Wan and <1Iardinal .
.
September 28, 1973
Otterbein College, We!ftervill_e, Ohio
Volume 56 Number 2
Smucker explains Board action on ·visitation by Lee Schroeder Visitation is probably the most talked about subject on campus. It has been an issue which in recent months has monopolized campus newspapers and informal discussions as well. However, up to now, it appears questionable as to how fully the student body has actually comprehended the issue at hand. Recently, I had the opportunity of speaking with Bill Smucker (student trustee) on the subject of visitation. 'fhe facts, as he presented them to me, were enlightening and straight forward. It is my sincere hope that the following article will invite serious contemplation on your part concerning visitation at Otterbein. The decision of acceptance or opposition is a matter of the individual-we of the staff merely entreat you, the reader, to weigh the facts surrounding visitation and apply them to your own conclusion. During the summer, the Board of Trustees. for Otterbein
College met to discuss formally & vote upon the possibility of a limited program of visitation on campus. Representing the positive arguement for visitation were John Cadella and Keith Shoemaker. The opposition was pursued by Sue Wanzer and Mike Darrell. The details of the meeting were reported to us by Bill · Smucker who has actively participated in the issue for visitation at Otterbein. According to Smucker many of the problems concerning visitation have arisen from within the administration itself. He stated that the Student Personel office, for one, is afraid of the disolusionment of the dorm program. They are concerned as to whether v1s1tation is · going to be a monkey on their back. Smucker ~elieves they are convinced it is, and they don't want any part of it. Furthermore, he implied that this attitude on the part of student personel validated a failure to recognize the need for
more socialization on campus. Another arguement which arose in opposition to the issue of visitation involved the problem of security. To this, Smucker simply replied, "All we _ have to do is take precautions against it." He suggested the installation of a alarm system on certain doors of the dormatory comperable to the alarm system
Bi 11 Smucker, Student Trustee
on the doors at the library . "All you have to do is go out the wrong door in that place ... " But how much does one of those things cost? "It's a one time investment anyhow-but divided into days of the year, it's pennies, I'm sure. In any case, this would probably be the most efficient way of getting around the security problem." In discussing the estimate in additional expenditures for the first y·ear of visitation, Dean Oldag predicted that the total would exceed $40,000. Smucker proceeded to describe this particular estimate as "an exercise in-imagination." This price estimate implied that new cost areas and addition desk assistance in the dorms alone will run into the cost of $ I 3,000-$ I 5,500. In addition, an extra $300 would have to be paid to each · counselor to compensate for their increased time and efforts which would be demanded of them as a result of visitation. Another escalated
expense that the college predicts is an additional $8,000--S 12.000 annualy for security purposes. Even a t first glance, th is particular expense appears totally unreasonable since the $8-$12,000 increase intends to cover only part time wages for a few additional hours during the weekend. There is also the fear that visitation will impede the succ·ess of the development system which has recently been introduced to Otterbein's dormatories. Smucker's arguement for this is based on the fact that the developmenta l approach at Muskingum was not hindered as a result of visitation. The Administration also predicts that visitation will have a "snowball effect." By this it is implied that if students get a little bit of visitation and find they cannot handle it in a mature fashion , the Administration will be "stuck" with uncontrolable visitati0n. Continued on 3
Housing Task Force studies alternative life styles This past week the Tan and Cardinal talked with Otterbein's Vice President · for Academic Affairs, Dr. Roy H. Turley , concerning the visitation legislation which was vetoed by the Board of Trustees this summer. Turley informed this reporter that, in line with the reccomendations of the Board, a
