The following statement was given to the Cornell community Wednesday, April 24, by President Hunter Rawlings. As the Chronicle went to press, conversations continued between the president and concerned students and faculty. Rawlings stressed that he will present only the broad goals and principles of his housing plan -- not detailed program directions -- to the board of trustees for action at its May meeting.
During the past several weeks, I have had many productive conversations and exchanges concerning the administration's proposals for residential communities. These exchanges have given many of us an opportunity to focus in some detail on the fundamental objectives to be served by campus housing and the degree to which those objectives are presently realized.
While widespread support has been expressed for the goals and broad principles identified in my March 15 memorandum to the Board of Trustees, the question of long-term opportunities for freshmen to live in program houses has become a lightning rod for commentary. Much of this commentary has been constructive and well-articulated, including many statements opposed to the particular course of direction that I have suggested. Some of that commentary, however, has been misinformed, and I would like to use this opportunity to clarify our intentions and to provide additional details.
One of the most troubling developments in the recent discussion has been the widespread assertion that our recommendations are nothing but a subterfuge for the "real" plan, which is alleged to have as its goal the eventual elimination of the ethnically related program houses such as Ujamaa, Akwe:kon, and the Latino/a Living Center. I have repeatedly emphasized that such is not the case, and speculation to the contrary does not make it so. Some students and colleagues have looked at the question of our residential communities policy as primarily a racial or group identity issue; I have sought to consider it as primarily an educational issue, though clearly one with racial or group implications.
It is my belief that new students arriving at Cornell should have an experience that demonstrates that they are entering an academic community, first and foremost. I am deeply concerned with the quality of the intellectual, social and cultural experiences for freshmen here at Cornell. There are certainly many excellent opportunities for Cornell freshmen in all these dimensions, but I am convinced that working together we can make them better. Cornell faculty need to be heavily engaged with these students, and not only in the formal classroom. The quality of our academic advising for all freshmen also requires significant improvement.
The quality of the on-campus residential experience available for our freshmen must be a top priority, especially since most students presently live on campus for only that freshman year. It is clear to me that a difference of view exists on this campus as to whether the most effective way to secure these objectives for our freshmen is to permit them to live in affinity or interest groupings immediately upon their arrival. As I indicated in my March memorandum to the Board of Trustees and in conversations with many different constituencies in the intervening weeks, I am not persuaded that this is the best alternative. I recognize, however, that it is imperative that we examine this matter together in the months and years ahead as we shape the details of programs and funding allocations required to achieve our agreed upon principles.
As I have already mentioned, I have been pleased by the support that has been expressed by the campus community for the goals and broad principles that will define the policy we ask the board to approve. This is important, for it is only those goals and principles that I am recommending to the board for their action. It is true that in also identifying an array of program directions that would flow over the next five to seven years as a result of the adoption of these objectives and principles, we have raised for many members of the community questions involving the limitation of choice in the freshman year, the future viability of the existing program houses and the potential for additional such facilities. It is precisely on these and related matters that I believe the dialogue needs to continue through the remainder of the spring semester and beyond.
To help this discussion proceed, I want to delineate a number of modifications to the March 15 document's program directions that I believe are appropriate at this point.
·The new policy concerning freshmen will not go into effect until we have implemented a plan for improving all our residential communities. This will include, but not be limited to, expansion of the number of rooms on campus, implementation of programs to attract upperclass students to campus, active engagement of faculty in the residential communities, creation of smaller communities within the residences, establishment of a more supportive campus environment, particularly on west campus, and a redesign of the pricing models for on-campus housing to achieve these objectives.
·We will work with the undergraduate colleges and other offices across the campus to ensure that all freshmen are sufficiently supported academically and personally to enable them to be successful in their first year.
·We will conduct a number of studies to develop a data base to inform the programming decisions that will flow from our proposed plan. Some of the studies identified so far include factors influencing upperclass students' decisions about housing; comparative housing prices; the impact of residential alternatives on students' decisions to enroll at Cornell; and the impact of those alternatives on the academic performance and retention of students.
·We will work with the college deans and senior administration to identify visible and tangible means of recognizing faculty who devote time and energy to participating in the residential and first year experiences.
·We will state that we are committed to maintaining the program houses as strong units among our residential communities during the period of transition and beyond. We value the contributions our existing program houses make to the campus at-large and to the residential alternatives for our students. We have no intention of eliminating program houses as a result of these proposals.
·We will work with members of the program houses and their broader communities to help them prepare for the planned changes so that they will thrive as residential units and cultural and academic centers once the changes are made to have sophomores, juniors and seniors as their residents.
·We will state that freshmen may choose to associate with program houses as active participants even while they are not living there and will facilitate their opportunity to become aware of program house offerings.
·We will promptly begin to develop the process to design the implementation plan for the proposed changes in our residential communities. We will involve as full members of that process faculty, staff and students from across the campus, including members of the Student Assembly, Faculty Senate and members drawn from and by the communities directly affected by the residential plan. At present, we envision the appointment of an overall Steering Committee to direct the work of several task teams whose assignments would include but not be limited to:
-- Attracting upperclassmen to stay on campus
-- Pricing and cost factors affecting housing choice
-- Recruitment and retention
-- Housing assignment
-- Faculty involvement, both in-residence and as fellows
-- Community center programming
-- Facilities, new and upgraded
-- Staff assignment and training
·Similarly, we will involve faculty, staff and students in the design and implementation of the first year experience which will be piloted in the fall of 1996. While defining a set of shared experiences for our new students, this program is designed to introduce students to the critical issues they will face as members of an intellectual community, to help them in their transition to Cornell and to explore the diversity of experiences we have at Cornell.
·Many issues related to fraternities and sororities are distinct from those related to the discussion of program houses. We recognize that they are substantially different in the type of experience they provide to students, and they will be addressed separately as the process moves forward.
·During the time in which there is a moratorium on new theme or program houses, we will work with the Student Assembly and Faculty Senate to develop a policy to govern the introduction of such units when the moratorium is lifted.
In addition to these specific references to program directions related to residential communities, we will restate both our continued commitment to diversify the university's faculty and staff and our commitment to the recruitment, enrollment and retention of a diverse student body.