RADCLIFFE FUNDS

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

We would like to respond to the letter of the '68 class president of April 18 requesting contributions to the Radcliffe College Fund and the Alumnae Annual Giving Program. We have serious reservations about giving to these funds.

Like you, we value our Radcliffe education highly and would like to contribute to the future growth of the college. But we are apprehensive that by giving money at this time we would be supporting certain policies which we found antithetical to our needs during our years at Radcliffe. These policies include financial priorities and the concept of the role of the student in college affairs.

We realize that Radcliffe has severe financial problems and its limited resources necessitate a tightly controlled schedule of priorities. It is the current priorities, however, that we find objectionable.

While we appreciate the need for maintaining many of the services mentioned in your letter--"the operation of Hilles Library, the Deans' Office, the protection of the Harvard University Police ... extracurricular facilities in Agassiz and the Gymnasium ..."--we nevertheless fear that any contributions to such services would serve only to free funds for use on Radcliffe's new dormitory system. We do not mean, however, to preclude the renovation of existing dormitories.

We suggest that money now going to new buildings be used instead for such purposes as enlarging the scholarship fund and granting subsidies to those who want to live off-off campus. We especially feel that funds should be used to attract and support students who without extensive financial aid would be unable to afford a Radcliffe education.

We hope that alumnae will always be involved in determining the direction the college is to take. However, we also feel that students should have a voice in these matters. As students at Radcliffe, we have felt that our opinions on such questions as student government, housing, and the overall direction in which the college is moving have been largely ignored. Now, on our imminent promotion from students to alumnae, we have not lost interest in the question of the students' role. Therefore, we feel that we cannot give money to Radcliffe College until we are sure that new and effective channels have been set up whereby student opinion is not only heard, but is influential in determining college policy. Carole E. Adams   Gene Bishop   Lucy Candib   Esther H. Ewing   Rachel R. Lieberman   and 100 other members of the class of '68