University of Virginia Library

Coeducation Lesson

As the University approaches the advent of
undergraduate coeducation which will begin
next fall, there are some feelings of
apprehension, confusion, and bafflement
among students, faculty and administrators on
the subject. No one in Charlottesville can say,
at least with conviction and reliability, what
problems will be faced next year and how
they all should be handled to alleviate any
strains that could develop. There is a sense of
the "great unknown."

There are recent lessons in coeducation
now available fr the University. Both Yale and
Princeton are nearing the close of their first
year as coed institutions and the problems
that they have encountered in their initial
coeducation experience are interesting and
perhaps could be helpful to us. We believe
that both of these noted institutions are
similar enough to the University to draw
valuable guidelines for coeducation here.

Both Yale and Princeton have a long
tradition of being exclusively male colleges
and both have approximately the same
number of undergraduates as the University.
Both universities are now facing serious
dilemmas as the result coeducation of their
approach to and as the New York Times
reports, "For the moment, no solution
appears in sight."

It would be wise to note now before we
review some of the difficulties the Ivy League
schools now face after a year of coeducation
that spokesmen for the administration and the
students of both universities feel that the
benefits of having the new women around far
outweigh the problems encountered. In fact,
there is absolutely no question of cutting back
the number of women or curtailing the
coeducation program.

Probably the central difficulty which is
connected to all of the specific problems that
have developed is the general attitude of many
people who are connected with the universities
in a variety of positions from students to
alumni. As one young freshman from Yale
states "there is a distinct difference between a
university's being coeducated and men's
university taking in women."

The girls at Yale and Princeton are
regrettably regarded as exceptions and not as
contributing elements in the growth and
understanding of each individual student.
Some of the women have been annoyed by
the fact that few of the men will accept them
as serious intellectuals. This is partly due to
the attitude that that the men had towards
the incoming coeds early in the year: "The
guys expected the girls to be bubbling over
with charm. But they found them to be just
regular human beings."

Just like Virginia, Yale and Princeton have
a tradition of importing dates from nearby
women's colleges. The beginnings of
coeducation have not cut off the flow.
Relations have in many ways become strained
between the men and women as groups
because of the unrealistic expectations about
coeducation, and has led to the return of the
practice of finding female companionship and
comfort from outside the walls of the
university.

With the escalation of the women's rights
movements on both campuses relations have
further deteriorated as some of the upperclassmen
find the women "too demanding"
and feel that they "ought to keep their
places." A number of upperclassmen found
the presence of women on an equal basis in
college clubs (i.e. fraternities) that used to be
their private domain very upsetting.

Next year both Yale and Princeton
intensification of their individual housing
crises and fear that the quality of education
may suffer as classes and seminars grow.

As we have noted in earlier editorials,
these are difficulties that will have to be
eliminated at the University for a successful
transition into full coeducation. We believe
that the experiences of Yale and Princeton
point to two general course of action that
would be wise for the University to follow.

First of all, as we have said before, the
University should plan to admit women as
regular students, not in addition to the men.
Of course this is a very difficult course of
action for the Admissions Office to follow for
a variety of reasons, but it is clear that when a
university admits more students than it is
prepared to teach from a logistic standpoint, a
great number of thorny problems arise which
will eventually act to the detriment of
everyone's educational experience. We do not
expect nor could the University implement
this policy completely, but it is absolutely
necessary that our booming enrollment be
arrested until we are prepared to handle the
increasing numbers without injuring the
quality of undergraduate education here.

Secondly, to avoid unnecessary and unfortunate
strains between the men and the
women, it is essential that we do not enter
next year with "unrealistic expectations"
about coeducation. We hope that the women
here will not feel that they are in social
isolation or that they are continually on the
defensive, but this will inevitably happen if
the men regard the new women as oddities or
weekend treats to be tasted on occasion, but
by and large ignored.

We must remember that the University is
no longer a men's school allowing lucky
women entrance, but an institution where
both sexes may "follow truth, wherever it
may lead."

Again we call upon the University to
intensify its study and planning for coeducation
so that we may lead in the light and not
follow blundering in the dark.