Same-Semester Initiation for Fraternities

[Little E]

First, we are required to give our new members their initiation date when they receive their bids. I was under the impression that this was not just AST but NPC. (We were the only NPC, so I'm not totally sure) It was ment to get at hazing issues of withholding initiation.

This is how our recruitment worked. We could rush, but not bid first sememster first years. We would start rush in September and have events through the fall. If we had enough soph-sr interest, we would try and do a class in late October with their initiation right before fall finals. After winter break we would bid the first years (sometimes have an event or two before they went out) with initiation before spring break. Around the time of their initiation, we could usually manage a second class, there was about a week or two of overlap where both classes were pledges. The second spring class was initiated before spring finals. Then to complicate it, if our end of the year events were going well, we would try to get bids out and pin another class which would be held over the summer and initiate around fall break.

We had our strongest classes from the last two classes suprisingly. The biggest issue is keeping the summer hold-overs interested and connected because they are new. Then you also had to start the year with tons of energy so they would feel swept up and excited about it all. This was an issue for some because they had three months at home where people were not totally supportive of GLOs and so some did change their minds. This was the same issue we had over winter break when we could bid first years right before break but not start classes until after break. We have the 6-8 week requirement, but that requirement is 6-8 weeks of classes. for example, spring break didn't count as a week, because you can't have NM ed classes while everyone is gone.

We had some issues with women and grades, but our school was not always supportive of helping us with information. We could not have taken our nms to their profs and asked about grades, that would have been keboshed pretty quickly. We had to trust them to give us their correct GPA and then we only found out the actual once they were members and signed the grade release form. It was archaic, but even the grade release was a huge step for us to get.

[IFC Advisor]

Does anyone know any more about whether or not fraternities on your campus initiate before grades? I'm aware that NPC has a lot more established rules than any fraternity does, and I really think that trying to connect fraternity and sorority policy on same-semester initiation is like comparing apples and oranges, especially since Nat'l requirements and policy differ so much among the fraternities. NIC doesn't legislate how the fraternities operate, letting the organizations decide this for themselves. They recommend changes, but rarely, if ever, mandate them. I will be looking at the Genesis Initiatives.

I don't have any problems with the NPC policies...the organizations know that they have to abide by them. Working with fraternities, with a much less structured process, beginning with recruitment, leaves you to make more decisions, and I'm trying to come up with the best one I can.

[ISUKappa]

Originally posted by AXOhottie
I couldn't imagine not initiating someone because of grades. I thought that's why the chapters received grade information on each of the PNMs. Then it's the chapter's fault if they decided to bid a girl and take a grade risk.

For those chapters who do not have deferred recruitment, this can be an issue. Girls may have a great GPA from high school, but not have good study skills and completely bomb their first semester in college. And some NPC's new member programs are so short, girls can't really get an accurate representation at the time of their initiation of what their final grade may be.

I think Dee has some great suggestions in how to keep that from happening for those chapters with shorter New Member periods who find New Member grades can sometimes be an issue.

[GeekyPenguin]

My Gamma Phi chapter does something that might work well for you in this situation. New members are required to turn in a list of their grades from their professors at midterms, and those who do not meet the grade requirements at that time are required to get weekly checkups from the standards and/or scholarship chair, and then turn in another set of grades the week before initiation. If they haven't met the grades at that point, they are told they will not be initiated with their new member class and we will wait to see their semester grades. If they made grades for the semester, we initiate them before spring recruitment begins (we have spring and fall, much like many fraternities). If they still haven't made grades, we give them one semester to try again, with heavy academic supervision and little "fun" sorority involvement, and if they aren't making grades again, they're gone. It has worked really well for the chapter and shows the new members we're serious about scholarship.

[sueali]

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
My Gamma Phi chapter does something that might work well for you in this situation. New members are required to turn in a list of their grades from their professors at midterms, and those who do not meet the grade requirements at that time are required to get weekly checkups from the standards and/or scholarship chair, and then turn in another set of grades the week before initiation. If they haven't met the grades at that point, they are told they will not be initiated with their new member class and we will wait to see their semester grades. If they made grades for the semester, we initiate them before spring recruitment begins (we have spring and fall, much like many fraternities). If they still haven't made grades, we give them one semester to try again, with heavy academic supervision and little "fun" sorority involvement, and if they aren't making grades again, they're gone. It has worked really well for the chapter and shows the new members we're serious about scholarship.

My chapter also does a grade check. However, some of the grades that professors give out during grade checks are not all that accurate. For example I had professors just say I think you have a B, because they don't really keep a accurate count of the points earned at all times(I mean that they really don't tally the grades until the end). I have also had professors not give a grade because the midterms aren't finished being graded or for other circumstances. We have had girls who met grade requirements from the grade check but then did not make grades the next semester.

