CU puts Greeks on notice
 

From today's Rocky Mountain News:

CU puts Greeks on notice
Frats, sororities get six weeks to agree to new restrictions

By Hector Gutierrez And Berny Morson, Rocky Mountain News
March 18, 2005

The University of Colorado on Thursday gave fraternities and sororities until the end of the semester to sign off on an agreement crafted to help rein in alcohol abuse.

One of the key components of the agreement would require fraternities and sororities to defer rush activities for freshmen from the traditional autumn period to the spring semester of the 2005-06 academic year.

The 14 fraternities and 10 sororities at the Boulder campus have until April 29, the last day of spring semester classes, to sign off on the agreement.

If they don't, the Greeks will lose certain privileges on campus such as inclusion on the CU Web site, in publications and on student lists. Fraternities and sororities that do not sign the agreement also would lose access to the Greek affairs office, the university's Greek adviser, campus meeting spaces, and sports fields and facilities.

"The purpose of this agreement is to help the Greek organizations return to their core values of scholarship, leadership, service and brotherhood/sisterhood," Ron Stump, vice chancellor for student affairs, said in a statement.

"We believe they have drifted from these important values over the past several years, and the entire Greek system has suffered as a result. Our expectation is 'no more business as usual.' "

A list of fraternities and sororities that have signed the agreement with CU will be available to freshmen students and their parents.

"The groups that have signed have agreed to a certain level of standards, that here's a group that's making positive changes," CU Greek Affairs Director Laura Strohminger said. "Parents would investigate that more and make sure they feel more comfortable, and the students, themselves, have to understand what they're joining.

"It will show that the institution is working with them and has a relationship with them, and the others we do not. And we have no way of knowing what expectations they're living up to," she said.

Administrators at CU and Colorado State University sounded the alarm last fall when both campuses lost a student to binge drinking at a fraternity house.

So far, the national offices of all of the sororities are backing the changes in the agreement, which also includes a requirement for a full-time staff member in each chapter house and a prohibition against hazing and alcohol consumption at events for new members.

The fraternities, however, have balked at a couple of the proposals, including delaying rush week for freshmen until spring, Strohminger said.

"They have said that they don't necessarily agree with some of the recruitment pieces," she said. "The women have said that they're pleased with the draft, and they've been asking their local chapters to support it. There's a need for cultural change and I applaud the women for doing that."

Requests for comment from fraternities were referred to representatives of the North American Interfraternity Conference in Indianapolis, who weren't available Thursday.

Katie Matthews, president of CU's Panhellenic Council, which represents the school's sororities, acknowledged that the sororities also were uneasy about delaying rush week for several months.

"It isn't what we prefer, but we're already working to change over all of our plans for the recruitment," Matthews said.

"We already have live-in advisers and, obviously, people don't drink underage at our parties and hazing is already prohibited, so our only main concern was deferred recruitment," Matthews said.

New rules for Greeks

Under the fraternal organization agreement, fraternities and sororities will be expected to:

• Engage a full-time, live-in staff member in the chapter house.

• Prohibit underage consumption of alcohol at events.

• Schedule rush activities according to a date determined by the university, which will be in the spring semester of the freshman year beginning with the 2005-06 academic year.

• Abide by federal, state and local laws.

• Meet the national organization's academic standards.

The agreement also prohibits any form of hazing and use of alcohol in new-member programming. The deadline for signing the agreement is April 29.

Re: CU puts Greeks on notice
 

Out of the entire article, two things struck me as the message schools are sending now.

They're sending, I hope somebody is receiving.

Amen to My Two Good Greek Brothers!

Now, I just wonder if this applies to The Athletic Programs?

Amazing is it how being in one position as compared to others that it changes things.:(

Are the freshmen at CU the dumbest and most naive freshmen ever? Like, they think beer only can be acquired from a keg in a fraternity house?

If they're not, I don't see what deferred rush has to do with controlling alcohol abuse, or how it will prevent it.

this is THUPER GHEY.

1 - adult in every house = good

2 - deferred rush = bad

I visited several CU houses last summer, and several were dumps. Anything would be an improvement.

Postponing rush will lead to several fraternity chapter casualties in the next two years.

There has apparently been some attention to CU by the NIC, and maybe they can organize some common action. See my earlier posts on "get a lawyer".

University of Colorado fraternities have refused to agree to spring rush for freshmen, according to the Denver Post.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...840180,00.html

It is amazing that so many Chapter Houses are dumps or they dont even have Houses on a Major University:(

It seems like there are some good points that are requisted by the Adm. but shoving the gobblygook down only Greeks throats is uncalled for. CU cannot take care of thier own inhouse problems.:rolleyes:

I am sure there could be a working situation worked out, but it seems that the school is of the mind set, "Do It Our Way or The Highway".

Now, if the Greeks would begin to act like Semi Adults there would not be this problem!

It just seems a force issue, everytime a Greek Org. closes, the Un. snaps the House up and recycles it or tears it down for someother use.

It seems interesting that if The Greeks dont abide, then they will no longer be able to use School facilitys. Da, play by My Rules or I will take my toys and go home.:rolleyes:

You know, I say good for them.

Why are the girls so willing to bow to the administration?

Because a lot of sororities (more than fraternities) have in their charters that if the school doesn't recognize them they will immediately pull their charter. Right now the school says deferred rush = recognition, so they are going along with it, but believe me, they don't want to. And they probably requested of the sororities that DON'T have it in their charters to stand with them on this. This is just my speculation.

Gordie Bailey's stepfather sounds like an asshat. So does this guy.

Ummm...because you're doing it for the wrong reason and trying to use it as a quick fix for something that is an ALL CAMPUS problem.

Asshat.

It sounds like they're expecting freshmen to learn that alcohol is bad mmmmkay. They're basically singling out a part of freshman life that just associates historically with alcohol....kids are going to drink one way or another, and pushing rush back two quarters or whatever is not going to fix the freshman mind on alcohol.

Some other posts have given possible reasons; I'd like to mention another possibility or two.

Think of just a handful of well-known schools that have deferred recruitment for women -- Indiana U., Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Duke, Southern Methodist, Cornell, Stanford, and Harvard, for instance. Since all of the NPC sororities at the U. of Colorado* have a chapter at at least one of those schools-- and some are at lots of them-- those sororities may feel, based on experience, that deferred recruitment isn't the end of the world. Or at any rate they may feel that when you have to pick your battles, this particular tussle isn't one they want to pursue.

Another reason may be that the NPC sororities at Colorado feel, rightly or wrongly, that they are in better shape financially than the fraternities and can weather a semester or a year or two of adjustment to deferred.

A third possibility could be that NPC sororities might tend to view deferred recruitment a bit more positively than fraternities do. Besides giving freshmen a semester to acclimatize themselves to university life, deferred recruitment can give the sororities a chance to see if some potential prospective new members are showing any substantial problems with grades, time management, out-of-control behavior, or extreme flakiness. Active members can have the chance to know PNMs slightly better after a semester has passed than at the beginning of the school year.

Not to say that deferred is perfect or always desirable -- but I can at least imagine that sororities might be willing to accept it.

* Note: NPC at U. of Colorado: Alpha Chi Omega, Alpha Omicron Pi, Alpha Phi, chi Omega, Delta Delta Delta, Delta Gamma, Gamma Phi Beta, Kappa Alpha Theta, Kappa Kappa Gamma, Pi Beta Phi.

When they tried to defer recruitment at U of Michigan for similar reasons, individual NPC alumnae and various headquarters' campaigned against it. To my knowledge, that part of the agreement with the University was dropped. Perhaps some administrations cave to pressure more easily than others. Or, they came up with more convincing arguments? Or, the alumnae who campaigned against it donate more money?

Dee

LOL, that DEFINITELY isn't it.

I think you are right when you say that they don't feel like fighting this one because there's been so much controversy there. It's another instance of the sororities trying to distance themselves from the actions of the fraternities. I wonder, though, how this will play out - because don't a lot of sororities also have bylaws now about not having mixers or other events with groups who aren't recognized?

FWIW, I've seen from personal experience where the deferred rush works well @ Northwestern. The Lambda Chi Alpha chapter recruited 20+ men in Feb. 2004, and many of them were frosh.

I suppose the case could be made that for every good thing that comes from waiting, there's a negative. But isn't that always going to happen?

Later-
BF

Can anyone explain why you're so opposed to deferred rush? We have it at Miami University, which has a very competitive recruitment, and it works really well. I'm honestly curious.

