A Reasonable Balance?

The Alumni Council's Ad Hoc Study Committee of Male-Female Ratio, which met a cool reception with an interim report to the club officers in November, fared little better with its parent body at the Council meeting early last month.

Chairman Frederick H. Stephens Jr. '53 presented his committee's report and recommendations, based on a four-month study of the ramifications of either retaining the status quo or adjusting the ratio - slightly or significantly, sooner or later. Basically, the report called for more female undergraduates at Dartmouth.

After two mornings and a long afternoon of discussion, the full Council voted to acknowledge with "gratitude" receipt of the majority and two minority reports, but not to accept their recommendations. The Council also urged the Trustees to delay action on revision of the existing 3:1 ratio of men and women until July and agreed to solicit further alumni opinions.

In his initial presentation Stephens reviewed his committee's charge "to represent as definitively as possible" alumni opinion and "to present findings that represented the committee's best judgment, after extensive investigation." He outlined the group's procedures and the findings that had emerged from discussions with Trustees, administrative officers, faculty, students, and alumni.

Stephens reported only 50 letters, mostly negative, in response to the appeal for alumni opinion. The committee found in general that there is wide concern about preserving Dartmouth's "uniqueness" and its "family spirit"; that the restrictions of the current ratio make it significantly more difficult for a qualified woman to gain admission than for a man of "equal academic standing" (and that alumni daughters are thus at a disadvantage);" that a modest increase in enrollment would have no major financial effect, whereas a substantial increase would be very expensive; that alumni are concerned about the effect on fund-raising of more alumnae, whereas testimony from college officials indicates otherwise; that faculty, students, and administrators recommend a more normal mix of men and women; that general opinion favors admissions "guidelines" over specific ratios and the gradual implementation of any contemplated change. The committee found the moral issue of potential clear-cut discrimination to be a real one and agreed that such discrimination is neither an acceptable nor a responsible policy for the College.

The committee, Stephens said, studied five basic alternatives - maintaining the status quo of a 3:1 ratio of 4,000 undergraduates indefinitely or for the next four years; changing the mix to 2,600 men and 1,400 women either gradually over four years or more rapidly; or adopting an "equal-access" policy while maintaining a minimum of 3,000 male undergraduates, with a probable expansion of the student body to 4,500 within four years.

Before the majority's recommendations were presented, five men, all alumni representing different areas in the operation of the College, were called on for their positions on the issue.

Dean of the College Ralph Manuel '58 said that "I am painfully aware that the mix we have now is not perfect, that the College would be better served with more women." Any change to be made, he suggested, should be gradual and should mean "no change whatsoever in the size of the undergraduate body." An increase "of even 25 per class," he stressed, "would put undue strain on the library, Thayer Hall, recreation facilities" and would detract from the relationship with students as individuals. Women students, so much in the minority and aware that 50 to 75 female applicants "who should have been admitted were replaced by men less qualified," do not feel the same about Dartmouth as the men do, the dean reported, recommending an increase in numbers of women students as "psychologically and socially helpful and better for the institution."

Geography Professor Robert Huke '48, chairman of the College Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid, echoed Manuel's sentiment that the current mix is far from perfect and his plea that the overall size of the student body not be increased. The faculty committee, working from the same options and considering the same issues as the alumni, he reported, had concluded that beginning with the Class of 1980, the mix should be changed to "no fewer than 2,600 men and no fewer than 1,400 women," a ratio roughly in line with the proportion of current applications. (The faculty committee's guidelines were accepted as a recommendation to the Trustees by the full faculty December 1, with the deletion of the words "no fewer than 2,600 men" and the addition, following reference to 1,400 women, of the phrase "as an earnest toward achieving equal-access admissions at Dartmouth."

George Colton '35, vice president for development and alumni affairs, prefaced his remarks by saying that while he was not in a position "clearly and with conviction to define the issue academically or socially, I respect those who are, who say that the change is needed for the welfare of the College, and I accept the fact that we need more women students." He emphasized that the institution "should not be increased in size by one student," lest "the sense of community, the sense of family that have made us great" be diminished, an issue he called "fundamental, more important than the ratio." Colton also urged that the change not be made with the Class of 1980, that the decision be postponed until June, because "the alumni have not had ample opportunity even to understand why a decision is necessary." From the development stand-point, he expressed the conviction that alumnae will be as important to Dartmouth as alumni have been, but he warned that if they are to be as generous, "we must deal with their feelings as undergraduates."

Seaver Peters '54, director of athletics, took exception to the views of some of his colleagues on the healthiness of the current situation, contending that "the coaches are as close to undergraduates as anyone at the College, and they find it not unhealthy." Dartmouth is already among the lowest in the Ivy League in numbers of male undergraduates, he argued, and if there were to be a reduction in males, even to the extent of 50 in each class, he said, "the athletes, most of them in the middle group of applicants, will bear the brunt, since Dartmouth won't change its commitment either to minority groups or to those with the highest academic ratings." More women, he added, would mean expansion and improvement of women's programs.

