Well - Roundef Individual
 

As said earlier in this thread...

One must choose a well - rounded individual that they believe will be an asset to their organization. There is not a "magic crystal ball" :D that will tell you how a prospective will perform once they are a member of your fraternity/sorority.

Now, In the interest of brainstorming some solutions, I'm going to play the devil's advocate herehttp://www.plaudersmilies.de/devil/goodnevil.gif........
Should BGLO's reinstate the use of Interest Groups? Could these types of groups give fraternity/sorority members an idea as to how a prospective would perform? Back in the '50's, during college, my mom was a member of the Ivy Plegde Club. She stated that, under the direction of the AKA members, they had to perform weekly community service activities, fundraisers, etc. By using such groups, they were:

(A.)Instilling in the prospective an idea of the amount of committment it takes to be a part of a sorority.
(B.)Give the current members an idea of the work ethic that a prospective posses.
(C.)Fosters a spirit of sisterhood between all the ladies (current and prosp.) starting from day one

What is everyone's opinion of the use of these types of groups?By using these types of interest groups, could BGLO's elinimate hazing, ( or lawsuits and liability issues) as well?

Re: Well - Roundef Individual
 

Keep on talking Honeykiss, I like your thinking!

Hey Sazon, are you feeling alone in this room???????

It's hot in here
 

Anyway...here's my .08 cent....

I think the GPA requirement should be raised on the local college level just a tadbit (I know each college has its own rules)....I'm not saying to a 3.0, but above a 2.5. Our national requirement should remain the same (Sorors...its not just a 2.5 overall -- its another part to that).

Reason: That's the minimum requirement to be active with 'us'...AKA. I've seen many young ladies who are selected with a 2.5 who become inactive after the semest they cross because of grades. And with us, that means NO participation. Some of them never return.

Hopefully, with a small cushion, sorors could remain active (financially/physically) and pull up their grads at the same time.

On the grad. level -- I think there should be a requirement as well; however, after so long, I don't think grades should matter. Also, if you obtain a graduate degree those grades should be looked at (I know...don't end a sentence with at! -- most graduate programs require you to have a 'B' or better average).

And before I get jumped on for wanting it raised....I have been to all types of schools from an HBCU undergrad (Dillard)...To a middle size non-HBCU (Illinois) to a top 20 law school (Vandy). And I know that schools vary...but a lot of schools take that into consideration in their grading system. For instance: Vandy's C+ is a 2.3; therefore, in order to be eligible to pledge, you just have a 2.3...not a 2.5. Most greek organizations (I don't know about all) follow the school's rules.

Wonderful! EVERYONE CAN learn. I tell my students that ALL the time! :D

What I'd Like to See
 

I've already said that I don't think the GPA should be raised but how about REQUIRING community service for membership? I know we all look for those people but where I pledged too many young ladies have never helped another soul or believe that joining will be their way of doing community service. I would like to see more people who are already involved because these are the peopel who REALLY work. Not to say those who have never done anything don't work but a person who has a 2.5 and is active in his/her community is more likely to continue to be active AND maintain their grades during there "journey" and once their "journey" is completed. I too have seen many a soror cross and then be inactive, the very next semester or be active one semester and stop because the owrk is too hard. Let's keep it real, a GPA doesn't say how dedicated or committed one wil be.

Re: What I'd Like to See
 

SeriousAKA, I agree with you 113%!! I also wanted to add that for membership in Delta, you have to have LETTERS of proof that you've provided public service in the community. Additionally, the service has to be ongoing. I'm not interested in letting anyone in the sorority who hasn't already put effort in improving our community. That's all!

to the top

Re: 2.3 question....

In my opinion, I must say that someone's eligibility should not be soley based on their GPA. A number should not reflect how much someone knows. If one has a GPA of 3.0 what is that truly saying? You know 3.0 of what? What is that based on? Yes, I know that it is based on a scale of 4.0 but 4.0 of what? I'm digging deeper here if you feel me. I am going deeper than the academic level. Again we are identified by numbers given to us. A low GPA in society reflects someone who is not too smart. As African Americans aren't we labeled enough?

Again, my opinion, how educated someone is can not be soley justified by their GPA. I know educated people who didn't even finish college that would be a wonderful additions to our organizations. But first we must define the word educated. There are some people with very high GPA's who are not wrapped too tight. Should we base someone's eligibility just on how much one can retain in school? Certainly all factors should be considered. What if all the other criterias are met but they are shy the GPA by one point. Should they still not be considered?

I know, I know, rules are rules. And if the rules state that a certain GPA must be attained then it must. Be could we honestly say that we are not excluding those who would make wonderful members of our organizations based on this rule of many?

Just my .08 cents worth.

I wish i had a 2.5
 

Old thread, but relates to me now, not a member of anything but interested . I understand both sides of the issue, because it is very much like the Lottery Scholarships that we have now. 2.5 is a hard number to reach AND maintain when you work full time, with overtime to pay for schooling and are involved on campus alongside "supporting" an organization. the 2.5 gpa is almost the perfect number because as a person who has truly fallen off the academic map (for MANY undisclosed reasons) to come back in and attain a 2.5 is very difficult. I have not accomplished it yet.

But I must say this, an aspirant must gain more than a 2.5 themselves so that they will have a "cushion" of sorts to fall back on when they undergo their process, unless they want to take the chance of making it and then not being able to be active within the org after recieving letters.

(i would like to apoligize if i have stepped out of bounds and request that the offending words be removed)

Yes, it is an old thread, but you have made a good point. Make your academics your priority, but not for the reason you cited. The org. in which you are interested will always be there, but the chance to improve your grades won't.

Agreed!