50 Years of Coeducation After 77 years as an all-girls’ school, Shipley’s Board of Trustees approved coeducation in 1971—a watershed moment in the School’s history. We examine the origins of the decision, share reflections of the people who shaped and experienced the transition, and explore coeducation today.
The Origins of Coeducation at Shipley
After 77 years as an all-girls’ school, Shipley’s Board of Trustees approved coeducation in 1971—a watershed moment in the School’s history. In this article, Shipley historian Trina Vaux '63 examines the origins of that decision, as well as some of the challenges that Shipley faced in making the transition.
Reflections on the Shift to Coeducation
Shipley’s move to coeducation was a difficult transition on a number of fronts—from attracting boys to a formerly all-girls’ school to convincing faculty and alumnae that it was in the School’s best interest. Here are reflections from some of the people who shaped and lived through the early days of coeducation at Shipley.
Why I Teach at a Coed School
Shane Kinsella, Shipley 's Assistant Head of School for Educational Excellence and Head of Middle School, started his teaching career at an all-boys' school. In this essay, he reflects on the transition to teaching at a coed school like Shipley and why he'd never go back to single-sex education.
From the Archives
Coeducation: Pros and Cons Excerpts from Correspondence
The Shipley community had a lot to say about the possibility of coeducation for Shipley. These excerpts from letters to the editor were published in the June 1971 Bulletin.
I assume my daughter will have been educated before she attends college and will have the judgment and maturity based on a sound moral and educational background to cope with the problem of relaxed college rules. A co-ed environment won't do this for her, and I honestly believe it will detract—you know the jealousies, insecurities of the young girl's world when boys enter the picture. With the prevalent drug and sex problems of today, won't the single-sex school give our girls a chance to grow and mature first?
As far as competing with the male—or, rather, the different role of the female in today's world—my observation has been that the gals who attended single-sex schools (Vassar, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, etc.) have been liberated all these years, and that the women leaders in the business and educational world are not the women from coeducational backgrounds.
As the husband of an alumna and as the father of a current student, a most unfortunate but likely result of the change could be to increase the schism between day students and boarders, if not actually to bring an end to boarding altogether. To me it is disappointing that day students and boarders seem so far apart, when they could be beneficially quite close together. In fact, the last alumnae magazine shows that the class of 1970, unlike its predecessors, has different day and boarder reporters.
I am not opposed to coeducation—even for Shipley—and I am certain that you will be able to make such a conversion smoothly and effectively. I will go so far as to say that there is a definite need for high-quality, privately-owned coeducational schools on the Main Line and elsewhere. My one objection is this: It seems that every such high-quality private school and college is contemplating such a conversion or has already begun to realize such a conversion. I honestly do not believe that when my child (or children) reach high school age that there will any longer be a choice. My parents wanted me to go to an all girls school. If my husband and l should feel the same way when the time comes, I think there will be "slim pickins." There is and always will be a need for high-quality, privately owned single sex schools—why else would they have come into being?
I feel that Shipley is a superior type of school for girls to which I wish to entrust my daughter's education over the next five years I liked what I saw as I visitedand talked with friends, all of whom seemed to have daughters at Shipley, and many of whom were themselves alumnae. It was, and is, a successful format-why change it? Is coeducation the only solution? Is it the only way to keep abreast of the times?
I accept the trustees thinking that they "do not intend to jeopardize our academic program nor our long traditions of stability and excellence" by such action. But, please, what interests of the school and girls would best be served by such a move?
Having spent most of my life in "unisex" educational institutions—Riverdale, Shipley, and Sarah Lawrence (and twenty-eight years since then in boys' boarding and day schools)—I would quite simply like to cast a vote in favor of coeducation at Shipley. All the independent schools of any note in the Northwest are—or will be by this fall—coeducational, and there seems to be considerable satisfaction on the part of all concerned. However, I would like to add that I often, and seriously, wonder about the validity of the boarding school per se. If Shipley continues to be one, I urge that that part of the school become coeducational as well.
Just a brief note to express my wholehearted support of Shipley's consideration of coeducation! With boys in classes, the social opportunities of the boarders would hopefully be increased, while there would still be many areas within the boarding department for all-girl association and self-government. I learned a great deal at Shipley, but I sincerely feel that a wider range of ideas would be provided if there were male students; also, more male teachers.
My observations of conditions on the Bucknell campus lead me to believe that much of the agitation for open dorms, co-ed dorms, and so on comes from students who have not experienced living with the opposite sex in their own families or at the high school level. Most of the girls who have brothers have no use for co-ed dorms. Others, those who attended public high schools, find that co-ed classes are little different from their previous experience and settle down nicely into the routine at Bucknell. We find that the average young lady student ranks higher in her high school class and is better prepared scholastically than is the average male student. Most of our women students rank in the top ten percent of their high school class and achieve most of the academic honors. To summarize, I believe that Shipley is taking a forward step in planning for coeducation and I believe it will better prepare students for the realities of college life.
