In Midst of Review, Social Houses Defend Niche NEWS ANALYSIS

Author: Claire Bourne

In March 1989 the faculty voted 113-13 to "abolish" Middlebury College's six fraternities by severing ties with their national affiliations and transforming themselves into "coeducational residential units," wrote David Stameshkin in "The Strength of the Hills: Middlebury College, 1915-1990." This action was prompted by several incidents that suggested the organizations promoted sexist attitudes and hampered the College's vision of "multicultural appreciation, understanding and compassion," Stameshkin continued.

Prompted by this convincing majority, President Olin Robison formed a task force to further assess the role of the fraternity system at Middlebury. In November 1989, the group voted 11-5 in favor of terminating fraternities on campus by May 30, 1990. The fate of the fraternities rested with the Board of Trustees, which, in January 1990, rejected the recommendation for abolition, stipulating that the traditionally all-male social institutions "could continue to exist if they became truly coeducational and called themselves 'houses,'" wrote Stameshkin.

The spring of 1990 was a turbulent time for the fraternities. Each faced an ultimatum: decide whether to heed the Trustees' proposal or disband altogether. Most chose the former, giving rise to the current social house system.

Twelve years later, the review process that monitors the houses' progress is more stringent than ever. The annual evaluation, administered by the Community Council subcommittee on social and academic interest houses, has many social house members worried that the current administration is out to get them.

Alpha Delta Phi's (ADP) premature acquisition of this year's subcommittee report, which includes recommendations for all six of the College's social houses but more importantly suggests that ADP be disbanded at the end of the semester for noncompliance with stipulations issued after last year's assessment, confirmed for some the uncertain future of the social house system.

Additionally, although Community Council has not officially released the report, sections of the document have reached other social houses on campus. Because the subcommittee's report is only a recommendation to the Council, which has yet to finish discussing all aspects of the suggestions and issue its own recommendations to Acting President Ronald Liebowitz, rumors about whether or not ADP will be suspended abound. While some argue that the secrecy maintained by the subcommittee and the Council perpetuates unnecessary anxiety, others assert that rumors are simply rumors and that the process needs to be completed for the evaluation to have any effect whatsoever.



The Role of Social Houses

at Middlebury



As the Community Council subcommittee examines the success, or lack thereof, of each house, it is also indirectly considering the role the social house system as a whole plays in student life on campus.

Kevin King '02, a member of Community Council and of Omega Alpha, popularly known as Tavern, defined the houses as "one of a kind student-run communities that make learning and living on campus more meaningful."

Zeta Theta Phi (ZOO) President Mike Frissora '03 said that the social houses "provided an outlet" for students. "They offer something different, and they don't restrict you to a hallway," he elucidated. "Because the campus is so spread out, they present students with a central place to gather."

King emphasized the familial aspect of social house life, saying that even if the houses did not hold weekend parties they would still have a positive impact on the College community. "Those who think the social houses are epicenters of bad behavior are wrong," he asserted. Speaking for Tavern, he said, "You have to be inside the house to see its value because a house is only as strong as the personal relationships it fosters. The College doesn't care to give us credit for it."

Dean of Advising and Assistant Professor of American Literature and Civilization Karl Lindholm disagreed. Lindholm, who served as dean of students at the time the fraternities were "ending," said that he did not think the social houses "advance[d] the social and academic mission of the College" because they "are not places of great diversity." Nevertheless, he affirmed that "historically" they had a "legitimate place" on campus.

"The social houses on their worst days are better than fraternities were on their best days in the '70s and '80s," he said.

The Inter-House Council (IHC), a governing body comprised of presidents and vice presidents from each social house, exists to ensure that the "worst days" are few and far between. Frissora called the IHC "an incredibly effective body," adding that one of its main objectives was to improve communication between the Dean of Student Affairs Office and the houses. "Once that line of communication has been established, we have a better sense of what they want out of us," he explained.

