Minervas seem great—they provide free ethnic food, comfortable couches and alternative space for educational and social events. Sounds grand, right? But wait, let’s give these houses each a budget of 25,000 dollars (which is arbitrary, because houses can request more funding) and let’s employ two full-time administrators working on this system. Let’s also push out the Greek organizations who built these homes, despite the fact that Union is the founder of Greek history. The Minerva System was implemented by Roger Hull, and has panned out to be just as successful as Hull’s campaign for Mayor.
I lived in Sorum last year—it was pleasant. However, I didn’t know anyone on my floor and vice versa. Most people didn’t care about the “community” aspect of the program. The reason many of us applied to live there was because we didn’t want to be subjected to Fox—where the party animals go to party even harder— and we didn’t want to live all the way in College Park. Does anyone really believe in the mission of the Minervas? The house councils are filled with many students who, admittedly, use the program to boost their resumes with cool titles like Finance Chair of the so-and-so Minerva.
Why keep them around? Have you ever been to a Minerva event? Nobody actually goes. Well, that’s not entirely true. Minervas are exploited for the good food. People will go to events for 10-15 minutes—just to eat, and will then bail. I think more people were present at my fraternity’s last social event than at the grand sum of all of the Minerva events combined for the term (and my fraternity doesn’t even have huge parties). Part of this problem may be due to the fact that many Minerva events are generally “dry.” While its understandable that the Minervas do not promote alcohol consumption, having a fully sober party on a college campus is not realistic.
Union has paid employees who are working to maintain the Minervas. What would happen to these jobs if the program stopped? It seems to me that the Board of Directors at Union doesn’t know what is really happening. I think that the paid employees are giving them false ideas of how the Minerva’s are running so the trustees won’t choose to close them down.
It is important to discuss the central reason Minervas are being kept, besides the possible false information provided by administrators, and that is that Union receives positive feedback from tours and info-sessions regarding the Minerva System. On paper, it is a great idea. They are supposedly social and academic institutions that promote student and professor interaction while offering great leadership opportunities.
Unfortunately, forced interaction does not work. Remember, college is about finding yourself—not just your major and career, but who you are as a person which is often based on the kids you build relationships with. We are young adults now; we don’t need mommy and daddy to tell us who to hang out with and what to do with ourselves on the weekends. On the other hand, this is the reason why Greek Life and Theme Houses do work. Students are able to pick their friend groups and essentially make their own decisions about what their niche is and who they want to hang out with—this is a much more adult-approach to housing and social gatherings and is more applicable in the real world.
What is my recommended solution? I think that the theme houses have a lot of potential and Greek life (as incredibly flawed as it is) can be reformed. The Ozone theme house is a primary example of a great social scene on campus—a bunch of students interested in a similar cause, living together, being productive and having a great time. Let theme houses, like Ozone, and other organizations compete for the free-standing houses on campus. These competitions could have many elements: who raises the most money for charity in one year, who volunteers the most, who hosts the most educational and/or alternative events, etc. Imagine if Union told each organization that whoever raises the most money for charity gets one of the homes on Library Lane. Union could raise a fortune for charity. I see parents and alumni feeling the inspiration to donate money to make sure that their kids, legacy, and younger brothers or sisters get great housing. If Union designates some of the beautiful houses on campus to go to different organizations on a two-year contract, the organizations would have a natural competition amongst each other to act to the best of their abilities. I admit that there are some students who enjoy the Minervas; however, there are too many of them for the number of students who utilize their programs. I recommend leaving North College and South College for the Minerva program to allow some students to continue to use Minerva services. With fewer Minervas, the remaining ones will get more traffic and a higher density of interest for events.
I understand that the Minerva program was intended to take time to work. However, this system has been running for nearly nine years. I, like every other student at this school, entered Union with the new Minerva system, theme house system and the limited Greek system. Most new students are still not buying the Minerva program. I do find great merit in the idea but it fails to satisfy.
Loading ...
Title is really “Minerva System: Union College Changes Definition of Minerva from Roman Godess to Waste of Money”
Heard a tour guide talking to a group of prospective students yesterday, and I quote “The one thing Union students remember most are their minerva programs”…got to be honest, I burst out loud laughing when I heard that. I can’t remember about hearing a minerva event that I thought “oh I got to check that out,” I simply just delete the emails that tell me this weeks minerva events at this point. No body actually cares about the minervas. I think the idea of making them theme homes is a great idea!
Brian, I respect your views, but your perception and opinion of the Minerva program is flawed and overwhelmingly ignorant. But unfortunately, your perception is widely held among many students on campus. Why don’t students like yourself try to change that view by bringing your own ideas to a Minerva Council Meeting?
The Minerva program offers an opportunity to students that cannot be found at any other college or university. Students have the ability to think of anything, and receive funding for it. Surely, the vast majority of students here at Union must have a passion in something. Why wouldn’t anyone want to take advantage of such an opportunity to receive the means to pursue that interest?
