Global Student Living Index data analysed for this year’s CUBO and GSL report into the accommodation experience of students with a disability, students who are neurodivergent, students from an ethnic minority and those who are LGBTQI+ in the UK and Ireland highlights that for many vulnerable cohorts, the accommodation experience is diminished because of their room allocation.
When asked about the one thing they would change in their accommodation, many students highlighted feeling like the odd one out and said they would choose to live with students who are the ‘same’ as them:
“I would have liked to be able to choose flatmates/be grouped with flatmates based
on interests, year, etc., rather than being randomly assigned.”
(Student who is LGBTQI+)
“As a final-year student, I couldn’t pick other final-year students. The flatmates I’m
living with aren’t in the same position as me. Also, as I am a girl, I picked a flat with some
girls in it but ended up with all boys. So, management needs to get a better system.”
(UK student from an ethnic minority)
“Create a better room allocation situation where you can select what sort of roommates
you’d like, as I’ve faced a lot of uncomfortable situations living with mostly heterosexual
people as a homosexual man.”
(Student who is LGBTQI+)
Other students expressed the desire for more diversity in their accommodation, with some student comments suggesting that some providers may be intentionally placing large numbers of ‘like’ students together:
“Having a more diverse range of flatmates. I sometimes find they lump flatmates of the same ethnicity together.”
(Student from an ethnic minority)
“Allocation of rooms in a Flat, I recommend diversity rather than flats for BAME/International/Local only.”
(Student from an ethnic minority)
“Mixing students of the same ethnicity in the same flat, for example, I am the only Nigerian
in my flat, and it kind of makes it hard to relate with other flatmates because they are
Asian and never speak to me. I have tried breaking ice, but the conversation never happens.”
(Student from an ethnic minority)
These student comments shine a spotlight on the conundrum present when it comes to allocation of rooms in student accommodation. For example, in last year’s joint GSL/CUBO report, we highlighted that when international students find a ‘critical mass’ of other students like them (at least at the building level), it appears to have a strong positive effect on student wellbeing. It is possible that accommodation providers who are placing large groups of ‘like’ students together may be trying to respond to this.
However, Unite Students’ Living Black at University report highlights that segregated accommodation could have unintended consequences and actually be harmful for other groups, noting that for Black students:
“Current practices in some institutions have led to the appearance of ghettoization. Universities and accommodation providers should be intentional and transparent about how they allocate rooms and be aware of unintended consequences. … Segregation also has historic links with traditions that are racist and reflecting this is negative, especially for students of colour. Ghettoization should be prevented, and conscious efforts made to reflect the diversity of the student body in all areas of accommodation. A more thoughtful process in assigning flatmates should be created to foster a more diverse and tolerant space.”
There is however evidence, that segregated, or ‘safe’ accommodation has benefits for some student cohorts. A recently released HEPI report into the experience of trans and non-binary students in UK higher education highlights the issue that segregated flats may be a positive thing for students who identify as LGBQTI+, noting that ‘LGBTQ+ flats’, have provided an “overwhelmingly positive experience for those who had lived in them. In particular, these flats make it much more likely that students will have a safe and tolerant space to come home to where they do not need to regularly explain or justify themselves.”
HEPI go on to note however, that “it may be undesirable for students to be separated in this way. It is up for discussion whether LGBTQ+ flats represent a legitimate extension of these other arrangements – if they are themselves legitimate – or if it is a regressive step which risks making campuses more segregated and less tolerant.”
GSL key driver analysis of the factors influence students’ MHI-5 scores[i] highlights that relationships have the biggest impact on the mental health of students with a disability, students from an ethnic minority and students who are LGBQTI+, and to a lesser extent, students who are neurodivergent. This highlights the importance for the sector of further exploring and measuring the benefits, drawbacks and wellbeing and other impacts of segregated or ‘safe’ vs mixed accommodation in general as well as exploring ways to support students to develop connections.
However, for now, what is clear is that when there is one person in a flat who is not part of the dominant group, they feel like the odd one out, and this has a lasting negative impact on those students. This suggests that there is a need for more deliberate room allocation practices focussed on providing students the opportunity to live with someone ‘like them’ and balancing this with the need for diversity.
Be part of the conversation!
At this year’s GSL Live conference, we will be exploring the ‘Community Conundrum’ in a session where we will dig deeper into these issue. Visit our GSL Live page now to view the agenda.
[i] The Mental Health Index – 5 (MHI-5) is an internationally recognised, five-question methodology to measure mental health. Respondents are scored on a scale of 0-100, where 100 represents optimum mental health. Scores over 60 represent better mental health.