After ZOO was put on probation for several party violations in January, Frissora and ZOO Vice President Mike Velez '04 wrote a four-page proposal to Karen Guttentag, assistant dean of student affairs and IHC advisor, "about how to run safer open parties." As a result, since the beginning of the spring semester, the social house has not encountered any significant party-related issues.



The Review Process:

Is It Effective?



Opening dialogue in such a way between the houses and the Dean of Student Affairs office appears to be an effective method of helping the social houses improve their standing within the College community — in the eyes of non-members, faculty, administrators and local residents. Because of such conversations, Frissora explained, the IHC "recognizes poor decisions before they occur."

Although, according to Director of the Center for Campus Activities and Leadership Doug Adams, who chairs the Community Council subcommittee, the IHC advisor and president have been "active members" of the subcommittee, both Frissora and ADP President Bob Wainwright '03 have acknowledged the lack of such dialogue between the social houses and the subcommittee charged with reviewing them. "When rumors spread about houses being kicked off campus, I think, 'What? Why do I have to hear about it like this?'" Frissora said.

Wainwright said that he had only met with members of the subcommittee once to discuss the status of ADP, and even then he was given "no indication that the house might be disbanded."

He continued, "As the incoming president, I wish I had been made aware of the possibility of house disbandment by someone other than the former president [of ADP]."

Many complained that on a broader scale, the terminology associated with the evaluation process — permanent status, provisional status and disbandment — is not clearly defined. A house placed on provisional status — different from the IHC-issued probation — is given a list of recommendations that it must address by the following year's review. If all the stipulations are not met, the subcommittee could recommend that the house be disbanded, or suspended, said Adams in an interview with The Middlebury Campus last November. However, it is also possible for a house on provisional status to be continued on provisional status if it does not meet all the requirements issued in the report.

Student Co-chair of Community Council Erica Rosenthal '02 recognized this ambiguity as "a dilemma." She added, "Grounds for termination are not cut and dry."

Lindholm, a member of the subcommittee, suggested, "The important issues in the review should be the acknowledgement of law and of safety. Nobody mandates that social houses have parties. They use the defense that dorm damage, for example, is not done by members, however the College is their landlord, and a landlord doesn't care if yo
u did it or your guest did it," he continued.

Frissora said that the IHC has discussed "where the line should be drawn," however King claimed that the IHC has not done enough to ensure that the Community Council subcommittee completes an accurate evaluation of the houses. "The IHC dropped the ball," he asserted, adding that the it should take a more "proactive" stance by performing an annual report comparable to that of the subcommittee.



The Future of the Social

House System



The College community — the social houses, student governance and the administration — needs to "find middle ground between house autonomy and being held to a community standard," Lindholm affirmed. The existence of the IHC already ensures that the houses meet "the community standard" while maintaining some degree of independence from the College, evident in its decision to suspend social house pledge events for two days last fall when an ADP pledge flashed inappropriate body parts to the crowd during Middlebury's Homecoming football game.

The social house system, said Lindholm, has to understand that "it is only as strong as its weakest link. When a house meeting the standards allows a house to defy the standards, it is only hurting themselves."

Some claim that suspending or disbanding a social house could result in its relocation to an off-campus site and thereby increase the risk of dangerous alcohol consumption and drunk driving. "This would be an unfortunate consequence of the review process," said King. He added, however, that this argument was "not enough because the houses consist of so much more." According to King, the social houses "should not be zones of lawlessness" and "the rules that govern them need to be clearer." He was quick to say that the current house system "has enough critical mass to respond positively" if one house was disbanded. "New houses might come online," he explained. "That would be a real test of the College's view of the houses. Not allowing a new house on campus would reveal the administration's commitment to eliminate the houses."

Lindholm said he recently overheard students discussing the future of the social houses on campus. "Everybody knows the College will get rid of social houses in five to 10 years," he said he heard one of them say. "I don't know that," he affirmed. "I've never heard that mentioned in any official meeting. If that's the perception of the social houses, it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy."