Ten years ago, a group of individuals came together frustrated with the state of the fraternities and sororities nationwide. From their perspective, the gap between what Greek organizations espoused and chapters’ behavior had become too large. The main culprit – high-risk alcohol abuse. These individuals, a widespread collection of college and University Presidents, inter/national Greek Executive Directors and Association leaders were fed up with this mixed message being portrayed by Greek organizations. So, instead of doing nothing, they decided to act. Their mission; transform the landscape of the Greek environment.
The outcomes of that meeting in Franklin Square in Washington were five recommendations centered on bridging the gap between what Greek organizations espouse and how their chapters’ behave. This blog entry seeks to examine each recommendation and the current reality of each recommendation ten years later from my perspective.
1. Strongly reaffirm the primacy of an academic culture for the campus community, and the importance that social organizations, including Greek systems, contribute to sustaining that culture by:
A. Reestablishing a five-day academic week;
B. Supporting faculty/staff interaction with students and student groups and valuing campus advising to Greek chapters and adult mentoring for chapter members;
C. Requiring an acceptable level of academic performance for Greek membership and chapter existence; and
D. Recognizing the contribution of student groups, including Greek chapters, to university and community service.
Current State of this Recommendation:
My opinion is that recommendation is relevant but outdated. I believe today’s student values their academics and our Greek students are good at balancing their fun with their school work. Thus, I’m not sure a five-day academic week is necessary but that is not to be mistaken with only having a one-day focus on academics. In addition, I believe requiring academic performance for Greek membership has become the standard on campuses nationwide. Yet, has this standard become complacent in my opinion…yes. I do believe we do a good job of recognizing academic achievement and service initiatives within our Greek communities but our engagement in actual service has taken a backseat to philanthropic endeavors. The one area that I think is in need of more attention based on this particular recommendation is the faculty/staff interaction with students. I’m not sure our profession has been able to come up with new, innovative ways to involve faculty members in their interactions with our Greek students. In my opinion, this is shown by the lack of resources and limited presentations at various national conferences on this specific issue.
2. Articulate collegiate expectations for student groups, including their responsibility for the behavior of their membership by:
A. Directing messages through venues which effectively reach incoming students, upper-level students, and chapter leaders;
B. Enforcing clear policies addressing underage drinking and social activities entailing alcohol consumption; and
C. Establishing periodic dialogues between university officials and advisers to Greek chapters.
Current State of this Recommendation:
The best way to describe the current state of this recommendation is a stalemate. I believe policy education has been engrained in our students but the issue I see is that it has become a mute point. Hearing the same message over and over has caused the students to miss the important message of policy enforcement that needs to be heard. Part of that can be attributed to the lack of periodic dialogue I feel is occurring between University officials and Greek chapters. I’m not talking about a forced, agenda-driven meeting. I’m talking about a sit down, honest, real conversation about the issues occurring within our Greek communities. Will this help address the ever-growing list of issues chapters are having, I think so. However, it will take time and a true commitment to listening to the voice of the students. The other point worth evaluating is whether or not the direct messaging to incoming students, upper-level students and chapter leaders is being effective or not.
3. Encourage the development of programs and policies addressing alcohol abuse based upon research findings and established best practices and oversee their implementation. Student alcohol abuse is a multi-faceted problem requiring multi-faceted solutions. The development, evaluation and fine-tuning of these programs and policies need to be a priority for campus student affairs leadership and extend to:
A. Adopting successful practices found on other campuses;
B. Engaging community, civic, and business leaders, as well as local alcohol distributors in addressing abuse prevention, and
C. Training programs and resource assistance for campus personnel and student leaders.
Current State of this Recommendation:
I think the current state of this recommendation depends on who you ask. I feel some would say we have made excellent progress while others would say very little progress. I’m somewhere in the middle but leaning towards very little progress. Using the sub-bullets as a measuring stick, I’m not sure there are many campuses that have found transferable best practices that other campuses can use. That is not to say campuses haven’t improved but I believe a campus culture is very difficult to mimic for another campus.
