At first glance, Dean of the College James Larimore's recent decision to consider allowing the movement of fraternity, sorority and coed rush to sophomore fall seemed a welcome and overdue departure from the policies the administration has pursued since the 1999 announcement of the Student Life Initiative. While the SLI patronizingly concluded that "houses should be given the opportunity to remain," the report represented the blueprint of the administration's plan to dismantle the Greek system. Even the writers of the SLI report, however, were forced to admit that after receiving student input, "the majority of the proposals advocated continuing Fall term rush."
It was shocking then, that in the face of overwhelming opposition, the administration unilaterally decided to change rush period from sophomore fall to sophomore winter three years ago. Not only does Winter term make transit to rush events colder and more unpleasant " especially for women in skirts and high heels-- but there are far fewer students on campus in winter than in fall, a fact that hinders the ability of new recruits to get to know the full membership of their houses.
This week's proposal places rush in the middle of Fall term, drastically shortening the critical pledge period of education and orientation for new members. Dartmouth's Greek societies are already at a disadvantage due to our condensed 10-week terms. The administration's demand that Greek societies attempt to cram nine weeks of pledge education into three is impossible to fulfill. As educators themselves, the administration ought to know that such a feat is ill-advised.
The administration has justified this change to fall rush by suggesting that the full restoration of rush to the first weeks of the term alienates underclassmen. This is a specious claim on two levels. First, it supposes that the absence of Fall term rush has improved the ability of freshman to interact with upperclassmen. As any student can attest, freshmen are primarily concerned with meeting other underclassmen in the first few weeks of the term. Second, holding rush early in the term illustrates the eagerness of upperclassmen to participate in a vibrant Dartmouth community, just as the entertaining antics of the Dartmouth Outing Club makes students feel welcome on their Freshman Trips. Friendship and community form the two pillars of Greek societies, and they are values that Dartmouth should embrace, not banish to the middle of the term.
Given the clear benefits of a Fall term rush, its sustained student support and the lack of any reasons why it would be a disruption, we are left to wonder why the administration would suggest it. At the heart of many criticisms of the administration is the observation that it pays little heed to widespread student opinion, and obscures its motives with an opaque decision-making process and little accountability to the community at large. This latest proposal has worrying familiarity, since it places students involved in the CFS system in an unenviable position. They face a catch-22: If they accept this new fall rush, they risk damaging the unity of campus Greek societies by making the period for new member education too short. On the other hand, if they reject late Fall term rush and hold out for its true restoration at the start of Fall term, they risk looking unreasonable by rejecting compromise, and could potentially gain no future concessions from the administration .
This week's proposal just doesn't make the grade. The Greek system on campus is supported by a majority of students and has spent the last several years jumping through many bureaucratic hoops in their midst. While the Greek system has its flaws, this latest episode is an example of overreach. Given the benefits of Fall term rush and the total absence of reasonable counterarguments, fall rush should be restored to the opening weeks of the term. To do otherwise would be a hoop too far.
