At first glance, the sweatshirts look like any other item of Harvard Athletic Department clothing.

But upon closer inspection, it's obvious that they don't quite fit the mold. On the front, in between the "D" for "Department" and "A" for "Athletics," there is a large "K" where an "H" would normally appear. And on the back, "Let's Just Stop Pretending."

Indeed, Kirkland House's sweatshirt makes no apologies for its jock stereotype. And Kirkland is not the only house well known for its distinctive character.

But these house characters have been changing, upperclass students say, ever since the non-ordered choice lottery system was implemented last year in an effort by the College to increase diversity in the houses.

Residents interviewed from four houses with widely-perceived stereotypes say that non-ordered choice has already started to diffuse their houses' distinct character.

And while the new diversity may have eased some of the concerns of first-years who will enter the houses after two years of non-ordered choice, the plan that is creating that diversity has drawn fire from current house residents, who say it is doing more harm than good.

Dean of the College L. Fred Jewett '57 explains that the decision to switch to non-ordered choice was based on large discrepancies in statistics describing the make-up of the house populations.

"In some of the houses, we felt they were becoming a little imbalanced in terms of academic fields and extracurricular interests," says Jewett. "We wanted to have a little less skewing. We're hoping this change will produce that."

The system was the result of a compromise after more than two years of consideration by the Committee on House Life, the Freshman Dean's Office and the house masters, says Jewett.

Under the previous system, first-years ranked their top three house choices and were assigned houses in one of three rounds, each round looking at the next lowest choice from each rooming group. Now that students list four unranked houses, more will not get their first choice than under the former lottery system.

After next year, Jewett says, the non-ordered choice system will be reviewed to see if the goals have been reached. So far, the system seems to be working, he says.

"The results of the first-years have certainly moved us in the direction we wanted. On balance, we think there's been some progress made," he says. "I'm hopeful we won't have to make any increased moves towards randomization. It's a little early to tell for sure."

This is little consolation, however, to students who say they have already noticed drastic effects of non-ordered choice. And not everyone appreciates the changes.

Adams House

In Adams House, for example, residents say that non-ordered choice has definitely had an effect on their house.

"Last year for the first time," says Nora S. McCauley '91, "I talked to people who weren't excited to be here." At the Adams House Waltz, she says, when she asked rising sophomores if they were glad to be living there, "it was the first time I ever heard 'no,' which I thought boded very poorly for house spirit."

Non-ordered choice has created a rift between sophomores who were randomized and non-randomized seniors and juniors, several residents say.

"The difference between the junior class and the sophomore class," says Richard E. Robbins '91, "is the sophomore class seems very fragmented. I think there's definitely less of a community in Adams House than there used to be, and I can't see that turning around."

"The sophomores are so nondescript. They have beer partries. It's wretched. It's miserable. It's [randomization] just like this big blender where everything is mixed up in a beer barrel. This gets my goat," says Khakasa Wapenyi '92.

"These people are babies," says Tanya S.J. Selvaratnam '92 of the randomized Adams residents. "They can't talk, they don't know where they want to live...we are soon to be surrounded by racists, bigots and homophobics, just like we have in Winthrop and Kirkland House, and I'm not paying almost $8000 a year for my living conditions to be shuffled in shit."

"We're not babies," she continues. "We know where we want to live, and it's not with you," she says.

Since Adams has been infused with non-ordered choice, says Nalini P. Kotamraju '92, the security of Adams's "space" won't be as easy to find. "If you were gay, if you were into women's issues, you could come here and feel comfortable," she says. Now that sense of comfort is diminishing, Kotamraju says.

Kirkland House

Adams House is not the only house that non-ordered choice has changed. Kirkland, too, is a different place than it used to be, many residents agree.

"When I first came into Kirkland House," says Beth Wambach '91, "it seemed like every person was a varsity athlete. Now it's definitely more diverse. There are people with all sorts of extracurricular activities, and it just makes for a different atmosphere."

Kirkland's senior tutor, Garth O. McCavana, agrees that there is "a different feel to the house" this year. "The numbers of athletes are pretty much the same in this year's sophomore class. We have a different spread of sports, however," he says.

But McCavana says that he has not heard specific complaints from students about the effects of non-ordered choice on Kirkland. "Nobody's really come up to me and said, 'I hate what this is doing to the house.'"

Nevertheless, there are Kirkland residents who much prefer the former housing system to non-ordered choice, in light of what the present system is doing to Kirkland's character.

"If anything, it's contracted the number of people that I meet because they're so different from me that I don't want to meet them," one senior says. "If people want diversity so bad, they can seek it some-where else," he continues.

"If you compare this house to what it was our sophomore year, it's completely different," says Julie P. Hopkins '91.