The second bullet is a very good idea in theory but in practice, much more challenging. Having sat on alcohol task force committees with community and business leaders and bar owners, their mindset is very different that one of a student affairs professional. The bottom line is that they are a business. Businesses rely on money. When students are a primary revenue source, they are hesitant to change their business model. Now, does that mean you shouldn’t try or that change can’t happen? Of course not. My experiences have just shown that this is more of an uphill battle than I would have anticipated.
The last bullet I feel is an area we have made some good progress. Programs such as TIPS training, increased risk management programs such as Ladders of Risk, more campus-based resources and increased research and statistics has helped improved training efforts for our students. There is always room for improvement and as the recommendation suggests, we need more multi-faceted solutions but at the end of the day, we are making progress.
4. Support the establishment and implementation of a site visit certification process for the Greek system on a campus, or for individual chapters, and make external reviews a condition of continuing chapter operations. The development, evaluation and fine-tuning of these programs and policies need to be a priority for campus student affairs leadership and include:
A. Hosting meetings with Greek representatives and local alumni to discuss best practices and institutional policies minimizing alcohol abuse;
B. Forming a review committee of campus programs targeting alcohol abuse and its second hand effects; and
C. Submitting best practices to higher education associations and fraternity headquarters to facilitate widespread adoption.
See Appendix A. "Sample Greek Community Standard."
Current State of this Recommendation:
When I read this recommendation, I just heard crickets in my head. Recent reports and studies, (see one here: http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/14/dsm-5-could-mean-40-of-college-students-are-alcoholics/?xid=gonewsedit) personify the notion that minimizing alcohol abuse is proving to be greater and greater with today’s college student. While sub-bullet B has good intent, it simply isn’t effective. Well, maybe not effective, but really needs new, innovative ways to educate our students on the effects of alcohol. Yet, when this document was created, the focus was primarily on alcohol. Today’s student is now dealing with prescription drug abuse, illegal drug abuse, sexual assault, alcohol abuse and insert whatever other risk management issue.
Thus, referring to an earlier point and touching on the last sub-bullet, I’m not sure we have done a good job of sharing ideas and helping one another on a national level facilitate widespread change. I do think there are organizations and individuals out there attempting to create positive change as it relates to risk management (see Pi Kappa Phi, Zeta Tau Alpha, Novak Hazing Institute as examples) but if there are others, I haven’t heard of it. I don’t say that to mean I would know if there was but I really haven’t heard of any game-changers aside from the organizations or Institute I mentioned.
5. Dedicate the necessary resources to promote healthy life-styles for all students and to encourage Greek organizations to emphasize common core values by:
A. Focusing on physical and emotional wellness, promoting a healthy lifestyle as a viable alternative to an alcohol abuse lifestyle, and
B. Emphasizing the core values implicit in an academic culture; namely, academic achievement, career preparation, civic engagement, intellectual inquiry, racial and cultural understanding, and mutual respect.
Current State of this Recommendation:
I feel we’ve made moderate progress in this area of promoting healthy life-styles for our students. Greater emphasis has been put on today’s student to become more holistic and providing alternatives to alcohol. In addition, the Call for Values Congruence document and various organizations have put greater emphasis on getting back to what our organizations are about; our core values. Add to that, a program such as UIFI, National Ritual Week and other intentional values-based discussions has our profession heading in the right direction. However, if I’m being honest, we need more. Even as professionals, we need to create more avenues for values-based conversations. I believe IFI is one example of providing that kind of environment but aside from that, where else honest, deep, values-based conversations occurring? Again, maybe I’m just missing the boat but I’m just not seeing it occur. What do you think?
As you can see by my informal analysis, I in some sense feel the Call for Values Congruence is outdated for today’s student and current issues facing our fraternal community. I believe it provides a strong framework for creating a new, updated version maybe entitled Call for Values Congruence 2 but until there is intentional dialogue about the recommendations provided within the document, I see it only as something people refer to here and there. I believe it is also worth noting that a lot has occurred in the ten years that the Call for Values Congruence document was created. Too often, I think people assume that people know and/or understand what it is or what its intention was for the fraternal movement. Critical reflection and conversations must occur on a national level to create more awareness and understanding of the document. Until then, I’m not sure how effective the document will ever be.
I’m very curious to get your thoughts so feel free to leave a comment below. Thanks for reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment