速
速
in this
issue – Allison Swick-Duttine, Editor
I
have always resisted technological advances for as long as possible. As an undergraduate magazine journalism major, I wrote my articles by hand convinced that I could develop my thoughts better on paper than on a computer. I refused to check e-mail or join listservs in graduate school. When I became editor of Perspectives, I printed out all documents and edited them by hand. In fact, I just purchased my first cell phone a little more than a year ago. Although I thought I was the last person to get on the technology bandwagon, I have discovered through the development of this issue that I am not alone. Technology invokes anxiety in many professionals in the field of fraternity/sorority advising. Technology can be a curse when working with college students. As you will read in this issue, technology allows many students to avoid face-to-face confrontation, often creates impersonal “friendships” with little relationship substance (e.g. Facebook), accepts improper punctuation and language use as the norm (an editor’s nightmare), and frequently is an ongoing safety and public relations nightmare.
5
The First 30 Years
11 12
virtual interfraternalism
However, I have come to believe during the past several years that technology is more importantly a teaching opportunity when working with fraternity/sorority members. It is a springboard to meaningful conversation, for personal and organizational values clarification, and for self-discovery. While it is easy to always focus on the problems technology causes to myself as a busy professional and volunteer, I must constantly challenge myself to reframe my focus on the opportunities it can provide.
afa
17
Twenty-five Years of AIDS
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE
• It is tempting never to log on to online communities for fear of what I might encounter. However, I have found groups such as Facebook and MySpace to be outstanding communication tools. These resources provide an opportunity to disseminate important information to students and entire organizations, to praise them publicly (e.g. on their “walls”), to share photos they can use in their publications and websites, and to learn about what they value.
Easing the Quarterlife Crisis: A Lesson on Programming and Support for Graduating Fraternity and Sorority Students
• AOL Instant Messenger may be a time waster for many professionals (I will admit to disabling my AIM frequently because I tend to get caught up in “chit chat” with professionals from other campuses.) However, instant messaging can be an ideal way for a student to ask a “spur of the moment” question they may hesitate to ask in a face-to-face situation or to schedule an impromptu meeting about an issue that concerns them.
NAVIGATING the new AFA Website
• The information technology department is a scary place for me because I am embarrassed about how much knowledge I lack in the area of computer software. However, I have learned that a little time invested in this campus resource today to increase efficiency and productivity can save days of time in the long run – time that can be used to educate students about the constructive use of technology. I believe it is important to meet students where they are in regard to technology and to engage in their methods of communication. However, we must never pass by an opportunity to guide students to where they should be through a face-to-face conversation. Fraternity and sorority members in particular need to have conversations with professionals about the fact that their image is their reality – if they post a photo, profile, or comment, then that becomes part of who they are to their peers, to administrators, and to employers. The more we learn about effectively using the technology our students embrace, the more frequently we can engage in developmental conversations about current issues and trends. If we effectively use technology to our advantage, we will be better able to help fraternity and sorority members grow and develop.
20
25
regular columns The Mighty Quill....................................3 From the Top ........................................4 SSAOs’ Perspectives (Pt. I)....................19 Putting It In Perspective ......................22 Core Competencies ............................24 SSAOs’ Perspectives (Pt. II) ..................26
Fall 2006 / Perspectives
3
Perspectives is the official publication of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, Inc. (AFA). Views expressed are those of the individual authors/contributors/ advertisers, and are not necessarily those of the Association. AFA encourages the submission of articles, essays, ideas, and advertisements. All Perspectives correspondence and submissions should be submitted to:
Allison Swick-Duttine 2006 Editor Director of Fraternity/Sorority Life & Leadership Development State University of New York College at Plattsburgh Angell College Center 204 101 Broad Street Plattsburgh, NY 12901-2681 allison.swick@plattsburgh.edu 518.564.4825 Fax: 518.564.4839
Perspectives is published four times per year.
T
en years ago, I presented a program at the AFA Annual Meeting entitled Technology & Greeks. The program was a bit cutting edge because it talked about how to make use of technology such as email, listservs, and websites; things we now take for granted. At the conclusion of the program, participants made predictions about the future of technology and how it would likely affect us. Their responses included the following: • Technology will play a larger role in how we go about our business (whether on the campus, within inter/national organizations, or as volunteers). • Technology will allow us to communicate to a wider audience within the fraternity/ sorority community (i.e. not just the chapter president).
Submission deadlines: Winter 2007 November 15, 2006 Spring 2007 February 15, 2007 Summer 2007 May 15, 2007 Fall 2007 August 15, 2007 Winter 2008 November 15, 2007
• Information (chapter statistics, forms, contact information, rules, policies, etc.) will be available on websites when students want it, not just when offices are open.
