The Tech - Online EditionMIT's oldest and largest
newspaper & the first
newspaper published
on the web
Boston Weather: 53.0°F | Fair

GSC housing plan reaches compromise

We strongly object to the claim of Robert D. Kiss G and Linda D. Baston G ["Article ignored graduate students who back proposed housing plan," March 20] that they represent "the few who are dedicated to the plight of homeless first-year graduate students," and that they must "speak up at the meetings as spokespersons for the nameless 1300 incoming graduate students." Housing for incoming graduate students has been a serious concern of all graduate students, and the Graduate Student Council as a representative body has been addressing this issue for more than three years.

The debate about housing for first-year students has been a constant tussle between two distinct groups. On the one hand, there are a few off-campus graduate students who claim to be the sole torchbearers of the interests of the new graduate students. In an effort to make housing more available to first-year graduates, this group has tried to curtail <>

the privileges of continuing on-<>

campus graduate students. On the other hand, a group of on-campus students has resisted any blind policies that have no regard to the sense of community that is essential to on-campus living.

The perspectives of the two groups are obviously very different and sometimes conflicting in nature. Thus, any reasonable plan that satisfies the different groups must necessarily be a compromise plan. Each group must relax part of its standpoint in order to meet the overall objective of providing housing priority to a maximum number of incoming graduate students.

The GSC housing plan is one such compromise that has been worked out after serious deliberation, involving various sections of the graduate student community. The GSC plan reflects the serious concern of current graduate students regarding the maximum availability of reasonable on-campus housing for incoming graduate students.

Any flaws in the above-mentioned plan as perceived by the Housing Office must be corrected by a similar consensus effort involving the various sections of the current graduate student community. The proposal of a counter plan by Director of Housing and Food Services Lawrence E. Maguire reflects his disregard of graduate student consensus opinion in favor of a blind administrative idea which may find acceptance from one small section of the graduate student population.

Lakshmana Rao G->

Nishikant Sonwalkar G->