Barnard College - Mortarboard Yearbook (New York, NY)

Page 10 text:

Barnard: Truly a women ' s college 91 «o (0 3 C n 0.) o Nineteen eighty-two was an exciting and eventful year for Barnard, one that will be remembered for many joyous reasons. One of these reasons is the culmination of years of negotiations regarding the relationship between Barnard and Columbia University. A lot has ' changed since the trustees of Columbia rejected President Frederick Barnard ' s proposal to admit women at their college. A compromise was reached in the form of a separate, affiliated women ' s institution, but this arrangement has been under fire ever since. In 1962, both schools began to offer courses jointly without further financial arrangements. It became quite obvious, however, that many more Barnard students were taking Columbia courses than vice versa, and that translated into a loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars peryear for the University. The University proposed a merger of Barnard and Columbia colleges in order to cut costs and increase enrollment. Barnard refused. In 1973, both schools signed an intercorporate agreement to increase cooperation in the use of physical facilities and faculty appointments, among other things. Columbia continued to seek a merger for financial reasons and because its all-male status was beginning to adversely affect its applicant pool, especially in relation to the other coed Ivies. By 1977, Columbia concluded that its only sensible solution was a merger, and again Barnard refused. The following three years brought many heated debates and few solutions. Barnard ' s faculty was seriously affected by the University ' s virtual control of tenuring procedures. Negotiations broke down completely in 1979, due to the clashing personalities of Barnard ' s president Jacquelyn Mattfeld and Columbia ' s William McGill. By 1981, negotiations resumed under the new leadership of Barnard ' s Ellen V. Futter and Columbia ' s Michael I. Sovern. Over the summer, the two schools reached a series of agreements in principle designed to bring about de facto coeducation. What President Sovern had in mind was the same level of coeducation of the Ivy League average; what it meant for Barnard was a revised tenuring procedure, the adoption of Columbia ' s core curriculum, and open housing and dining facilities. Negotiations reached a stalemate when President Futter realized that to achieve Columbia ' s minimum level of coeducation, we would have had to send 79 to 81 percent of our registrations across the street, which she considered not a tenable solution. X X 1 A rmr;

Page 9 text:

IBKIIIIIliP cerns of the Barnard community as a whole. As a result. Dean Guildersleeve was able to deal sensitively and effectively with all parties in her thirty-six years of office. Aware that instructors were a vital influence on the students, often serving as role models, Dean Guildersleeve noted that it was necessary to appoint en- couraging, successful, dynamic women to the faculty. Under her direction, Barnard emerged front the Depression and both world wars, strong in its own right, devoted to the education of women. . By 1947 when Barnard appointed her fourth dean, Millicent Gary Mcintosh (who changed her title and became Barnard ' s first president because corporation heads wanted to speak to the president of Barnard, not the dean) it marked a departure from conventional academic practice. None of the other Seven Sister colleges had appointed a married woman for its head and no other women ' s college in the country had a mother for its leader, much less one with five children. Mcintosh also strove to prepare Barnard ' s graduates to bridge the gap between learning and living. Within this concept, the curriculum continued to increase in diversity, and Barnard started sponsoring conferences on topics ranging from philosophy to physics, whereby Barnard faculty and students could share with other scholars discussions of important problems and ideas in their own fields and relating to the community. By the time Dr. Jacquelyn Mattfeld was inaugurated as president of Barnard on November 5, 1976, the College was no longer the poor sibling it started as within the Columbia University system. With its own departments and administrators, it stood tall as a proud advocate of women ' s education, not only because of the quality education it provides, but also by virtue of its successful — though arduous — struggle to survive. Society ' s attitude towards female students and scholars had been fluctuating between disdain and accolades. But with the proven advantages of women ' s education — 70% of women listed in this year ' s ' Who ' s Who graduated from women ' s colleges instead of coeducational schools — the intellectual capacity of women should no longer be doubted. At Columbia, the drive towards admitting women had gathered full force, marking Dr. MattfeM ' s administration with her strong efforts to articulate the need for women ' s colleges, institutions whose pri- mary purpose is to nurture women scholars. Barnard College ' s evolutionary — even revolutionary — history draws a full circle this year with the inauguration of her newest president, Ellen V. Futter. President Futter was a 1971 Barnard graduate before receiving her J.D. from Co- lumbia ' s School of Law. She is married to Mr. John Shutkin, also an attorney, and their first child, Anne Victoria, was born this academic year. Unlike with Barnard ' s first dean, in the eyes of the community it is clear that President Putter ' s positions as wife and mother will not detract from her capacity to lead Barnard in the coming years. In this. President Futter and other and future women scholars benefit from the legacy left by the perseverance and success of Barnard and other women ' s colleges ' graduates.

