The Crimson Staff

The deal hasn't yet been signed, but it seems likely that today will mark the final Commencement at which Radcliffe College will be represented in Tercentenary Theater as a college. In late April, the two schools announced that Radcliffe will relinquish its independence--and college title--and become the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study under the Harvard umbrella. Female undergraduates will no longer be admitted to Radcliffe College and then enrolled at Harvard; all admissions will be directly to Harvard College.

Radcliffe will instead focus on its mission of "studying women, gender and society" and expand its already-famous post-graduate research centers. As part of the restructuring, President Linda S. Wilson, who headed the college during the negotiations that shaped its future, will resign her post as Radcliffe's seventh and final president. On Tuesday night, the Radcliffe Board of Trustees conferred upon her the title of president emerita and named the directorship of the Radcliffe Public Policy Institute in her honor.

The new Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study will be governed by a dean, with the Director of the Schlesinger Library and former president of Smith College Mary Maples Dunn serving as interim head until a permanent replacement is selected.

The redefinition of Radcliffe was a long time coming and, we feel, overdue. When the women's college ceded direct responsibility for female undergraduates to Harvard in 1977, its role became hazy and somewhat peripheral in the minds of many students. Last year, a debate over women's diplomas revealed a student body split and uncertain over the role of Radcliffe in their lives--some felt it crucial to have Radcliffe's seal and the signature of Wilson on their diplomas, while others felt the inclusion was an inaccurate reflection of an education fostered entirely by Harvard.

More and more, it seemed clear that Radcliffe was at a crossroads, needing to redefine itself and move forward instead of remaining stuck in an uncertain position. April's announcement has us hopeful that such a move has been made.

At the same time, however, for hundreds of alumnae returning to the Yard today for Commencement exercises and reunion festivities, Radcliffe was their alma mater, a significant influence on their lives and a source of many memories. This transition, while progressive and necessary, is thus also bitter-sweet. There is the reasonable concern that with the redefinition of Radcliffe as a research institute will also come the eventual fading of Radcliffe's incredible role in the lives of Harvard women from our collective memory.

It is therefore important to remember on this Commencement day just how crucial Radcliffe has been to Harvard's integration of women as full members of its community. It was Radcliffe which brought Harvard professors down Garden Street to teach classes to the best and brightest of women students, Radcliffe whose presence eventually caused Harvard to make classes coeducational and to allow women to live in the Yard and Houses. Female undergraduates today study in Lamont without a second thought, but our freedom of access to that library was forged by the integration of Radcliffe women in 1967. Radcliffe's influence on the role of women at Harvard should be indelibly marked on the University's history.

It is our responsibility to remember just how much Radcliffe did to make our careers at Harvard College possible. Its redefinition now is a reflection of its success at helping to make women equal partners in the Harvard experience. Radcliffe now seems poised for a new century of contributions to women's scholarship and advancement on a larger scale.

What are the details of Radcliffe's future? Guessing is a little like looking into a crystal ball. Once Radcliffe ceded responsibility for undergraduates completely to Harvard, it must now concentrate on expanding its position as being the foremost center for women's research and study in the nation. The donations that Radcliffe has received in the wake of its announcement have shown that some alumnae support Radcliffe's new mission. Such financial backing may be a positive sign that the Radcliffe Institute will be able to play a dominant role in women's studies in the future.

We expect that the Institute's prestige will only grow as its mission, unhindered by the illusion that it is still a college, becomes clear and well-defined. Wilson's successor faces the formidable task of molding the Institute's identity and crafting its success. How this will be accomplished is still unclear, but it is our hope that the promise of this beginning is not squandered. Here is a unique opportunity for Radcliffe to change without compromising its integrity or importance as an institution but rather to increase both.

To claim that the redefinition of Radcliffe means that Radcliffe's service to undergraduates is over is false. Radcliffe, like the other affiliated institutes on campus--but especially because of its legacy as a college--must continue to support its undergraduate programs without discriminating on the basis of gender. The Institute should make special efforts to include undergraduates interested in the field of women's studies and advancement.

Meanwhile, Harvard has the added responsibility to acknowledge the concerns of the women on campus who feel that Harvard does not do enough to ensure the safety and equality of its female students. The College must step up to the plate on these issues, addressing student concerns such as rape, harassment, classroom inequality and the dearth of tenured women faculty with tangible, public measures. For those undergraduates who found a home at Radcliffe, Harvard will need to fill the void.

The future is bright for the Radcliffe Institute, but it is still hazy for student groups and concerned women on campus. We hope that in the coming year, Harvard and Radcliffe, together in a new partner-ship, will allay our fears and realize our dreams.