Just failed my new member exam- need some encouragement

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

I'm sorry but I don't see how requiring attendance and making sure they actually paid attention are separate. Also I fail to see how test would be hazing as you would expect the sisters to know your history.

Tests in any form are always hazing.

I can definitely see a reason for considering a NM exam hazing.

I disagree with removing them, but I understand.

[Kappamd]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

I'm sorry but I don't see how requiring attendance and making sure they actually paid attention are separate. Also I fail to see how test would be hazing as you would expect the sisters to know your history.

I believe that Kappa defines hazing as any activity that is not required by ALL members (active or new member) and that is why exams are not allowed.

Edit: Now that I think about it, isn't that the basic universal definition of hazing?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kappamd

I believe that Kappa defines hazing as any activity that is not required by ALL members (active or new member) and that is why exams are not allowed.

Edit: Now that I think about it, isn't that the basic universal definition of hazing?

I have heard that definition but many organizations to not subscribe to it. And neither do I. New members and actives don't have to do the same thing for a reason. But, actives had to do it when they were new members.

[thetygerlily]

Originally Posted by Kappamd

I believe that Kappa defines hazing as any activity that is not required by ALL members (active or new member) and that is why exams are not allowed.

Originally Posted by Kappamd

Edit: Now that I think about it, isn't that the basic universal definition of hazing?

I went to the Kappa website on hazing, and here is the definition:
Kappa Kappa Gamma Hazing Policy
Hazing is defined as any activity or action taken with or without consent of the individual involved that produces mental, emotional, psychological or physical discomfort, intimidation, humiliation, degradation, embarrassment, harassment or ridicule. Such activities and situations include but are not limited to, blindfolding for any purpose; creation of excessive fatigue; physical and psychological shocks; treasure hunts, scavenger hunts or kidnaps; wearing apparel that is conspicuous and not normally in good taste: engaging in stunts or degrading or humiliating games and activities; and late work sessions.

Under examples, it specifies "Asking new members to pass a test for initiation."

Handled properly a test wouldn't have to be hazing, but perhaps some people crossed the line a few too many times and they decided to play it safe and discontinue it.

[Kappamd]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

^^^ Not to be in your business, but I am assuming what you're saying is that the NMs have to attend presentations on history, policy, whatever else the sorority deems as important, but there is no tool for assessing whether they retained any of the info?

If that's the case, is there also any objective tool for disqualifying someone from the process entirely? (Attendance points, for example)

Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to respond to your question.

New members must complete the new member program, which at my university meant one presentation/week on history, risk management, philanthropy, etc. There is nothing in place to assess their understanding of the material, nor do I think there needs to be. If the new member does not complete the program, she cannot be initiated.

[thetygerlily]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

^^^ Not to be in your business, but I am assuming what you're saying is that the NMs have to attend presentations on history, policy, whatever else the sorority deems as important, but there is no tool for assessing whether they retained any of the info?

If that's the case, is there also any objective tool for disqualifying someone from the process entirely? (Attendance points, for example)

Correct. Some KKG chapters do use a point system for attendance and grades and such, but it's not org-wide. Our chapter was fairly small so we self-regulated without points. If someone missed mandatory events and didn't get excused, they could face the standards board. Initially just a "hey what's up" type of thing, but it could be a disqualifier if it got to that point. But as a small chapter (and small school) people generally were pretty good at attendance and participation. We also didn't have the semi-typical "senior apathy" (although we had heard it existed), boy was that a shock when I started working with a PAC 10 school


ETA:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I didn't say she wasn't right. How the hell would I know? I said it would interest her to find out whether she's right. She's the one who included the "so I was told" disclaimer as though she didn't know.

The reason I used the disclaimer is because I didn't have our Bylaws & Rules/Regs handy. Better safe than sorry, lest I get beat up on GC!

[Senusret I]

Why don't you think there needs to be assessment?

[Kappamd]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

Why don't you think there needs to be assessment?

Honestly, because I've never seen a need for it. The information, while only FORMALLY presented once, is DRILLED into the new members in other ways (for example, we would have trivia contests for the new members during informal meetings). I just don't think an exam is necessary for what really shouldn't be difficult information to retain.

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by Kappamd

Honestly, because I've never seen a need for it. The information, while only FORMALLY presented once, is DRILLED into the new members in other ways (for example, we would have trivia contests for the new members during informal meetings). I just don't think an exam is necessary for what really shouldn't be difficult information to retain.

I see.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a Kappa educator introduced a version of "positive behavior intervention systems" into the organization.

Giving the new members the information to learn for a prize has a similar effect of giving them information for a quiz. Just that rather than punishing those that fail, you reward the ones who pass.

I think both have a place in fraternal and sororal education, just as they do in schools where I have seen PBIS introduced.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I see.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a Kappa educator introduced a version of "positive behavior intervention systems" into the organization.

Giving the new members the information to learn for a prize has a similar effect of giving them information for a quiz. Just that rather than punishing those that fail, you reward the ones who pass.

I think both have a place in fraternal and sororal education, just as they do in schools where I have seen PBIS introduced.

Therefore, punishing those who fail through the lack of a prize.

It's really all semantics and a psychological game.

Given the popular definition of hazing which confuses pledging with hazing in many instances, they are still being hazed even if they walk away smiling.

[Kappamd]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I see.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a Kappa educator introduced a version of "positive behavior intervention systems" into the organization.

Giving the new members the information to learn for a prize has a similar effect of giving them information for a quiz. Just that rather than punishing those that fail, you reward the ones who pass.

I think both have a place in fraternal and sororal education, just as they do in schools where I have seen PBIS introduced.

We used positive reinforcement in other ways as well (rewards for best class attendance that week, point system for attendance at non-required events, etc.) I don't know how other [Kappa] chapters run, but it worked for ours.

As for the lack of an exam, I know that when the day came for Initiation, we were just as well educated as any of the actives.

I also always thought that it was nice that our Founder's Day sat smack in the middle of the new member period, because it made a lot of the historical education seem a lot more tangible and relevant.

[thetygerlily]

Originally Posted by Kappamd

I also always thought that it was nice that our Founder's Day sat smack in the middle of the new member period, because it made a lot of the historical education seem a lot more tangible and relevant.

Oh, that would've been nice! We had deferred recruitment so we only had CORs during the fall. Although for us because we had a term between graduation and recruitment, it was like the time to come together and resolidify as a chapter. So Founders Day fell during that time, which was pretty cool. I guess it's good at any time of the cycle!

[Senusret I]

This is all fascinating to me.

*no judgment here*

[Psi U MC Vito]

I don't get it. You expect brothers or sisters to know the info, so shouldn't the NM be held to the same standard? Psi U doesn't have any official policy but most chapters won't cross pledges if we feel they don't have a good enough concept of our history and traditions.

[theta_belle1]

I would have been terrified if we had to pass an exam - I was a COB - so I was a little behind the girls in my pledge class and had to catch up with our education program, which wasn't too difficult, but an exam might have thrown me over the edge.

I don't think the exams are right or wrong - just depends on the size of an organization, it's traditions and histories, and things like that. But I have to say that I am glad I didn't have to pass one, even though I feel like I know most of the things a girl in my sorority should know, including our history and relevant facts.