Both Thompson and Marshall were among thetutors who signed the letter that prompted themeetings.

"As tutors of color, we are wary of any policy,including randomization, which implies that acommunity of minority students gathering togetheris inherently insular, and thus, problematic," theletter argued.

Nicky Sheats, a resident scholar in EliotHouse, who as a resident tutor last spring helpedorganize the open critique of randomization, saysthe meetings should be a catalyst for studentdiscussions on randomization.

"They didn't agree to any concrete changes,"Sheats says. "But I think that if they were theimpetus for campus-wide discussions, thensomething will have been accomplished."

By the end of the meetings, Epps says the groupdecided to compile a survey on randomization anddistribute it to students within the Houses.

All parties involved in the meetings agreedthat an accurate assessment of student sentimentis the first step toward any re-evaluation of theHouse assignment policy begun in 1995 by then-Deanof the College Fred L. Jewett '57.

Survey Says

A survey may sound like the perfect way togauge student sentiment toward randomization, butthe process of actually compiling questions andcollecting answers--at least in the eyes ofUniversity Hall administrators--is anything butsimple.

Dingman says there has been some disagreementamong administrators, masters and tutors over whenit would be best to conduct a survey of studentsentiment toward randomization and House life.

"In some Houses--not all--there was sometension created when people who ended up in Housesthey very much wanted to be a part of saw thesystem of choice end," Dingman says. "Some ofthose people were not particularly welcoming tojuniors and sophomores."

"There seemed to be a feeling of, `You don'tseem to share or be aware of what makes this aunique possibility,"' Dingman adds.

Considering that these experiences might stillbe fresh in the minds of today's upperclassstudents, Dingman feels that it would be best towait before distributing a survey aboutrandomization.

Such a waiting period might help ensure thatstudent feedback on House assignment policy is notinfluenced by any negative experiences they mighthave had with an unrandomized class.

No administrator would pledge to a particulartime for a survey, saying only that it would notbe appropriate until students have a chance toexperience a fully randomized House.

But by waiting to survey students, Sheatsargues, the College will be surveying a group ofstudents who never had the opportunity to choosetheir House or never saw firsthand the benefits ofan ordered choice system of House selection.