Co-Education at Harvard

Now that a Harvard alumnus can donate money to a Radcliffe fund and still receive full credit for giving to his University, it becomes increasingly difficult to dispel the old adage that "Harvard is not coeducational in any respect except in point of fact."

He can do this by contributing to the Radcliffe quota for either the proposed Harvard-Radcliffe Health Center or the Harvard-Radcliffe Theatre. Both these projects, which were announced this year, represent considerable forward steps in the development of closer relations between the University and its "sister college."

Another indication of increasing cordiality came this year in the area of undergraduate life. Harvard's Dean Watson and Radcliffe's Dean Lacey, recognizing that men and women are working together in extracurricular activities, suggested that the time may be ripe to discuss a formal merger of undergraduate organizations.

At present, the exact status of young women in the University community as a whole almost defies definition. As undergraduates and graduate students in the arts and sciences, women are enrolled at Radcliffe. But if they are studying medicine, law, education or some other profession, they are registered directly in the Harvard professional schools.

But if women wish to study business, they cannot attend the Harvard Business School, they must enroll in the Harvard-Radcliffe Program in Business Administration, begun originally by the Annex and now sponsored jointly by Radcliffe and the B-School. Still more perplexing is the situation of the students persuing the degree of Master of Arts in Teaching. They are in the Radcliffe Graduate School, not Harvard's, unlike the women studying for the degree of Master in Education.

The role of women in the Harvard community is so amorphous because, like Topsy, it "jus' growed." With new signs this year of closer relations between Harvard and Radcliffe, many have taken to speculating just how far this "merger" tendency may proceed.

The die-hard traditionalists look askance at any indications of "creeping Radcliffism" in the University. They are dismayed at the thought of Cliffe-dwellers invading Lamont and the IAB, running for Student Council offices, or leading cheers at the Harvard-Yale game.

On the other extreme are those individuals who are convinced that the University is coeducational "in point of fact" and look toward a future utopia of Har-cliffe, Rad-vard, or a truly "coeducational Harvard." They would agree with the University professor who says that since the initial step of holding joint classes, "everything else is inevitably going closer together."

The "coeducationalists" overlook the Harvard alumnus who may want to contribute his millions to a "man's" college and the Radcliffe administrator who may want to keep his job. But they point to the success of coeducation in the Harvard professional schools and suggest that greater efficiency could be achieved by eliminating the present duplication in endowment funds and administrative machinery.

Advantages for Radcliffe

Several advantages of a total submersion of Radcliffe into the larger University have been suggested. Foremost is that the greater financial resources of Harvard would benefit women students on an equal basis with men. A classics professor has pointed out that it is often more difficult for a top-ranking Radcliffe student to get a graduate scholarship because of the Annex's more limited funds.

There have been some indications that women might prefer the prestige of holding a degree from Harvard rather than Radcliffe--although President Pusey currently countersigns every Annex degree. The secretary of the Radcliffe Graduate School reports that occasionally an applicant will ask if she can obtain a Harvard diploma, and that graduate students in applying for national scholarships are prone to say that they attend Harvard rather than Radcliffe.

But the traditionalists argue that a Radcliffe degree is a mark of distinction and that a merger with Harvard might not prove a financial saving in the long run.

Radcliffe administrators, moreover, are quick to point out the advantages to Annex students of even the limited amount of independence which the sister school still maintains. The most obvious is the smaller size of Radcliffe which permits a greater degree of warmth and friendliness between students and administrators than can exist in an institution the size of Harvard.

Dean Lacey has pointed out, for instance, that the "sheer force of numbers" would prevent Harvard from holding an outdoor picnic for the entire sophomore class as Radcliffe did this spring. "I doubt if Mr. Trottenberg would want to serve chicken in the Yard," she said.

Radcliffe is extremely proud of its system of student government and particularly of its honor system in the residence halls. Dean Lacey firmly believes that Radcliffe students can govern themselves better than Harvard and Radcliffe students together could govern both groups of undergraduates. "I can't think of an effective self-governing system for Harvard," she said." On the graduate level, however, the Student Council is a "coed" organization.

Although some would disagree, Mildred P. Sherman, dean of college relations, has asserted that a women's college is necessary to enable women to carry a full share of the "burden of responsibility" for undergraduate activities. She maintains that it is the men in coeducational schools who get the big offices, and women are generally left with the job of providing refreshments or taking minutes.

It has been pointed out too that a women's college may be more useful to the graduate in helping her secure a job after graduation. There is often the feeling that a coeducational school would be more anxious to secure the top-notch positions for its male graduates.

Less tangible and therefore more difficult to assess are the so-called "psychological" advantages of belonging to a women's college. Men, in particular, are quick to assume that for a girl "it is better to have an identification with a women's college," as John U. Munro '34, Director of the Financial Aid Office, has put it. Moreover, he, like many other Harvard alumni, admits to having "an entrenched instinct for Harvard as a men's college."

The most likely and most appropriate next step of merger would be in the area of undergraduate organizations. Extracurricular activities are certainly joint in "practice though not in theory" since many Radcliffe girls participate in Harvard organizations, although a University ruling prohibits them from the full membership rights of voting and holding office.

Wilbur K. Jordan, president of Radcliffe, has indicated that any merging of activities would have greater direct significance for the student than would a merger of the health services. He has stated, however, that "Here is an area in which the officers of the colleges should be guided by what students really want."

Evidently the Radcliffe administration is not yet convinced that students would like to see the ban on full joint membership lifted. Several weeks ago Dean Lacey, whose office as Dean of Residence includes dealing with problems of undergraduate activities, said that there is "no immediate crisis" for joint activities since "no organization is beating at our doors for joint membership."

On the question of joint organizations, Wilma A. Kerby-Miller, Dean of Instruction, has said that the administrations might as well recognize that "the groups have to work together," and that "women should have a chance to hold office on an equal basis with men." She indicated that "certainly most of the administrators would be in favor of it."

Although Harvard and Radcliffe students meet together for classes and hour exams, the custom of holding final examinations separately has prevailed in most courses, and this is an inconvenience which many professors feel is "a terrible pain in the neck." However, this is one change which would probably be met with violent reaction from the Radcliffe student body.

Opposition to Plan

In the 1948-49 academic year, the Annex governing board recommended joint exams but the students' over-whelming vote against it caused the proposal to be dropped. In her annual report for that year, Mildred P. Sherman, then Dean of the College, wrote: "Seldom has such articulate vigor been displayed at Radcliffe as when the students fought for their honor system and their independence."

Almost a decade later, Radcliffe students are still strongly opposed to the idea of joint exams which would be closely proctored and which would necessitate wearing skirts rather than sloppy blue jeans, uncombed hair and make-up-less faces.

Several Annex deans have suggested that there may be undue duplication in operating separate registrar's offices and records for Harvard and Radcliffe, and that this may be an area for merger in the future.

But if there are to be any further changes in the relationship between Harvard and Radcliffe, administrators at both institutions feel that such changes will come about gradually, and only whenever the two schools reach a "common realization of a common need," as Jordan has expressed it.

"I doubt very much whether you would be either sensible or proper to have a plan laid out for increasing cooperation," Jordan said. "Rather you are guided by the natural logic of events."