Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The houses at Bowdoin are social houses and there is a mutual selection process somewhat similar to rush.

So really they are frats (but not allowed to call them that).

Yep.

This is emphatically untrue. First-year students are assigned to a college house based on their first-year floor. Everybody is affiliated with a house (and only one house) automatically, with no selection or participation involved.

As for who lives in the houses, they are chosen by the professional residential life staff of the college. The only "mutual selection" process is that groups of friends try to get residential life to admit them all to the same house. But we're talking about groups of 4, not groups of 40. So the houses still end up drawing from a decent cross-section of campus. (The super-quiet students and those who are "too cool" for that sort of thing excepted.)

Anyone who goes to Bowdoin expecting frats is going to be sorely disappointed. The college house system aims to replicate some of the small-community feeling of frats, but at the end of the day, it's college housing controlled by residential life, patrolled by security, etc.

Anonymous wrote:Alright, I get it. The college house system predates Harry Potter. But U.S. colleges didn't start emulating it en masse until after the books and movies became popular. It just smacks to me of, "Don't worry, overprotected kids who are afraid to leave home, we're going to give you a ready-made family on campus, just like those 12-year-olds you grew up reading about had." When, to me, college should be about growing up and learning to navigate the big, scary world.

No. I went to Harvard, where the House system predates Harry Potter by many, many years.

Perhaps Bowdoin is emulating Harvard, not Harry Potter?

Anonymous wrote:The houses at Bowdoin are social houses and there is a mutual selection process somewhat similar to rush.

OP here. This isn't how it is described in the online info session - it says you are assigned a house based on first year residence hall.

While I don’t know a lot about the house system at Bowdoin, I clerked at a Portland law firm with a whole bunch of Bowdoin alumni and I ended up pretty envious of their college experience - it sounds like a great place to go for undergraduate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The houses at Bowdoin are social houses and there is a mutual selection process somewhat similar to rush.

So really they are frats (but not allowed to call them that).

Yep.

Anonymous wrote:The houses at Bowdoin are social houses and there is a mutual selection process somewhat similar to rush.

So really they are frats (but not allowed to call them that).

The houses at Bowdoin are social houses and there is a mutual selection process somewhat similar to rush.

If you are looking for less selective schools to add to your list, Franklin and Marshall offers something similar to freshmen.

Anonymous wrote:DC loves the idea of "houses" within a college (what can I say, he grew up on Harry Potter). We have heard they are very robust at say Rice, but were interested to discover that Bowdoin has these, too. It appears the College House system was started in the late 1990's at Bowdoin in conjunction with disbanding of the greek system.

Are the College Houses a strong part of a Bowdoin student's experience? I went to a different SLAC with residential houses and very few of the student body participated, so I am a little skeptical of how much of an impact these would have on one's college experience.

It's probably in between your experience and Rice. The college houses were indeed meant to replace greek life at Bowdoin, which was a really robust part of campus life until it was closed down in the late 90s and the college took over the houses. In practice, mostly groups of sophomores live in the houses, and the houses tend to form the center of social life for first-years and sophomores. Each house is associated with different floors in the first-year dorms, so all the people you live with and near will be part of the same house. The houses also reflect a pragmatic attempt to centralize younger-student partying on campus, recognizing that those students will drink anyway and that it's better for them to be drinking beer and wine in a public place patrolled by security than jungle juice and shots in their dorm rooms. (The latter happens, of course, but my sense is it happens less than at other schools that purport to be stricter about drinking.)

The houses are very involved in orientation activities (at least in non-covid years). Ultimately, most of the programming at the houses that people attend are parties, and all of them are open to the whole campus, but members can come earlier, maybe use a different line for the keg, etc.. There are some more specific house-only events like dinners, lectures, and the like, but those are more sparsely attended. To some extent, the houses have different personalities (and particular parties thy hold each year), but because their membership is based on first-year residence floor rather than some sort of rush process, it's not like there's a jock house or a nerd house or anything like that. Although there is a substance free house that holds no drinking activities (affiliated with the substance free floors in the dorms.) By junior and senior year, people tend to be less focused on the house system (although the college is always trying to change that.)

All in all, I always thought it was a nice compromise. You can be part of it as much or as little as you want, everyone can attend the many parties they hold, and it gives you another outlet for meeting different people from across campus. (It's also a decent sophomore living option because they're mostly singles.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is it with supposedly elite colleges trying to model their campus life after a children's book series? I can't imagine most college kids, at least the cool ones, thinking that such a system is anything other than lame. If you're picturing a bunch of kids running around campus repping their "house," then unless it's a total geek school, your perception is likely way off. Things were so much simpler in my day when the freshmen all got thrown into random dorms with random roommates and then the cool ones joined frats. The attempt by college administrators to reclaim control over the social climate is just another symptom (or perhaps a cause) of the never-ending adolescence being manifested by this generation.

Tons of colleges have houses that predate Harry Potter by decades. Even my school's half assed version has hoses going back to the 80s as an alternative to the greek system

I didn't realize that. My school's alternative to the greek system was just called "being a nerd" (or, alternatively, "not getting laid"). I also don't remember campus tour guides doing the thing they all do now where they try to downplay the percentage of students in frats and sororities so as not to scare away all the helicopter parents who are afraid of greek life. Like I said, this generation is a different animal - one that takes way too long to wean off its mommy.

So instead of houses you like fraternities. Got it: "Don't worry, over-indulged kids who are afraid to leave home and make friends on your own, we're going to give you a ready-made family on campus, just like those frat boys from "Animal House" had.

Anonymous wrote:Alright, I get it. The college house system predates Harry Potter. But U.S. colleges didn't start emulating it en masse until after the books and movies became popular. It just smacks to me of, "Don't worry, overprotected kids who are afraid to leave home, we're going to give you a ready-made family on campus, just like those 12-year-olds you grew up reading about had." When, to me, college should be about growing up and learning to navigate the big, scary world.

You are just wrong here. This is odd as saying kids didn't stay on campus during the holidays until Harry Potter did.