Ms. Keller's statement that 1-1-2 includes no suggestion of grouping sophomores by concentration runs counter to The Crimson's understanding of the proposal reached through discussions with Dean Rosovsky, Dean Whitlock, and members of the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life. It is to this aspect of 1-1-2 that Rosovsky refers when he speaks of its "exciting" character. More disturbing in Ms. Keller's letter is her suggestion that 1-1-2 (which would end hoosing of upperclass students in the Quad Houses) is the only housing option that retains student choice. What about the many students, male and female, who now prefer living in Currier, North and South Houses and are fithging against the plan's implementation? Charles Shepard
Read more in News
The Judge's Conclusion