Send address corrections to AFA:
• Computer labs will be needed in all fraternity and sorority facilities.
Association of Fraternity Advisors 9640 N. Augusta Drive, Suite 433 Carmel, IN 46032 317.876.1632 Fax 317.876.3981 info@fraternityadvisors.org
2006 Editorial
Board Monica Miranda Smalls AFA Vice President for Resource Development University of Rochester Jim Barber, University of Michigan Dan Bureau, Indiana University Kurt Foriska, Ohio State University Tim Haskell, Santa Clara University Michael Hevel, Willamette University Megan Johnson, Dartmouth University Kirsten Siron Young, Jacksonville University Melinda Sutton, University of Texas, Tyler
4
Technology & Greeks: Ten Years Later
Perspectives / Fall 2006
• Including advisors in all communication efforts will be easier (especially with listservs and email).
• Communication will shift from paper to electronic. • Technology will be in place of what we do, not in addition to. • Technology will enable time once dedicated to routine tasks to be re-directed toward higher level student interaction (“high touch”). So, did any of these predictions come to fruition? There is no question that technology has advanced greatly since the early 1990s. In addition to email, listservs, message boards, and websites, we have cell phones (many residence halls and fraternity and sorority houses no longer have land-line phones in the rooms), text messaging, iPods, webinars, conference calls (too many, sometimes), etc. It is easy to wonder what will be next.
– Dr. Ron Binder, AFA President It is hard to imagine any office (on a campus or for an inter/national organization) without the following: • An advanced website with the ability to interact with the target audience (not just post information); • Multiple listservs (undergraduate officers, chapter/alumni/graduate advisors, faculty advisors, regional volunteers, parents, etc.); • Cell phones (versus land-lines) to connect to an individual, not a location; • PowerPoint presentations (undergraduates, advisors, parents, prospective members, etc.). In some respects, we are caught up in a world where more technology is needed to keep pace with entering students who, by definition, are always one step ahead of us. The bar is continually raised right along with the technology budget. The current AFA strategic plan calls for the Association to make better and more use of technology as we serve our members. The new AFA website, Online Community, and Virtual Seminar Series are examples of how we are ramping up in this area. This is the litmus test that must be applied to all new forms of technology. “Technology for technology’s sake” is not a desired outcome; its use must be directed toward organizational advancement and the improvement of the student experience. It can be easy to get caught up in the allure of the newest gadget. As we implement the latest technology to keep pace, to offer better services, to deliver things faster and more cheaply, we need to ask the harder questions about the effectiveness of technology. What is the real value of that newest gadget? What are the tradeoffs (high tech vs. high touch) associated with such rapid advances? In 10 years, will today’s projections about the future of technology ring as true? I do not know the answer to that question, but I look forward to what will undoubtedly be a fast-paced ride toward the answers.
afa The First 30 Years This is the final installment in a four-part series about the evolution of the Association of Fraternity Advisors. – Dan Bureau
A
“After the Board completed the Mission and Vision Statements, we created Goal Areas. The Goal Areas were identified as crucial to fulfilling the Association’s mission and realizing the vision for the future. One Goal Area identified was that of ‘Convener, Facilitator and Partner’, which we defined as AFA’s proactive steps to convene, facilitate, and participate in meaningful dialogue and partnerships with stakeholders to advance the interests of the fraternal movement, the profession, and the Association. As we identified tasks or accomplishments under each Goal Area, we settled on ‘Develop/Plan a Forum that Unifies the Movement’ as a key task for meeting our goal of becoming
a Convener, Facilitator and Partner.” – Amy Vojta 2003 and 2005 President
In December 2005, they gathered to discuss the possibilities. Representatives from different aspects of the fraternal movement and higher education had come to realize their dependency on each other. Together, they could advance a movement; apart, they would continue to fragment a vast and diverse collection of fraternal organizations. Poised to create a united effort, leaders from AFA, NALFO (National Association of Latino Fraternal Organizations), NASPA (National Association of Student Personnel Administrators), NIC (NorthAmerican Interfraternity Conference), the NIF (National Interfraternal Foundation), NPC (National Panhellenic Conference), and NPHC (National Pan-Hellenic Council) imagined what it would take to realize the new AFA mission: “a unified fraternal movement and an increased recognition of the value of the fraternity and sorority experience.” Several decisions since 1990 laid the foundation for AFA to convene this meeting. This article will examine the Strategic Planning and Decision Making Phase of the Association as well as the Evaluative Phase and make recommendations for the future. The Strategic Planning and Decision-Making Years: An Overview of 1990-2001 “For the first 17 years of AFA, the Association operated out of the campus office (or spare bedroom, garage or perhaps even the car) of the president. While the general membership witnessed the gavel being handed over during the
