That Monday, the radio program interviewed Etu, a member of Sigma Phi Epsilon, concerning the recommendations of the committee on the student life initiative.

Etu said that the report contained “not too many horrible surprises.” One of the most controversial recommendations, he said, will be the prohibition on residency in CFS houses during the summer term. Also important are the proposed standards for CFS houses’ physical plants, which he feels will be a “financial burden.”

While Etu said that the new physical standards will create problems for several fraternities, the biggest issue for sororities is the recommendation that all students who rush be guaranteed a bid.

Many sororities feel that they do not have the capacity to accept every student wishing to become a member, Etu said.

Dartmouth’s Greek system currently includes eight sororities, with memberships of up to 120 students, and rush numbers are increasing. The committee report also recommends a prohibition on additional sororities.

According to Etu, the CFSC response to the report will take one of two forms. Either the CSFC will write a combined response or each CFS house will write its own individual response to the report. The latter might occur because each house is affected differently by the report and will have different reactions.

Etu praised several recommendations, saying he was “psyched” that the college is “forcing us to renovate.” He feels that there are houses that need work and that these houses “needed that push” from the college. Several Greek presidents, however, objected that the expense would mean the end of their societies.

Regarding the recommendation to create more venues that are licensed to serve alcohol, Etu said he was “excited to see the College provide alternatives.” He added that, “If the Greek system fades out, fine, let the market decide.”

Etu criticized the report’s lack of attention to the problem of sexual abuse at the College. “I was taken aback that it was never brought up,” aside from a brief “factoid,” he said.

In his final comments, Etu mentioned that many students “don’t understand what is going on behind closed doors.” —NOAH HUTSON-ELLENBERG

The Social Life Initiative Committee’s report, citing the concerns of the College’s Dean of Admissions Karl Furstenberg, is a direct insult to the members of the class of 2003. Beyond that, it underscores a troubling misuse of admissions statistics for political purposes.

The numbers mentioned highlight defects in Dartmouth’s admissions program that undermine standards of academic achievement in determining acceptance to the College.

To begin with, the “class average” of admitted students is artificially low compared to the average scores of those who might have been admitted. Sports recruiting in particular affects the averages considerably, with a large pool of athletically-talented students with relatively low test scores. Athletic recruits lower the means, perhaps considerably according to anecdotal evidence.

Further, the College’s racial preferences in admissions also take a toll. In their efforts to make Dartmouth a more “diverse” and multicultural place, the admissions office admits students with test scores below Dartmouth’s average. According to 1992 data, the average SAT score of black students at Dartmouth is 218 points below that of whites.

Approaching the numbers from another direction, one must consider the effects of competition in the school-selection process. These “high-ability” students are more likely than other applicants to be accepted into several top-tier schools, each of which is vying for their attendance.

Regardless of academic programs, social life, or any other measure of a school’s particular success, Dartmouth just doesn’t have the name caché of schools such as Harvard or Yale. Based solely on marketing, Dartmouth loses in this respect.

It’s certainly a shame that these “high-ability” students chose to spend their college years elsewhere. To compare the scores of the best students who choose not to attend Dartmouth with the average scores of actual Dartmouth students—whose talent and ability is too-often diluted by admissions agendas—is misleading at best.

In reality, if the scores of these top-tier students were compared with those of the top-tier of students who chose Dartmouth, the numbers would be similar. That Dean Furstenberg, who should be more familiar with these statistics than anyone else on campus, chooses to abuse them in this way underscores the administration’s duplicity in the attack on the state of social life at Dartmouth, which, as numerous college surveys have shown, is a triumph over every other school in our class of institutions. —ANDREW GROSSMAN

Though many present affirmed that there are significant problems with alcohol abuse, residential space, and social activities at Dartmouth, they feel most of the recommendations are aimed at eliminating the Greek system rather than solving these problems. Higher minimum standards for CFS houses are seen as a veiled attempt to close down many of the Greek houses, to avoid the alumni outcry at an official abolition of the Greek system. Some of the proposed standards and requirements, students said, are ridiculous; one student claimed his dorm room wouldn’t even be able to meet half of the report’s requirements for CFS houses.

The proposal to install a non-member UGA in each CFS house was met with laughter. Many pointed out that a UGA’s primary purpose was to advise freshmen; only seniors and juniors would be allowed to live in CFS houses under the proposal. Others thought the idea of a non-member UGA living among fraternity brothers or sorority sisters was silly, and questioned how the UGA plan related to the report’s proposed ban on non-members living in CFS houses. Encouraging professors to give tests on Thursday mornings as a deterrent to Wednesday night drinking was regarded as simply cruel. One student predicted that the next move for the Trustees would be to institute mandatory bed times on Wednesday nights or detention for students who miss Thursday morning classes.

There were also complaints about the proposal to give Safety and Security access to CFS houses at all times, with many students stating that the College should trust house members to be responsible adults. Several also expressed concern that by limiting drinking and parties in Greek houses, the College would only force drinking into the residence halls and off-campus locations. Far from solving any alcohol abuse problems at Dartmouth, they argued, this would exacerbate the problem, making drunk driving more prevalent.

Many present pointed out that restrictions on the CFS system would take effect next fall while most of the extra social options and gathering spaces will not be available for three to four years.

Over all, the students present were disillusioned by the committee report, which, one student argued, although it was made to look as if it took into account student’s feelings and opinions on the future direction of Dartmouth, in actuality would only accomplish a narrow set of goals set forth by the Trustees. —KEVIN MORAN

The main recommendation, pertinent to both the many students who will be displaced from their Greek houses and all students affected by the ensuing lack of social options, will be a revamped cluster system, an outgrowth of today's East Wheelock cluster experiment. What have we learned from East Wheelock? Well, the cluster seems much like any other. It's definitely popular among students, many of whom rave about its large rooms and lavish furnishings. Social life in the cluster is actually less active than elsewhere on campus according to many residents. Unlike the older dorms, whose small rooms and thin walls encourage socializing, East Wheelock's well-appointed rooms encourage students to keep to themselves; activity in the hallways is nonexistent and noise overall is kept to a minimum. The social areas are neat and almost always empty. Cluster events go unattended; even the cluster's snack bar area is lightly trafficked. In short, the College's great experiment at building a cluster-based community has failed. Yet, clusters are still the wave of the future according to the Committee. —ANDREW GROSSMAN