The current problem with the Minerva system is that the student body has a flawed perception of what it is used for. There are just not enough students who are utilizing the Minerva system to follow through with their passions.
I challenge you and the rest of the student body to bring your own ideas to a Minerva Council Meeting or to request an event. You will be pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to gain the means necessary to follow through with your passion.
Anonymous, I don’t think you understand.
I think this Minerva idea could work only if it could be more of a Harry Potter-type houses where you eat, sleep, and compete together. Competing is the big one.
Think about it. The reason why Greek life and athletic teams (which are also usually associated with Greek life) create bonds much deeper than Minervas or non-Greeks, is because they share a common bond which forms around a common experience. Where is that experience in the Minervas?
I don’t think the goal of the Minerva Program is to create bonds similar to those found in Greek Life or on a Sports Team.
The Minerva houses offer a way to make connections with other students through a common interest, culture, food, or discussion. Often, these connections are spontaneous. But they also give the students the opportunity to continue forming a bond with the other students through such a Minerva event.
But Bryan’s argument isn’t centered around this creation of a bond. His argument is more centered around the ample funding that the houses receive to put on events that may not seem popular to him or to the rest of the campus. With that said, my argument is a challenge to those who are against the Minerva program. Take an interest of yours and run with it. A Minerva house is the perfect place to do so.
I agree with both the comments above. However, Bryan isn’t arguing to get rid of the Minerva’s. he said he wanted to reduce the number and let other houses with pre-established interests compete for the other free standing houses. In this way, the smaller number of students who take advantage of Minerva’s can do so closer together and have stronger events. While, on the other hand, those who love theme houses can have expanded houses that allow them to explore their interests. Minerva’s are necessary, but they have too large of a scope on a campus that is both very small and mostly uninterested in the concept of Minerva’s. 10 years later and
you cannon force the type of students union attracts to start utilizing Minerva’s. but you can concentrate the power of Minerva’s and make them more applicable to students needs while improving the overall experience through competitive theme house. In reality, people are drawn together because of shared experiences – that is the theme house and Greek difference.
“I recommend leaving North College and South College for the Minerva program to allow some students to continue to use Minerva services. With fewer Minervas, the remaining ones will get more traffic and a higher density of interest for events. ”
Great recommendation !
As a perspective student and freshman, I really liked the idea of Minervas because of the variety of activities they offered and the additional leadership positions they offered. I soon came to realize, however, that while some of the program ideas are really unique and could be great successes, most are not. Students DO come primarily for the food. The idea of giving that much money to 7 (is that even how many we have?) houses who put on programs that hardly anyone attends is absurd. I agree that the idea is good and that the program has good potential, but it’s been 10 years and students see them as nice places to live, hosts of events worth going to for 10 minutes to get good food, and resume boosters for students who don’t get elected to other positions. The events that are most popular are often co-sponsored by multiple clubs, greek organizations, or theme houses, which goes to show the importance of those OTHER organizations on campus. I agree that the number of houses should be reduced because maybe then programs will be more successful and students won’t have to read about dozens of events every week that they have no interest in attending.
I just wanted to help dismiss a common myth on campus. In the first paragraph, it says, “Let’s also push out the Greek organizations who built these homes, despite the fact that Union is the founder of Greek history.”
Union administrators and students did not think of the Minerva idea and say “Oh, lets kick the Greeks out and make them Minerva houses.” In fact, Union for decades was decided on the idea to not renew the leases of the Greek houses once they ran out because they were in the center of campus. So the question was, “What do we do with these houses once the Greeks are moved to another part of campus” and the Minerva system ultimately became the solution.
The Minerva program came about, in part, of the decision to move the Greek houses, not the reverse (Greek systems were moved because the Minerva program was started). Minervas, Greeks, and Theme Houses are all great parts of this campus and students should be a part of whatever, or as many, organizations that allow them to pursue their interests and passions.
Everyone keeps debating over student’s perceptions and opinions about the reality of how Minverva’s actually serve the campus, and how students use these facilities. This answers to these questions seem critical if students are, indeed, hoping for some kind of reform. Why doesn’t someone make some kind of survey for the student body asking them how often they use Minervas, why they go there (food or the events), how long they stay, and if they believe that the money could be better allocated? Then, the debate about the reality of the Minerva system could stop going around in circles and people could use this information to actually make a difference on campus.
great idea and such surveys have been e-mailed to the student body at large several times throughout the history of the Minerva program and they have been used to make changes. Honestly, the Minerva Program budget is the student’s money to use for whatever they want. Every college has to spend a certain amount of tuition money towards student activities. And this money goes to a lot of programs: all the clubs and organizations on campus, intermurals, the theme houses, UProgram, Speakers Forum, and others. But every program and club uses its money towards activities it plans (ex. Outing Club uses its money for awesome outing trips).
