The Dartmouth Review The Dartmouth Review The Dartmouth Review 25th Anniversary Gala

Wright, Trustees to Close Down Greeks

By Andrew Grossman & Alexander Wilson | Friday, April 21, 2006

Originally Published February 3, 1999.

Two related incidents at Dartmouth have put the future of the College’s treasured Greek system in severe jeopardy. On February 9, 1999, the Trustees of the College released a letter to the student body, and President James Wright gave an interview with the Daily Dartmouth. Taken together, these announcements constitute a new administrative policy. Dartmouth, it seems, in a new “spirit of inclusion,” has threatened its fraternities and sororities to become coeducational by policy. President Wright says he expects the changes to take place in time for next fall’s rush. The forced coeducation of fraternities and sororities has uncorked a firestorm of student and alumni protest.

Though the fraternities and sororities are ostensibly independent entities, Dartmouth will likely outlaw those houses which choose not to accept the changes, and prohibit their members from registering at the College. Recently, Bowdoin, Colby, and Middlebury Colleges have all outlawed single-sex fraternities by these means. Though lawsuits are still pending, to this date the courts have consistently upheld the right of colleges to outlaw private student associations, among them fraternities and sororities.

The Board’s decision was phrased as an attempt to revitalize the College’s “residential life,” to make it more “inclusionary.” Several student groups, then, have argued that those Greek houses which own their own physical plant might not freely comply, since they are not strictly College residences. The legal grounds for this argument are murky.

President Wright, however, announced that the Board of Trustees was willing to put up “tens of millions of dollars” to purchase the physical plant of those houses—twelve in all—that the College does not own. The last time the College had a serious confrontation with the independent fraternities they compelled cooperation by convincing the Hanover Police Department and the Hanover Fire Department to raid the houses routinely for underage drinking and fire violations. The fraternities, under serious legal threat, capitulated.

This latest hubbub started when the student body received a seemingly innocuous set of letters from both the president and the Board of Trustees. Masked by their conciliatory tone, the letters critique Dartmouth’s current out-of-classroom experience and announce a new policy that, if enacted, would alter the lives of Dartmouth students forever through the elimination of the current Greek system.

Implying that the current residential system doesn’t “contribute significantly to each student’s intellectual and personal growth and well-being,” the Board criticizes the system that has been central to campus life for 158 years. Stating that their goals are incompatible with the current system, the Trustees presented a list of principles that they say will “characterize the [future] residential and social system at Dartmouth.”

While few have opposed calls for “greater choice in residential living,” “additional and improved social spaces,” and a reduction in the number of students living off-campus, the mandates for a “substantially coeducational” environment and the elimination of the “abuse and unsafe use of alcohol” seem to many to be direct assaults on our way of life. While everyone is against the abuse of alcohol, such a vaguely worded and sweeping statement could bring forth many repercussions. In an interview with the Daily Dartmouth, President James Wright explained that the Trustees’ decision would, in fact, put an end to the Greek system “as we know it.” He asserted that a new social system, one “not built on single-sex fraternities and sororities,” will be created.

Said Wright, “This is not a referendum. We are committed to doing this.” The strength of Wright’s words have left many students wondering if their opinions will be ignored. Interestingly, Wright encourages these same disenfranchised students “to participate in the process of identifying specific ways to meet [the Trustees’] objectives.”

Although the (as yet) unformalized changes will not be enacted immediately, it seems unlikely that there will be traditional rush next year. Wright suggested that the system may well be dissolved by the time this year’s pledges are seniors.

Although Wright has stated that the Trustees are “prepared to invest money to meet [their] aspirations,” it is unclear how this decision will affect the financial standing of the school, which relies heavily on the donations of alumni, many of whom were members of fraternal organizations. On special weekends such as Homecoming and Winter Carnival, many alumni return to campus to visit their houses, strengthening their continuing bond with the College. Some have threatened to withhold donations in coming years as a protest against the elimination of the system that made Dartmouth a challenging and unique environment during their time here.

In his interview with the Daily Dartmouth, President Wright was asked if Dartmouth’s four traditionally black fraternities and sororities (Alpha Phi Alpha, Alpha Kappa Alpha, Kappa Alpha Psi, and Delta Sigma Theta) would be included in the new plans to go coed—if, in effect, Wright’s new “spirit of inclusion” would extend to houses which are vocally exclusive.

“I think that most of the historically black fraternities and sororities are not residential,” Wright told the Daily Dartmouth, “so they are not playing the same sort of role in the social life of the community that the residential houses are.” In other words, they’ll be spared the ax.

Several alumni have raised the question of whether this is part of a long-term ploy for dormitory expansion. Wright has long talked about bringing more students on campus, and about creating an in-house dining system on the Harvard model. That would mean building more dorms.

The only geographically feasible place that the College hasn’t yet built on is that land owned by the fraternities—particularly Webster Avenue. This announcement by the Trustees, some alumni have speculated, may be the first step in a long-term strategy to displace the fraternities and build more dorms on their land.