First-Years Divided On Lottery Compromise

First-year students remain deeply divided on the future of the housing lottery, with many critical of a compromise plan devised by the Committee Against Randomization (CAR), according to an informal survey taken by The Crimson this week.

In a set of interviews with nearly 100 first-year students, a majority said they oppose any change to the current housing lottery system. But a significant minority said they favor CAR's non-ordered choice plan, under which students would be randomly assigned to one of three houses listed on their housing forms.

Earlier this year, Dean of the College L. Fred Jewett '57 said that he intended to push ahead with a plan to reserve at least 50 percent of the spaces in the residential houses for random assignment, later saying that such a plan might not go into effect this year. The Undergraduate Council is slated to debate the randomization issue on Sunday.

Many students yesterday were openly critical of CAR and its founder, James M. Harmon '93, for backing away from its original anti-randomization stance in favor of non-ordered choice.

"Ever since the first large meeting of over 100 people, the committee seems to have, through no readily discernable fault of its own, lost contact with those whom it pretends to represent," said Bradley A. Evans '93, a council member who said he supports the status quo. "This leaves us with randomization without representation."

In an interview yesterday, Harmon defended CAR's position, saying that a compromise proposal was necessary to keepJewett from implementing a stricter plan torandomize house assignment.

"I know that pushing for the present systemwould have made me look better but it wouldn'thave stopped 100 percent randomization," saidHarmon, who is also vice chair of the council'sresidential committee. "Those who criticize me fornot being able to preserve the present systemshould wake up and realize how undemocraticHarvard is."

Many students also criticized Harmon forholding leadership positions in both CAR and theUndergraduate Council. Joshua S. Byard '93 saidthat Harmon's position as a council representativemay have motivated him to alter his position.

"There is a real conflict of interest," saidByard. "It is impossible for him to do an adequatejob on both."

Other students criticized CAR for being "out oftouch" with student opinions.

"When the committee was first founded, Ithought it was supposed to be againstrandomization," said one student, who asked not tobe named. "But now that the UC elections are over,it seems that the formation of that group was moreof a political move by Jamie Harmon."

But Harmon said that if CAR had supported thecurrent housing system, Jewett and the housemasters would have eventually moved toward fullrandomization. He said that after Jewett releasedstatistics showing a lack of diversity in thehouses last month, it became clear that the housemasters would not support the current system.

"Although non-ordered choice may not be aspopular as the present system, it is the bestsolution to a bad situation," Harmon said. "Thehouse masters and Dean Jewett want to compromiseonly if there is a popular solution.