After Twenty Years in Student Affairs, I Have Seen My Fair Share of Ethical Dilemmas, And

The Meretta Project - 1

THE MERETTA PROJECT:

Dissonance Is Created In A Performing Arts

Living-Learning Community

Daniel Murphy, Ph.D.

Director of Residence Life

Small Midwest College

April 11, 2026

After twenty years in Student Affairs, I have seen my fair share of ethical dilemmas, and made my fair share of decisions. When I was a young professional, I could not wait until I was promoted through the ranks and be given more decision making power. Most of the decisions that I had made up until this point only affected a small group of people. During my fourth year on the job, I made all of the Residence Halls on campus non-smoking. After the initial hoorah by the students, the plan went forward without any friction.

My first year as an Assistant Director of Residence Life, I was the driving force between making each building co-ed by suite. I faced some opposition by a parent group and the Board of Trustees, but through some careful planning and implementation, the plan has been a complete success. Before leaving that position, we were nationally recognized for our approach towards on-campus living.

Taking the next step forward in my career, I moved to a small private school in the Midwest were I took a position as the Director of Residence Life. I took the first couple of years adjusting to the position and to get my bearings straight. Now, as I was entering my third year in the position, I was faced with my first major decision.

The Dilemma

With the rise of Living-Learning Communities around the country, I was amazed by the fact that Small Midwest College (SMC) had not created this program on its campus. Shortly after I arrived, I began making plans to implement a Living-Learning hall into our regularly offered housing options. Since SMC is nationally recognized as a school for the Fine Arts, I thought that this would be a natural choice for the college to be the guinea pig for a Living-Learning Community.

After acquiring some building space on campus and getting the faculty on board, we began discussions on how to select students for the program. The program, which later took on the name “The Meretta Project,” became very popular around campus. The program would house 30 instrumental- and vocal-music education students. Admittance to The Meretta Project would be based on essay and audition. A panel of faculty and staff would listen to all of the applicants through a blind audition process. This blind process set the tone for a merit-based admittance to the project.

Through a generous donation provided by an anonymous alumna, we were able to renovate an existing residence hall to fit the intricacies necessary for a Performing Arts Living-Learning Community. Double rooms were renovated into singles with soundproof walls. Each room was acoustically tuned to provide the truest sound when students were practicing. State-of-the-art practice rooms were installed in the basement of the building for the residents of the program. Finally, a chamber recital room was added off of the west end of the building as a venue for performances. This building was truly one on a kind. No other campus in America could boast of the same facilities.

Last March, we held our first auditions for The Meretta Project. There were over 150 applicants fighting for 30 spots in the program. After hours of nameless, faceless auditions, the faculty and staff ranked the students from one through 150. The top 30 students would be offered admission to The Meretta Project first and any available positions after that would be assigned. This list was to be kept completely confidential as it was delivered to my desk late one afternoon. I was preparing my admission letters when I received a phone call from the President of SMC.

Dr. Spradling has been a good friend of mine and was in his 17th year at SMC. He was beloved by all of the students and had a way of winning over alumni and donors. In his tenure, he had increased alumni giving by 215%. The college was on firm financial ground, but a backlog of deferred maintenance was slowly eating away at our budget. There was little room to do any of the big projects that we wanted… until now.

Dr. Spradling had just gotten off of the phone with an extremely wealthy alumna. This was the same wealthy alumna that had donated the large gift to make my Living-Learning Community idea a reality. As it turns out, her grandson had just auditioned for The Meretta Project and she wanted to ensure the students placement in the program. In my conversation with Dr. Spradling I told him that I had not looked at the list yet and would see what I could do.

Dr. Spradling remarked, “Dan, this alumna is willing to endow The Meretta Project. They will donate all of the funding necessary to keep your program running for its entirety. This is not chump change this is the real deal. This family has done a lot for us already, and if you would like to keep funding your project, I recommend you not think too hard about this decision.”

