University of Virginia Library

Administration Frustrates Change
Of First-Year Parietals Policy

News Analysis

By William T. Smith

Frustration best summarizes the
feeling of the First Year Council
following their unsuccessful attempt to
change administration policy on
dormitory parietals. The final "no" came
at a meeting between Edgar F. Shannon,
President of the University, and Student
Council President Kevin Mannix
Thursday, February 25.

The First Year Council, with the
backing of the Student Council, wanted
to shift authority for determining first
year dormitory visiting hours from the
University Administration to the Student
Council. This is the policy followed in the
setting of upperclass hours and in the words of
Student Council member Phil Chabot, "The
intent of this proposal is to insure equal
treatment for all students."

The opinion of both Councils was that by
the second semester of first year, students
should have control over their own parietal
hours. The proposal was supported by a margin
of 25-1 in a referendum among first year
students held in January.

The frustration of the First Year Council
was a product not so much of Mr. Shannon's
decision but rather, according to the Council,
of the Administration's refusal to respond
directly to the main arguments the Council put
forth.

D. Alan Williams, Vice President for Student
Affairs, provided the principal Administration
reply to the proposal in a letter to Mr. Mannix.

He wrote "The visitation program and
policy throughout the University has worked to
the mutual advantage of the students and the
University ... the present regulations appear to
me to have worked to provide a proper balance
in regards to the social, academic, and personal
privacy demands of individual students.
Therefore, I do not believe we should change
the existing policy at the present time."

The rationale of this argument evades the
basic argument submitted by the Council.
Whether the present policy has "worked," as
Mr. Williams suggests, was not the crucial issue
upon which the Council rested its case. The
issue was whether first year men and women
entering their second semester ought to enjoy
the same rights as upperclassmen in determining
their parietals. The proposal should have rested
upon the merits of this argument, yet neither
Mr. Williams nor Mr. Shannon chose to address
it.

Larry Sabato, First Year Council Vice
President, and the student who initiated the
proposal, expressed a deep sense of frustration
at this lack of Administration response. He
explained how a meeting with Mr. Williams left
him with a feeling of bewilderment over the
lack of communication throughout.

Mr. Mannix experienced similar difficulties
with Mr. Shannon. Speaking of his Thursday
meeting with the University President, Mr.
Mannix described him as being "unspecific in
his response to the Council's
recommendations."

The Council members worked hard in
developing the proposal. In addition, they
invested a significant amount of time and effort
in fighting for its approval. They deserved more
cogent reasons for its rejection.