Hooray for Shipley! Having gone on from there to a coeducational college and having been employed since then in a "man's world," I have increasingly come to think that a school for only girls is a mistake. As for academic standards, my own experience is that with care they will not suffer, and should improve. I discovered in college that men's minds really do work differently from women's—they challenge and question more. Regardless of what the Women's Lib people say, women are different from men; they tend to be much more conservative in their thinking generally, and expo sure to the "male" point of view is good for them, just as their more controlled approach is good for the men.
I feel that coeducation is a very good idea, especially since most of the girls do go on to co-ed colleges. The experience of relating to and working with boys enables them to fit into the co-ed colleges more easily. Also, I have noticed that girls in an all-girl school sometimes tend to be sloppy in their appearance and dress. Perhaps having young men in their midst would inspire the girls to take more of an interest in how they look.
I would like to express my enthusiastic approval of your decision to adopt coeducation at Shipley. I attended a women's college after Shipley and now very much regret having done so. I feel that such artificial situations are outmoded, and that they contribute to a much too narrow range of association. It is wonderful, I think, that Shipley was willing to reevaluate itself fundamentally.
I read with great interest the recent letter advising that Shipley was considering the possibility of admitting boys or a merger with an existing boys' school. I would like to take this opportunity to express my enthusiasm for this proposal and to commend those involved for their progressive thinking. I am sure that Shipley would maintain its excellent standards if this change took place and would actually prepare its students more fully to meet the challenges of a changing world.
I feel sure that the trustees reached their decision after much thoughtful consideration of the question. It was interesting to note that trustees, faculty, alumnae, parents, and students were all brought into the discussions. I certainly intend to support this decision and to continue to support Shipley as strongly as I have in the past. I suppose that a bit of nostalgia makes me resist anything that will change Shipley from the school that I knew. But at the same time, I find real pride in knowing that the school is growing and changing to accept the new ideas of excellence in education.
It really doesn't make sense for girls and boys to be separated; it does not afford a good learning experience. It really makes far better sense for boys and girls, from the very beginning of their lives, to learn each other's differences, their weaknesses and strengths, to respect each other and themselves.
I heartily endorse the proposal, not only because I feel that the addition of boys in the classroom could lead to a more meaningful educational experience, but, in a more practical vein, I think that the age of segregated education is drawing to a close... Although you will undoubtably receive hundreds of letters indicating positions on both sides of the fence, perhaps a word from someone who has lived on a co-ed campus for the past ten years might be helpful. When our youngest daughter was a senior (about four years ago) all house rules for the dormitories were thrown out. She did not like it. At her age (and younger) there were many pregnancies, and girls had their rooms "only on the books;" they came occasionally to get clean clothes or to do their boyfriend's laundry. Then co-ed dorms came into vogue, with staunch support from most undergraduates, but after a year or so that did not suffice either., The kids wanted to live in houses off campus because it was cheaper and more convenient, and they could do their own cooking. "Communes" came into being all over the area. I have female students working with me who live this way and they are great. They come from both private and public schools and want to live away from any supervision—parental or administrative—but they are not really rebellious, in that they still cling to middle class traditions in so many other ways. But they are young! And I guess my feeling is that if they started living in co-ed dorms at high school age, the natural progression to wanting to live communally off campus would become an issue even earlier, and parents would really have problems on their hands. So, although I agree absolutely that co-ed classes are more interesting and more challenging and should be arranged in as natural a way as possible, I think that living arrangements should be entirely separate. I never could understand why college kids would want to meet the opposite sex at breakfast or while doing the laundry, and it should be even more undesirable for school students who have so many adolescent fears and inhibitions anyway (or if they don't they should have!). I do urge caution, and consideration of the painfully wonderful hangups about popularity with boys and crushes on older girls and teachers… I hate to think that girls will get to be adults and mothers without ever having had the chance to be real girls.
I believe Shipley should remain a private school for the education of girls because I believe that is the best way for Shipley to prepare women for the many roles they may assume in society.
At the Forum the question was asked, "What type of product do we wish to produce?" I hope that the goal is to produce young women who can go in any one of many, many potential directions. If I did not think this would be possible at Shipley, I would not send my children there. Some of your graduates may want to become professional people (such as the young women who went to medical school), some may choose careers in law; a smaller number will choose government service, science and engineering; still others will assume roles that have been more conventional for women, such as social service and nursing. Most of these women with careers will be housewives also. I believe that these graduates will be better able to pursue their careers because they have had the benefit of an extremely fine educational environment in which they have been encouraged to exercise their powers fully.
Retaining the single-sex concept at Shipley does not require a return to the convent-like, isolated, and somewhat narrow orientation that girls' schools have often had in the past. The new attitudes of the faculty, the addition of male teachers, and the sharing with boys of some class during the "mini-terms" make it inevitable that there will be a considerable exchange between boys and girls even in the framework of the single-sex school.
Articles from the Beacon
Beacon articles about coeducation from students’ perspectives during Shipley’s coeducation exchanges, with St. George's School in January 1971 and with Episcopal Academy in the 1971-1972 school year, and during the first year of coeducation in the Lower School in the 1972-1973 school year.