The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 42, No. 2 - 88

Deborah J. Taub * R. Bradley Johnson * Torry Reynolds

GNH policies at responding institutions.
Gender-neutral housing has been discussed or considered at most of the responding campuses (approximately 86%). In
comparison, Willoughby et al. (2012) found
that 41% of the institutions that they surveyed
had formal or informal discussion about
gender-neutral housing; after subtracting the
institutions that had actually implemented
it, 13% of those without GNH were having
formal discussions. And while Willoughby et
al. (2012) found that implementation of GNH
was very limited (64 institutions), the present
study identiﬁed 117 institutions (38.24%)
that have implemented either a trial/pilot
program or a full program. Although it may
be that the passage of time between the Willoughby et al. (2012) study and the current
study could account for the higher number
of programs, it is more likely that the wider
scope of the current study was able to capture
more programs that could provide a more accurate picture of the status of GNH on college
and university campuses.
An examination of policies related to gender-neutral housing reveals a range from institutions with no policies or those just beginning
to work on a policy ("still learning") to those
with very detailed and well-developed policies. This is another indication of the evolving
nature of gender-neutral housing. DeCoster's
(1979) study documented the evolution of
coeducational housing as it was emerging in
the 1970s. Gender-neutral housing may demonstrate a similar evolution. Willoughby et al.
(2012) observed, "It is interesting to note that
this transition [to GNH] closely mirrors that
of coresidential halls that began in the 1960's
and 1970's" (p. 744).

The geographic distribution of genderneutral housing revealed in this study shows
results similar to those of Willoughby et al.
(2012), who reported that institutions on the
East Coast and the West Coast were more
likely to have GNH policies, that much of the
current discussion about implementing GNH
was taking place at Midwestern schools, and
that there was "very little movement toward
gender-neutral housing" in the South (p. 739).
Similarly, the present study indicates that a
larger percentage of institutions in the Northeast, the Mid-Atlantic, the West, and the Great
Lakes had implemented trial or full programs
compared to the other ACUHO-I regions. Al-

. . . a larger percentage of
institutions in the Northeast, the
Mid-Atlantic, the West, and the
Great Lakes had implemented trial
or full programs compared to the
other ACUHO-I regions.

though institutions in the Southeast reported
having fewer trial/pilot or full GNH programs
when compared to some of the other regions,
they did report higher instances of having had
informal and formal discussions about GNH
as well as having explored the concept of GNH.
This higher number of discussions in SEAHO
region institutions may indicate that institutions in the South are exhibiting movement
toward gender-neutral housing in the future.

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENT HOUSING

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 42, No. 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 42, No. 2