Page 11 text:

Alums Pledge Support By Mary Witherell The first indication that Barnard has gotten that its agreement with Columbia is being positively received is that the college is now $50,000 richer. Just like that. Within twenty-four hours of President Putter ' s announcement of the new agree- ment with Columbia at the January 22nd faculty meeting, volunteers were on the phone informing approximately 300 alum- nae of the news. The reaction, according to Irma Moore, Director of Alumnae Affairs, was more than favorable. I would say that they were aU very pleased that we had not lost our identity, said Moore, and pleased that we still had the relationship with Columbia. They all felt very keenly that it is important for Barnard to remain a college for women but with a tie to the university. BARNARD Signor Michaele! Signor Michaele! Si, Renaldo. Mtchaele, it ' s the agree- ment! Si, Renaldo. All the original terms, Michaele! Si, Renaldo. Elena accepts them! The women, the enrollments, everything. She won ' t interfere. We give her the tenure conces- sion, and she gives us a free market in girls. We coeducate! It ' s amazing. . . The new agreement will permit Columbia to admit women in the fall of 1983, thereby ameliorating the quality of its applicant pool and its students ' social life. Tenuring procedures for Barnard will include a panel of two Columbia professors, two Barnard professors (as opposed to the former 3-2 arrangement), and one outside scholar, to be approved by Barnard ' s Dean of the Faculty. The agreement will be in effect until 1989, thus ensuring both schools a certain degree of stability. Cross-registration and access to facilities will remain as they are until then. On January 25, 1982, over 800 students, faculty, and administrators crowded into the Barnard gym for an all-college assembly. President Futter presented the major points of the new agreement, and representatives from other interested parties gave their views. Although many people fear that Barnard will not be able to survive Columbia ' s competition, the majority of the Barnard community was relieved to hear there will be no merger, and confident in the school ' s future. Undergrad president Nancy Poundstone pointed out that with each new discus- sion we were losing another piece of Barnard. Now we can pursue our own goals. Senior Class president Rosa Alonso observed that Columbia University chose to keep us in their unison of schools. In this affiliation, Columbia University has given prestige to Barnard, but it has been more than proven that Barnard has brought prestige to Columbia University. Our identity and excellence is not threatened by the decision of Columbia College to admit women. Barnard competes with the top Ivy League coeducational institutions, and the fact that one more should come into the competition does not mean we are ' finished ' . Until now, the speculation got in the way of the daily program at both schools, according to JoeTolliver, Director of College Activities. The political science department ' s Leslie Caiman said that the key to Barnard ' s future seems to be future admissions, but warned that high school women are not as aware of the problems of being women and the virtues of an all-women ' s education. Christine Royer, Director of Admissions, expects a lot of hard work, but believes that things are going to be happening at Barnard in a very positive way. In the weeks that followed. President Futter met with students in the dorms and in Mcintosh to discuss the agreement and answer their questions. Bulletin and Spectator published stories and letters on every aspect of the issue until both campuses were saturated with it. The staff of Mortarboard believes this is a great opportunity for Barnard to grow and prosper, and looks forward to many more years of feuding with The Columbian, confident that — like our school and her students — we will shine. 7