Radcliffe is extremely proud of its system of student government and particularly of its honor system in the residence halls. Dean Lacey firmly believes that Radcliffe students can govern themselves better than Harvard and Radcliffe students together could govern both groups of undergraduates. "I can't think of an effective self-governing system for Harvard," she said." On the graduate level, however, the Student Council is a "coed" organization.

Although some would disagree, Mildred P. Sherman, dean of college relations, has asserted that a women's college is necessary to enable women to carry a full share of the "burden of responsibility" for undergraduate activities. She maintains that it is the men in coeducational schools who get the big offices, and women are generally left with the job of providing refreshments or taking minutes.

It has been pointed out too that a women's college may be more useful to the graduate in helping her secure a job after graduation. There is often the feeling that a coeducational school would be more anxious to secure the top-notch positions for its male graduates.

Less tangible and therefore more difficult to assess are the so-called "psychological" advantages of belonging to a women's college. Men, in particular, are quick to assume that for a girl "it is better to have an identification with a women's college," as John U. Munro '34, Director of the Financial Aid Office, has put it. Moreover, he, like many other Harvard alumni, admits to having "an entrenched instinct for Harvard as a men's college."

The most likely and most appropriate next step of merger would be in the area of undergraduate organizations. Extracurricular activities are certainly joint in "practice though not in theory" since many Radcliffe girls participate in Harvard organizations, although a University ruling prohibits them from the full membership rights of voting and holding office.

Wilbur K. Jordan, president of Radcliffe, has indicated that any merging of activities would have greater direct significance for the student than would a merger of the health services. He has stated, however, that "Here is an area in which the officers of the colleges should be guided by what students really want."

Evidently the Radcliffe administration is not yet convinced that students would like to see the ban on full joint membership lifted. Several weeks ago Dean Lacey, whose office as Dean of Residence includes dealing with problems of undergraduate activities, said that there is "no immediate crisis" for joint activities since "no organization is beating at our doors for joint membership."

On the question of joint organizations, Wilma A. Kerby-Miller, Dean of Instruction, has said that the administrations might as well recognize that "the groups have to work together," and that "women should have a chance to hold office on an equal basis with men." She indicated that "certainly most of the administrators would be in favor of it."

Although Harvard and Radcliffe students meet together for classes and hour exams, the custom of holding final examinations separately has prevailed in most courses, and this is an inconvenience which many professors feel is "a terrible pain in the neck." However, this is one change which would probably be met with violent reaction from the Radcliffe student body.

Opposition to Plan

In the 1948-49 academic year, the Annex governing board recommended joint exams but the students' over-whelming vote against it caused the proposal to be dropped. In her annual report for that year, Mildred P. Sherman, then Dean of the College, wrote: "Seldom has such articulate vigor been displayed at Radcliffe as when the students fought for their honor system and their independence."

Almost a decade later, Radcliffe students are still strongly opposed to the idea of joint exams which would be closely proctored and which would necessitate wearing skirts rather than sloppy blue jeans, uncombed hair and make-up-less faces.

Several Annex deans have suggested that there may be undue duplication in operating separate registrar's offices and records for Harvard and Radcliffe, and that this may be an area for merger in the future.

But if there are to be any further changes in the relationship between Harvard and Radcliffe, administrators at both institutions feel that such changes will come about gradually, and only whenever the two schools reach a "common realization of a common need," as Jordan has expressed it.

"I doubt very much whether you would be either sensible or proper to have a plan laid out for increasing cooperation," Jordan said. "Rather you are guided by the natural logic of events."