annual business meeting, there would be a number of boxes that were being shipped to the already crowded office of the incoming president. Having a Central Office and Executive Director meant the president and executive board were able to focus on the long-range direction of AFA instead of spending endless hours on paperwork, phone calls and correspondence… having a Central Office and Executive Director even increased the credibility of AFA among the many partners in the fraternal and higher education movement.” – Rick Funk, 1993 AFA President As the 1980s ended, fraternity and sorority membership had begun to plateau (Anson & Marchesani, 1991). Issues of risk management, promoting diversity, and the movement from pledging to more comprehensive membership development programs emerged as challenges for the fraternal movement (Cufaude, November/ December 1990; Hayes, 1995; Padulo, 1994). Many campuses employed persons with either some or full-time responsibilities related to advising fraternities and sororities (Appolonia, 1997). AFA continued to engage with umbrella groups and higher education associations to aid campus professionals in addressing challenges in the fraternal movement and higher education. Many signs of AFA’s progress continued to show in the early 1990s. The Association continued to host a well-attended annual meeting. In November, 1990, the Association boasted 855 members. Involvement continued on page 6 Fall 2006 / Perspectives
5
afa
continued from page 5
The First 30 Years opportunities abounded with new committees and task forces developed to address emerging issues within fraternities and sororities. Services and programs continued to improve including a job hotline, the revamping of the Fraternity Newsletter, and a comprehensive marketing plan. All of this occurred while maintaining a healthy budget (AFA, 1990; Association of Fraternity Advisors Executive Board, 1991; AFA, 1992; Cufaude, February 1990). AFA had survived its first 15 years with some significant progress in spite of its challenges. As the 1990s progressed, the Association’s leadership was forced to think strategically about the future. While efforts in 1985 to develop a strategic plan were initiated, little documentation exists to verify its facilitation and successful completion. It was not until the 1990s that the practice of strategic thinking and planning became a focal point for the association. A plan was initiated in 1991. Completed in 1995, it laid the groundwork for the next stage of long-term planning which would begin that year (Association of Fraternity Advisors Executive Board, 1991; 1995 (2)). Through this process, many initiatives were undertaken. Many notable accomplishments are referenced in the plan but most prominent is hiring AFA’s first executive director. In her 1989 state of the association address, Bridget Guernsey stated, “With over 700 current members the need for an association central office is evident. The funding for the preparation and operations of this office is a main concern” (Guernsey, 1989). This was echoed in the thoughts of Paul DeWine (1990 President), Doug Case (1991 President), and Richard Walker (1992 President) (AFA, 1990; AFA, 1992). While all of these individuals laid the foundation for the procurement of a staff person, Rick Funk, 1993 President, hired the association’s first executive director, Gayle Beyers Webb. Webb, who had served the Association as newsletter editor and president, began her position on July 1, 1993 (Funk, 1993, July 8). Housed in Indianapolis, the office was created to serve as a clearinghouse for AFA resources and coordinate the efforts of the volunteers of the Association. A job description outlines multiple tasks of this person, but Webb was given the opportunity to shape the position (AFA, 1993). As the NIC gave birth to AFA, it seemed fitting to provide space in their office.
6
Perspectives / Fall 2006
Webb remained in the position until early 1999 when her departure allowed for Sue Kraft to be hired as the second executive director. In 1999, the Association was able to move into a larger office area in the same building. In addition, the hiring of a second full time staff person, Erin Durnell, allowed for continued success in the Central Office’s management of day to day functions of the Association (Jones Hall, 1999). By 1990, the Fraternity Newsletter had begun its own transformation. Jeff Cufaude became editor and the newsletter became more of a magazine. New fonts and the addition of color marked the transformation (Cufaude, February 1990; Cufaude, November/December 1990). More attention was paid to articles involving theory and
“
and maintaining membership, assessing Association leadership effectiveness, a long listing of member services such as the listserv and the job hotline, the annual meeting, and identifying key issues related to working on campuses with fraternities and sororities. Close to 400 of the 915 members replied offering significant information for the Association’s leadership (AFA, 1996). The data allowed for credibility to be given to many of the assumptions the Association had of those working with fraternities and sororities. For example, the membership had an average tenure of 3.69 years and joined AFA for professional development, to network, to keep current on fraternal trends, to attend the annual meeting, and to receive support from colleagues (AFA, 1996). While none of this was probably shocking to the leadership or overall mem-
a unified fraternal movement and an increased recognition of the value of the fraternity and sorority experience.
