<p>I don’t care. Enjoy! I was being philosophical about issues related to so many perks.</p>
<p>My D was just saying that she thinks her spartan dorms were a good learning experience YMMV.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that one should live beyond what they “can afford”. We live in a small house that we can afford too. Just because someone has a big screen TV does not mean they are financially irresponsible. The point is those luxury apartments are actually CHEAPER than the dorms in many cases.</p>
<p>Do your children earn the food they eat (other than gruel), or do you just bless them with it because you love them and want them to enjoy tasty food?</p>
<p>OK, if that’s not your mindset - that’s fine. Glad we do it differently at our house.</p>
<p>Something that I’ve noticed is that people with a * lot* of money often spend rather conservatively.
Want to find a family that puts importance on * bling!* new car/flashy jewelry/huge a$$ television?
They are the ones who are feeding their family fast food because it is cheap and spending their money on stuff that gets noticed.
:rolleyes:</p>
<p>emeraldkity,</p>
<p>What about people that choose a place to live with more amenities that is much cheaper than a place with sparse amenities?</p>
<p>Don’t know if you’re talking about my post or not, but my D will live in one of these places, and we are certainly NOT geared toward bling, nor do we have a lot of money. We don’t have name-brand on much of anything…and if we get it, it’s “special”. We drive used cars and cheap mini-vans, we live in a middle class neighborhood in a small old house. Our home is decorated in “early garage sale” and we do okay. We don’t worry too much about appearances.</p>
<p>And for the record, we abhor fast food. </p>
<p>It just so happens that this awesome place is cheaper than dorms and meal plans, and it affords D, who is a junior, a little more independence/freedom.</p>
<p>YMMV because I haven’t found a post-grad apartment in my metropolitan area that doesn’t have a pool, a gym, free coffee, and other amenities, and I’m not making anywhere close to 6 figures</p>
<p>I think the argument that it will make kids sad when they can’t keep up with that standard of living after school is flawed. I lived in a single dorm with a private bath in a vibrant downtown area for college, and it was awesome. I had public transportation for the first time in my life and could walk anywhere I wanted, and had endless opportunities to go to museums, movies, plays, concerts, etc and so forth, and I had free access to a gym in the form of the campus fitness center. Ooh, and the arboretum in walking distance was awesome. It was my own little slice of heaven. All things I had never had before. </p>
<p>When I finished school, I had to move back in with my parents and lose all of that, and even now that I have my own beautiful home I still don’t have many of those awesome amenities I had in college. There is no such disappointment, and to be disappointed has never even occurred to me. My upbringing and how I lived for the 18 years before college had a lot more to do with my expectations for my life than the 2-4 years spent in college, and I think a kid who feels otherwise is set up for all kinds of disappointments in life that have nothing to do with their student housing choices.</p>
<p>Emaheevul07, thanks for that insight. We have offered/suggested that D move back in with us after graduation and pay off all student loans and sock some money away to purchase a modest home. Don’t know if she’ll do that or not. It is VERY possible that she will get married soon after college. Either way, she’ll have to give up “all that” 
Somehow, I don’t think she’ll be terribly disappointed. I don’t even know what use most of those amenities will be to her. Mostly I think she will just be happy to have a room of her own!</p>
<p>Huh, and here I am with the other problem - paying $60k when the dorm room my S had was the size of a jail cell, and his fraternity house doesn’t exactly pass the white glove test. He will be pleased to know it’s building character.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say * any* dorm room had “bling”.
True my oldest always had a private room, and the dorms themselves were fairly small so you weren’t sharing a kitchen with a hundred people, but still * it’s a dorm room*.</p>
<p>Yea, most dorms here DO NOT afford a private room or a kitchen</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Indeed. At my LAC, single rooms tended to be reserved mainly for seniors, juniors, lucky sophomores, and those whose documented disability/medical condition necessitates a single room. </p>
<p>We did have kitchens in some smaller dorms, but they were for the entire dorm and were strictly controlled by the RA. If the RA feels the dorm residents haven’t been cleaning up after themselves sufficiently, he/she has a tendency to lock it and thus, prevent anyone from using it.</p>
<p>In the late 1990s and the 2000s, colleges got the message that ho-hum and even decrepit dorms were turning off some applicants. Shiny new dorms became a way to attract attention, including the attention of donors and generous alumni.</p>
<p>Yes, it does seem like the dorms/apartments at some colleges are overpriced for their region. I think that other posters have it right when they say that students in main choose their dorms for personal reasons that often have little to do with cost.
That being said, I was nearly floored when junior sent back a video of the college apartments at the state flagship were he is completing a summer research internship. Wow!!! If my old dorms were as nice as his campus apartment, I’d have never left college.</p>
<p>We assumed dorms were functional, which was all we expected & so we didnt tour dorms at most schools we were considering.
We saw a dorm at Seattle U, which was pretty nondescript- but D wasnt applying there anyway and we toured dorms @ TESC because that was Ds first choice and because their dorms were different than some- many were suite style dorms.( except for freshmen)</p>
<p>She ended up at Reed and we had only seen exteriors of their dorms. She was assigned a single ( they have singles & divided doubles- two rooms with one door to hallway)
She didnt request it & so we were surprised when it was assigned, but it wasnt more expensive and it had floor to ceiling windows as befits the " 60’s ski lodge vibe" that overlooked the wooded canyon.:)</p>
<p>Her freshman dorm supposedly could house 28 students, but Idont think it was completely full. It was built in the 60s as mentioned & kitchen was not designed to be closed off. They had a common area with a blackboard to facilitate group studying and a loft where the common use printer was kept. The kitchen wasnt huge, not that much bigger than residential, and considering they only had one fridge- it could be thought small. ( Her sisters house has two full size refrigerators) Students had stickers to delinate classifications of available food.
