In addition, major construction on the Quad began in order to normalize the experience from House to House. And by instituting a “limited-choice” system where students could list their three top House choices, the plan would minimize the random selection of students sent to unpopular Houses.

Backlash

When Fox first revealed his plan, he ignited a firestorm that did not end until the proposal was implemented three months later.

The Crimson editorialized against the plan, calling it “singular in its lack of sensitivity for the Quad point of view” and arguing that four-year housing, a lower male to female ratio, and “an alternative for many to the overbearing, ‘old Harvard’ atmosphere of the River Houses” presented valuable options for first-years.

Eric S. Roberts `73, a tutor in Currier House, resigned over the plan.

Roberts, now a senior assistant dean and computer science professor at Stanford, says the Quad was culturally distinct from the rest of Harvard, housing more public school graduates, academics and feminists—as well as offering greater interaction between first-years and upperclass students due to their status as four-year Houses. He says that opposition to the plan on the Quad was nearly unanimous.

Roberts speculates that by putting all Harvard first-years in the Yard and encouraging bonding within classes, Harvard may have boosted reunion attendance and, through it, the amount of money it reaps in alumni donations.

In February, opponents of the plan distributed leaflets discouraging students from giving money to Harvard after they graduated if the Fox plan were implemented.

According to Fox, one student even spat on him when he arrived at Currier House to discuss the proposal.

The Dust Settles

But opposition to the plan was clustered in the Quad Houses themselves.