The editorial in the Dec. 8 issue of The Amherst Student suggests that upperclass RCs are less accessible than first-year RCs. The truth is that this problem, presented largely as an unfair attack on the residential life staff, is the result of a basic truth: Freshmen have different expectations for and react differently to RC initiatives. The Student advocates that RCs institute "open door" hours to solve a "visibility" problem. RC hours are, and have always been, 24/7, for upperclass or freshmen RCs.

The Student rightly noted that RC counseling services often go underutilized. But the root of the little-to-no-contact issue is perpetuated by residents as well as RCs. Most upperclassmen don't see their RCs' role as the same as that of their first-year RC; thus, upperclass RCs respect the distance that their residents seem to prefer by not being "suffocating" or "intrusive." We do acknowledge a middle ground that sometimes goes untapped by either side.

The job of helping residents "adjust" and "foster a sense of a community" is not limited to freshmen RCs. There are new things to adjust to every year, and community remains important for everyone. It is unfair, however, to say that RCs are solely responsible for these shortcomings.

Few upperclass residents attend programs initiated by their RCs, and they often come only to grab food and run. This can lead to lazier planning, with RCs assuming no one will attend a program they invest energy into organizing. The residents might resent this, but would they really come to hear a faculty member speak despite all the homework they have to do? It is every RC's dream for residents to provide suggestions for programs.

We particularly regretted reading The Student's opinion of the Toys for Tots event. There was no "scrambling" to organize, as the editorial suggested. This fundraiser is at the end of the semester because the start of the holiday season is an appropriate time to donate toys to tots. No dorm spent a "vast" proportion of its budget. The entire cost was divided among the seven social dorms and four Area Coordinators, and everyone spent less than they would have on a typical study break. We collected $500 in donations and hundreds of toys.

We hope that students will take advantage of the evaluation process offered by their RCs to raise concerns and not hesitate to e-mail suggestions to their RCs at any time. We also hope that evaluations will be completed without undo antagonism so that, as RCs, we can skip the time spent dealing with frustration and get straight to what counts.

The Residential Life Staff