Pinehaven Shellgame - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 24, 2005

Pinehaven Shellgame

Date: Mar 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Bothersome Question
"Right now:
Sorority members live at the Panhellenic dorm or off-campus. Married/family housing is at Pinehaven.

The plan:
Raze part of Pinehaven to provide sorority housing and move married/family off-campus.

The Bothersome Question:
What will happen to Panhellenic? Even if just the upperclassmen (upperclasswomen) move to the new sorority village, there will still be many rooms freed up.

It is my experience that, while some will want to live in a "sorority house" situation, many sorority members will still vastly prefer off-campus housing."

Someone help me out please if you know different or can confirrm: Panhellenic is due to be renovated into a freshmen dorm......

Date: Mar 24, 2005

I have a separate conspiracy theory that ties in a lot of the campus "goings on". I think SFT is truly making an attempt to change the face of USM's campus from what it is now (diverse with traditionals, nontraditionals, singles, marrieds/families, etc.) to a campus made up almost exclusively of 18-24 year-olds. Why do I think this is so? Look at the big "pushes" SFT has made: bringing dining chains to campus (Chick-Fil-A, Starbucks, etc.), building up the football program, tearing down Pinehurst to build a sorority village, attempting to spread all M-W classes to M-W-F classes, etc. These "initiatives" can be seen as positives for the 18-24 year-old and negative for nontraditional/married/family students (NTMF). NTMFs usually work during the day and take classes at night; those who do take classes during the day come for class and leave quickly to go back to work or they live on a budget that, in most cases, cannot be stretched to afford on-campus fast food -- no room for the new dining services in either the time or money budgets. While many of the NTMFs may support football, football in the South is often a cornerstone of underclassmen's social scenes. Of course, the Pinehurts/Sorority Village swap is a direct exchange of housing between these two groups. Perhaps with less affordable housing for NTMFs, fewer will attempt to continue education at USM. Finally, having more classes spread out between 8-5, M-F means that fewer NTMFs will be able to arrange favorable schedules and will have to take more time from work (sometimes an impossibility) or take more time from a babysitter/childcare (often an impossibility due to budgetary constraints).

I will be watching to see what other moves SFT makes that could feed my theory's fire. I will be very suspicious if on-campus childcare-related services become diminished or if the number of night classes is reduced.

Date: Mar 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Upper Class A$$
"I have a separate conspiracy theory that ties in a lot of the campus "goings on". I think SFT is truly making an attempt to change the face of USM's campus from what it is now (diverse with traditionals, nontraditionals, singles, marrieds/families, etc.) to a campus made up almost exclusively of 18-24 year-olds. Why do I think this is so? Look at the big "pushes" SFT has made: bringing dining chains to campus (Chick-Fil-A, Starbucks, etc.), building up the football program, tearing down Pinehurst to build a sorority village, attempting to spread all M-W classes to M-W-F classes, etc. These "initiatives" can be seen as positives for the 18-24 year-old and negative for nontraditional/married/family students (NTMF). NTMFs usually work during the day and take classes at night; those who do take classes during the day come for class and leave quickly to go back to work or they live on a budget that, in most cases, cannot be stretched to afford on-campus fast food -- no room for the new dining services in either the time or money budgets. While many of the NTMFs may support football, football in the South is often a cornerstone of underclassmen's social scenes. Of course, the Pinehurts/Sorority Village swap is a direct exchange of housing between these two groups. Perhaps with less affordable housing for NTMFs, fewer will attempt to continue education at USM. Finally, having more classes spread out between 8-5, M-F means that fewer NTMFs will be able to arrange favorable schedules and will have to take more time from work (sometimes an impossibility) or take more time from a babysitter/childcare (often an impossibility due to budgetary constraints).

I will be watching to see what other moves SFT makes that could feed my theory's fire. I will be very suspicious if on-campus childcare-related services become diminished or if the number of night classes is reduced."

Before you can jump to that, I think you need to look at the number of on-line classes and the enrollment figures (up or down) for both on-line and face to face lectures..........

Date: Mar 24, 2005

These two "theories" are not at odds. They are both based on Shelby Thames' strategic objective to reach 20,000 students. What a shame that there is no VP of academic affairs (a provost by any other name) who balances the growth focus with a reminder that this is a university and should have, at its core, a focus on academics.