Wallace: consumers' choice

Perhaps the most controversial issue concerning student accommodation relates to the merits or otherwise of Halls of Residence. The question is a vital one, for the restricted resources available lo provide for accommodation must be used in the best way possible. Those who claim that flats would be cheaper and more popular are opposed by others who point to the great benefits which the communal life of a hostel can provide. The latter view is favoured by the various religious and charitable organisations which have borne the major responsibility for the provision of student accommodation in the past. The Government has supported them in so far as it has in recent years subsidised their building costs, but its failure to commit itself to alternative types of accommodation is probably attributable to the fact that no feasible schemes have been presented to it.

There is, however, an increasingly large body of opinion convinced that blocks of inexpensive flats are a realistic and preferable alternative to Halls of Residence. Ironically many students feel this way. and they are among the strongest critics of the Halls of Residence with which others work to provide them. While much of the anti-hall sentiment can be dismissed on the ground of the ignorance of students who have never experienced life in a good hall and who have mythical ideas of over protective, policed institutions reminiscent of boarding schools, (of which there are admittedly some), surveys do show definite preferences for other types of accommodation.

The most comprehensive recent survey is "The Students' Choice: The Housing Preferences of University of Canterbury Students" by Dr. C. H. Gray and Miss Barbara Croy of the Department of Psychology and Sociology at the University of Canterbury. This survey research project was carried out in 1965 with particular attention being paid to what kind of housing students want. It showed that living at home was preferred by most students (23.5%) while 22.1% preferred university flats, a bowing type which did not then exist at Canterbury. The Hall of Residence was favoured by 18.8% even though students considered it expensive, followed by private Mats 17.1%, with boarding being the least preferred. In terms of unmet demand in Christchurch at that time the University flat stood out, being three and a half times as much in demand as Halls of Residence on which university policy concentrates. The positive demand for University Halls was 5.8% and for Church Halls 0.3%. The major conclusion of the research was that the students' choice is to go "flatting". Out of every 10 students 5 wanted university or private flats, 3 halls of residence.

The implications of this research for housing policy are clear, but are only valid if the policy maker accepts that students' preferences are important in making policy decisions—the kind of housing which has priority in the building programme at present is not what students themselves want.

The Minister of Education speaking of future university accommodation problems in May 1967 said "Whether the Hall of Residence is the proper solution to this question however is debatable, and student pereferences must be taken into account."

Present Government policy subsidises various charitable and religious bodies in the erection of Halls, The motive underlying the interest of these bodies in student housing appears usually to lie in Christian concern for adequate accommodation aimed at bringing about academic success, social integration and personal development. There is no doubt that a good Hall can provide those things. If an atmosphere of work is created "a community of scholars" where directly or indirectly students help students lo study, academic success is more assured than in the usually over-crowded, ill-equipped flat. As our Universities grow so can the impersonal nature of the lecture and written examination system. Social integration in a hall may rectify this. The opportunity to mix with a cross-section of students enables personality and personal values to be developed.

To which view should we subscribe—flats or halls? I believe that we must turn to both, and our aim should be a residential complex. Flats should be built and run by the University and the Churches for those students who are mature enough to use and enjoy the freedom they give and can cope with the routines of flat life without disrupting their study. Halls of Residence should be built for all the advantages they can give. Halls provide a sense of real community but to some students they may seem unduly restrictive. They offer some the opportunity for intelectual cultural social and moral development which is seldom shared to the same extent with those who live elsewhere. To others the greater freedom of a flat may be a more appropriate introduction to adult social life.

The construction of blocks of flats and Halls of Residence should not, therefore, be seen as alternatives they are complementary. Let us not decry one by means of the other. To be "adequate" in the fullest sense any accommodation programme must provide for a diversity of housing.

page 11