I don't think it's so much the deferred rush that's the problem -- it's the fact that the administration is forcing the Greek system to accept a decision that doesn't address the problems they're trying to correct. It's the same as if the university responding to risk management problems by mandating that all Greek houses must be painted blue. There's nothing wrong with a blue house, but it doesn't have anything to do with risk management problems, so why shouldn't the sororities and fraternities be allowed to choose what color to paint their houses? ;)

Switching to deferred recruitment can cause financial disaster in a chapter. If you're used to budgeting for 50 new members in the fall semester, then you expect those 50 members to be paying monthly dues for 7-8 months. With deferred, they will only pay dues for 3 months, which can be a huge difference.

The housing situation on some campuses can make a big difference too. In the case of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor has a serious housing shortage. Freshmen live in dorms and the rest of the campus lives in off campus apartments and houses. People sign leases in January which take effect in September. This would mean that freshman are signing leases to live in apartments or houses before recruitment is even done and long before they are initiated. This can pose a problem because that means the next fall, you'll only have juniors and seniors to fill a house. These are also the members who are most likely to qualify to live OUT of the house because they're studying abroad, doing internships, student teaching out of town, etc. When you have to fill a 50, 60 or even 70 bed house, that can be a real problem. Some sororities have 2 year live in requirements, which would also mean you had to live in both your junior and senior years. Typically, it would have been sophomore and junior years that women would live in.

But, I would agree that a part of it is the principle of the thing. Not all people who die of alcohol poisoning or hazing are freshman. There is no research to show that deferred recruitment leads to less risk management problems. In fact, the last person to be hospitalized at the U of Mich in a hazing incident was a spring '04 rushee who wasn't being initiated until September. Why do administrations seem so convinced the deferred recruitment will change anything?

Dee

I vote for blue houses. I think it will solve all problems, similarly to a magic wand that Harry Potter uses. Actually, i don't think they had risk management issue at Hogwarts so therefor the better solution would be to teach every one magic.

Okay, seriously. THe one thing i could see as positive to deferred rush, is that people who did not think of going greek could/might consider it. I know at my school we had lots of women at informal in spring and I think that a lot of those women did not find a place to fit in and thought that greek life would be a way to find the social life they want.

NOw, as far as Risk Management, I think that taking a semester to get to know women could help if the sororities want to "pledge" women who do not drink and can use the 1st semester to see what girls do on saturday nights with their free time. But i still think the blue houses would solve all the problems in the universe, maybe that is part of the math formula in hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. Just a thought.

I am the biggest deferred rush cheerleader on earth and I'm opposed to this because like Heather said, they're doing it for the wrong reasons.

As far as Dee's housing argument, of course you'll have a budget crunch the first year you go from one to the other - that's why they let you know in advance. The housing shortage sounds like something the school overall needs to fix and it shouldn't get tied up with whether first semester or deferred rush is better for that campus. (I know, easier said than done) Ideally housing shouldn't be tied up with rush at all...people should go Greek for the friendships and opportunities not for a place to live.

Because all orgs should be able to make those decisions independently of an administration.

-Rudey

Doh! Maybe I should read the entire thread before I respond. ;)

On many campuses, fraternity recruitment is year round. As such, these campuses have some sort of a structured rush at the start of each semester.

Now I'm not sure if Colorado's IFC practices this, but if they do, then getting rid of "Fall Rush" for the fraternities may impact their numbers dramatically.

Edited for spelling.

Then the rub comes in that it Will Impact the GLOs in question.

As someone mentioned, it comes down to a School Dictating.

Granted there have been problems at C U but it is not only Greeks, it is the whole system.

C U let everything go to Hell in a handcart, and The Greeks became the whippng Group.

But, also, the Greeks have left the door open for it.:(

Right on target, Tom. The CU greeks are the scapegoat - I'm sure there is enough of a drinking problem on the rest of the campus to make the greeks pale by comparison, but, the Greeks are a GROUP, and that makes them an easy target, and easy to regulate, even if resorting to draconian measures.

Greeks need to wake up and become what they set out to be: a step above - be the example, not the scapegoat.

Precisely.

This whole mess almost makes me glad we don't have a chapter there anymore.

If we did, I'm sure I'd be into this up to my armpits.