But the Minerva money is for all students to use for any event they want, whenever, and you don’t have to commit to a club or organization to be able to have that event. So all you have to do is submit an event request to your Minerva house and it is almost always approved. That simple. Most colleges don’t have a system where any student can use money to have anything they want to see happen on campus but Union does! So if you’re asking Minervas to get less money, you’re asking the school to take money away from you being able to do whatever you want on campus. So use your money and submit a request for whatever event you want to do: http://www.union.edu/offices/minerva/event/index.php
I lived in a Minerva (Sorum) my sophomore year. Sure, I had a few friends in the building already that either lived in Sorum or Green, the house was nice, too – but I felt no connection with any of the other students there. Everyone else seemed to live off in their own little corners. Walking down the hallway, people would look down at the floor instead of giving you a friendly nod. Those who lived in single rooms became hermits. As a resident, we were responsible for cleaning up the kitchen every so often and I like to say I take pride in my quarters, but the problem was, nobody really respected the house so things were always missing and bathrooms/kitchens were left in a huge mess. What was the point, eh? It was a nice place to live, but that’s it! If you weren’t friends with the right people, you couldn’t really try to influence any activities or innovations that could take place on behalf of the house. Nothing in common. At least with Greek life or theme houses, it feels like you have more opportunities to make a mark on the campus.
I posted this under the response article, as well, but I felt it bore repeating…
I hate to critique writing styles straight off the bat, but how you write is in large part how you are received. And I found this response to be far more eloquent than the (somewhat angry-sounding) article it followed. I think a little objectivity may be called for on both sides.
As an alum (who started when the Minervas were shiny and new), I have the benefit of distance from the system to see it from both the outside and the inside. And I think that there are far more pros to the Minerva system than cons.
I was not a member of a Greek organization on campus. And, lucky for me, that didn’t make me feel out of place. And I think a big part of that was having other viable options to make Greek life NOT the only social event on campus. Parties are great. Parties get old. Even when you’re young and in college. Minervas offered other options with more variety and spice and interest. There is almost no end to what you can do with your Minerva. It’s simply a matter of having an idea and following through.
There doesn’t need to be competition between the houses. That would be rather the antithesis of what the Minervas are trying to accomplish. This isn’t Harry Potter. And it’s not trying to be. And while the idea of joining the Minervas and the theme houses is interesting…let’s face it, unless things have SERIOUSLY changed since I was there, the only theme houses that consistently do much of anything are Arts and Ozone. And they have their own houses already. Honestly, I’m not even sure if Arts still has as much of a presence as it used to. I was a member of a theme house and if you think Minerva events are poorly attended, most theme house events are even worse. Often, we would have to pair up with a Minerva to even have an event or get it noticed. The Minervas make it much easier to get the word across campus and actually attract attention.
Let the Greeks be the Greeks. There is absolutely no reason to compare the Minervas to the Greek system. Enough already with the Greek-VS-Minerva rivalry. There is nothing constructive in this. You talk about constructive ideas and feedback and changing the Minerva system because it hasn’t done much in 10 years. That’s fair. But don’t downplay the positive impact the Minervas have had on students during its time, nor the hard work that has gone into them. I’ve talked to friends at other universities and colleges, and am currently attending grad school at a large, urban university – the Minervas make a difference. They add a dimension to campus social life that very few (if any) other schools offer. It is, however, what students make of it. So try and have a positive outlook about it instead of only scathing criticisms.
It comes down to how much money the school puts into the minervas, and how many students take advantage. The ratio is scary. VERY VERY few people go to minerva events. They become more cliquey than Greek houses. I went to an event at messa once, before I was greek. I walked in, and saw 4 people watching TV eating pizza, when I asked if there was an event, they said “yea, this is it” and then went back to watching TV. They were so unwelcoming and boring, that I never wanted to return to an event. I went to events at other minervas, and found similar situations. THE ONLY STUDENT WHO SUPPORT MINERVAS ARE THE STUDENTS WHO MAKE THEM SO TERRIBLE. It is the students who see the minervas as a cash cow, and make no effort to change their events, that make them so terrible. GET RID OF THEM, they are just a waste of money. Theme houses should take their place.
I am interested in hearing more about how turning the Minervas into theme houses would solve the Minerva system’s problems. Have things changed so much in 2 and a half years that the theme houses (again, other than Arts and Ozone) are markedly active on campus? It used to be a struggle to get people to come to theme house events. Generally they were only populated by apathetic house members who had only joined the theme house because they had gone abroad and didn’t want to live in College Park or Fox when they got back. I speak from experience of that, by the way, I’m not trying to denigrate the smaller theme houses.
I am just curious as to how this will solve the problem.