”
its application as well as research. While it still served as a vehicle of communication for the Association, it finally had the “scholarly” and “professional” image that many long time members called for (Cufaude, February 1990; Cufaude, November/ December 1990). The changes continued into 1991 with the newsletter adopting a new name, Perspectives. The magazine’s role in the Association’s history cannot be overstated. Members frequently have cited it as one of the most visible and useful resources (AFA, 1996; AFA, 2002). Throughout the 1990s, the movement from a newsletter to a magazine focused on articles examining theory to practice and research was assisted by the increasing role of technology. The development of the World Wide Web, email, and other communication vehicles such as discussion groups and listservs allowed for the day to day business and discussion forums to be taken out of Perspectives. Examining issues of between the years of 1995 to 1997 provides testimony for the impact technology was having on the Association during this time. In 1996, AFA conducted the most thorough membership survey in its first 20 years. Areas of assessment included: surveying tenure in the profession among numerous other demographics, reasons for joining
bership of the Association, the undertaking was significant. The ability to plan for the future of the Association required that its members be inventoried. Finally, the creation of the AFA Foundation Inc. in 1993 allowed the Association to think strategically about the financial future of the association. This had been a long time goal of the executive board. Appolonia (1993) writes, “…the concept of a public benefit corporation…was formally advanced…in December of 1989 by Association President Bridget Guernsey and myself [sic] as Past President. Our interest was…to maximize the Association’s potential to attract gifts…After successfully assessing [membership] interest…our recommendation to proceed toward incorporation was approved by the Executive Board in June of 1990…” (pp. 1-5). Officers were elected for the Foundation and operations continued to evolve as the end of the 20th century approached. A Board of Trustees was appointed in 1997 (AFA, November/December 1997). A significant undertaking in the foundation’s early development was marked with the 1996 “$20 for 20 Years Campaign” (Author Unknown, 1997). The foundation evolved into an important entity funding not only the profession of fraternity and sorority advising, but the advancement of the fraternal movement.
The creation of strategic plans that book ended the 1990s and the first two years of the new millennium permitted AFA to not only succeed in the present but plan for the future. Other significant undertakings during the 1990s include resolutions addressing heterosexism and homophobia, anti-racism and anti-sexism and alcohol free housing (AFA, 2006, August 22). In addition, the partnership with other higher education associations such as NASPA and the Association for Student Judicial Affairs (ASJA) was nurtured through the opportunity to come together in 1995 for an AFA sponsored think tank on new member education programs and fraternity culture (AFA Executive Board, 1994; Hayes, 1995). The hosting of new professional and senior manager tracks at annual meetings permitted for tenured membership to serve as mentors and also as students (AFA, 1995). The development of a listserv and webpage permitted AFA to be accessed by not only its membership but also by potential members (Smithhisler, 1996). All of these accomplishments and much more mark the 1990s of AFA as a period of progress, strategic planning, and increased credibility. The Evaluative Years – An Overview of 2001-2005 “Volunteer and paid staff members, agreed that it was the right time to provide the Association with a direction that was open, creative, and collaborative in nature. The Strategic Plan that came out of those efforts provided specific, measured goals and objectives that were attainable and would provide the backbone as the Association moved into a new millennium. By the end of 2001, The Association had fully embraced the strategic plan. The work that was accomplished through the efforts of our incredible Central Office staff and the volunteer corp. solidified that we had made a good choice to spend the year 2000 developing the plan. I believe our thoughtful approach to the plan, including all stakeholders in its development and subsequently in its implementation, is what has catapulted the Association of Fraternity Advisors forward and provided the foundation for its advancement.” – Charlie Warner, 2000 President “Association Management literature talks about Boards having to address their ‘mega issue’: that once answered can provide clarity of vision and can propel the association to take action. Our mega issue was defining who or what AFA was.
Were we a higher educational association or interfraternal organization? The more we discussed this, the more we realized it wasn’t an ‘either or' proposition, but rather a ‘both and’ solution. Rather than feel like we were forced to act in only one dimension, the Board realized that the nature of our profession is extremely complex...we work with those in higher education but the nature of our work necessitates a commitment and partnership to that which is interfraternal.” – Amy Vojta, 2003 and 2005 President Honoring the past while evaluating necessary changes for the future became the theme throughout the most recent five years of the Association. Significant changes to the structure of the executive board, advancing partnerships with other professional associations and fraternal umbrella groups, and realizing potential through assessment and research were early priorities in the new millennium (Bureau, 2005 Summer; Bureau, 2005 Winter; Bureau, 2004; Bureau & Fussell, 2004; Vojta, 2004; Wardhammar, 2002). In addition, conversations regarding the benefits derived from different categories of membership proved to be an important cornerstone as the Association reshaped its purpose. Structurally, AFA had been a sound organization, but the size and the scope of the Executive Board had been called into question (Sullivan, 2002). Changing the structure presented new opportunities but also brought new challenges: how would removing the Conference Chair impact the content of the Annual Meeting? How would making the Regional Vice-Presidents a non-board position change the scope of the position and represent the voice of the membership of AFA? Should existing one-year terms be changed to two years to allow for more consistency? All of these questions had to be answered. Through a planning process, positions were changed in 2002 to move from a 12-person board to a seven-person board. AFA’s changes resulted in streamlining operations and coupled with some by-law changes allowed the Association to best serve the fraternal movement (Vojta, 2004). In the early stages of the new millennium, “partnerships” was the theme of several AFA Annual Meetings. While much had been said about the potential to work together, few in the fraternal world have been able to get past politics and agendas and truly collaborate (Bureau & Fussell, 2004). In 2003, the concept of working together became essential as the emergence of standards documents became a focal point for AFA members. A group of college
and university presidents called “The Franklin Square Group” (named after the location in Washington, D.C. at which they met) had their own thoughts on the future of fraternities and sororities on college and university campuses. The Call for Values Congruence served as a call to action as university and college presidents declared “the cure for maladies facing collegiate Greek chapters is a collaborative and proactive approach amongst stakeholders…” (Franklin Square Group, 2003). In 2004, leaders from umbrella organizations, AFA, NASPA, and college and university presidents convened in Washington, D.C. to discuss partnering for the implementation of the Call for Values Congruence (Bureau & Fussell, 2004). While how the mandates of the document would be realized within the larger fraternal movement was still being debated, relationships with umbrella organizations improved, AFA and the NASPA Fraternity and Sorority Knowledge Community recognized their functions were similar and partnering was essential to progress, and all persons agreed that it was time to make progress on the issues impacting fraternal organizations on college and university campuses. Another area of focus for AFA during this phase is an attention to research and assessment. As higher education focuses more on examining engagement outcomes, assessment has become a focal point for student affairs practitioners (Bureau, 2005 Summer). In 2001, discussions between AFA and Educational Benchmarking (EBI) began, the goal was to develop an instrument to assess the experiences in fraternity and sorority communities. Over the course of the next 18 months, a survey was developed with an initial pilot effort in spring of 2003. The AFA/EBI Fraternity and Sorority Assessment has since been conducted on 65 campuses. The effort continues to provide insight into how the fraternity and sorority experience shapes the college and university experience for young adults (Butler, 2004; Vestal and Butler, 2005). The assessment work led to increased efforts to expand research on undergraduate fraternal organizations (Bureau, 2004 Winter; Bureau, 2005 Winter). The power behind assessment and research was another frontier AFA was aggressively tackling in order to affirm itself in the larger mission of higher education. Examining the last five years, the factor that has had the largest impact on the Association’s mission and vision was the decision to examine membership privileges continued on page 8 Fall 2006 / Perspectives
7
afa
continued from page 7
The First 30 Years and determine the scope of what the Association had come to be. AFA had evolved into more than an association existing to simply serve campus-based professionals (Association of Fraternity Advisors, Summer 2004). Membership in the early millennium was increasingly more diverse than merely a campus practitioner. According to an April 1, 2003 membership update, more than 20 percent (n=268) of AFA’s membership (n=1156) were employed somewhere other than an institution of higher education (AFA, 2003 April). More often than not, this was at a fraternity or sorority headquarters. Evaluating the association’s role in higher education and the sometimes antagonistic, but more often complementary relationships it had with interfraternal partners became a pivotal process as the conclusion of the existing strategic plan approached in 2004. During 2003, discussions on the Association’s responsibility to serve both the higher education and interfraternal community at the same time caused strong sentiment by some members. As the Executive Board