goes beyond only housing. Students, administration and alumni must realize that it is the mindset of the University that is failing, not individual issues.
These failures can be surmised in two mentalities: deception and denial. I realize this is a strong statement, and while there are many good people who are part of this campus, the actual campus operation and its’ decisions occur within these thought processes.
As far as deception goes, Fairfield has often passed the buck. The past two years’ debacles with Spam Jam were issues in which the University wanted to be viewed positively and pawned the issue off on Residence Life. The reality is that if the University wanted to have the tradition continued, they could have.
How about fire codes in the apartments?
The University knowingly placed students in rooms that were unsafe because of locked windows. What happened when there was finally intervention: a lot of gray answers and hazy responses.
The list can continue from current housing standards to programming and begs the question, “where is the accountability?”
When poor or dangerous decisions are made, no changes occur and there is no consequence for those who made the decision in the first place.
Denial is another presence at Fairfield. It occurs as commonly as a beach party or waiting outside of Bravo. Unfortunately, much of this stems from alcohol as the University fails to realize that drinking is a part of college and can not, rather will not, be eliminated.
With the recent housing incidents and so many students failing their health and safety inspections, the students are blamed, not the policy. If a vast majority of townhouses do not adhere to the current standards, isn’t that a sign to review the policy?
However, the root of the “basement lockings” lies in drinking and that Fairfield does not want partying.
While this may be justified to parents and prospective students, the problem is that there are no alternatives.
Rather than focusing on the drinking, why not focus on the lack of desirable programming? If students had an alternative other than bingo, perhaps drinking could be curbed or at least controlled.
Blatant signs point to the need for an overhaul in how Fairfield operates in regards to the students. The issue has become so bad that kids would rather over pay for a cab to the beach, risk getting arrested, take questionable rides from strangers, all in search of getting off campus and avoiding the Gestapo-esque control of the nightly social scene.
If this wasn’t enough, there are the even braver students who will travel in packs of 20 or 30 up to the townhouses in search of something to do. Plainly drunk and with no regard for hiding their condition or intention, students would rather contend with public safety and judicial then attend programming or sit in their dorm.
However, this perspective is not examined. The root of the problem is felt to be alcohol and the blame is placed on the students. Students recognize this and hence comes the overlying issue, perception.
In Fairfield’s na’ve view, Residence Life is a successful program that keeps students happy in their living arrangements and assists them with their needs. FUSA is a wonderful student organization that equitably represents the student population and acts in their best interest. Public safety is a great aspect of the University that keeps the students feeling safe and protected.
While this is the tagline that is used to represent these programs, the student perspective is much different.
Residence Life is merely an elitist and out of touch group that is looking to stifle drinking and lock basements. FUSA is thought of as a generally self-serving and useless group that a few popular kids get into and deals with sub-par concerts. Public Safety evokes the terms “parking ticket Nazis” and “alcohol police.”
Why the discrepancy? Why the total lack of reality? Fairfield needs to address the problem at the source, the policies.
However, while I feel the University is severely flawed and certainly worthy of criticism, the students are nearly as guilty.
I am as guilty as any student on this campus of falling into the Fairfield student trend of apathy. We complain and hold prospective arguments with our peers, but do any of us get out there and try to look for change?
Students should be rallying, protesting and knocking down doors to change the way this campus operates. Instead, we sit around and rest on our laurels. This is ineffective, lazy and makes our legitimate case much more difficult.
How could one concert be allowed without a mere complaint? How could we allow a barely average band such as OAR be our lone concert of the year while Sacred Heart University gets the Goo Goo Dolls?
This is the real Fairfield. We overpay for our stay here, but we receive a decent education. We’re not Harvard in our academics and we’re certainly not the University of Texas in our social scene. Our students are apathetic while our administration is covert and operates in the tightest of circles.
Put that in the admissions brochure.
Leave a Reply