![]() |
Also wanted to add/clarify:
I don't believe interviews during the rush process are a bad thing, but I don't believe they should be evaluative. They can be a good mutual introduction for those who are shy in groups. I also think Pledge Reviews or other assessments should happen more than once in the process, and closer to the middle than the end. I basically agree with emb and arv. :) |
True, but this is something that must be made clear to people (both in and out of the fraternity).
Each chapter should have clearly defined pledge requirements (in line with the National Pledging Standards). ALL potential pledges must understand they must met them. When it comes to that final pledge review, it should be in the light of "did each pledge met the clearly defined and objective requirements?" If they did, they should be voted in. If they didn't, the chapter can choose to 1) vote that pledge in because they were really really close or 2) give a particular pledge more time to complete requirements or 3) let them re-pledge or 4) tell them they didn't met the requirements. To me, its a 'self selection' process. Not a bunch of Brothers passing in judgement. |
Quote:
Here is why I am so pro-selectivity: It is one of the key elements of what a fraternity is all about in its truest sense of the word as opposed to merely being a service club with elements of a fraternity. Exclusitivity helps gives a fraternity a sense of mystique about them and makes a person's membership in it more treasured and valued. I really think this is one of the reasons why Alpha Phi Omega isn't held in as high a regard on college campuses as it could be. Alpha Phi Omega owes NOTHING to a candidate, and as long as the attitude within the org is that a candidate is entitled to membership once they express an interest in joining, the org will continue to suffer from one -and-done members (read: one meeting/service project and they're gone), high percentage of inactive chapters (currently slightly > 50%), and the campus perception that that APO is merely Circle K with a ritual. Selectivity assesses one key thing out of three that's frequently ignored in APO, the first two keys being aptitude and attitude: FIT! If you don't fit, even though you're a brother, you will end up being a very alienated one. You can't force people to fit in where they simply don't. APO always asserts that it is not a social fraternity, but ignores the fact that social dynamics is a critical element of brotherhood. Even though we are a service org, we are not robots. If we were, the issue of fit wouldn't be one, because it would be irrelevant. But there definately is a social dynamic that isn't addressed, at least not adequately because we think as long as we're doing service, that's all that matters. Fact is, that is simply not true. I think implicitly, the understanding of the importance of selectivity was what kept the remaining all-male chapters all-male for so long. I heard that Delta Chapter is going co-ed. If this is true, I'm curious as to how it will affect the chapter in the long term. |
Very good post I think you summed up very nicely many of the things people bring up about APO when they complain about it.
I've gone back and forth on the selectivity issue myself over the years. When I first joined I was flat out against it since when I pledged (fall of freshman year) I probably didn't fit the chapter that well and would not have been accepted. However, as I progressed through the years and the chapter turned around and got very large we began to have many of the problems you so clearly laid out. We had a high percentage of brothers that would pledge and you'd never see them again (except when they wore letters to look cool). We also had major cliques form since the chapter was just too large to know everyone well and the perception/ public opinion of us on campus really dropped. Not all of these things could have been fixed by greater selectivity since it is still a fallible process and we can choose the wrong people but it definitely would have made things easier to fix. |
[QUOTE=KAPital PHINUst;1852302]
Alpha Phi Omega owes NOTHING to a candidate, and as long as the attitude within the org is that a candidate is entitled to membership once they express an interest in joining, the org will continue to suffer from one -and-done members (read: one meeting/service project and they're gone), high percentage of inactive chapters (currently slightly > 50%), and the campus perception that that APO is merely Circle K with a ritual. There is a difference between requiring objective criteria and having easy criteria. I've seen pledge programs with Objective Criteria that fulfill the National Pledging Standards that take more time for students than classes (including homework) in their major. 2 hours for the pledge meeting, 2 hours for the chapter meeting, and at least 2-3 other hours per week. While the quizzes may not be as tough as those for their classes, still, add additional study time for that. Hmm. Pledge quiz as tough as those for classes... 1. Name the first chapter chartered for whom the school name has changed since they chartered. Give the old name of the school. 2. Name the last State to have a chapter chartered in it. 3. Name the only National President for whom the end of their time in office did not co-incide with a National Convention. 4. Name any student who initiated in the 1925-1926 school year *other* than the 14 student founders. 5. Name any section in the Fraternity whose borders have not changed since it was established at Con-con. 6. Where was the 1942 convention *supposed* to be? 7. Where was the 1994 convention *supposed* to be? 8. Name any charter at a closed school. 9. Name the calendar years since the Fraternity was founded in which we did not charter any chapters 10. What were there six of in the fraternity's original crest. |
Ciricle K with a ritual indeed.
Why should anyone be asked to pledge if they are not interested in community service? What if the individual has personal issues with a few brothers in the chapter? Why do you want to join? If it is to improve your resume then you are in the wrong place. I've seen a few of those in my time A difficult, yet attainable pledge program is what forges a brother. The attitude of 'paying a fee, a member you shall be' is unacceptable. If an applicant works hard during pledging, a sense of personal accomplishment and acceptance among the fraternity will carry with that individual his entire life. Membership retention is improved within the chapter that extends to well beyond college to where one an alumni. |
Quote:
Which is why bidding and 'pre-selection' should be unnecessary. A good pledge program (including proper requirements) without hazing are all that are needed. This is why I've been so adamant about the need of improving our pledge programs. I actually developed a multi-level training course for this, but have only been able to do the first level at a couple of section conferences & region conferences, never at National. The only pledge training session I attended at Nationals was pretty much 'lets sit in a circle and discuss our pledge programs' instead of instructing the participants in what a good pledge program should do (and not do). |
Quote:
If there are chapters that are using easy peasy pledge programs and letting everyone in, why on earth do you think bidding or preselection would help?? They'd just bid everyone! |
Quote:
Quote:
While your post still doesnt adequately address the issue of fit being a critieria of being an APO brother, and since objectivity is such an issue of weeding out members, I got some really good objective criteria that will stop a lot of brothers at the door from further pursuing APO if their heart really isn't in it that would make the bidding issue a non-starter: Have candidates submit their past record of service & volunteering on campus and the community and get letters of recommendation from such organizations and event sponsors and planners. Give additional consideration for candidates who served in a leadership capacity and who can quantify the projects and events with measureable numbers. Right there that's two of our three cardinal principles addressed and verified. The third (friendship) ties into the "fit" issue: Has the candidate attended and/or volunteered at any APO events or service projects? Have they at least offered to help volunteer with APO in some capacity? Do they have strong social rapport with any of the brothers (I personally prefer at least three, but 1-2 will probably suffice)? Can any of the brothers vouch for the candidate and their commitment to service? And there you have it: objective and measurable criteria to determine if a candidate is fit to be a brother of APO and that addresses all three of our cardinal principles. I doubt if any candidate being taken to task on being screened who isn't serious about joining would further pursue APO. If they did, there's enough evidence that should stop them from being initiated. And for those who are serious and saavy, they should be discerning enough to know why they weren't selected and make any and all necessary corrections to try again in a future semester with their ducks lined up beak to tail to ensure a prompt initiation into the brotherhood on their next go-round. |
The members of the National Pan-Hellenic Council are shown below in alphabetical order.
Alpha Kappa Alpha January 15, 1908 (age 101) Howard University Chicago, Illinois 950+ 1930 Alpha Phi Alpha December 4, 1906 (age 102) Cornell University Baltimore, Maryland 850+ 1931 Delta Sigma Theta January 13, 1913 (age 96) Howard University Washington, D.C. 950+ 1930 Iota Phi Theta September 19, 1963 (age 46) Morgan State University Baltimore, Maryland 200+ 1997 Kappa Alpha Psi January 5, 1911 (age 98) Indiana University as Kappa Alpha Nu Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 700+ 1930 Omega Psi Phi November 17, 1911 (age 97) Howard University Decatur, Georgia 750+ 1930 Phi Beta Sigma January 9, 1914 (age 95) Howard University Washington, D.C. 700+ 1931 Zeta Phi Beta January 16, 1920 (age 89) Howard University Washington, D.C. 800+ 1930 Sigma Gamma Rho November 12, 1922 (age 86) Butler University Cary, North Carolina 500+ 1937 Alpha Phi Omega is not on this list. Please stop using the expectations of the organizations on this list to apply to it. |
Quote:
Quote:
OTOH, maybe I will once Alpha Phi Omega starts to get some backbone and use more stringent criteria to weed out the lame and lazy slackers and no professional game having resume-padders. Your post confirms my point: Alpha Phi Omega has turned into Circle K with a ritual. |
Going to get flamed
Quote:
I'm sorry that APO ended up not being what you thought it was, but you knew what you were joining and had plenty of opportunity to back out if you didn't feel it was a good match. Your pledge period was 6-10 weeks long, surely at some point you realized that this wasn't what you were looking for, right? Quote:
When was the last time you actually worked with a chapter outside of your little Viking scope? Or went to a conference instead of cookout? Or volunteered as an advisor to a chapter? How about joined an alumni association other than MOTRS? Why haven't you become an APO LEADS presenter or presented a workshop that can help develop students into campus and community leaders? How about become a Torchbearer? In other words, what have you done for Alpha Phi Omega as a whole lately other than bitch about it online? You talk a big game and like to throw around "Circle K with a Ritual", but you really don't know what you're talking about. You're clearly unwilling to work within the existing structure to change it, and frankly that rings hollow with me. Obviously Alpha Phi Omega doesn't mean that much to you or wasn't meeting your needs in some way. I'm sorry to hear that, but I'm glad you found an organization that is more up your alley. I'm seriously happy for you. However, don't think that just because you found what you were looking for means that everybody who joins APO is looking for the same thing. Frank Reed Horton didn't find the standard of manhood he was looking for in SAE. He didn't take what he developed in APO and tried to change SAE to be more like that, nor did he try to make APO more like SAE. What makes you think it's ok if The Lightbearer wasn't willing to do it? |
arvid1978- well said.
|
Well said, only one thing to add...
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Chapter Historian, Alpha Gamma Theta Chapter, 1992-94. Helped organize a weekly service project where we would help a local community development program assemble fresh fruit and vegetable packages to issue to low income families. Brother of Rho Theta Chapter, 1995-97. Assisted the Pledgemaster and Assistant Pledgemaster in the training and indoctrination of pledges. Initiated the Last Rites March where pledges and brothers would march across campus by candlelight. BTW, these chapter are most definately NOT Viking chapters. As far as attending workshops and conferences: Chapter Presidents Workshop, 1992 Section 57 (later 56/59) Conference, 1993-97, 2000. Region V Conference, 1995 National Convention (non-voting) delegate, 1996 Submitted legislation for the 2000 National Convention. And I hadn't even mentioned that I helped get some women to organize a local chapter of Gamma Sigma Sigma in 1999 to help build synergy with Alpha Phi Omega. As for joining an alumni association, all they did was have a monthly dinner and socialize, and that was when I was an undergrad. When I finally graduated, the association had faded out. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.