discussed the future, it determined the role of headquarters staff had evolved to complement higher education. This spurred the determination that AFA should exist as both an association committed to higher education but also one that prioritizes its commitment to the fraternal movement and anyone invested in this experience (Vojta, 2004). In addition, during this time members, association leaders and staff persons, and interfraternal and higher education partners began to view AFA as the convener of the larger fraternal movement (Association of Fraternity Advisors, 2004). Much of this is well-connected to the role AFA took in efforts to address the evolving standards movement. The movement of AFA from important partner in the fraternal movement to an essential constituent and convener of these groups began to reshape the mission and vision of the organization. Other innovations of the Association included the development of Core Competencies, a Code of Ethics, a focus on improving volunteer training and management, addressing hazing, resource development to aid in addressing topics such as incivility and alumni involvement, compilations of ideas to aid practitioners in their day to day work, and addressing the challenges and opportunities with AFA hosting its
8
Perspectives / Fall 2006
first Annual Meeting without the NIC (AFA, 2005; AFA, 2004; Bureau, 2004; Vojta, 2004; Wardhammar, 2002). These challenges were met head on and membership numbers increased and retention improved (AFA, 2005; AFA 2004). By the end of 2005, the Association was poised to take on a new and different role as the entity that brought together all invested in the advancement of fraternities and sororities on college and university campuses (AFA, 2006 (2)). Recommendations for the Future AFA has come a long way in 30 years. It is appropriate to recognize the work of those who have led the Association to this point. It is equally appropriate to challenge future leaders and all AFA members to recognize their responsibility to sustain a dynamic and essential association for the advancement of fraternities and sororities. Attention to the following items may permit AFA to make progress on fulfilling its mission and vision: • First, AFA must be committed to managing the process and nurturing relationships. For years, AFA failed to recognize what many were aware of: it was the convener for the fraternal movement. It may have been that the role was not comfortable for the young association or that leadership felt uneasy asserting themselves in such a manner, but what has been apparent through work on anti-hazing initiatives, standards documents development, and efforts to address discipline and risk issues is AFA has emerged as the entity to lead these efforts to transform the fraternal movement in higher education. No other group has the ability to do this in the manner to which AFA is poised. • Second, AFA must assert itself. Coming into the fraternal movement as spawn of the NIC, AFA has adopted a complex regarding its ability to exist without the NIC. It is appropriate to respect the NIC and acknowledge the need AFA has to work hand in hand with this group. They are essential players in the fraternal movement; however, if AFA is to convene the movement and engage a wide range of constituents in fulfilling its mission and making progress to improve fraternities and sororities in higher education, then AFA must be willing to work hard to collect information and make decisions. It must not be afraid to offend, as long as the work conducted reflects the priorities of its strategic plan and is in the best interest of the collective fraternal movement and higher education.
• In addition, AFA must continue to maintain involvement in discussions in both the world of higher education and the fraternal community. Efforts to tackle alcohol misuse and abuse, advance assessment and research, and address issues of diversity represent broadly some of the current aspirations of student affairs and higher education. While not separate from or operating in opposition to, the issues of the fraternal community are somewhat different. Issues addressing freedom of association, deferred recruitment, and the relevance of the overall fraternal experience are high priority items for fraternities and sororities across North America. The delicate balance of serving both higher education and the fraternal movement is tenuous at times. Efforts to support both worlds could result in AFA not serving either well. • Finally, AFA has outstanding volunteers but the Association’s capacity is weakened by limited and overworked staff often asked to take on more than humanly possible. Volunteers need to commit to their roles and staff must train them, but regardless of how much work and effort volunteers provide, increasing professional staff and improving their work environment must be a priority. Fortunately, the current leadership of the Association identifies this as important and progress is being made but volunteers among the ranks need increased levels of information in order to maintain interest and active engagement in association happenings. Conclusion December 2005 was a month that may mark the turning point for the fraternal movement. At the least, it reflected a confident and intentional AFA recognizing its role as convener. The possibilities appear endless as collaboration sparks change. As key players sat and discussed the opportunities for the future, priorities emerged. Essential to the fulfillment of the mission and vision of AFA is the engagement of many to advance the fraternal movement. While a meeting of key players may not seem revolutionary, placing people in a room and asking each of them to put aside personal agendas and focus on the larger goal of improving the experience of persons invested in the fraternal movement was an accomplishment that should be celebrated by all who contributed. The conversations cannot stop there. – Dan Bureau is a Ph.D student in the Higher Education Student Affairs Program at Indiana University. He also works for CAMPUSPEAK.
