As a senior, I have a problem with my housing assignment. Being on the short end of the stick caused me first to question the system and then ultimately to demand a revision.

All the upperclassmen know about the Draw and how stressful it can be. You have to form a draw group, find a house that you like and, finally, wait for your Draw number. This process stretches out over spring quarter, creating uncertainty while we all hover around Housing’s key dates.

It’s the Draw number that I have a problem with. I feel like every year it separates people into “haves” and “have-nots.” Those with low numbers are idolized in articles in The Daily and get wows from friends. They invariably choose the Row even though the houses are just as old as the dorms. Row house food is better than that in the dining halls, but it’s not my mother’s cooking. Nor is Bob necessarily a haven for cool and social people, just those with lots of luck (no offense).

Those with high draw numbers like me face a different fate. When asked our number by others, our voices hush with embarrassment. Nor are we all assigned during the first round; we can be placed on the waitlist, and some even have to be walk-ins, causing the uncertainty to extend into the summer. Worst of all, gross misassignments — like a junior to Toyon or even to a freshman SLE dorm — are not uncommon.

While the current system does its job of assigning housing, I think the students and the administration can do better. Here are two suggestions for improvement.

First, provide more public online information about each residence, such as a floor plan, map, physical address, square footage per room, number of rooms, type of bathroom, dorm history, etc. In the real world, who goes house hunting without looking at the square footage?

Currently such knowledge passes through word of mouth and actual dorm visits. However, in order to inform students quickly and accurately, this information should be alongside the administrative forms and due dates on housing.stanford.edu. These facts should be easy to access and easy on the eyes. Housing can definitely make this change before next spring.

Second, combine regular and in-house draw into one online process. Currently, rooms are assigned in each residence’s in-house draw. According to the Undergrad Housing FAQ on the Housing website, this method accommodates each residence’s preference of how to assign rooms.

However, my two inhouse draw experiences at Soto and Kimball, along with interviews with fellow classmates, tell me that most dorms and houses have largely similar processes. Every student randomly receives a number, and then future seniors, juniors and sophomores in order choose the room they want until none is left.

Differences such as priority status or past residence are not adequately explained. For example, if Kimball had art studios or music practice spaces, allowing priority residents to choose first so that they could live near them would make sense. But no such situation exists.

Allowing the student to ask for a room or room type (single, two room double, etc.) online gives flexibility to students with different goals. I personally value room type as most important. I can live in a single anywhere on campus because I have friends everywhere. However, I have a friend who craves Roble because it is so close to his classes at Gates. Unlike the current process of assigning a residence first, combining the regular and in-house draw allows us to make that distinction.

Overall, I envision the housing process as not listing your preferences and praying for the best, but an experience more like shopping online at Amazon or Newegg. Students will have more control over the decision and, thus, feel like they made the right choice. After all, we will live there for a year, so it’s fairly important to us. I can’t guarantee bliss — some students will complain no matter what. But I believe that with more flexibility, more students can be happier than they are now.

With 6,689 undergraduate students and growing, revision is inescapable. Opening Munger and making Crothers undergraduate are a good start, but we need more. Changing housing cannot be done overnight, but it’s something that active student effort and real administrative cooperation can do together.

Todd Lewandowski ‘08 is majoring in electrical engineering.