569 Would Live In 23-Hour Dorm

569 Would Live In 23-Hour Dorm

Dormitory Life

Students of Mary Washington College give their opinions on 23-hour visitation rights. Information is based off of polls taken to see how the students feel. It tells the reader of what is soon to come based off of the negative opinions.

Mello, Michael A.

Mello, Michael A. "569 Would Live In 23-Hour Dorm." The Bullet, Tuesday, October 17, 1978, News Clippings, Box 1, April 19, 1976-October, 1979, Michael A. Mello Papers, 1957-2008, Special Collections, Simpson Library, University of Mary Washington.

HIST 298, University of Mary Washington

1978-10-17

The materials in this online collection are held by Special Collections, Simpson Library, University of Mary Washington and are available for educational use. For this purpose only, you may reproduce materials without prior permission on the condition that you provide attribution of the source.

2 JPG

300 dpi

English

Fredericksburg, VA

The 981 students who responded to the recent SA poll on 23-hour visitation indicated overwhelming support for “the creation of an experimental dormitory which would operate under a system of 23-hour visitation.” 80.1% of those returning the surveys favored the establishment of such a policy at Mary Washington College, and 58.7% indicated that they personally would live in a dormitory with 23-hour visitation.

According to poll organizer Eric Wootten, the survey was distributed to the 1669 residential students at MWC. The purpose of the poll, according to its introduction, was to “determine whether students are satisfied with the present visitation policy and, if not, whether the option of twenty-three hour visitation is a desirable alternative.”

These results are consistant with the findings of a similar survey conducted by the SA three years ago. 80.1% of those polled in 1975 favored extended visitation hours; this figure is exactly the same as the findings of the recent survey. The percentage of students willing to tolerate the possibility of an “increased security risk” rose 15% since 1975, from 79% to 94%. The percentage of students willing to “occasionally make other sleeping arrangements” under a policy of extended visitation also increased: from 77% in 1975 to 89% today.

Other findings in the poll include:

• 65% favored and 21.2% oppressed the granting of the 23-hour option to students between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one who are financially independent. 13.3% had no option.
• 70.8% favored and 21.9% opposed the granting of the option to students between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one who could secure parental consent. 7.3% expressed no opinion.
• 96.6% were aware and 2.0% were not aware that “a system of 23-hour visitation could necessitate the use of…proper dress outside of your room.”
• 84.1% realized and 13.3% did not realize that extended visitation might entail “sharing bathrooms with the opposite sex.”
• 89.2 were aware and 8.2 were not aware that such a policy might necessitate “occasionally making other sleeping arrangements.”
• 94% realized and 4% did not realize that 23-hour visitation could entail “increased security precautions.” Students had a wide range of comments on the question of 23-hour visitation.
  
  “23 hour would give us the freedom to live like the adults that the College says we are.”
  
  “It would put this school into the Twentieth Century.”
  
  “It’s totally against the whole purpose of MWC.”
  
  “We already have our morals established by the time we get to College. If students are going to have sex, they’ll have it regardless of the visitation policies.”
  
  “The visitation system is the most glaring anachronism at this school—an outdated leftover from a bygone time.”
  
  “23 hour visitation is ridiculous. We are here for an education, not a total social life.”
  
  “If a poor, neurotic girl has to have her boyfriend around 23 hours a day, let them either go to a motel, get married, or make use of Ball Circle. If offers no advantages except for whores and their clients.”
  
  “It would allow adults to make an obviously personal decision.”
  
  “My husband could visit me at any time.”
  
  “The demonstrated maturity of students on this campus does not seem to warrant mush optimism for the success of 23 hour visitation, but I think that I should be given a chance to stand or fall on its own merits.”
  
  “Dorm life is as much a part of our learning experience as are classes. We should have the option of as many lifestyles as possible.”
  
  “I have friends at schools that have 23 hour visitation, and they have little good to say about that system. Roommate friction is a big problem.” “It is absurd to say that a student is old enough to drink, vote and go to war, but not old enough to chose who should be in one’s room at any time.” “It’s worth a try.!”
  
  This recent poll was organized under the auspices of SA Whip Eric Wootten. Wootten commissioned Student Lobby Research Committee Co-Chairman Betsy Bowen in mid-September to conduct the survey. Bowen, who is also Chairman of the Special Projects Committee of the SA Senate, plans to conduct thorough research into the ramifications that 23-hour visitation would have on WMC. This research will include a study of other Virginia institutions of higher learning as well as an evaluation of the state of the Virginia law as it relates to 23-hour visitation.
  
  The results of the survey will be submitted to the Executive Cabinet later this semester for consideration. Wootten said that he plans to poll the parents of residential students, as well as alumni about the question of 23-hour visitation in the near future.

Newspaper

Walsh, Eily P.

Williams, Megan