Of course, the root of this campaign is more likely than not the desire to raise more money for MSU. And although there might be nothing wrong with that, the department is going to have to come up with better incentives if they expect juniors and seniors to seriously consider making the dorms their homes.

Students need to realize the vast price difference between living on and living off, and take that into consideration when deciding where to live. To put it in perspective: A single at Chandlers Crossings is $855 per month. A single at Abbott Place is $734 per month.

But a single for those students who decided to live on? It’s $1,258.25 per month.

True, it comes with a meal plan, but the meal plan is not optional and forces students to pay $19.38 a day to eat in the residence hall cafeterias.

The price discrepancy becomes more apparent when you consider the additional amenities available to those off campus. Apartments and houses tend to have multiple rooms, and might have swimming pools or free workout equipment.

To truly have a successful campaign, the department will have to offer older students something more than happy memories and a short walk to class to lure them to stay on campus. The commonly held idea that rooming in a dorm as an upperclassman is “lame” isn’t going to help either.

Living in an apartment or house off campus has its own advantages. Some allow students a level of independence — such as cooking or decorating — not found in the dorms. Those who choose to live in the apartments gain experience with paying monthly bills. Living in an apartment makes it easier to have guests and possibly a vehicle.

Being frank, an increased ability for students over 21 to possess alcohol and indulge in a night of drinking without having to worry about checking in at the door of the dorms with their ID is a very enticing aspect of off-campus living. In fact, not needing a student ID at all to check in could be seen as a convenient feature of living off campus.

The rule that a meal plan is necessary for a student to live on campus greatly adds to the cost of living on, while requiring students to pay for more meals than they can eat. A cheaper, more limited meal plan is a way to lure more upperclassmen back to campus, although it might not be enough to make up for funds lost allowing students to buy cheaper meal plans.

Trying to bring more money to the university through the residence halls is a fine idea. But with the added costs and hurdles that come with “living on,” the department has to realize that a new advertising campaign won’t be enough.