Maybe I'm too skeptical, but I can't help wondering about the U. of Colorado fraternities' stated position. For example, a couple of days ago the Daily Princetonian had an article about that school's discussions about possibly having deferred rush:

. . . Kerry Willoughby '05, a Pi Beta Phi member and former president of Princeton's Panhellenic Council, suggested late last month moving rush to November as a compromise.
When told about it, [Dean] Deignan welcomed the idea.
But some students and administrators doubted that Greek organizations would delay rush. Rush is timed, they said, to capitalize on freshmen's social inexperience.
The former fraternity president agreed that the goal of holding it early in the term is to attract as many freshmen as possible.
"I really enjoyed my fraternity experience. But in leadership positions, you formulate strategies where you want to get to kids early and influence their opinions because you want to build your organization," he said. "You could say it's manipulative."

Yes, I know that Colorado and Princeton are somewhat different :) , but I can't help thinking there's a lot of truth -- applicable to both schools -- in the quote about "freshmen's social inexperience" and early rush being "manipulative."

Princeton article is at:
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/arc...ws/12888.shtml

If, and that is a big Word, Greeks would show that they are bigger in GPA, Campus Participation, Chairty Events and less in the big partys, they would not be where they are today.

Deffered rush is not a neccesity if all of the above was true.

True, trying to get new incoming Frosh is easier than if they can and do join other organizations before joining Greeks.

Dollars can only go so far, True?

Yes, but not all of that is necessary Tom. Greeks have no obligation to justify the worth of their existance . . except to themselves.

They certainly don't need to prove themselves to administrators.

I think that in one sense, we do. We put out there publicly that ABC is devoted to "these certain values." We sell that in recruitment. Therefore, we do have to "prove" that we're living up to those values we said we would. If we don't, then the organization's worth is diminished in the eyes of the very community that our organization has chosen to be a part of (the college campus).

And I'm also going to disagree with what Rudey said about deferred recruitment ("Because all orgs should be able to make those decisions independently of an administration"). We (organizations) exist on college campuses by the willingness of the host institution. Our organizations have it written in their governing documents that chapters will only be opened on college campuses (with the exception of alumni chapters). Since we've chosen to operate only on college campuses, the organizations cannot operate totally seperate from the college administration. It's a partnership by choice. (Notice, however, that I'm not saying that the administration should dictate every single thing the orgs do...nor should the orgs dictate everything the administration does in regards to student organizations. Partnership is the ideal situation). There are some campuses where deferred recruitment is the best decision...there are some campuses where it's not the best decision.

It sucks when any authority figure (administration or HQ) comes along and says "Do this because I said so." I understand CU Greek's reactions to this. I'd rather have everyone come to the table and say "Here's the problem. What you've been doing in the past isn't workig anymore. We've got to come up with a different solution." And then come up with a different solution. This is why I always tell Greeks to figure out how to change things before it's figured out for you. Because it will be figured out for you, and if you don't step up and do something about it first, you may not have a chance to complain about the outcome.

PsychTau

My point on all of this is that once paying students are 18 years of age, isnt it their right as citizens to associate freely wioth whom they choose.

My opinion is that all enforced deferred rush is discrimination at some level, plain and simple

Lenoxxx

Take a look at today's articles about Pi Kappa Phi and the BB guns at Berkeley. An administrator is quoted as saying they didn't want to permanently expel the chapter, because it might result in an unregulated off-campus fraternity.

Berkeley gave a one-year suspension so the ex-Pi Kappa Phis won't just go "off campus".

http://www.coloradodaily.com/article...lder/news3.txt

Fraternity members played no part in Friday's private party at Acqua Pazza, an Italian restaurant located at 1801 13th St., that ended up being broken up by Boulder police due to underage drinking.

“Some of the guys involved in the planning of it were former members of Phi (Kappa) Tau and former members of Phi Gamma Delta,” said Ryan Lynch, president of the Interfraternity Council (IFC) at CU-Boulder.

http://www.lovelandfyi.com/region-story.asp?ID=3883
BOULDER — Delta Lambda Phi’s rush week began with coffee Monday night and ended with a home-cooked lasagna dinner in the fraternity president’s living room on Friday.

In between, pledges of the University of Colorado’s only gay fraternity joined for a movie night, a bowling trip and an outing to a gay dance club in Denver.

CU’s chapter of Delta Lambda Phi received its charter last year and has about 15 members in the fraternity that advertises itself as being for “gay, bisexual and progressive men.” Seven men participated in this semester’s recruitment week, which marked the fraternity’s third formal rush.