[Kevin]

Using the numbers from the first 12 hours under deferred recruitment is flawed I think.

Joining a GLO takes a significant time committment. If we are truly committed to our members' grades (or having members with good grades), then we need to judge their abiltiy to perform academically while under the stress of being a pledge/new member.

Some only require a 2.0? Wow.

My chapter requires new members to make above the all-men's GPA (usually around a 2.6).

If the current policy is aimed at reducing hazing, you might consider requiring chapters to submit their pledge process calendar to your office in writing, and to inform their pledges of their initiation date assuming that they fulfill the requirements.

[Rudey]

We don't have problems with grades. I always wonder why a fraternity wants to expand into a school with bad students given the higher risks and lower prestige.

But, anyways, what is the point of a lengthy pledge period? You can tell how they are doing in their classes, they write their checks, they pass their tests and then what? They should just wait? Perhaps the brothers will bond with them more over 4 months as a pledge than 2 months as a pledge and 2 months as a brother?

-Rudey

[SirHornyToad]

From my experiance a short pledge period is usually a bad thing especially if there was a transition from a long pledge period into a shorter one. Let me explain some, if you were pledging previously for 8 weeks, and then switch to 4 or 6, there's a high possibility that all 8 weeks worth of crap is going to be crammed into a 4 or 6 week period.

I say pledge um all for 12 weeks, pledging activities only allowedon sat/sun/mon, mandatory study hours during the week and monthly proffessor reports for all classes.

[Betarulz!]

At my big Midwestern school, only one fraternity that I know of initiates before grades are available, and they are the only one without a chapter house. The rest (nearly 20) wait until grades are posted. Since we do nearly 100% of our recruitment through the summer (again only the non housed chapter has any sort of substantial school year recruitment) we actually have a 17 week pledge period, with initiations held either the first or second week back from winter break. Our pledges can also live in the chapter houses from day one. Thus, part of the financial burden is mandatory because they're living and paying for the chapter house and facilities.

I am 100% for waiting until grades are posted before any sort of initiation or pre-initiation ceremonies are conducted. It's easier to stop someone from initiation than to kick them out and it's a lot less stress for everyone.

I would make sure that the chapters inform their new members that initiation is contingent on achieving a minimum GPA, and that new members who don't reach that will be carried over according to each individual organization's bylaws and constitution. Those members who succeed without any problem initiate as soon as possible after grades are posted and school is back in session. The whole class is not punished for the failings of one. I don't think it is a good idea to have the possibility that pledgeship is extended due to sketchy terms like "class unreadiness" -- if the expectations are clear and are met, then they initiate.

I would also say that I'm VERY much against the whole "shortened" pledge program for all organizations (within reason - any thing much longer than a semester is overkill). On my own campus one NPC group (a very large one) waits until grades are posted at semester before initiating - our sororities have recruitment the week before classes start in August so they also have a semester long pledgeship while other chapters only go for 6-8 weeks. From four years of seeing how the sororities function, I can tell you that the sorority that waits for grades has much higher retention of older members, higher involvement in chapter activities, and far less clique-ieness than any other sorority chapter. Every other chapter has far higher numbers of ladies that don't stay in the chapter for four years, transfer, only show up for football games or formals, or don't have any of their best friends in their chapter.

I realize that there are issues over hazing and such, but I don't think that shortened pledge periods are necessary nor sufficient to address the problems of hazing.

[IFC Advisor]

Originally posted by ktsnake
Using the numbers from the first 12 hours under deferred recruitment is flawed I think.

Joining a GLO takes a significant time committment. If we are truly committed to our members' grades (or having members with good grades), then we need to judge their abiltiy to perform academically while under the stress of being a pledge/new member.

Some only require a 2.0? Wow.

My chapter requires new members to make above the all-men's GPA (usually around a 2.6).

If the current policy is aimed at reducing hazing, you might consider requiring chapters to submit their pledge process calendar to your office in writing, and to inform their pledges of their initiation date assuming that they fulfill the requirements.

I agree with you.
Our university standard for joining any Recognized Student Organization is 2.0. Due to NIC standards, we may change that for fraternities...not sure how that will fly, as exactly half of our chapters are NIC. I don't think that the university will raise the standard for all RSOs.
I will be bringing this up with chapter officers. What you mentioned as your organizations all-men's requirement is listed as an NIC Standard...that would raise the bar to a 2.888 here.

