When I read the article on changing the dorms from Thurston to Potomac for tour guides, I actually got a little mad. It's college people...Thurston is a dorm where it seems like NO rules apply but it does represent the condition of most Freshmen dorms. Potomac is very nice and renovated, while Thurston and Fulbright both have their issues with grungy floors and extremely over used bathrooms. I agree with one of the tour guides who
said she fears showing a sophomore dorm may be misleading. "I understand why the
change occurred but it's not a good idea," she said. "It's not realistic.
I also loved how the article started with explaining how Potomac has an open room for a mock freshmen dorm, and ended with the reactions by the tour guides of the beer bottles and hookah. Why not start the story with those issues? The story made it out that the reason they were changing from Thurston to Potomac is because it was hard to get people to open their doors...right. The REAL reason is the University does not want to show parents where their children will be living next year until the checks have been signed.
However, covering it up is not going to solve the problem. Freshmen year students are going to realize...damn this place is loud...there is floor incest...and drama....MOM/DAD save me! Which only means there are going to be a lot more ANGRY phone calls to the housing administration...Good Luck!
1 comment:
Yes, I understand you think that the university is trying to hide Thurston. The thing is that getting into Thurston was extremely hard. The tours had to constantly follow someone in. Then they had to walk around the floors, searching for a room, bumping into other tours.
You have to be a tour guide to understand the issues. Now you may also think that I'm just in the University's pocket and that's why I'm saying this. However, if you didn't know, the tour guides here at GW are not paid at all. So I commend them all for doing what they do. Have you ever had a parent see a beer can in the hallways of Thurston and look at you with disgust. It's something unfortunate that you don't want to experience. Parents have a lot of influence on where a student decides to attend.
Showing Potomac House has turned out to be great. It is organized and people can actually be guaranteed to see a room. This is how it works. The more people that apply, the lower our admit rate goes down. Right now GW has a rate of 36%. Harvard has a rate of 9% (Class of 2009, http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=506759). If we can present the university as a great place to come (and lower tuition - that's another story) then more people will apply and that can only help our reputation.
So that's what the issue is. And the University is not covering it up. But let's be honest. Thurston is a crap-hole. Why would we should THE worst residence hall to prospective students? Why not show them a nice residence hall? Why not?
And your theory about the University not wanting to show Thurston is ridiculous. Thurston has been shown for years. Where were your comments when the University said to the tour guides "We want to give them a taste of what freshman year is like: good and bad." Potomac has only been shown for 5 months, it has only been in operation for a year and a half. Why can't they try something new without you judging them? Why don't you call the Visitor's Center and ask them the "REAL" reason that they don't show Thurston anymore. How could you possibly know?
Post a Comment