Co-ed debate an example of campus politics

The effect implementing co-ed housing at Oberlin would have on recruitment, yield and alumni funding is a matter of concern for members of the Alumni Council, Admissions Committee and Parents Council.

Though the co-ed housing issue has caught the public's attention, many express surprise about the sudden debate and discussion surrounding the topic. "I was surprised this issue became the issue to end the year on," Dean of Student Life and Services Charlene Cole-Newkirk said.

Student Senate held a speak out Thursday demanding that a proposal they have drafted be implemented next fall. Most of the students who spoke at the rally were Senators who feel the administration is avoiding the issue of co-ed rooms and presenting an alternative proposal that is not what Senate was asking for in the first place. Senator senior Noah Bopp said, during Senate's co-ed housing discussion at its meeting Sunday, "[The proposal] is not what we were asking for ... I think Charlene Cole lied to the Senate. That's crap. I think we should take a stand on this issue."

Cole-Newkirk said the concerns of non-students also have to be taken into account and assessed before drastic change is made. "Students are just one facet," she said. "Oberlin is faculty, administration - the people who are invested in this place - the alumni …"

"I push for what is the students' ultimate objective, but I need time and I'm not being given time," Cole-Newkirk said, regarding the Senate's demand for immediate implementation.

Student opinion about co-ed housing has been positive since Senate first passed the proposal. In a referendum held in 1994 students expressed overwhelming support for the proposal. This spring, in a survey administered by Cole-Newkirk, 261 students said they would consider making use of a co-ed housing option.

Since the Student Life Committee (SLC) passed the recommendations to the original Student Senate proposal this spring, members of the Alumni Council and Parents Council have received and responded to Senate's original co-ed housing proposal as part of the administration's assessment process, but not Cole-Newkirk's alternative proposal. Responses from members of those bodies, though, have not been nearly as positive toward the Senate proposal as students. Just recently, Dye has sent copies of Cole-Newkirk's proposal to Alumni Council and Parents Council members.

About 130 members of the 270 member Alumni Council have responded to the proposal. According to Margaret Brittingham, executive director of the alumni association, more of responses received have been negative rather than positive, with the older grads most vehemently opposed.

Overall, Brittingham said, the response from alums has been mixed.

Brittingham notes that the people most opposed to the proposal wrote in to express their opposition immediately. Thus, the largest and most opposed response came from members of the classes of the 20s, 30s and 40s.

Opposition stems from a variety of personal and practical reasons. One respondent, a member of the class of 1934, suggested that not only would Oberlin experience adverse effects in alumni giving if the proposal were implemented, it would also have to seek legal advice because of the "inevitable lawsuits that would eventually result when a student [living in a co-ed room] contracts a sexually transmitted disease."

One alum writes that there is no advantage to making sexual activity a part of the college lifestyle, and another writes, "Oberlin doesn't have to be a leader in progressive causes, but is often at its best as a leader in common sense."

But Brittingham said she didn't think most alums would be opposed to Cole-Newkirk's proposal.

The 31 member Parents Council also had a mixed response to the Senate proposal. Liesl Strickler, assistant director of the annual fund, said that while some parents say they will trust the College to make the right decisions for students, and while some parents are more opposed to the proposal than others, "no one is wildly enthusiastic."

Another body that has thought about the co-ed rooms issue, the admissions committee, also expressed disapproval.

Professor of Mathematics Susan Colley, chair of the admissions committee, said the admissions committee is "pretty opposed" to the Student Senate co-ed rooms proposal, but supported Cole-Newkirk's proposal. "That kind of plan is not foreign on campus," Colley said, in reference to Cole-Newkirk's proposal.

The opposition on the admissions committee springs from a fear that a co-ed housing option of the nature described in the Senate proposal would have negative effects on Oberlin's yield and recruitment. Colley said she feels any families who are not familiar with typical colleges and universities in the U.S. - which could include students of color, international students and first-generation college students - might be particularly uncomfortable with the Senate's co-ed housing option.

"If the College gets so far ahead of the curve on something like co-ed rooms it could be difficult for recruitment," Colley said.

SLC member and Professor of Psychology Steve Mayer said he originally voted against the proposal because he did not feel it was congruent with the goals of Oberlin. Mayer said that if one of the aims of the College is to promote diversity, the proposal could discourage people who are less liberal from applying to Oberlin, an event could possibly affect on-campus diversity.

The only sector of the Oberlin community that doesn't seem to have thought much about the issue of co-ed housing is the faculty.

"I don't really have an opinion," Professor of Psychology William Friedman said, when asked his opinion about co-ed housing.

Professor of Classics Thomas Van Nortwick said, "I don't have a view formed. I haven't been privy to the discussion in the SLC."

Cole-Newkirk said she thinks few faculty are "plugged in" to the issue of co-ed rooms, and that for most the issue probably rose to prominence so quickly that they have not had time to think about it. "It's not a real issue I was conscious of before a month ago," Cole-Newkirk said. She also said that only SLC faculty members have approached her to discuss co-ed housing.

Professor of Politics Chris Howell, an SLC member, said that the issue has taken a lot of faculty by surprise. "They haven't had time to think about it," Howell said, adding that to many the issue appears to be a "silly low-level issue." He said that most of the faculty he has spoken with about the issue have had a pragmatic response, rather than a moral response, and raised the question of what impact a co-ed housing option would have on recruitment, rather than responding to the question of whether the proposal is a good or bad thing.

Howell himself supports the proposal, saying he does not feel the college should be in the business of deciding who students can live with. He also said that the proposal is something that has gone through a long process of debate and discussion and is clearly something students want.