Commie food- which meant go ahead and use it-
Shared food- but ask first &
Do not eat this if you value your body parts.
They werent permitted microwaves in their rooms, so having a kitchen available was pretty helpful. Trader Joes and a few other places to buy food were just a few blocks away.The cafeteria ( the school is so small, it only has one), sold ingredients if necessary.
Dorms also have family style bathrooms. Meaning-open to all.</p>
<p>Sophomore & jr yr she was in a newer dorm ( which perhaps was being finished up her freshman year- its been a long time and like many schools, there is ** always** construction going on campus.
[REED</a> VIRTUAL TOUR](<a href=“http://www.reed.edu/apply/tour/index.html?welcome_to_campus/steele_east_west.html~mainFrame]REED”>http://www.reed.edu/apply/tour/index.html?welcome_to_campus/steele_east_west.html~mainFrame)
This may be an old video, not only are the couches the same, but I recognize the student speaking.</p>
<p>I dont think my younger daughters school ( public) has dorms with kitchens, probably why she opted to live off campus after freshman year. While her sophomore year apartment was farther away than her freshman dorm on the edge of campus, her junior year housing ( an older home) was much closer to the middle of campus than either of those choices.
She likes to cook, including growing her own herbs and veggies. Her house is also much closer to the center of town, making it easier to go to the weekend farmers markets without a car.</p>
<p>I think it’s reverse snobbery to pretend there is virtue in spartan, unappealing, dated or poorly-kept-up dorms. I think my alma mater is particularly weak on the dorm dimension and I applaud the efforts they make to put up new housing or renovate the old housing. They’re finally tearing down some dorms and fraternity houses and it’s long overdue. I don’t want them putting up cinderblocks to replace them just so it’s not a “distraction to studying.”</p>
<p>And I will say that nice dorms do make a college “show” well. Unlike Beliavsky, I hope my kids have nicer than I had. My D’s college has (for the most part) lovely dorms – loads of charm, common rooms that are picturesque, and I think that’s great. I think studying in lovely circumstances is something that’s nice. Why else do people value / love beautiful old libraries? To hear Beliavsky talk, those are “distractions from studying.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, my freshman dorm room was not even very functional (poorly lit for one thing), and my parents, who think somewhat as I do, were disappointed with it. I’d want dorm rooms for my children that are better than that but not as luxurious as some of those described in the article. Look at the thread title, taken from the article – my view appears to be shared by the NYT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This may be one reason an increasing number of students take five or six years to graduate. (I know there are others, such as an inability to take a required course.) A few posters have noted that some students’ standard of living, especially housing, drops just after college.</p>
<p>Those weren’t run by the colleges, though. These are private, off-campus housing that students and their parents can choose from or not as they see fit according to their tastes and budget. I would think as a staunch capitalist who believes people should enjoy the fruits of what they can afford, you would applaud the smartness of the developer who builds these things and is able to attract well-to-do parents to buy these amenities for their children. That’s the American way, no? </p>
<p>I wouldn’t buy into that super-luxury because frankly I prefer my kids staying on campus and am not a fan of off-campus housing in general, but if someone else wants to spend their money that way, I don’t see what concern it is of mine. </p>
<p>I know lots of kids who go to college in resort towns in Arizona and California where their parents bought them condos near campus – to serve as second / vacation homes once the kids were done living there. Not my style, but what’s it to me?</p>
<p>I don’t really care what the NYT thinks of my kid’s apartment. Kids will find distractions where ever they are if they are so inclined. As stated earlier, a nice apartment has not been a distraction in our experience, and kid is thinking of graduating early.</p>
<p>I lived in a few different roach infested old apartments while a student. I don’t think they built any character. Older D’s dorms were mostly old and crowded, and as soon as she got off campus she went looking for a nicer apartment. Youngest D did not base her decision on dorms, but when it came down to the final 2 schools, the one she picked had the nicer dorm/dining situation.</p>
<p>Beliavsky,</p>
<p>While I don’t necessarily disagree with you that some of these amenities could just prove to be a distraction - I don’t think that if you have a big screen TV in the common area that it’s somehow MORE of a distraction than a regular television. And so much depends on the kid. My D really just doesn’t have time for much other than her work, and her work is important to her.</p>
<p>MY point is that if private enterprises can furnish all of that at a cost less than the spartan dorms - what is the university doing wrong? Can they not offer modest accommodations with private rooms and suite bathrooms that are clean, painted and furnished at a FRACTION of the cost of a full-fledged apartment complete with kitchen, television, furnishings and on site amenities? It’s ridiculous when you compare the two and the Taj Mahal is cheaper than the dingy old tiny room shared with two people and the tiny bathroom shared by 4 IF YOU’RE VERY FORTUNATE, all climate controlled by one individual on a different floor. </p>
<p>I think dorm living is ideal for a freshman, and maybe a sophomore, but I understand completely a junior or a senior wanting to move off campus and maybe light a candle in their own place, cook a meal in their own kitchen, have guests, have their own room, etc. I think it’s very reasonable and understandable. Sure they could pick out a crappy apartment that was merely functional for the same price, but why WOULD they?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not calling for further government regulation of student housing.</p>
<p>Some students and their parents take on more federally subsidized debt than they need to live better than they need to. When they default, the taxpayer loses. In general, excessive spending on student amenities both raises college prices and encourages people who are not intellectually inclined to attend college.</p>