Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DST_philoso4
Now this is the idea with which I beg to differ. High scholastic and ethical standards.....I hardly call 2.5 HIGH, it's actually mediocre, and I'm not pointing this specifically at AKA, we ALL have 2.5, I heard one frat's gpa requirement is actually a 2.3, and since some frats, at least used to, allow ppl to pledge their first semester, there was/is no gpa requirement at all!!! If we were all "promoting" high standards, the gpa requirement would be FAR ABOVE a 2.5, and letters of recommendation would not just be Soror/Service/Scholastic and one of each [although I know not all orgs even require THESE three letters from a candidate] they'd also require some type of fitness of character, and the requirements for the letters would be much more demanding. Our Founders used to compete for the highest GPA, and would not add chapters at schools that had less than a B [3.0] average, initially it was A. But even with the school having a B average, most would hesitate to accept ppl with anything near a 3.0. And unity?!........ have you been to a coming out show/stepshow lately?! it's not EVERY org on EVERY campus, but in EACH org there are SEVERAL chapters that are NOT about promiting unity!
|
Well, 2.5 is the bare minimum but at least in my experience, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. is a very competitive sorority to get into on any campus and in any city. We handpick our graduate candidates and do not even let them submit applications, thereby just adding to one more level of selectivity. Therefore, the requirement may say 2.5 on paper, however, in practice, the required g.p.a. is pushed up by the caliber of our candidates, just as with anything that is competitive. You mentioned lawschools so that will be my example. I graduated from the University of Chicago Law School, a very hard lawschool to get into. They can put whatever they may want as far as the required LSAT score and/or gpa (and it is ridiculous to start with). However, when you only take 120 a year, as compared to law schools such as Harvard that takes upwards of 3-400 per year, the bare minimum is not going to get it. Therefore, the bare minimum becomes just words basically when you have competition and you don't take tons of people. If either factor is relaxed (lack of competition or taking tons of people) then I agree that you may end up with a less than stellar group.
It plays out in the real world, which is the real focus of the question to me. What happens in the real world, not what gpa is written on paper. In any circle, take a random slice of the most educated, most financially prosperous AA in any city and guaranteed that a large % will be members of BGLO. Don't you agree? Frats that let you pledge year one aside, this seems to be the case to me.
Quote:
|
Now this is something I KNOW to not be true! For instance, law school, in 1997, the median LSAT score for those admitted to Yale was 164, in 2004 it was 173, before 1997 it was far below that, the same trend you'll see in Medical School and ALL other grad/professional programs. It is much more highly competitive to get a spot than it was even 8 years ago! So that's not something I see as a general trend. While we all do still have stellar candidates, but then there are SEVERAL in ALL ORGS who would probably not have made it 10 years ago!
|
The reason that it is more competitive to get into lawschool than 8 years ago is b/c the economy is so bad that more people are opting to shelter in school and cannot find jobs. At least that's what the newspapers were reporting when I started lawschool in 2001. Again, this would be a case of more competition driving up the numbers, you have exhibited exactly the point that I am making re Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. and the general high caliber of our candidates.
I believe that this must carry over for other BGLOs as well.
SC