Oh my, a question about my very own school, how exciting! It's late past a Sunday midnight for me but what a fun little prompt to stay up for and research a bit into my school's past!

To understand the transition period and what Vassar was like in this time, let us first outline why Vassar became coeducational in the firstplace. Vassar College was charted in 1861 by the wealthy Poughkeepsie businessman and ale brewer Matthew Vassar, aiming to provide an education for women equal to established schools like Harvard and Yale. Opened in 1865, Vassar was to become the second of the Seven Sisters, leading prestigious women's colleges in America's northeast. Vassar was well regarded, a desirable choice comparable to Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Smith, and other elite colleges. It produced notable alumnae such as Edna St. Vincent Millay and Mary McCarthy.

By the 1950's however, the situation for Vassar and many women's colleges were turning. Postwar America put emphasis on women to wed early and prioritize housewife roles. Women had to give up career aspirations for domestic life, and nationwide enrollment of female students dropped. Moreover, a greater quantity of incoming students came from public coeducational schools rather than private single-sex ones. Concern was raised on the quality of the faculty and students. Being a women's college, Vassar was different from its Sisters in that its geographic location was comparatively isolated, Radcliffe was beside Harvard, Smith and Mount Holyoke with Amherst, Wellesley was close to Harvard and MIT, Barnard next to Columbia, and Bryn Mawr with Haverford. Vassar, in Poughkeepsie, had... West Point? Note, Vassar is two hours bus ride or car drive from the city. In fact, many students would make weekend trips to Yale or the city. As scenic as the Hudson Valley may be (forgive my local bias), it lacked drawing power for faculty and students alike, and this impacted competitiveness.

Fundamentally, Vassar needed to change. In 1966, Vassar's president Alan Simpson convened a committee to discuss necessary action to revitalize the school. Various options were explored, such as establishing a coordinate men's school, or even doing graduate education. Most serious was a proposal to do a sort of merger with Yale, and this would have involved relocating the campus to New Haven. Simpson announced to the students in December of that year of both Vassar and Yale's boards agreeing to develop the possibility, with the students readily cheering on the proposal. The school paper Miscellany News headlined “For God, for Country, for Yale and Vassar.” in its next edition. Half of the 1967 student body (696 students) signed a supporting letter addressed to the alumnae magazine.

The alumnae, on the other hand, passionately rejected the idea.

“a shabby and sneaky way to treat the alumnae.”

"Why on earth was this sprung on us as it was!"

The were shocked and dismayed to learn of such monumentous news from the paper rather from the president himself. Simpson's letter addressing the matter did not placate the alumnae's woes, he responded two months after the matter and claimed he could not control the leakage of information. From the letter:

“I am writing to you about the academic bombshell of December 16." ... "If there had been any way of alerting the Vassar family, you can be sure we would have taken it." ... "Holding the press at bay, once the approval had been given, was impossible. We tried! Telephone teams were armed with long lists of alumnae workers and benefactors. But the time shrank as the news leaked. We are just too famous to be allowed a private life.”

The idea of merging Vassar with Yale, relocating to New Haven no less, was an insult to many alumnae. It undermined Vassar's values and uniqueness, the beautiful campus, the dedicated faculty, the tradition of committing to women's education. Some additional reactions and quotes:

"What on earth would be accomplished by tying Vassar to the tail of Yale’s kite?”

“I'm shocked and dismayed at the possibility of moving Vassar to New Haven.”

“the height of idiocy”

"insane"

"Should the college be forced to move from its present location, it would be the same, in my mind, as its having ceased to exist."

"Is Vassar so sick morally and spiritually; physically and financially; intellectually and emotionally, that euthanasia must be practiced? This is what the proposed move amounts to.”

"Not another cent to Vassar from me while there is a possibility that the college may be moving to New Haven. Also, I shall change my will and leave nothing— like a parent with a wayward daughter."

"I had named Vassar as heir to 35% of my residuary estate. Needless to say, I am writing a new will!”

