College Denies Co-ed Rooms

Despite overwhelming student support, Student Senate has essentially stopped working on a proposal to allow co-ed dorm rooms at Oberlin. Communication from the administration has discouraged Senate from pursuing the issue.

"At the beginning of the year, Senate really wanted to focus some attention on that, but we're told by [Dean of Students] Peter Goldsmith and [Acting President] Clayton Koppes that that's not an option right now," senior Senator Erika Hansen said. "Peter Goldsmith basically told us that it is futile for Senate to pursue this because [President] Nancy Dye is absolutely opposed to it, and that it was futile for him to try and persuade Nancy Dye," she said. "And Clayton Koppes is acting in President Dye's place and has said that he is going to stand by her decision."

A referendum distributed last year by Senate asked: "Are you in favor of the implementation of co-ed rooms in residence halls?" Of the 1,353 respondents, 82.8 percent said yes.

Goldsmith cited the configuration of rooms on campus as an obstacle to allowing co-ed living. "I think there's at least some misunderstanding of this issue. We are sometimes compared to Haverford and Wesleyan, who permit upperclass men and women to live together in suites, but that's made possible by the greater variety in rooming configurations than we have at Oberlin. And we do, for example, permit men and women to live together in the woodframe houses that we make available to students on Woodland Street," he said. Goldsmith said that if suites were available at Oberlin where men and women had singles that opened onto a common room, "then it would be uncontroversial."

Goldsmith said that, "when most residence halls were built - before 1970- builders didn't have in mind the kind of needs that contemporary students have in the way of living arrangements. The age of our residence halls doesn't give us the flexibility that other schools have."

Senior Senator Aaron Leavy expressed frustration with the administrative accountability for decisions, saying, "The concern I have is that the rationale for these decisions is always that someone else in the administration doesn't want it. I'm less concerned that the administration holds the same beliefs as me, but I'd like to know who is making these decisions and why."

Hansen said the administrative stance was motivated by financial concerns. "What's at stake here really is money. Nancy's reason is money. A lot of the alums who contribute large sums of money are older and their values are different than more recent graduates."

Assistant Director of Residential Life and Services Sandra Hougland echoed Hansen's conjecture, saying, "Every year, you hear about it. I believe the concern has been that alumni didn't support it," she said.

The proposal has been brought to the Housing and Dining committee before, in March 1994 and April 1995.

"When it was a proposition before, Senate brought it to the Housing and Dining committee on just a limited basis with no open doubles, and it would obviously not be opened to first-years. It passed the Housing and Dining committee in 1995, and died later on," Hougland said.

This semester, Senate feels like they have reached a dead end. "We're not pursuing it. Senate's pretty much exhausted what we can do about it," Hansen said. "I don't know how Peter Goldsmith actually feels about co-ed rooms, he's not been clear about that. He's never clear about his own feelings on issues, that's the problem with Peter Goldsmith."

Leavy also expressed frustration over the administration's ambiguity regarding the issue. "If someone were to stand up tomorrow and say ŒI do not think Oberlin should have co-ed rooms and here is why,' I would have infinitely more respect, and I think that would foster a better working relationship between students and administrators," he said.