Admissions director Edward Chamberlain '36 cautioned the Council against placing too much faith in statistics, used liberally by both protagonists and antagonists of change, as "subject to various conditions and not as simple as they appear." The decision on 2,000 applicants to any class, he suggested, could go either way, with the candidates enjoying equal success as undergraduates. "Let's face it," he said, "admission to Dartmouth since 1922 has been discriminatory for some kinds of people or against some kinds of people; no matter what we do, you cannot avoid it." The important issue, Chamberlain stressed, is "what Dartmouth is going to mean in this country, what the product of this institution will be 25 years" hence, not what the mix in applicants is this year or next."

As for the ad hoc committee's recommendations to the Council, supported by eight of its 11 members, they rejected retention of the status quo either for long term or short and also the faculty-favored position of moving rapidly toward a 2,600-1,400 mix.

What the majority proposed was a policy it termed "reasonable balance," retaining the College's right to be selective, avoiding the words "sex-blind" or "equal access," but stating that "the ultimate objective in admissions, over a period of years, will be to consider equally qualified men and women without regard to sex" - "equally qualified" defined as including other criteria as well as academic excellence. The feasibility of expanding the student body by 100-200 over the next fours years should be studied, along with distributing the students in residence more equally over the four terms and reducing the numbers of exchange and special students to avoid overcrowding.

The "reasonable balance" policy should be phased in gradually, the committee recommended, to accommodate alumni objections to too much change too rapidly, to minimize disruption of schedules and abrupt impact on personnel and facilities, and to allow the athletic department time for increased efforts to attract "scholar-athletes," a move that "can more than offset a modest fluctuation in the numbers of males and females in any given class."

In arriving at the composition of any class, the director of admissions should be guided by the applicant pool and available facilities, with the goal of having "the most qualified well-rounded class possible that given year." To achieve this, admissions "should be authorized, if necessary, to lower the number of males by 25-50 per class over the next four years" and to admit as many more women "as reasonable within the previously stated limitations."

The majority report further recommended that next year's freshman class be admitted under existing guide-lines and that in June the Trustees consider approving the report's recommendations, to be implemented for the Classes of 1981 through 1984; that the Council continue to monitor the issue for the next four years; and that both Trustees and the Council undertake another formal study during the 1979-80 year.

The two minority reports found the proposed changes "too small and too slow" on the one hand, and the proposed reduction in the number of male undergraduates unacceptable on the other. The first, submitted by Nancy Kepes '76 and supported by Charles T. Duncan '46, called for equal opportunity for men and women to gain admission to the College. It cited faculty and student opinion that the current ratio had negative effects on the campus, questioned the representativeness of the limited alumni response, and found the proposed changes - which Kepes calculated to permit at most an enrollment of 2,843 men and 1,166 women over a four-year period - contrary to the committee's findings and inconsistent with its stated long-range goal of a policy of considering "equally qualified men and women without regard to sex." The second, submitted by Lloyd T. Krumm Jr. '48, called for Trustee affirmation of a commitment to a minimum of 3,000 male undergraduates; recommended that an additional 100-200 women should be admitted only by expanding the student body; and contended that "as representatives of the alumni, we should reflect that body's clear opposition to any further change."

During a long afternoon of discussion, which pre-empted a scheduled presentation on the Medical School, the Council failed to reach a consensus on the report, although the comments, largely negative, left little doubt that the ad hoc committee's recommendations would have been defeated resoundingly had they come to a vote. One new member, voicing his conception of the Council as lobbyist for a constituency and the Board of Trustees as the decision-making body, asked, "Who the hell is representing the alumni?" Another, while contending that "the finest thing that ever happened here has been the admission of girls," called for retaining the status quo for the next four years. A young alumnus suggested that in soliciting alumni opinion, the tendency was to poll the like-minded. An undergraduate member concluded that the Council was "shooting from the hip," a member of the committee that the Councilors were "getting an uneducated reaction" from other alumni.

Some favored tabling the resolution to accept the majority recommendations; others countered that the Trustees would thereby approach their January decision without alumni opinion. A suggestion that the report be sent to the Board "as a sentiment, but not a recommendation" met objections on the grounds that such a move might imply approval. The most consistent view was for delay of any decision, and a committee was appointed to draft a resolution for consideration the next morning.

The beat went on Saturday until the Council finally approved a resolution to the effect that: majority and minority reports were to be received, but their recommendations not accepted; the Trustees be urged to take no action to revise the current ratio before July; the Council's Committee on Enrollment and Admissions be responsible for disseminating additional information to the alumni, collecting further alumni opinion, and making "appropriate recommendations" at the June Council meeting.