Maid for Harvard? (divisive implications)

[2diagnosis]

Maid for Harvard?
Students should be wary of Dormaid’s divisive implications

By THE CRIMSON STAFF

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=506289

After recent approval by Associate Dean of the College Thomas A. Dingman ’67, other members of the Dean’s office, and all 12 House Masters, a new student service is sweeping onto campus. Dormaid, founded by Michael E. Kopko ’07, is a cleaning service that allows students to avoid the perennial problem of dingy, smutty, questionably-habitable rooms. But as appealing as the thought of a perpetually tidy room may be, (independent of family visits), Dormaid could potentially mess up as many rooms as it cleans. By creating yet another differential between the haves and have-nots on campus, Dormaid threatens our student unity.

.....The less well-off among us, however, make semi-weekly journeys to the basement with bulging mesh laundry bags and quarters in hand. These differences extend to the social sphere as well—to final clubs composed predominately of wealthy young men, or to basic activities, like eating out, that some students cannot afford to enjoy....

...A service like Dormaid can bring many levels of awkwardness into this picture. For example, do two people sharing a double split the cost? What if one wants the service and the other does not? What if one cannot afford it? Hiring someone to clean dorm rooms is a convenience, but it is also an obvious display of wealth that would establish a perceived, if unspoken, barrier between students of different economic means. ...

....This openness must be imbued in the atmosphere of this school, which means that unneeded distinctions between the rich and the poor are the last things that Harvard needs to foster. Although Harvard has given its approval, students don’t have to. We urge the student body to boycott Dormaid. Everyone’s certainly busy, but Harvard students shouldn’t choose convenience over healthy relationships with their blockmates. It’s up to each one of us to ensure that our peers feel comfortable on campus, and if that means plugging in a vacuum every two weeks, then so be it... END

---The rich need to learn how to pick up after themselves.:mad:

(edited becawz i kant spel)

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Next they will have a limo service to drive some students to classes...

EXCELLENT sig!!!!!!

[bluestateguy]

2. Students who want this can move off campus

Students should not live in the dorms expecting to emulate the luxurious lifestyles they grew up with at home.

I'm sure it will only be a matter of time before some economics or finance major writes in to the Crimson to "set the record straight".

[sir_captain]

8. You clearly don't know anything about Harvard

99% of the students live in the dorms (which use the English House system) precisely because they are ridiculously luxurious (that's actually not the whole truth--the houses are fantastic for all sorts of reasons not related to comfort as well.) There is a free service at Harvard afforded to all students called "dorm crew" whereby a crew comes around (either made up of work-study students (best paying job on campus by far) or a third party contracted service) that cleans the in-suite bathrooms once a week. Dormaid, or whatever they want to call it, is not that different, really.

And anyway, if you think most of the kids at Harvard had maids at home, you're just wrong. The houses are by far the best place that most of those kids will live (including me, believe me) for a real long time.

[starwolf]

3. If this is such a large issue

that is rates being trumpeted from the school paper, its clear there is little of consequence being discussed there.

[Nikia]

4. Having gone to a private intellectual elitist college

I agree. Students are there because they are the best intellectually. Such colleges should do as much as possible to minimize the economic differences between students. They should either not have the service or offer it as part of the housing cost for everyone with applicable financial aid.

[GraysonDave]

5. You've got to be kidding

These are smart kids we're talking about here. They already know that there are economic disparities amongst the student body. What is gained by prohibiting someone the freedom to spend their money as they see fit on a needed service?

[Nikia]

10. Students are prohibited from living in luxery apartments off campus

Harvard, like some other residential colleges, has a campus housing policy for undergraduates, which keeps most undergraduates on campus. Both the richest and poorest students live in the same dorms regardless of welath. It is done in the name of campus unity.
Harvard also has a generous aid program, which does allow the poorest students to attend the colllege without having to work long hours during the school year.
Yes, there are sometimes differences that become apparent. The college's administration or housing department shouldn't be officially encouraging them, especially since their housing situation is meant to discourage class differences.

[sir_captain]

13. That's not actually true

while 97% or so of undergrads live in the houses, there are a handful that choose not to and can live wherever they want. Only freshmen are forbidden from living off-campus.

All the stuff about aid was spot on, though.

[98geoduck]

7. Especially because there is a correlation between wealth and "intellect"

Actually, The strongest.

[Nikia]

11. I assume that you are talking about the general correlation

between grades and test scores and parental income.
Harvard and many other competitive private colleges go out of their way to recruit the best poor students in the country. They also offer them good financial aid packages so that it is cheaper for them to attend the private college than the state colleges.
Yes, they may give them preferential treatment in admissions, not that they are admitting unqualified students. It just means that a student from a poor background who overcame many hardships with a 1300 SAT might be admitted to Harvard while a student attending an elite prep school, where students are admitted from every year, probably wouldn't with the same SAT score. That is done in the name of diversity. In fact, the SAT was designed to identify poor students who might benefit from a Harvard education.
Anyone who is admitted to Harvard is strong intellectually. If the admissions committee made a mistake, the student will be unable to do the work and most likely, drop out.
Some poor students do quite well though, get their degrees, and go on to do great things. It makes a bigger difference in the college where poor students go than rich students as far as achievement after graduation. They don't have to be lower class all their life.

[TygrBright]

6. I don't get it...?

What's so disgraceful about being poor?

Granted, it's not pleasant. (Been there, done that.)

But if you're going to Hah-vahd, for godssakes, you're not exactly doomed to panhandle for the rest of your short miserable life.

Heck, if you're going to just about any college, you've got plenty to be proud of. You're doing something to make a better future for yourself.

This might actually give some students a way to earn cash, by doing cleaning. I earned part of my college cash by cleaning. It wasn't fun... I hated it. But I sure liked the cash. And it felt good, in a way, to know that I could earn my own damn' money. I wasn't dependent on Mommy and Daddy for payola.

Look, you can't wipe out distinctions between rich and poor this way. It's artificial. It's meaningless PC pandering. The whole "if I can't have it, you can't have it" or "if you get it, I have to get it, too" mindset is part of a problem that sidetracks people from the REAL issues of economic justice.

It's the deadly sense of entitlement that destroyed the Soviet revolution by obsessing about whether "kulaks" had too many cows, rather than whether land was being used efficiently and people had what they needed to be productive.

Use this energy creating momentum for REAL economic change that will increase the availability of living-wage jobs, put housing and health care back within the reach of the lower three quintiles, and other substantive changes.

impatiently,
Bright

[sir_captain]

9. Harvard already has a dorm crew

which is the highest paying job on campus. But yes, you're absolutely right--this would be another way for the kids on work-study to put some cash in their pockets, and there's sure nothing in hell wrong with that.

[Nikia]

12. Well, they do it in the military

Colleges are private institutions, which make their own rules. They are artificial environments, which can encourage or discourage some behaviors. Although students come in with their own values, professors, campus staff, and the administration also influence students values.
The predominate value at my college was liberal learning and that intellect was the highest value. I felt very little class discrimination, as did most of my other financial aid heavy friends. A few told me that they were looked down upon less in our "snobby" college than they had ever been in their entire lives. We did see it used against food service and physical plant staff, unfortunately, but not the fellow intellectuals who happened to come from poor backgrounds.
Students at private colleges are a relatively small part of the population. Poor students who attend may or may not become honorary members of higher social classes. Does it matter in the larger scope of things when lower class people are discriminated against heavily and suffer because of their economic situation? Not as much. On these campuses, it does matter though both to the poor students and perhaps to the rich students too who may or may not learn to judge someone on something other than their wealth.