Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
Summary of Differences in Entertainment Options between TSU and UH
Introduction
Apart from the rigorous requirements in academic institutions, the provisions of student centers and extra curricular facilities offer importance to living conditions of the students’ body. The differential amenities contained in the student centers around learning institutions provide for the type of motivation enhanced within the students. In addition, they offer a sort of public relation exercise on behalf of the institution to the public. The critical components of the student centers are dependent on the administration’s financial outlay in improving the standards and present circumstances at the institutions with a view to rehabilitate all aspects. In categorical analysis of the provisions, dining options, games facilities, leisure and enabled recreational platforms all provide for the ambience contained in the student centers. TSU and UH institutions posses student centers within the premises, which offer varied avenues for the benefits of the students. Comparisons made between the two institutions, show the state of affairs of their learning and living conditions. Entertainment and leisure activities provisions within TSU and UH require rehabilitation and improvement for better students’ living and centers.
Discussion
In the feasibility, study carried out between TSU and UH institutions, the availability of space and enhancement quarters for recreational areas are small. For example, in TSU the second floor of the gaming area provides for the indoor games like checkers, cards, and dominos with billiard leagues among the tabletop ones. In comparison, the student centre offers facility for similar indoor games with contracted usage among the requirements of the students within the institution (Cogell and Gruwell 14). In both, external availability to the public is also enabled through the authority and central command. Improvement is required in both centers as means of encouraging talent development and promotion of leisure activities. Morale for the students is improved while encouragement in course schedules is guaranteed (Rodriguez 1). In addition, it serves as a public relation offertory for both institutions as society is positive to the holistic approach of gaining knowledge.
Major inclusions of varied welfare groups within both TSU and UH is an avenue for socialization and interaction between the students of both institutions. In TSU student centre, fraternity brothers and sorority sisters are the main proponents for the interested groups among others. Inclusion is also witnessed in other interested parties. At UH, associations and welfare groups are permitted as well to thrive in the learning environment as means of promoting interest addresses (Macionis 13). It should be noted that in both institutions, the council of organizations and interest groups have taken a compounding arm to serve all mater regarding their existence. However, more space should be allocated and improvement of the SSL building, lobby and stands in TSU while N101 is adept to the same. With improved mechanisms at all levels, all students will be available to champion for better management and address of social problems that face communities.
Apart from the welfare groups, dining requirements are vital for the survival of students within learning institutions. In most cases, the preference of students is based on service delivery, quality, standards, and ambience for holistic approach. For example, it is worth to note that TSU offers three dining options through provisions of restaurants (Texas Southern University 1). In UH, the restaurants enabled are more with trademark companies. One of the main contentions with both institutions is availability of the dining options. Due to the growing student population with each annual turn, increasing of the availabilities is paramount (Brown-Glaude 11). It was noted that the rehabilitation and increase could foster positive timing for all concerned as well as categorical culture within the students. In most cases, the availabilities serve to create trends and marketable dispensation to the students. It should be encouraged without compromise on quality and standards.
The spatial requirements for interaction and communication among the students in dining availabilities improve the culture within institutions. In the study, it was clear to note that students prefer appeal and ambience when having their needs catered (Frausto 13). In both TSU and UH, the administrations have to be lauded for the marked improvements shown in enabling the existence of such needs. For example, cougar express and mini market within UH in comparison with the available in TSU have enhanced freedom and adjustable settings to accommodate increased numbers, provide leisure activities and encourage more spent time within their structures (University of Houston 1). Themed events and festivities for different ethnic groups and associations are also delivered in the same. It is a positive contribution towards the learning experience, companies’ contacted and public image as an all-rounded capability (Xu 16). In turn, all interested groups benefit from the created environment.
Entertainment utilized within institutions should serve as accommodation of the diverse ethnic groupings and origins of the students. Incorporation of festivities and themed amenities into extra curricular activities should be encouraged in the institutions (Creighton 17). For example, the information acquisition within TSU and the shops at the student centre can enhance the experience through the varied ethnical representation within the facilities. It can be a directive in alternation in order to have every category represented. At UH, the administration should deliberate on Panda express shops in regards to sales of various artifacts. Apart from increasing the value of living through interaction and socialization within the students, it can create bonds and unity within the bodies (Goleman 17). Both administrations should be encouraged to do so as concern for inclusiveness among the students thereby portraying an example to the communities on its importance.
The approach to entertainment within the institutions as studied should embrace both traditional settings and modern requirements (Ball and Tyson 19). For example, in both institutions, there are movie theatres and facilities that provide informational backgrounds on historical events. However, the embrace of traditional forms is minimal. Both administrations should preserve functional amenities from the past into the present. In this regard, students can embrace the ascent of the institutions in developing the living standards. Guettier (13) argues that the display of talents and nurtured professions can be embraced throughout the institutions from time to time. The deans offices are the central authorities and merits are enabled through first come first served basis (Salomon 22). In addition, campus events are also earmarked throughout the year with embodiment to cultures and relevance. In turn, the living and learning experience is positive to all students (Smith, Lisa, Wolf, and Levitan 12).
Conclusion
Entertainment and leisure
activities provisions within TSU and UH require rehabilitation and improvement
for better students’ living and centers. The approach to entertainment within
the institutions as studied should embrace both traditional settings and modern
requirements. In the feasibility, study carried out between TSU and UH
institutions, the availability of space and enhancement quarters for
recreational areas are small. Major inclusions of varied welfare groups within
both TSU and UH is an avenue for socialization and interaction between the
students of both institutions. On the overall basis, entertainment and culture
building is vital for the institutions as the translated effect is witnessed in
the students.
Works Cited
Ball, Arnetha F, and Cynthia A. Tyson. Studying Diversity in Teacher Education. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2011. Print.
Brown-Glaude, Winnifred R. Doing Diversity in Higher Education: Faculty Leaders Share Challenges and Strategies. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press, 2009. Print.
Cogell, Raquel V, and Cindy A. Gruwell. Diversity in Libraries: Academic Residency Programs. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2001. Print.
Creighton, Sarah H. Greening the Ivory Tower: Improving the Environmental Track Record of Universities, Colleges, and Other Institutions. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2004. Print.
Frausto, Salomon. 2011. The Berlage survey of culture, education, and practice of architecture and urbanism. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers.
Goleman, Daniel. Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships. New York: Bantam Books, 2006. Print.
Guettier, Christophe. Institutions Administratives. Paris: Dalloz, 2010. Print.
Macionis, John J. Sociology. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall, 2006. Print.
Rodriguez, Natalie. “Texas Southern Sues Architect Over Student Center Defects.” Law 360, 1: (2015). Print.
Salmon, Gilly. Podcasting for Learning in Universities. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2008. Print.
Smith, Daryl G, Lisa E. Wolf, and Thomas Levitan. Studying Diversity in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004. Print.
Texas Southern University. Sterling Student Life Centre. TSU. Web. 23 April 2015 <http://www.tsu.edu/About/Administration/campus-services-and-operations/sterling-student-life-center/>
University of Houston. Student Centers. UH. Web. 23 April 2015. <http://www.uh.edu/studentcenters/>
Xu, Yonghong J. Refining the Focus on Faculty Diversity in Postsecondary Institutions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2012. Print.