As Housing Day approaches, anticipation, excitement, and fear of the Quad fills the air in Harvard Yard. Freshmen across campus grapple with the intricacies of blocking groups, house culture, 8-minute-long housing videos, and the annual River Run tradition, where Harvard freshmen visit each River House the night before Housing Day to avoid being placed in the Quad. Amidst this storm of suspense and speculation, one question remains: Why does Harvard assign housing this way?
The origins of Harvard’s housing system date back to the late 1800s, when dormitories in Harvard Yard lacked the most basic comforts—no indoor plumbing, heating, or electricity. In search of better living conditions, the wealthier students on campus commissioned private and luxurious homes reserved for affluent Harvard men known as the Gold Coast dorms, reserved for Harvard’s elite.
In 1913, the President of Harvard Abbott Lawrence Lowell ’1877 sought to address the exclusivity of the Gold Coast Dorms by spearheading a project to construct dormitories along the Charles River and renovate Harvard Yard itself. This initiative aimed to create a more inclusive living experience for students on campus, eventually leading to a formalized house system that became a hallmark of student life in the 1930s.
In the early ages of the housing system, students had to apply for admission into specific houses. Similar to current comping processes on campus, students would often undergo an intense interview cycle to be accepted. Despite these efforts to democratize housing, this system did not eliminate social or economic stratification on campus. House Masters (now Faculty Deans) often favored students from elite prep schools or influential families, reinforcing the concentration of privilege in houses like Adams and Eliot.
Over time in the early and mid-20th century, each house developed its own distinct identity. Kirkland became synonymous with athletes, Quincy was known for its significant Asian population, and Adams was known for its large queer community. These evolving identities gave each house a unique character. Rather than praying to the River Gods, students had clear preferences for certain living spaces according to their personality and involvement on campus.
By the 1970s, Harvard sought to reduce inequity in student life. The “great experiment” swapped 50 men from the all-male Winthrop House with 50 women from the all-female Pforzheimer House in the 1969-70 school year. The experiment marked the beginning of Harvard’s transition to fully co-ed housing, creating the modern intellectual landscape we have today and paving the way for an official merger of the Harvard and Radcliffe Colleges in 1999.
The next major initiative looked to eliminate the influence of House Master favoritism in the housing process. To make the system more equitable, the administration introduced a ranked-choice system in housing. This removed the application process, but a variety of house identities remained intact, as students with similar backgrounds and interests would still often rank the same houses first.
Later in the decade, Harvard further reformed the system by reducing the number of rank choices the students received, from 12 to four. This marked the first step toward randomization in the housing process. As a result, not all blocking groups receive one of their top four choices, causing the less desirable houses—often the Quad—to become more diverse.
In 1990, the administration took another step toward reducing homogeneity in the houses by shifting to a non-ranked choice system, where students ranked their top four houses in no order. This change led to a higher percentage of students being put in one of their top four houses, but it also helped limit those top houses being tied exclusively to one ethnicity, religion, or social class.
Despite these efforts, self-segregation continued to shape the housing system. For example, Black first-years showed a stronger preference for the Quad Houses over the River Houses. For many, this decision was not only a response to their dissatisfaction with the college but also a statement of being at Harvard while feeling disconnected from its history and actions.
Housing at Harvard took a significant turn in 1995 when the College implemented full housing randomization to counteract social divisions and ensure diverse residential communities. Under the new policy, blocking groups were assigned to Houses without consideration of preference. The decision was met with strong opposition, with an overwhelming 82% of students opposing the policy, claiming it disrespected the agency and maturity of the student body.
Despite the opposition, Former Dean of the College Harry Lewis defended randomization as a measure to prevent houses from continuing to become increasingly homogeneous. Over time, house reputations evolved as previously self-selected communities gave way to more inclusive identities. The randomized housing system has remained in place, and Housing Day continues to be one of the most spirited traditions at Harvard. Freshmen eagerly await their assignments, as upperclassmen storm dorms clad in House gear, chanting and celebrating new members. What began as an attempt to dismantle exclusivity gave rise to new traditions for future classes.
As students continue to embrace the randomness of the lottery, they carry forward a legacy that maintains the spirit of the housing system, transforming a once-elitist system into a unifying practice for Harvard freshmen. But no matter how many upperclassmen reassure freshmen that “the Quad is a great community,” the anxiety over scooter costs and the unreliable shuttle system remains impossible to ease. The history of the Harvard housing system reshaped not only house culture, but the way students experience Harvard itself.
David Daniel ’28 (david_daniel@college.harvard.edu) wants Alan Garber ’76 to put him in Lowell if he sees this.