Women and Admissions: All Deliberate-speed Ahead

WHEN the Trustees met in January and decided to increase the number of women students at Dartmouth and reduce the number of men, they were, paradoxically, voting at once for change and for protecting the status quo. The change, described with some emphasis as "gradual," will come, of course, with the altered proportion of the sexes. The status quo? That, in the form of an overall enrollment of roughly 4,000 - with no more than 3,200 students on campus in any one term - appears ironclad for some time to come.

A year ago, the Trustees announced that in order to achieve Dartmouth's fundamental purpose of educating "men and women who have a high potential for making a significant positive impact on society," a change was necessary in the admissions policy adopted with the start of coeducation and leading to the current 3:1 male-female ratio. They furthermore said they would delay their decision on new guidelines for future class composition until all constituencies of the College had the opportunity to submit their views on the issue.

For a year the Trustees solicited and heard the opinions of various segments of the Dartmouth community. The overwhelming majority of the faculty and over two thirds of the students responding to a poll went on record as favoring equal access, or equal opportunity for admission to the College, regardless of the sex of the candidate. The Alumni Council recommended that "up to 25 more women" be admitted each of the next several years, but only if the current number of men be maintained and the College be enlarged to accommodate the additional women.

After weighing the contradictory sentiments, the Trustees put their first priority on preserving the small size "determined to be one of the most critical elements in maintaining an environment which fosters the strong interpersonal relationships which are central to the Dartmouth experience." In a statement unanimously approved, they instructed the director of admissions to accept 25 more women and 25 fewer men for the Class of 1981 and henceforth, for an indefinite period, to "increase the number of women in future classes by up to 15 in any given year, depending on the quality of the applicant pool." The number of men in the Class of 1982 and beyond would be maintained only if more students were persuaded to attend the less populated spring and summer terms; otherwise their numbers would be decreased by up to 15, in line with the Board's determination that "the number of matriculated undergraduate students on campus in any one term should not exceed the present [winter term] peak of 3,200."

If the students continue to favor the more popular fall and winter terms to the degree they do now, the Trustees' decision means that the ratio of men to women in the incoming class would reach approximately 2:1 with the Class of 1984 and that the student body would be about 65 per cent male and 35 per cent female by the time that class graduates. Many observers guess that is where the enrollment pattern will level off - unless, that is, there is an unexpected surge in qualified female applicants. If Dartmouth suddenly proves irresistible to women and the admissions office keeps pace by adding 15 more women to successive classes, the College would consist of an equal number of men and women in 15 years.

The Trustees also reaffirmed the "long-standing recognition in the 'selective process' of the importance of certain personal qualities and relationships which have made Dartmouth unique." Special consideration will still go to alumni offspring, faculty and administrators' children, minority applicants, and candidates with outstanding extra-curricular talents such as athletic prowess. This would seem to presuppose that a declining number of men students would be coupled with intensified recruiting efforts among high school actors, musicians, newsmen - and football players - with academic promise.

REACTION to the Trustees' statement has been mixed. Early, scattered returns from alumni seem generally favorable. A rumored move by a dissident alumni group to promote its own candidate to compete with the Alumni Council's nominee for a vacancy on the Board of Trustees apparently died a-borning after the announcement, and a few alumni heretofore disenchanted with recent changes at the College have written to applaud the new admissions policy.

A significant number of students, faculty, and other college employees were, however, incensed by what they saw as a flouting of campus sentiment for equal access. They staged a protest rally in the Top of the Hop, a march on Parkhurst to deliver petitions with several hundred signatures "demanding" equal access, and an all-day teach-in the following week. 1969 it was not. Despite some calls at the rally for radical action - striking of classes, burning of diplomas, withholding of tuition were among the proposals - the march was decorous, the questioning for the most part genteel, and President Kemeny's reception of the petitioners warm and friendly.

"The Trustees' feeling," Kemeny told the gathering, "was that given that Dartmouth has gone through enormous changes - not just coeducation, but in a number of other ways - they wanted a period in which change comes more slowly, steadily, and consistently, but at a rate that doesn't go through major up-heavals every year."

To a suggestion that student opinion had been given short shrift, Kemeny replied that the Trustees "listened to all three major constituencies [students, faculty, alumni] - I can assure you on that - but clearly came up with a decision that doesn't agree with any of the three of them exactly. As a matter of fact, it differs very drastically from some, and I must say the Trustees' position, as I read it, is a lot closer to the student consensus than to either the alumni position or the faculty position."

The morning after the announcement, The Dartmouth in its lead editorial accused the Trustees of sidestepping "any major policy change relating to the proportion of men and women at the College" and of preserving the status quo. "We understand the attentive ear lent to the great contributors," the paper declared, "but there is some point at which the voice of the people who are currently experiencing the College should be heard and recognized." In the following issue, associate editor Marc Capobianco '78 wrote a column on "The $6-million Women," assigning that value to each of next year's 25 additional women, "assuming the alumni will now deliver on [a] $150 million capital funds drive. After all, one good turn deserves' another." The Dartmouth's publisher Ted Kutscher '78, however, pointed out the following day that the 750 men and 300 women to be admitted to the Class of 1981 constitute a ratio of 2.5:1, the precise proportion of men and women applying for this year's freshman class. Calling this "de facto equal access," he said, "I find it amazing how many people simplistically dismiss the Trustees as having listened only to the mandate of the Alumni Council and ignored the wishes of the campus as a whole."

It is fruitless to speculate on who won and who lost in what is generally acknowledged to be, for better or worse, a compromise solution to a knotty dilemma. The Alumni Council wanted, first and foremost, a guaranteed minimum of men and was willing to increase the size of the College to keep it. Most faculty and students wanted, first and foremost, to maintain the current size of the College and also to see the principle of equal access established. From where we sit, the score seems to be:

Size of the College

campus - 1; alumni - 0

increase - in women

campus - 1; alumni - 1

Decrease in men

campus - 1; alumni - 0

Equal access

campus - 0; alumni - 1

In short, a compromise.

Since 1900, Dartmouth's enrollment has increased from only 622 to about 3,000 before the start of coeducation and year-round operation. The first women admitted in1972 brought an 11 per cent feminine presence. By 1976, with all classes coed anda full summer term, enrollment reached about 4,000 and the male-female ratio3:1. Now the decision to increase the number of women at the possible expense ofmen offers the unlikely potential that women could outnumber men by the year 2000.