REFERENCES Anson, J.L. & Marchesani, R.F. (Eds.). (1991). Baird’s manual of American College fraternities. Indianapolis, IN: Baird’s Manual Foundation Inc. Appolonia, T. (1997) The role of the fraternity/sorority administrator. In Advising fraternities and sororities. Chapter Two, pp. 1-8. Association of Fraternity Advisors. Indianapolis, IN. Appolonia, T. (February/March 1993). AFA Foundation becomes a reality. In Penrod, M. (Editor) Perspectives. pp. 1, 5. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA). (2006, August 22). Resolutions. Retrieved August 22, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/Resolutions.aspx Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (2006 (2)). Strategic Framework. Retrieved August 21, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/Business/Strategic.aspx. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Association of Fraternity Advisors (2005, Fall). Year in review. Retrieved August 21, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/default.aspx?actio n=Content&ContentId=23. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (2004). Year in review. Perspectives. pp. 12-15. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA). (2003, April 1). Membership Update. Retrieved from electronic files of Dan Bureau on August 22, 2006. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (2002, Spring). 2001 Fraternity/Sorority advising profession survey highlights. Perspectives. pp. XX-XX. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (1997, November/ December). Achievements and acknowledgements for 1997. Perspectives 25 (5). pp. 20-23. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Authors Unknown (1997). AFA Timeline. A listing of significant events from 1973-1997. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA.Officer Files. MS-364. Box 1. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (1996). Association of Fraternity Advisors 1996 Membership Survey. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Proceedings. MS-364. Box 4. PostConference Board Meeting minutes/reports. 19851991, 1993-1999. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (1995). Annual Report. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS-364. Box 7. Michael Hayes. President. 1994-1996
Association of Fraternity Advisors Executive Board (1995 (2)). AFA Strategic Plan – Implementation Years 1995-2000. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Committees. MS-364. Box 7 Long Range/Strategic Planning. 1985-1987 and 1995-1996. Association of Fraternity Advisors Executive Board (1994). Association of fraternity advisors executive board meeting minutes December 4, 1994. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officers. MS364. Box 7. Michael Hayes. President. 1994-1996. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (1993). Executive Director Job Description. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS-364. Box 3. Rick Funk. President. 1992-1993. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (1992). Annual Report. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS-364. Box 3. Richard Walker. President. 1991-1992. Association of Fraternity Advisors Executive Board (AFA) (1991). Strategic plan adopted at the 1991 conference. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Committees. MS-364. Box 7 Long Range/Strategic Planning. 1985-1987 and 1995-1996. Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) (1990). Annual Report. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS-364. Box 2 Paul Dewine. President. 1990-1991. Butler, D. (2004, Fall). Improving members’ perception of the fraternity/sorority organization. Perspectives. pp. 6-7. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Bureau, D. (2005, Summer). Assessment/program review and strategic planning for fraternity/sorority life. Perspectives; pp. 6-9. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Bureau, D. (2005, Winter). Presidential Remarks. Perspectives. pp. 2, 4. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Bureau, D. & Fussell, S.K. (2004, Summer). From the top. In Barnhardt, C. (Editor). Perspectives. pp. 2,4. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Bureau, D. (2004, Winter). Installation speech – AFA President 2004. In Barnhardt, C. (Editor). Perspectives. pp. 10-13. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Cufaude, J. (Editor). (November/December, 1990). Fraternity Newsletter. Vol. 18. No. 4. Iowa State University; Ames, IA.
Cufaude, J. (Editor). (February 1990). Fraternity Newsletter. Vol. 17. No. 3. Iowa State University; Ames, IA. Franklin Square Group. (2003). A Call for Values Congruence. Retrieved August 22, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/uploads/Public Documents/CallforValuesCongruence.pdf Guernsey, B. (1989). State of the association. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS364. Box 1 Bridget Guernsey. President.1989-1990. Hayes, M. (1995, September/October). President’s perspective: Commission on pledging. In Breitholtz, B. (Editor) Perspectives 22 (6). p. 3. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Funk, R. (1993, July 8). Memorandum to Regional Representatives. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS-364. Box 3 Rick Funk. President. 1992-1993. Jones-Hall, J. (1999). State of the association. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Officer Files. MS364. Box 7 Jennifer Jones Hall. President.1998-1999. Padulo, K. (1994, Conference Issue). President’s perspective. Perspectives. 21(8). Association of Fraternity Advisors. Indianapolis, IN. Smithheilser, P. (Editor). (November/December 1996). Perspectives. Vol. 23. No. 5. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Sullivan, T. (2002, Winter). 25 years of reflections by AFA past presidents. Perspectives. pp. 4-6, 8. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Vojta, A. (2005, Fall). AFA strategic framework; 2005-2010. Perspectives. Retrieved August 21, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/uploads/Public Documents/2005-2010_Strategic_Framework.pdf. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Vestal, S. & Butler, D. (2005, Winter). Understanding the differences between fraternities and sororities. Perspectives. (pp. 10-12). Indianapolis, IN: Association of Fraternity Advisors. Vojta, A. (2004, Winter). From the top. In Barnhardt, C. (Editor). Perspectives. pp. 2-3. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Carmel, IN. Wardhammar, L. (2002, Fall). From the top. In Abbott, T. (Editor) Perspectives. p. 2, 23. Association of Fraternity Advisors; Indianapolis, IN. Webb, G. (1995, February 9). Memorandum regarding NIC board meeting agenda item this weekend. Copied with permission from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. MS-364. Officer Files. Box 7 Michael Hayes (President_1994-1996.
