Higher GPA
 

Hey sorhors:

I was wondering what do you think about raising the standard gpa for admission into our sorority? Do you think by raising the standard would it help in weeding out women who are interested in our sorority for the wrong reasons and/ or bring in quality women in our organization?

Tinese
Zeta Nu Alumnae Chapter
SGRHO

I

[This message has been edited by blu_theatrics (edited July 24, 2000).]

I really am kind of torn on this issue. My line sisters and my self all had GPA's well over 3.0 (I think we all had above 3.5)but anyhow although we did have above the 2.5 I do know of a sorhor who had about a 2.6 I think and graduated with a 3.4. Why? because her sisters had her back. My chapter is at a cummuter school (not a community college, we just don't have dorms, only apts.) But anyhow, my point is that when you are 10-15 min away from campus it is really easy to be like I'm not going to calss today, but I know that my sorhors know what time my classes are and they will be all over the phone, if they did't see me walking across the yard at 11:27 and they know I have an 11:30 class.

So basically I think we should look at the lady as a whole, if she has a 2.5, no job and lives at home with her parents and you see her just "chillen" in the student center five hours a day that's completely different than someone with a husband and child who is trying to complete a degree while being a full-time mother, part-time worker. So we need to look at the person and let me say that if you stroll in with just a 2.5 ( the bare minumum) don't think you are on the top of the list.



------------------
It took three rough drafts to create a masterpiece....
Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority Incorporated
Epsilon Chapter~[url]www.iun.edu/~sgr[url]

I agree with Blu.
One of the things we have to remember about our organization (or any NPHC) is that there's a huge focus on academics. The 2.5 minimum is just that, the MINIMUM. To be true sisters to each other we would encourage and expect higher and higher standards. Like Blu said, I enterd with a 3.6 GPA. So I knew that I would be in good standig for consideration. But when I actually became a member, expectations were even higher!!! I knew I better not let that GPA slip or sorors would be all over me.
And if it does slip, there better be a reason and if there is, they'll help you through it. So the standard shouldd't be changed in my opinion. Aside from the fact that a GPA always has the chance of inceasing; I'd rather have sorors with a 2.5 GPA who go to work, raise children, do community service, are active, have ideas to offer, etc... than have someone with a 4.0 and absolutely nothing else aside from a number to offer. Lord knows that just because you have book smarts, it doesnt neccesarily mean you have any other kind of "smarts". But thats just my opinion.
http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif

Sorhor, I agree with you, it's like one of my prof said to me freshman year....everyone's gardes aren't made the same way and I would love to have a sorhor who has persevered to make a 2.5 ( and she has other great qualities) than someone who takes areobics first semester to get a 4.0 and look good to us

*bump*

Dang...
 

Soror went DEEEEEEP into the archives... I think that the GPA should be at least a 3.0 . A 2.5 is not EVEN academic excellence. I think that if someone is such a great 2.5 candidate, she should spend a little more time at the library, and then she can be an even better candidate.

A sorority is a great thing to belong to and all, but a college student's top priority should be his or her academics.

:)
Then again, that's just me.
TRSimon

I think it should be raised to 3.0 also
A 4.0
B 3.0
************
Not Acceptable
C 2.0
D 1.0
F 0.0

My worry is that the if we take ladies teetering on the edge, once they cross and learn to stroll, they will spend too much time strollin' and not enough time in the library, and not finish their degrees. We are about SCHOLARSHIP, after all.

my 22 cents...
 

i think that a 2.5 isn't hard to achieve at all... at the same time, academic excellence, committment to one's studies, and committment to being an excellent woman in general CANNOT be measured by GPA... it's an approach you have to life and an attitude you have about your studies. there are some folks with 2.5 GPAs that work harder than a lot of folks who have 4.0s...
i know at many points during my academic career, my grades didn't reflect half the struggle it took to achieve them.

excellent results tend to indicate excellent efforts, i will agree, but a 2.5 not being "excellent" is kind of relative. the person who sticks it out and graduates and overcomes every test of their dedication is EXCELLENT to me...the person who does the best they can NO MATTER what is excellent to me... i think the 2.5 is just a bench mark because we gotta have a standard. if you wanna raise GPA, i'm for it-- my line came in and maintained the highest GPAs in my chapter while i was an undergrad... but a number doesn't reflect a woman's committment to excellence or high standards or obligation of duty. we cannot afford to get it twisted.

Re: my 22 cents...
 

I didn't say that a 2.5 person wasn't committed, but Soror Rho4life had a point about the teetering folk. I know of a grip of folks who had that 2.5, joined their org of choice and ended up on academic probation because they were the bomb diggity soror or frat.

That's all I was saying, but last I looked, they weren't handing out honor roll, cum laude or dean's list designation to well meaning, hard working 2.5s.

Sorry to crash your thread . . well not really ;)

I think the people that commented that excellence is not solely a GPA issue are on the right track.

Sometimes we forget that some of he most successful people in the world didn't have the best GPA's in school. GPA is a singular measure of worth.

My Fraternity hands out awards differently. We have something called a scholarship leadership award that we give to students. GPA is just a part of the criteria used, and not even the largest part. The largest part is leadership rules in various organizations.

So it depends on your viewpoint. If you think that college is soley for getting good grades (an objective but limited measure of academic success) and that all our organizations are completely ancillary to that . . then GPA is indeed going to be your prime consideration.

But if you believe that the importance of college is the overall experience, which the classroom might be the smallest part of in many case, then the total person needs to be considered.

Thanks for listening to me Ramble.

I really don't have a problem with any org raising their GPA cause as was stated a 2.5 isn't demonstrating scholarship. However, I know myself and several others at my undergrad institution STRUGGLED to get that 2.5 because we were in majors that we shouldn't have been in and were too busy holding on to classes that we SHOULD have dropped. And for me personally it wasn't my major that was kicking my butt it was cognate courses in physics, calculus and organic chemistry that devestated my GPA. As soon as I switched majors, I had straight A's but it wasn't enough to have put me where I would have been comfortable applying. That undergrad experience did initially make me work harder in grad school but when I got there it just turned out my new field was where I should have been so I went from a 2.5 to a 3.9 MA GPAand now have a 3.7 in my PhD work.

I say all that to say that while sometimes it is laziness on behalf of the person. Other times it could be major or personal reasons that keep a person struggling academically.

Sorors, I really don't agree with raising the minimum gpa to 3.0. Why? Because I would not have made it!

When I was pursuing membership into Sigma, I had a 2.8 gpa as a chemistry major. I was also a regional officer for NSBE, an officer in the chemistry fraternity, and working 2 jobs for a total of 40 hours/week working. Even though my gpa was a 2.8, it didn't mean that I was just sitting around doing nothing. I was very involved and plus I had to hustle to get the money to pay tuition (and my fees as well!)

I think that raising the gpa to 3.0 will make a lot of quality women who want to give to our sisterhood ineligible. We should be after quality women, but gpa isn't always an indication of that.