Evidently, there was genuine concern that relocating Vassar would destroy its indentity, history, culture, and past. Most vocal were the oppositionists, though the proposal garnered some supporting alumnae, who recognized the importance of the institution over the location. Regardless, Simpson continued his designs on mergers. Just as serious as relocation plans were, coeducation was the other major issue. Vassar would continue one way or another, but Simpson wanted Vassar to "stay on top" and make it "the best imaginable college". With that, he strongly felt separate education for women was not the way to proceed, supported by a poll from students where 80% favored a coed future. Simpson felt that the "world is coeducational", and the only thing unnatural was educating men and women separately. Meetings in 1967 only supported the plan, much to the vexation of the oppositionists. The fifth president of Vassar, Henry Noble MacCracken would speak up, "(Merging Vassar with Yale) would be an ethical breach of trust in the more than 1000 individual endowments to Vassar College dating back 106 years.”

Additionally, alumna Dorothy Seiberling Steinberg, who wrote and edited for Life magazine, was strongly against the idea. She published a series of damning articles in October 1967, bringing the matter to the national spotlight. This would put pressure on the Yale merger proposal. The alternative plans were thus making proceedings, and coeducation gradually became a definitive. It would "enable Vassar to fit more sensibly into the overall pattern of American education" and “help keep Vassar in the forefront of quality education where it wants to be." In November 1967, it was announced Vassar would remain in Poughkeepsie, moving ahead separate from Yale. In the following weeks the proposals shifted focus towards coeducation. Coordination with regional schools and establishing new institutions was murky and unfeasible, while coeducation, Spimson said, was "simpler and quicker and happier and cheaper. By the end of May, the faculty approved the coeducation resolution 102 to 3, and in July, so too did the trustees. Board chair John Wilkie would note the factors for coed, “the increasing proportion of Vassar students coming from co- educational high schools, the increasing competition and allure of men’s colleges which admitted women . . . the greater freedom of association between young women and men, [and] the relative remoteness of the Vassar campus from sources of congenial male companionship.”

The response of the alumnae was rather muted. Compared to men's colleges going coed being met with intense backlash, the alumnae had already won their battle of relocation, and conceded to these terms. Coeducation was not a simple matter however, Simpson wrote “Hardly a week passes without reading of some private university or college or secondary school which is reconsidering its commitment to separate education. Whatever nostalgias some of us may feel, we should be proud of the fact that we are leading, not following, this movement.”

There were no precedents to a women's college becoming coed. Could Vassar even attract male students? Would their academic abilities match those of the women? And what kind of person would even be attracted? (There was, in fact, fears that the college would mainly appeal to gay individuals.) Spring of 1968–69, 77 male exchange students came from Williams, Trinity, Colgate, and Haverford. In '69–70, of the 1,620 enrollement, 91 were male transfer students. To meet this changing climate, regulations were to be relaxed. Men and women lived in the same dormitories, curfews were eliminated, students no longer had to sign out when they left campus, parietals were abolished on weekends, later to be abolished altogether. A larger student body compelled the college to build Terrace Apartments and Town Houses, and a new dining hall was constructed with longer hours of operation to replace in-dormitory dining. With all the news coverage on Vassar pioneering only-women to coed, there was a marked interest from prospective students. There were 1,400 applications from women for the class of 1974, the largest number in five years. 475 applications were from men. As for the makeup of these applicants, women outranked the men academically, two-thirds of female and two-fifths of male students ranked in the top 10 percent of their high school classes. Although there were reassuring application numbers, the school was worried if the men would retain interest, and if the women would actually enroll when admitted. Things were to work out, the '70-71 academic year saw 1,779 students, (1,448 women and 331 men), in '71-72, 1,994 (1,446 women and 548 men). Of that figure, 400 were freshmen women, 244 for men. Faculty and students noted the positive atmosphere on campus,

“Coeducation adds to the variety of the whole educational experience. It is a lift to morale and everyone’s spirits.”

“Vassar is a less pastoral and more demanding place to teach.”

"the place is more alive now. Maybe that’s a sign of the changing times, but coeducation is involved there, too.”