I quickly ended the conversation and told Dr. Spradling that I would get back to him with my decision the next morning. My heart began to race as I went to the list. The rankings had been done based on the auditioning student’s number. On a separate sheet, was the key that explained which number belonged to which student. I found the students number and began to search the ranked list. I reached number 30 with no luck. I eventually found the student’s number ranked 135th on the list of 150 students.

Staring up at me from the paper was my dilemma. I had 30 spots set aside for the musical elite at Small Midwest College. These students have worked very hard to get where they are and now I had to make a decision. Keep the student in question in his original placement on the list and possibly lose the funding for my program, or pull a favor that would ensure the survival of my program but losing the more talented student. I had to think about the individual student concerns versus the concerns of the project community. I also had to look at short-term versus long-term benefits associated with this decision. This was not going to be easy.

The Moral Principles

I knew that this decision was going to take a lot of time and thought on my part. I wasn’t sure if I was going to be able to do it alone, so I referenced a book I had picked up in Graduate School called How Good People Make Tough Choices (1995). In this book, the author, Rushworth M. Kidder, discussed three moral principles in difficult decision-making. He referred to these principles as ends-based thinking, rule-based thinking, and care-based thinking.

First, I looked at my situation based on ends-based thinking. This concept calls on the decision-maker to “do whatever produces the greatest good for the greatest number.” (Kidder, 1995) I like to think of this as the ends justify the means principle. Looking at my current situation, I looked towards the future and saw the survival of my program. By sacrificing one talented student now, I was guaranteeing that my program would live on for years to come. If I stood my ground and offered admission to the top 30 candidates, I was assuring one person that they would receive the opportunity that they deserved. In assuring that one person their opportunity, I was gambling on the chance that no future students would ever benefit from this program. In this scenario, doing the greatest good for the greatest number would be offering the alumnus’ grandson a spot and guaranteeing to continuation of my program.

Next, I looked at rule-based thinking. In this scenario, I would have to apply my decision in this case to all situations similar to it. In essence, my decision would become “universal law.” (Kidder, 1995) To look at this further, by deciding to give the spot to the alumnus’ grandson, I would establishing a rule that when in a scenario that looked at merit-based admission and a lot of money, you should always choose money. I did not like the sound of that idea. While in I think it would benefit this situation, the principle implies that a person can never really guess the outcome. I don’t think that this is a rule that I would want to universal law. Sometimes, it would be more important to think of the merit-based student’s needs just as much as the programs.

Finally, there is principle of care-based thinking. This follows along with the Golden Rule of “do to others what you would like them to do to you.” (Kidder, 1995) Some individuals think that this principle is just too simple to use as the foundation of difficult decision-making. My first problem in this principle is that there are two parties involved and I cannot do to both of them what I would like them to do to me in the same situation. If I were the student who gained admission based on merit, I would want the Director of Residence Life to side with me. After all, I have worked very hard to get into the top 30 and I don’t think it would be fair to kick me out because of a business venture. On the other hand, I am the grandson of a very rich and very prominent alumna. I may not have played the best or be the best musician, but I have other resources that SMC could use. My grandmother will give this school all of the funding they need for this project, and I think that sacrificing one student isn’t that big of a deal.

I find this last principle too difficult to use in this situation. It did not provide me with any clear insight into the problem at hand. The other principles did help me gain some perspective on the problem. Unfortunately, the principles that I used produced conflicting results. Now that it was getting late in the day, a decision would have to be made soon.

The Decision Making Process

With the sun setting over the quad, I began pacing back and forth in my office. This was the last problem that I thought I would be dealing with today, but none-the-less a decision needed to be made. With all of the moral principles in my head, the problem had become slightly muddled. In an attempt to gain some clarity on the situation, I found my notebook from a class I took in Graduate School called Organization and Administration. I remembered one day in class we discussed the steps to ethical decision making. I found my handout and returned to my desk to work out the problem.

The first step was recognizing the problem. I scratched down on my note-pad, “Problem: Accept Student-Get Money, Deny Student-Admit Most Qualified.” I didn’t like how matter of fact the statement was but that is what everything boiled down to.

