'My understanding was that the more write-ups you had, the worse off your number was going to be ' That was obviously not the case at all.'

Lauren Krivich, freshman history major, voiced a common misconception and feeling of disappointment over the Housing Reward Program used in the housing lottery for the 2007-08 school year. Freshmen students were the most upset with the outcome of the sophomore lottery, and after speaking with disgruntled students, Residential Services is open to exploring another system, said Debra Monk, assistant dean of students.

'This was created to reward students who make good choices,' said Connie Robertson, associate director of residential services. 'But the only thing we have to measure is bad points.'

Residential Services collaborated with the Office of Civility and Community Standards, Residence Education, the Alcohol Coalition Policy and Enforcement Committee, Student Government Association representatives and Student Development Vice President Dr. William Schuerman to create the Housing Reward Program. It replaced last year's SGA housing resolution that ensured anyone on disciplinary probation or sanction could not participate in the housing lottery. This immediately placed qualifying underclassmen in the Marycrest Complex and kept upperclass students out of university housing.

Residential Services had been researching other possible changes to the housing lottery for more than 10 years by speaking with student focus groups. They presented the possibility of freshmen students entering the lottery and getting assigned a random, individual number. Groups would receive their lottery number'telling them when they could choose a house'based on the average of their individual numbers. Residential Services wanted to know if they should add undesirable points for disciplinary write-ups to the individual or group number.

Most focus groups answered they wanted write-ups to hurt the individuals' lottery number and create a division between those who received write-ups between August and Feb. 1 and those who hadn't. Students with no disciplinary write-ups could still participate in the housing lottery with individuals who had write-ups. Finding the average of what could be a mixture of extremely low and extremely high individual numbers creates the possibility of a group with write-ups receiving a low group lottery number and first choice of housing.

'People with two or three write-ups got higher numbers because they were in a group where one person had the lucky high number,' said Brianna D'Alessio, pre-law major. 'It was just too random and unfair.'

Students were unhappy about lottery disappointments like having no write-ups in their group and living in Marycrest Hall their sophomore year. Jonathon Reinhart, freshman electrical engineering major, created the Facebook group 'UD Housing Lottery is JACKED UP!' He acted on members' suggestions to 'go to Gosiger and protest,' and called for everyone to meet there Feb. 23 at 3 p.m.

'How we failed in communication was obvious by response from students,' Robertson said.

Krivich said that meeting Monk was very informative and that she was understanding of the 15 students who showed up. Monk explained to the group that students may think their peers have been assigned write-ups, but until the judiciary system holds them responsible, there are no consequences in the lottery. She also surprised the group with statistics.

'Of all 135 groups that actually got into VWK through the lottery system, only 16 of them had any violations,' Reinhart said. 'Which means that not very many people 'got screwed.''

Robertson said she anticipates re-examining the Reward Program sometime after midterm break. Considering the number of students compared to available rooms, it is likely there will always be some sophomores living in Marycrest. But UD is ready to re-evaluate the housing lottery based on students' questions and complaints.

Reinhart captured one of the recurring suggestions from students. Most students without any write-ups in their group want to guarantee that they are awarded for their good behavior.

'I think the groups should be assembled first, then sorted by cumulative points, then randomized,' Reinhart said.

For more information about the lottery and point system, visit http://www.udayton.edu/~commstds.