lizzardfire

@compucomp

I think that it's pretty easy as a student to make your own opinions about which houses are right or not right for you. If a house really is a party house and a lot of drinking goes on in said house, this will be apparent during rotation. Which is better for a student to base his opinions on: the biased opinions of a bitter alum or the things he can see with his own eyes? You say that prefrosh should be more informed; fine, compile facts. You're not giving them information, you're giving them propaganda.

I also would respond to your comments that one of the reasons rotation works as well as it does is because of the lack of transparency. I don't expect you to agree with me, but surveys show time and time again that the vast, vast majority of the campus likes rotation and the house system as currently implemented. I didn't and don't know you well enough to know why you personally don't like the house system, but I only know one person at tech right now that shares your opinions. He feels that his lack of friends is due to the house system, whereas I (and many people I know) just think he's quite arrogant, quite awkward, and somewhat of a jerk. I doubt he would have friends in any system.

I don't understand how people can sit back and say "the house system / rotation need to be changed" when these processes clearly are supported by the overwhelming majority of campus. I totally agree that the house system is not right for everyone, but no system is, and I encourage any students who are turned off by the idea of the house system to go to another school.

EDIT: FYI, this sentence "reality has a bias, and everything I wrote down is true" makes no sense whatsoever. First off, reality doesn't have a bias. Each person's perception of reality is biased, but presumably there is some objective reality or referring to reality as some universal thing is meaningless. Additionally, if there is no objective reality, then how can any comments about reality be "true" when they are obviously either non-applicable to the "realities" of other people (in the case of there being no objective reality) or subject to your own biased interpretation of reality.

webhappy

Lizzard and compucomp have pretty extreme views.

I know multiple people, including compucomp, who have negative to neutral views of the current housing/rotation system. I know there are people like lizzardfire who think the housing system is the most amazing part of Caltech and have trouble believing that there are Techers who don't think so highly of the current system.

Fact: the current system means that some students are forced into a house they didn't really want to be in. If we didn't do rotations, people could be sorted randomly into the houses. I remember making this point previously to lizzardfire, but I don't remember what his reply was.

In my opinion, the issue with the current opaqueness of the process is that it only benefits current students and the houses they're part of. The current students will claim that they will help pull the frosh into the houses that are right for them, but I doubt the incentives of both parties really match.

As a note, I will agree that someone who complains about the house system limiting their friends probably wouldn't make too many friends anyways. Some of my closest friends that I keep in touch with are from other houses.

lizzardfire

In both the case of random sorting and non-random sorting, some students will end up in houses they don't want to be a part of. Additionally, students have the option at any time of running for membership in another house.

There are three options if you don't like your house:
1) You don't run for membership in another house, either because you're lazy (too bad) or you can't live in ANY of the eight houses (then move to marks or braun)
2) You run for membership in another house and get rejected. This would be because they don't like you, so why would you want to live there anyway?
3) You run for membership in another house and are accepted. Great, move there.

I don't think my views of the house system are extreme. I don't think it's the best thing ever--I think it has pros and cons. What I do think is essential is that some schools have something like the house system and some schools don't. I think some students are better served by the house system and some are not, and I encourage those students who feel the house system would not serve them to go elsewhere. This excludes some students from Caltech, but only in the same way that ANY system does--there is no ideal system that serves everyone.

jdhutchin

I also disagree with the idea that lizzardfire's ideas are "extreme". While many people will admit that there are issues with the house system, there is significant amounts of data (yearly rotation surveys that have high response rates) that indicates that most people are pretty happy with the house system and the house they are in.

webhappy

I can't agree with your first statement, unless we are envisioning different premises: "In both the case of random sorting and non-random sorting, some students will end up in houses they don't want to be a part of."

If students are randomly assigned, I would think that the cultures would disappear and the houses would homogenize. Thus, students would not really prefer one house over another. I guess you feel that the traditions are so strong that students randomly assigned into a house will take them up and continue them. In addition, students wouldn't invest as much effort in a process that they have no influence over, so they wouldn't get as worked up if they did end in a house that they didn't want to be in.

By the way, is there any news regarding the trustees being interested in the Rotation process?

Finally, this statement of yours feels pretty extreme to me: "I think some students are better served by the house system and some are not, and I encourage those students who feel the house system would not serve them to go elsewhere. This excludes some students from Caltech, but only in the same way that ANY system does--there is no ideal system that serves everyone."
In my opinion, the rotation process and housing traditions were an inconvenience, esp. first term as a frosh, but not something that trumps other factors over where I choose to attend college.

lizzardfire

Having seen houses with random sorting processes at places like Rice, I don't agree that the homogenization occurs. The houses seek to differentiate themselves from one another, and in doing so gain personality. Students at Rice, for instance, can be quite disappointed that they didn't end up in one of their preferred residential colleges.

As for the trustees, even if I knew anything about their involvement I wouldn't discuss it here.

As for your final statement, we're not adjusting Caltech to suit you personally. Changing a system that the large majority of students prefer to suit your own personal opinions doesn't make a lot of sense to me, as the change would inconvenience more people than it would serve. I'm just saying that if it is a huge deal for someone, they can choose to attend another school; if they attend this one, they do so knowing that the majority of students they attend with support the house system.

I totally respect your right to believe what you want about the house system, and I think you are perfectly entitled to feel the way you do. That being said, please don't campaign for a change that will make most students here very unhappy. (Edit: To clarify, I am not suggesting that webhappy is campaigning for a change here)

dancer_skater

My child is a freshman this year. After rotation, he ended up in one of his least favorable houses. All his friends got into one of their top choices. Can he change the house next year?

IMSAgeek

@dancer_skater
I'm sorry to hear that. Your son can apply for membership in whatever house he chooses starting second term. If he gains membership, he will then be able to participate in that house's room picks procedures for next year.

dancer_skater

Thank you IMSAgeek! What would be the chance for his membership application to be approved and what are the determining factors for approval/reject of the application? Can he only apply memebership for one house or multiple (say 2 or 3) houses in case that his top choice will not work out?

Quelloquialism

Membership procedures vary wildly from house to house, so it'd probably be best for him to ask around the houses he's interested in. Also, having multiple house memberships is perfectly acceptable (although you do have to pay house dues for each house).

Batllo

After living in his house for a year he might start liking his housemates and want to stay.

dancer_skater

@Quelloquialism:
Thank you for the information. I will tell him to ask around and check out. If his membership application gets approved, does it mean that he is guaranteed to stay in that house next year? Or is he just eligible to participate in the lottery for that house, but whether or not he can get in still depends on his luck?

IMSAgeek

He will likely not be guaranteed a spot and will have to participate in whatever procedure the house has in place for determining which upperclassmen get to live in the house. The procedure will vary from house to house.

EDIT: I should also add that I'd encourage him to at least give his current house a chance. The thing to remember here is that even when we're divided into houses, most Caltech students will share some common interests.

Kamikazewave

Actually IMSAgeek, there are some people who just can't fit in with some houses. You can usually spot them pretty quickly, and no amount of time will help. It's better for the house and the person in question to move out as quickly as possible.

dancer_skater

But you have to wait until next year to possibly change the house, right?