Is it time to get rid of undergrads?
 

(This post was copied from the Phi Beta Sigma board. What are your thoughts on undergraduate chapters?)


Let’s face it brothers, for every undergraduate chapter that is functioning at any level of productivity, there are 5 that have folded, floundered and are only tangentially connected to the broader fraternity. More importantly, the undergraduate brothers expose the fraternity to great financial risk with some of the activities that they engage in, under the so-called banner of "brotherhood-building." Isn’t it time to do away with undergraduate chapters? (Mind you, I pledged at the undergraduate level, and we spent most of our time bickering, planning parties and trying to “hit” everything we could get our hands on.) It wasn’t until I got to the graduate chapter level that I realized the fraternity was about the larger objective of uplifting our people.

Can our cause really “speed on its way” by having a bunch of 19 year olds representing us? Besides, the capital needed to carry out a productive and progressive policy agency just cannot be raised by undergrads.

Blueknowledge ‘93

Please, no bashing. Let’s have a serious discussion on this issue.

I do not think that it is time to get rid of undergraduate chapters. It is up the the grad chapter to cultivate all of the young people that are coming in the organization. This is honestly a difficult subject to talk about because your undergraduate years is where it all begins.... Tell me what you all think....:confused:

I can understand why some would consider ending undergraduate chapters - reckless behavior exposes our organizations to lawsuits and bad press. But isn't it the duty of the graduate sorors & frat to guide the younger members? My undergraduate experience pretty much sucked. Not because my chapter sorors bickered or were petty. It was bad because we didn't get the necessary guidance from our graduate chapter. It wasn't until I had been a Zeta for almost 4 years did I fully come to appreciate my sorority.

Undergrads need to have a more intense intake process for this very reason. If they aren't taught ALL of the organization's history & traditions, how can they truly appreciate it? How can to make a lifelong pledge to uplift Zeta's principles when you don't truly understand them? Notice that I said "process" which means that I do NOT condone hazing whether it be mental, emotional, or physical. But I do condone instilling a true sense of love and dedication to an organization during an aspirant's process.

I don't think we should get rid of undergrad chapters at all!

Where I live, if you don't see Zetas on campus, you probably won't see a Zetas doing the work of the sorority. They weren't that visible where I grew up.
I am certain I would not have seen for myself what Zeta Phi Beta is all about, unless I saw it at school. I would never have become a Zeta.

My fear is, this would be the case for women in most cities in the South. I think membership would dwindle significantly here.

Where I am, Zeta chapters are springing up everywhere and thriving. I think there is change in the air for undergrad chapters.
So regardless of if undergrads have the capital to benefit the sorority, more than likely they will have it 5 to 10 years after they graduate.

Anywhere there is an undergrad chapter not thriving and doing good, there is a graduate chapter somewhere not doing their job.

Anywhere there are undergrads who don't make the transition to the grad chapters, is an advisor who was not an example for them.

So I think the blame is a little misplaced.


DivineZeta

AMEN!!
 

DivineZeta,

You just gave the gospel. WE keep forgetting that our founders were undergraduates. This is a tradition that must be upheld, and its up to the graduate level sorors to set an example. Undergraduate soror imulate what they see, which are older sorors.

Most undergrads just aren't ready.....
 

Yes, the founders were undergraduates - nearly 100 years ago! But let us remember the context for which they lived: they were the social elite. They were college students when the percentage of African Americans attending college was less than 1%. (Heck, over 85% of A/A were illiterate at the time) Today, that standard would at least be a master’s degree (and that’s a conservative estimate).

Perhaps the world of Zeta functions a little different from the world of Sigma, but the notion that undergraduates are looking for role models from the graduate brothers is more fairytale than real. I know I am not that far removed from my undergraduate days and I remember the dubious nature by which we approached the graduate chapters. There were fine brothers in the graduate chapter, yet I know that we cared little for them, as we pursued our own agenda.

In fact, there were two primary objectives when dealing with the well-intentioned, but hopelessly uninformed, graduate “advisor”
1. Don’t let him know when the boys really go on
2. Hit him up for money so that we can do our service projects

We need to seriously reconsider undergraduate chapters. We need to study whether or not they are cost-effective and productive. We can all admit that they are our primary liability and that they contribute very little capital to our organizations. Indeed, we need to study the probability of successfully gravitating from the undergraduate level to the graduate level. If you know, for example, that undergraduate chapter A only transfers 25% of its graduates into the grad chapter, and that the average member of undergraduate chapter A only stays “financial” for two years, then what’s the point?

The founders were different people at a different time. If you were 21 years old in 1914 or 1920, that made you, firmly, an adult. Today, adolescence doesn’t end until you’re 25. I, respectfully, think it’s time to rethink how people get access to our organizations.

Blueknowledge

BTW – I am willing to compromise by having an experiment whereby all undergraduate chapters are collapsed into a graduate chapter. But in my normative vision, the undergraduate membership would be significantly smaller, and the graduate chapter would strictly control the notion of membership.

My thoughts:

I can't speak to this about Sigma specifically, so
I'll generalize it to all organizations.

The founders of most organizations were between 17-21
when they founded their respective organizations. I
think more of the reason some undergrad chapters (and
I think more than 1/5 chapters are functional) are the
way that they are is because they are indeed disconnected
from the larger organization--and this seems to be
encouraged. Some folks now use organization offices as
another resume point, and as such, really focus on a
successful "reign" (usually dealing with the growth of the general membership) rather than the health of chapters as
a whole.

