The Stanford housing draw is an incredibly Byzantine process involving priorities, preferences, groups and houses. This time of year, no one — and especially no freshman — seems to understand everything and the dreaded “draw-ma” is ensuing. An upperclassmen’s only knowledge of the draw comes from past experience and anecdotes. And freshmen only have their staffs’ and friends’ past experiences to go on. This leaves many freshmen unnecessarily clueless and anxious.

The most commonly misunderstood aspect of the draw is the way the process handles co-ed draw groups. Since housing is assigned based on gender and men and women cutoff numbers in certain houses can be drastically different, parts of co-ed draw groups often end up in housing without the members of the opposite sex with whom they drew. On housing.stanford.edu, co-ed draw groups are discouraged from forming with the statement that “men and women are assigned differently in the Draw program, so co-ed groups will likely be spilt in the assignment process.” This discouragement, however, is sometimes misunderstood, especially by vulnerable freshmen new to the process.

Priority is another draw buzzword that is often misinterpreted by students. The deadline to turn in special priority applications pops up while people are still trying to consider their options and form their group, and priority opportunities are not very well publicized. In fact, the priority deadline was last Friday, Apr. 25, even though groups don’t need to form until this coming Sunday. Unlike upperclassmen who might have an idea of where their group wants priority beforehand, any freshmen who is with-it enough to know about the priority deadline is trying to form a group, scope out houses and get priority all at the same time — and all while rush is taking place. In the end, many draw groups fail to secure priority because of a lack of information and coordination so far before the group-forming deadline.

In-house draw is another source of mystery. Different houses conduct their in-house draw in drastically different ways. In the end, it is in-house draw that determines one’s living space and for many this is an important feature of their residential experience. Every year it seems that there are sophomores who draw into Roble with dreams of snatching up one of the many singles, only to discover later that they will be last in line to receive them. Some people may be interested more in a location or specific social sphere and care mostly about what house or dorm to which they are assigned, leaving the in-house draw as an afterthought. But it must be remembered that getting a “good” number doesn’t guarantee a “good” room — just a “good” house.

Stanford Housing is taking a few steps to eliminate the confusion surrounding the draw. Dates and times for deadlines are widely publicized — though not necessarily the meanings of these deadlines — through flyers and emails. An email sent Apr. 26 alerted yet-unapplied underclassmen to apply for the draw before May 4. This week in White Plaza there will be a “Get Your Draw Questions Answered” table from 11:30 am to 1:15 pm on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. This resource is, however, appearing rather late in the draw process considering that the disability draw and priority deadlines have already passed.

Also, the open houses that allow draw applicants to get a feel for various living options have already passed. In fact, the last open house was a day after the draw opened for registration. While open houses are a great idea and prove useful to get an idea of where to live, most people don’t and can’t talk specifics about where they are going to live until after they are assigned their number — or at least after the draw opens for registration.

Draw will always be a stressful time for students but it can be made less so through a commitment to providing students, especially those least likely to know what is going on, with the knowledge they need to navigate the process. The open houses and question tables are steps in the right direction, but they need to be reconsidered in the overall timeline, especially with relation to the deadlines for forming groups.