Will SMU Eventually Require 4 Year On-Campus Housing?

[StallionsModelT]

I was thinking about this the other day as I was passing the new Residential Commons on 75. The buildings look amazing BTW and when the data center/tennis facility is completed across the street, that entire section of campus will be spectacular.

Given that SMU doesn't really have a lot more land on which to build additional dorms, could you envision the university adopting a four year on-campus housing model? I know schools like Vanderbilt require four year on-campus housing and they are certainly an institution which we strive to be associated with. The only area of campus that I could see being a fit is the area now occupied by the frat houses leading up to Blanton Administration. I remember someone here saying that the plan was to eventually move those frat houses to another location. You could throw up a couple of dorms there I suppose. I kind of like the idea of SMU being a four year on-campus environment.

[blackoutpony]

When the frat houses are relocated (to just north of where the Lambda Chach house is and on that same strett), that area will be filled with admin buildings,offices and education stuff. GW doesn't want dorms across from his library. SMU does not have a plan for 4 year on campus housing. It's not in the master plan or even in the "longer term" goals of the university. There's no place to put them.

Side note, there's no way I would have atteneded school here if I had to do 4 year on campus housing. That would be awful. I have no idea why anyone would want to do that outside of living in a frat/ sorority. Even then

[72mustang1]

Stanford guarantees but does not require four years on campus. Because of the local economy ie silicon valley there is tremendous demand for on campus housing both undergraduate and graduate. Warren Buffet partner Charley Munger help fund a law school housing project.

[Digetydog]

When the frat houses are relocated (to just north of where the Lambda Chach house is and on that same strett), that area will be filled with admin buildings,offices and education stuff. GW doesn't want dorms across from his library. SMU does not have a plan for 4 year on campus housing. It's not in the master plan or even in the "longer term" goals of the university. There's no place to put them.

Side note, there's no way I would have atteneded school here if I had to do 4 year on campus housing. That would be awful. I have no idea why anyone would want to do that outside of living in a frat/ sorority. Even then

If the system is set up right, living on campus can be fantastic. My sister went to ND and never considered living off campus. At Yale, most undergrads stay on campus in their residential colleges. I have heard very few complaints.

[whitwiki]

Always better to be given the option to stay than to force them. hopefully the sophomore housing gives people incentive to stay.

[gostangs]

I think the four year option is one we could pull off, and probably will over time. Good schools don't really care of someone wants to be off campus. We are only now starting to be good enough to ask students to bend to our rules.

The new dorms are something you would want to live in by the way. Nothing you have seen before.

[PonyKai]

If any school required more than 2 years on campus, that'd be the end of my interest in it.

[Charleston Pony]

I lived on campus 3 of my 4 years - FR dorm, then FR dorm again as a Soph advisor, frat house JR year and off campus rental house as a SR. I liked 3 years on campus just fine but will admit I missed out on more activities my SR year being off campus.

[gostangs]

The kind of student that just has to live off campus is probably no longer our target student.

[couch 'em]

Ridiculous. We are not Harvard and even there they still party. Our average SAT is still in the 1300s, not exactly genius territory.

[StallionsModelT]

couch em,

I don't think anyone is saying that we are Harvard. However, I think its clear that the university has made vast improvement in both student quality and recruitment in the last 10 years. As Dallas continues to grow, SMU will be an even more attractive destination for high quality prospective students from around the country. We aspire to be in the same category as Vanderbilt and Northwestern correct? Why can't SMU be the Vanderbilt of the Southwest? There is no good reason why we can't. Vandy requires four year on-campus living. Last I checked they're doing ok.

[whitwiki]

Your logic is flawed. Living requirements don't define Vanderbilt's success. They are way down the list of influences on the average college student. If good housing exists, people won't care.

[Water Pony]

Vanderbilt's policy is explained here:

http://admissions.vanderbilt.edu/vandyb ... anderbilt/

Vanderbilt is located not far from downtown Nashville. My daughter went there and all the undergrads adapted well to the on-campus requirement. There is great energy on campus and along the commercial streets nearby. As for Vanderbilt of the SW, Rice probably qualifies before us, yet this should be our aspiration. Northwestern is another prestigious school worthy of comparison, if we want to raise our academic profile along with athletics.

[StallionsModelT]

Yes I see no reason why SMU couldn't be on the same level as Northwestern. None at all.

[gostangs]

If you love SMU - you want as much on campus living for our students as you can get. It :

1) attracts more serious students
2) increases on campus events
3) helps athletic attendence/school spirit
4) more connected to campus, therefore better alumni

it also increases school safety. There really is no downside - except it is expensive and it uses up land that can be for other school funcitons. expense is off-set by more rental income so that basically goes away.

SMU has been basically an expensive commuter school (of better quality). That is now changing.