We seem to WANT our undergrads to have bake sales,
parties, stepshows, a few service projects and keep
their noses clean. And that's what we get, mediocrity
and sustainability from our undergrad chapters. We
forget sometimes that the lifeblood of the
organization comes from its undergrads and that they
bring an insight and a complement of new ideas and new
excitement to the organization. How many organizations
have an undergrad "model organization" where
undergrads operate as if THEY run the organization? I
think that most "powers that be" like to keep the
undergrads in the dark because their responses are
unpredictable. I will add that undergrads are not
entirely without blame either though. Undergrads seem
content to step, party and do little fundraisers.

Finally, many undergrad members I've met have little clue of what the "true" original mission of their organizations are. They know how to regurgitate history, but they don't actually understand what it was like in 1908, 1914, 1963. They don't understand how innovative their Founders REALLY were. But again, I also don't see leadership, from graduate on up, exactly focusing on history and background either.

Greetings Brothers and Sorors,

Having read the posts that both of you (in addition to the sorors) have written, I must say that you both make very valid points.

Before, I go any further let me first say that I was "made" by a graduate chapter. Unlike most of those on this post, I did not have an opportunity to come in at my alma mater.

Be that as it may, my feelings are that undergraduate chapters should NOT be done away with. I am of the opinion that the undergraduate chapters are the lifeblood of our GREAT organization. Truthfully, without those undergraduate chapters, our organizations would crumble for sure!!! I mean, graduate chapters do not have people beating their doors down to get in!!! In my case, I knew I wanted to be a Sigma, so when I graduated I seeked out a graduate chapter in my area. Would I have done this if I had not at least been exposed to Sigma as an undergrad? Probably not!! Why would I have done that? Had there not been a a undergraduate chapter at my campus (albeit suspended for 5 years), I would NEVER have known about this great organization. In short, I don't think our undergraduate chapters should be done away with.

With regard to the graduate chapters and their roles in the lives of undergraduates, I feel like graduate chapters are good intentioned individuals. I don't feel like these brothers are there to harm anyone or change anyone's traditions (yall know what I'm talking about). I do feel that graduate chapters should be more vigilant in their monitoring of undergraduate chapters' activities. I don't mean they should breath down their necks, but I feel like the undergraduates should at least know that the graduate chapters have their eyes on them (not because they're looking for trouble but because they are genuinely interested in how the brothers are doing).

On the other side of the coin, the graduate chapters have an uphill battle to fight with the undergraduate chapters they "oversee". Someone on Zeta post stated something to the effect of "undergraduates simply look for the graduate chapter or advisor for money for the service projects and also they make sure to keep the time when the boys (or girls) really go on to themselves." That statement was not exact, but it was close. How are graduate chapters supposed to work in unison with undergraduates when those are the feelings held by SOME and perpetuated by MANY? (It only takes one DP to tell a line this and a majority of that line will probably go out and perpetuate the feeling.)

It honestly all goes back to what is being taught at the undergraduate level. Of course, I don't know this first hand, but having spoke to some of the frat from many undergrad institutions, I have learned that when they were on line, they learned alot of negative stuff about graduate chapters, the brothers in them, and the brothers who came in through them. These same brothers who told me this went on to tell me that it was not until they had been in the frat for many years (usually around 4), that they realized that it was not all about how you came in nor about the graduate chpater coming in there to "wreck shop". They realized that it was all about the work.

Truth be told, it does not matter who does the work. The most important thing is the work!!!!!!! (Don't get me wrong. I am all for the PROCESS.)

Also, financial backing of undergraduate chapters is an objective of some graduate chapters along with the mentoring of these younger brothers. BUT, do you think that our graduate brothers are going to dump money into chapters who are not even producing at any level? Would you propose backing undergraduate chapters or brothers who only contact you when they need something? Finally would you financially support anyone who has antagonistic feeling toward you and your goals. I would certainly hope not!! These are some of the things that graduate chapters encounter when dealing with undergraduates. For the most part, the graduate brothers who came in through the undergraduate chapters have not forgotten what it was like to have a treasury that had nothing in it two weeks before Sigma Week or to only have two brothers on the yard for homecoming who want to do stuff but cannot physically do a lot of what they want because they don't have money and/or the manpower. These brothers have not forgotten. They see it everyday in their own chapters. (Graduate chapters need fundraisers also.)

Anyway, I have written way too much.

To recap, undergraduate chapters should not be done away with.
Undergraduate "prospects" need to be properly taught about the goals and objectives of our frat and HOW the FRAT achieves them. (Our undergraduates should not be taught that "if you don't "pledge" you are respectable.) They should be taught that work will always speak for itself.

Additionally, graduate chapters should work more diligently with the undergraduates under their jurisdiction. Only through work and interaction can the divide between us be made smaller. (Of course it will never be closed because there are some who will not change no matter what.)

Holla at me Frat and sorors

I don't believe undergraduate chapters should be done away with because as many said before they are the lifeblood of the organization. Undergraduate chapters when they represent well are the best spokespeople for our orgs. However there are so many "issues" between both grad and undergrad chapters that stem largly because of inabilities to relate to each other. Even us younger members of graduate chapters have a hard time relating to the older members. The school of thought is different, everyone has come from different times and different ways of handling things and often times our opinions may clash. As an undergraduate advisor, I came to see that there is such bad blood between the undergrad and grad chapters. The undergrads don't feel respected, they don't feel trusted, and the grads often times don't feel that the undergrads conduct themselves in a way where they should be trusted. This MIP thing has great cause to broadening the gap amongst undergrad and chapter members. Personally I don't think our orgs would have lasted very long if they only extended grad membership and not undergrad, but I also think our orgs won't last much longer if we keep having to deal with lawsuits and people getting seriously injured and killed during their pursuit to become members.