Advertisement

The Future of Randomization

Minority Students Question the Efficacy of the Policy and its Effects on Their Communities

Randomization was presented last fall as a solution to what administrators saw as a lack of diversity in the houses. But less than two weeks after the policy's initial implementation, the dean of the College has had to reverse one of the policy's major tenets, as criticism from a number of minority student groups has continued to grow.

The decision by Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 to recommend to house masters that they reinstate the use of gender controls in the housing lottery comes only 10 days after first-years received their housing assignments.

Lewis announced the change in a Committee on House Life (COHL) meeting yesterday, pointing to the uneven gender distribution in many of the houses that has resulted from this year's lottery.

The diversification of house communities has also been challenged by a number of minority students who have sought to self-segregate themselves.

According to an informal Crimson survey, more than 40 percent of black students in the Class of 1999 are members of all-black rooming groups.

Advertisement

Other minority communities say that while they are unsure of the composition of their blocking groups, they fear that randomization may seriously undermine their community.

Members of the Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Students Alliance (BGLSA) say that the dissolution of traditional gay community centers, such as Adams House and Dunster House, may make it more difficult for students to come out of the closet.

The College has embarked on a new era of student life that administrators hope will be marked by diversity and open-mindedness, but students say that this transition may not be as easy as expected.

Women After Randomization

Of the many changes to student life that will likely follow the implementation of randomization, the change of the gender balance in the houses may have the most immediate impact.

Whereas in past years computer controls ensured that the houses maintain an even balance of males and females, the controls were removed from this year's lottery, leaving some houses with a sizable gender imbalance.

Pforzheimer House, for example, was assigned 69.91 percent males and 30.01 percent females and Eliot House was assigned 65.38 percent males to 34.62 percent females.

"We just decided to take off the controls because we wanted to do it completely randomly," Lewis told the Crimson in an interview last month, noting that the decision to remove the computer controls was actually made by his predecessor, L. Fred Jewett '57.

But in the COHL meeting yesterday, Lewis reversed that decision after seeing the results from this year's lottery.

In an e-mail to the Crimson last night, Lewis writes that he supports the COHL's recommendation that gender balance be restored.

Recommended Articles

Advertisement