Now, I had to figure out who all of the players were. There were many people involved in this decision. Unfortunately, or fortunately, many of them would never know anything different based on the decision. We have on one side the President, Dr. Spradling, a powerful alumna with a wealth of resources, and a student who would otherwise be completely out of the running for a spot in the program. On the other side of the coin, we have a student who has worked very hard for admittance into the program and the only thing standing in their way is the possibility of letting this other student in. We also have the faculty and staff that read through all of the essays and listened to all of the auditions. Last but not least, we have the integrity in the program. The Meretta Project promised a blind admission process based solely on merit. If we let this other student in, we run the risk of sacrificing our quality of students.

Next, I had to look at all of the facts. The Performing Arts Living-Learning Community had been my brainchild. Working collaboratively with the School of Music and other faculty and staff, we had put together an amazing program. With the assistance from an anonymous alumna, who was no longer anonymous, we were able to create state-of-the-art facilities for our students. There are 30 spots available in the program. The alumna’s grandson was ranker 135th on the list of 150 applicants. I am being pressured by the President of the University to accept the student who is less qualified in the interest of financial gain. The alumna will endow The Meretta Project and insure that the program will be around for many years to come. There are some other facts to take into account. The entire application process has been blind. No one knows who has qualified for the program and I have the only list that tells which student qualified. Not even the faculty and staff that did the audition know which students made it.

Before I get too far into my decision making process, I should consider if there really is a dilemma on my hands. If I find that this situation is a right versus wrong decision, then I will not need to go much further. I remember some of the ideas my instructor gave me from the course. Am I breaking any laws? No, I am not breaking any laws. The stench test relates to how you feel in your gut. Since the very beginning, I did not want to make this decision. My gut actually went back and forth on this issue and has not helped me out very much. There was also the front-page test. How would I feel if the information got leaked to the student newspaper or local press? While I wouldn’t be too happy that it got out, no individual students would be harmed in the process. Since the process was kept completely confidential, the student who was bumped from the 30th spot would never know. Finally, I had to take into consideration the mom test. What would my mom think if she found out about this situation? I think my mom would be empathetic to my situation and support me in any decision that I made. In my opinion, this was clearly a right versus right decision that needed to be made.

The idea behind right versus right decisions is that whichever outcome I decide on; it will be the right decision. In talking about the dilemma for the first time, I touched on which right versus right paradigms this situation fell. The first paradigm is the individual versus community. I have to look at how this decision will affect/benefit the individual involved. I need to think about what that student will gain from the experience and how their contribution will help. I also need to think about how the decision with affect/benefit the community. It is possible that a lesser talented student may bring down the prestige of the program. It is also possible that the individual’s contribution will sustain the community for a long time to come.

This transitions nicely into the second right versus right paradigm. The situation that I have been dealing with also fits into the short-term versus long-term paradigm. By deciding to let in the student who qualified, I am looking at the short-term benefits. I will be doing what may be best in this situation, but am putting the future of the program at risk. If I accept the alumna’s grandson, I am thinking about the long-term implications that a large financial endowment will have on the program.

The next steps calls for me to apply the resolution principle. I mention in the conclusion of the last section that the care-based principle did not help me out at all in looking at the situation. There were simply too many sides to take into account. The ends-based principle had me examine if the ends justify the means. If I follow this principle, I would most likely accept the less-qualified student in the interest of financing the program. In the rules-based principle, I would probably choose to go with accepting the student that originally qualified for the 30th spot. Since that decision would set universal law, I think that it would be more important to stay true to the process instead of making exceptions for money.

Is there any other way? This question caught off guard and made me start to think. As I learned back in my oversized leather desk-chair, I began to run some possible scenarios through my head. I called Facilities Management and they assured me that there was no way to add another set of furniture anywhere in the hall without taking away practice space. I contemplated letting the unqualified student participate in classes and practice with the students, but providing them a place somewhere else on campus. This idea defeated the purpose of the Living-Learning Community. I finally came to the conclusion that there was no other way around this problem; I would have to make a decision. All that remained was gathering my courage and moving forward. Regardless of the decision, I would have to look back on this in the future and see how this decision panned out.