Faculty Dismiss V’s Proposal

Despite unanimous support from Student Council (StuCo), a proposal to extend visitation hours to 9 p.m. for upperclassmen garnered zero votes from dorm heads.For years, Exeter’s visitations policy has remained an issue on campus that has sparked conversations in StuCo. In response to the ongoing discussion, current StuCo President Alice Ju pledged to amend the visitations policy during her campaign last spring.Last Tuesday, StuCo united in their approval of an amendment that would extend visitations until 9 p.m. for upperclassmen and sent the proposal to the dorm heads to be voted upon.The proposal was turned down last week, with the majority of dorm heads voting against it and others abstaining, leading to zero votes in favor of extending visitation hours.Despite her disappointment at the dorm heads’ decision, Ju explained the rationale behind the suggestion that the proposal entailed.“We proposed extending visitations hours from 8 [p.m.] to 9 [p.m.] for upperclassmen because we believed that having a member of another gender in our rooms at that time was not inherently more disruptive to study hours than having a member of the same gender, which is currently allowed,” she said.Ju continued, outlining her ideas on why the dorm heads would have voted against the proposition and the rift between the student body and faculty.“The faculty seemed to disagree on the main impetus behind our proposal. They felt that having someone of another gender in a student's room with open doors at this time would be disruptive to study hours,” Ju said. “We understand the faculty's argument, and since we disagree on this main point, we don't think this proposal can be pushed further. Some faculty brought up the idea that any visitor of either gender should have to get visitations from 8 [p.m.] to 9 [p.m.] in order to make things fair, which is reasonable.”Director of Studies and StuCo advisor Laura Marshall believed that open-door visitations during study hours could pose problems.“Study hours begin at 8 p.m. in dorms campuswide. Upperclass students who want to study with students of the opposite gender can do so in the common room or elsewhere on campus, like the library or the Academy Center,” Marshall said. “It is distracting to have students studying together in rooms when the door needs to be open.”Other faculty members agreed with Marshall. Modern languages instructor and Ewald Hall Dorm Head Fermin Perez-Andreu noted that extended hours of visitation could potentially shorten study hours and would not be beneficial to students.“Two hours of study hours after the first check-in time is not that long, so we should try to keep it to what it is within an environment that is quiet and conducive to study,” Perez said. “What I really think is that from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., there should not be students of any gender from other dorms or day students in students’ rooms, as I think it can break the spirit of study hours.”Perez also emphasized that the faculty currently do not look favorably upon more lenient policies regarding visitations.“The visitations policies proposal prompted an interesting conversation among dorm heads, and it raised questions and things to think about that perhaps need further discussion,” Perez said. “Things, obviously, are not just black or white, and it is important to consider what students have to say, but I see it unlikely at this point that the faculty would want to become more lenient with the current V´s policy.”Many students believed that extending V’s hours was not an unreasonable request. “I don't think it's fair. Upperclassmen are very responsible for their actions and their incentives. We are mature enough to be allowed to have one more hour with V's,” senior Lloyd Campbell said.Upper Mason Polk agreed, arguing that faculty members had conflicts of interest when voting for StuCo’s proposal. “I think the faculty were speaking for their own self-interest when they almost unanimously shot down the proposed V’s policy. They didn’t take into the account the fact that upperclassmen are more responsible and mature and should be given the privilege to have later V’s hours,” he said.With the V’s issue at a stalemate after the decisive dorm head vote, members of StuCo became split on whether to continue pursuing a change to the policy or not.“Alice has tied herself into V’s reform because of her campaign. She promised some kind of reform, and while it’s pretty unlikely that we’ll ever get anywhere with how the faculty reacted to our last proposal, she can’t look bad and abandon ship altogether,” upper Max Larnerd said. “From here, I just don’t know. V’s are such an antiquated system for how the school and us work. It needs reform, but for now, I can’t tell you what’s the best route to go.”Understanding current faculty sentiments, however, senior TJ Hodges stated StuCo should make no further attempts to revise the V’s policies, believing that the faculty members made it clear that they will not support such changes.“We were all optimistic about the V’s policy that StuCo proposed this year, but the dorm heads simply could not allow visitation hours and study hours to overlap, which is why they voted nearly unanimously against it,” Hodges said. “It was a good run, but I believe StuCo should use the next half of the school year doing other things. It is not worthwhile to pursue a change in V’s at this point. We may have struck out on V’s, but there are still a lot of options for how we spend the next 14 weeks.”Regardless of future outcomes and current opinions among faculty members and students, Ju said that StuCo will continue to push for amendments regarding visitations that can please both parties.“We are going back to the drawing board with visitations,” Ju said. “Hopefully, we will find a compromise with the faculty.”