Task Force · on Long Range Planning for Student Housing has been formed and is in the process of hiring a consultant to reaserch possible housing options which might be implemented at Otterbein. The Task Force, according to Turley, is looking for a ~professional consultant who would be "experienced, open, and imaginative." . Objectivity and the ability to solve problems and communicate were also listed as qualifications for the job. Otterbein has made application to the Educational Facilities Laboratory in New York, for funding in the amount of $12,550 which would enable the school to undertake a more thorough study of alternative life styles on campus. The members of the housing task force are: Robert B. Bromeley-Chairman, Dr. Roy Turley- Vice Chairman, Dane VanSant, Edwin · L. Roush, Richard Pettit, Virgil Hinton, William Smucker, Chester L. Addington, Philip E. Barnhart, Miss Pam Pauley. Thoughout the interview, Dr. Turley expressed a desire to facilitate communications members of the among Otterbein community. To this end, Turley supplied the Tan
and Cardinal with a copy of the recommendation by the Executive Committee to the Board, concerning the visitation proposal. This recommendation is printed here in its entirity. Recommendation of the Executive Committee to the Board of Trustees of Otterbein College on Bill Number 17, "Proposal for Visitation": l. The Trustees commend the proponents of Bill No. 17 for focusing attention on the needs of students for greater opportunities for social interaction between men an;women and for individual and small group privacy in residenc e hall life. II. The Trustees do not approve Bi 11 No. I7 for implementation because of the inconclusive evidence of the ability of visitation to achieve stated goals and the inconclusive evidence of its impact on areas vital to sustaining the College and its programs. III. Otterbein, by not having adopted visitation in the past, is now in a position to exercise significant leadership in residential education. In the light of well known problems connected with visitation, the adoption of visitation without a careful exploration of alternatives be ill advised. would Therefore, the Trustees request that the Chairman of the Board of Trustees appoint a Task Force Committee, chaired by a Trustee and including
representatives of the At Large, Alumni, Church, Student and Faculty Trustees, The Vice President for Student Affairs, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, one student and one faculty member, to study housing patterns at Otterbein and recommend a long-range plan for housing to the Trustees by the June, 1974 meeting, if possible, but no later than the Fall, 1974 annual meeting. The recommendation should be directed to achieving the educational goals of the College as a residential institution, to improving opportunities for social interaction between men and women, to improving opportunities for individual and small group privacy and to providing some optional living patterns within the of existing framework facilities and reasonable costs. The Task Force should examine and evaluate: A. A well defined group living experience during the first two college years with emphasis on the group. B. Various options beyond the two-year pattern including: (1) J uni or - Senior residence halls with varied facilities and different group living experiences than those emphasized during the first two years. (2) Fraternity and Sorority group living.
(3) Converting
selected existing residence halls to either suite or type facilities single room facilities. ( 4) 0 ff-campus living patterns including approved rooms, apartments and a wider range of choice for students. C. The relocation of some men into some residence halls now utilized for women and the relocation of the women into some halls now utilized for men in such as manner as to break down the idea of two isolated camps and facilitate social a nd intellectual programming _ and interaction in lounge, and otl1er public areas.
D. T h e continued development of date-study rooms and other residence hall improvements. E. The positive and negative · impact of visitation within various facilities and residence hall patterns. F. Other possibilities the Committee may wish to consider. The Committee is autl10rized to employ professional consulting and other staff assistance • outside the College for the purpose of research and clerical work. The staff functions should include: A. A study of housing
patterns and programs at' selected institutions similar to Otterbein in size , goals and constituency. The study should include some institutions with and some without visitation. B. A survey of the attitudes - toward visitation held by parents of prospective students and current students, alumni and friends of the College. C. The development of cost estimates ' for various cha11ges and housing patterns under serious consideration by the Committee. D. Such other studies as the Chairman of the Committee may direct. E. The preparation of reports as directed by the Chairman. The Chairman of the Committee shall submit a proposed committee budget to the Budget Control Committee. of the Board of -Trustees at the September tQ7'3 meeting. During the period prior to the report and recommendations 0f the · Task Force Comn .•ttee, the Student Personnel staff and the various committees in teh governance, including the Campus Affairs Continued on 3