"Among the guys here, the average height and weight has dropped about three inches and 20 pounds, but most of it's in shoulder girth," says Valerie C. Nellen '91.

"I think the house used to be a little more fun, a little more wild," says Nellen.

"This house may have had a reputation then," adds Hopkins, "but you knew what that reputation was, and that's why you chose it."

Not all Kirkland residents are bothered by the changing house character. "There are fewer football players, it's noticeable," says John Marshall '91. "But I don't think the attitude is different. We're a lot more casual about the whole college thing."

Eliot House

A house known for its anything-but-casual atmosphere may be losing its distinctive environment, too. several residents of Eliot House agree that change has taken place there.

"It's a friendlier place now. You used to come into the dining hall and everyone would turn around and look at you," says James R. Burns '91.

Yet even if house friendliness seems to be a change for the better, non-ordered choice isn't necessarily the best idea, students say. "You shouldn't take people's choice away from them," Burns says.

"What's wrong with having places where people have an identity?" asks Burns. "Twenty years from now, they'll be saying, 'Adams House--it's just another house.'"

Diversification has not lessened house spirit, however, says Martin J. Valasek '91. "We have some sophomores who definitely wouldn't be classified as preppie. Although the image of each individual person has diversified," says Valasek, "I think the general spirit of the house has stayed."

One of Eliot's 1989-90 house co-chairs says that he has observed a decline in Eliot's volunteerism, however. "I definitely think there's a lot more apathy in the house," says Eric A. Levine '91. "There's a significant amount of apathy in the sophomore class. Pretty much all the committees are dominated by seniors," he says.

"I would hope that the house would maintain some identity. I think it's nice that the houses keep some kind of flavor," says Levine.

Dunster House

Dunster House, which does not have as strong a stereotype as Adams, Eliot or Kirkland, but is often described as politically left and highly environment-conscious, may be in transition as well, several residents say.

"The stereotype's just mutating," says Douglas D. Wolk '91. "What you need to do is look at the house T-shirts over a period of years, and see how stereotypes change." Dunster House T-shirts and suggestions for T-shirts have ranged anywhere from "PC-ness Envy" to "Dunster House...I live there," Wolk said.

"I've seen minor changes," says Wolk, "but I don't think they're changes that are necessarily due to non-ordered choice. We haven't been struck as heavily as some other houses."

But other Dunsterites say they've noticed greater changes.

"Our house is generally pretty leftist but a couple right-wingers got thrown in here and they've been making trouble," says Seth D. Tapper '91. "Non-ordered choice is the latest manifestation of a conspiracy by the administration to break up centers of student power and cohesion. After 1969 their philosophy has been divide and rule," Tapper says.

Dunster House Co-Chairs David Lim '92 and L. Cameron Kitchin '91-'92 say they've noticed that residents' interaction is less frequent than it should be.

"I think non-ordered choice is good in promoting diversity within the house, but it sort of detracts from strong student interaction. It's sort of been dampened. There's not as many groups that are just hanging together," says Lim.

"I think it's sad," says Rebecca E. Hollander-Blumoff '92. "The people who chose [Dunster] first are kind of demoralized by the fact that a lot of people are unhappy to be here."

First-Years Less Concerned

On the other side of Mass Ave., where the first-year class lives under the most diverse possible living conditions, the effects of non-ordered choice are not so important--unless, of course, randomization was involved.

"I was suprised at first; I was shocked," says James L. Livermore '94, who was randomly assigned to Adams House. Yet the football player says that he and his rooming group plan to make the best of the situation.

"I'm not even sure if the stereotype is true," he says. "I've never even been there."

"I'm sure I'm going to witness some unpleasant things," says Livermore's future roommate Max Koh '94, also a football player. "The image is hard to erase. In the long run, it will gradually disappear, I hope. Just because it's Adams, I won't say I'm not going to do anything for the house. I'll try to listen to as many people as I can and be open-minded.

Elizabeth A. Frutiger '94 was not randomized--the future Adams House resident says she listed the house on her housing form. She says she feels it's only "a matter of time" before stereotypes are dissolved.

"It's nice for the house to have character, but I think sometimes it gets kind of vicious," says Frutiger.

Holly K. Tabor '94. who will live in Eliot House next year, says that her rooming group didn't worry about house stereotypes in choosing the four houses to place on their form. "There would be people you have something in common with, and there would be people you didn't have something in common with, but that's what college is all about," she says.

After two years of non-ordered choice, efforts to increase diversity in the houses have had a noticeable effect. And while students in four of the houses with widely-held stereotypes may disagree with administrators over whether the new system is beneficial or harmful to house life, they all agree that it is...