[Tom Earp]

What is great about Frosh Fall Recruitment is that The reason that they are in College is they passed certain recuirments to even be there, GPA.

LXA would like to have a shortened Associate Program to have New Associates Initiated. I dont agree! Getting Mid Terms is fine, but what about learning about The Greek Organization and study skills? Is the reason still there among us about getting grades and Graduating? Granted it is the long haul. But, I want some New Associates to know about My/Our Fraternity.

We have a different Program with The New Associate Program where they can participate, but, still need to learn about Our History of What, Why and When.

PSU still does this with all GLOs. 1 Sem. Upon returning you will be Initiated.

Shortend yes, get Mid Terms and Maybe Initiate before the time of burn out sets in.

[gpb1874]

i'm a Greek advisor too and in Texas. If you want to talk more, send me a pm. most of the fraternities at my campus initiate same semester. sometimes they will hold someone over if there is a problem (he didn't attend many functions, had personal problems, financial problems, etc). It seems the NALFO chapters are more likely to hold over an entire class, whereas the NIC are more likely to hold over just a few guys, unless there are other problems in the chapter or with the nm educator that would otherwise cause them to not be able to inititate.

if there are many problems with first semester freshmen not making grades, maybe the chapters should decide to not take in many or any freshmen, but i believe that should be left up to the individual chapters. i'm not a big fan of long nm periods (especially if it extends over a break) for most of the reasons already stated. some campuses will not allow mid-semester grade checks and some faculty will just not give them out.

i agree with a lot of what Dee said. I would also like to add this....how many people here or in your chapters have had a bad semester with grades? one semester does not make a bad person. i have been a chapter advisor and it is frustrating to get grades and see people doing poorly. i also remember that grades do not make the person. we have had members who are wonderful in all aspects, but struggle with grades. many of them had learning diabilisities and were working with the counseling center or their doctors to make improvements. there were members who were just lazy or liked to party too much, and they were removed from the chapter. it is sad and we often would have liked to not wasted our time. with freshmen it is also difficult to tell what their personality may be once away from home. i know of one girl who was just the sweetest thing and from a small town and probably never did anything "bad" in her life. she came to college, cut her really long blond hair, dyed it, got a couple tattoos and piercings and started wearing really short (nasty, really) clothes. started drinking and doing drugs. who would've known that would happen? she seemed so nice and sweet during recruitment.

it does take some time, but it's not something that is easy to tell when you meet a person....you can't judge a person's ability to study on high school gpa and college gpa is a little better. you should look at the entire person and what qualities they can bring your chapter. grades are something that can be worked on, lack of values cannot (or can be really difficult).

grades, studying and academic achievement should be stressed at all times, not just the nm period.

sorry about the length....i guess i got carried away!

[SmartBlondeGPhB]

Originally posted by SAEalumnus
I strongly disagree with initiating anyone in the same term they pledged for the single reason that you haven't seen their grades yet, so you don't really have any proof of their level of responsibility (people can say they have straight 'A's all they want, but need to be able to put their grade report where their mouth is). A number of pledges of my chapter who might otherwise have been initiated were depledged on the grounds of not putting school first. Students are at the university to get an education first; everything else is secondary.

I have to strongly agree with you. I SO wish we would go back to not initiating until we had grade reports. I consider it a barrier to entry, and not hazing in the least.

The students are there to go to school, we should be making grades a priority.

And I speak as someone who was a pledge for an entire school year because she did not the grade point to initiate after the first semester of pledging. I have only myself to blame for that.....

[OleMissGlitter]

Some NPC groups require that the new members are initiated within the same semester they pledge. At Ole Miss the majority of the fraternities initiated in the fall semester but some do hold over until spring semester.

[AXO Alum]

Originally posted by NebraskaDelt
If grades are such a big issue for not implementing this, the easy thing to do is have 2 active members take a new member to each of his professors and ask what kind of progress the student is having so far in the semester and then give a best estimation of a grade.

First, I realize that I speak as an NPC woman, but I wanted to throw in my 2c about this practice.

For us - professors are VERY much against doing ANY kind of mid-term grade reporting. We do use a form that lists the name & contact info for myself, my CP, and my VP Intellectual Development. Often times they will refuse to give it back to a member because they are not required to give them this information (which is crazy to me!) -- but they certainly would not give the info directly to two other students regardless if the student/member is there or not.

Sigh... it would be a wonderful thing to be able to hold for grades, but as it stands now, XO are the only ones on campus that do that. We have the 6-8 week new member period starting with bid day.

I was the first class at my school to be initiated same-semester. We had an 11 week new member policy, and we were in a LOT of study hour sessions!