Working with fraternal organizations — just like yours — all over the Eastern Seaboard!
200 East Buffalo Street Ithaca, NY 14850
( 607) 272- 5550
i i i i i
Annual Budgeting Monthly Financial Statements Membership Billings Vendor Payments Payroll Services
Bookkeeping Services Quarterly Payroll Filings Annual State and Federal Tax Returns i And much more! i i i
Call us for additional information. Fall 2006 / Perspectives
9
10
Perspectives / Fall 2006
response to the devastation from Hurricane Katrina, we are also providing attendees a Service Plunge experience working on a much-needed Habitat for Humanity project in the City of New Orleans. During this pre-conference opportunity participants will spend the day helping a family by building a Habitat for Humanity house.
[5]
Educational Programming and Partnering: The Call for Content process has yielded a strong slate of educational opportunities directly requested by the AFA membership. These programs will address issues important to our development as professionals. Additionally, we have partnered with the Fraternity Executives Association (FEA) to deliver programs specifically for inter/ national fraternity and sorority staff members.
A
s the Association of Fraternity Advisors celebrates its 30th anniversary, we invite you to join us for an amazing Annual Meeting experience. We will not only honor the “strong foundation” of the Association, but also that of the city of New Orleans. As we embark on the Association’s next 30 years, we will explore the “new possibilities” for AFA, our members, and our profession. The 2006 Conference Committee is excited about the educational opportunities, learning formats, and professional development experiences that the Annual Meeting will provide. We have incorporated the feedback and ideas shared through the Call for Content process, and have created a curriculum for the day-to-day challenges of fraternity/sorority advising. The following are the top 10 reasons this AFA Annual Meeting promises to be a great professional development experience:
[6]
Developmental Resource Center Idea Exchange: Back by popular demand, this interactive idea sharing session will allow colleagues to give and receive information to help in our daily work. This will be offered concurrently with the Speaker Showcase and Fireside Chats to offer members a variety of learning opportunities.
[7]
Fireside Chats and Meet & Greet: Twenty-minute Fireside Chat sessions between campus and inter/national headquarters professionals will be available, and a 45-minute Meet and Greet networking opportunity will precede the individually scheduled Fireside Chats meetings for those who would like to network without scheduling a formalized “chat.”
[8]
Graduate Track Training: Funded by a grant to the AFA Foundation by Rho Lambda National Sorority Leadership Recognition Society this intensive and interactive two-day track for graduate students will complement the educational experience of those seeking careers in fraternity and sorority advising.
[1]
[9]
[2]
[10]
Two Dynamic General Sessions: The two general sessions will feature Dr. Cathy Small, a university professor who stepped into the shoes of today’s college student for a year, and Dr. Marvalene Hughes, president of Dillard University in New Orleans, who will speak about responding to tragedy at her institution in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
Pre-Conference Opportunities: Five pre-conference opportunities will be offered, including a service plunge with Habitat for Humanity into the streets of New Orleans. Three programs are offered through partnerships with the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), LeaderShape, Inc., and CAMPUSPEAK. Another pre-conference program will address the critical topic of changing campus culture.
[3]
The Return of Networking Sessions: Known as Homeroom Experiences in 2005, these sessions will allow for structured idea sharing and information processing. The sessions will be led by some of our Association’s seasoned professionals.
[4]
A Special Philanthropy Project: In honor of AFA’s 30th Anniversary, we will be partnering with the AFA Foundation on a special “$30 for 30” project. Half of the funds raised through this initiative will go to support the New Orleans chapter of Habitat for Humanity. As always, the Foundation will use the gifts it receives to support educational programs and opportunities within the profession. In
Peer Network Program: The Peer Network Program is a program offered by the First Timers Committee designed to support the experience of first-time Annual Meeting attendees. The Peer Network Program will be held in conjunction with the First Timers Kick Off, our annual welcome program for all new attendees. Speaker Showcase: We are pleased to offer again the AFA Speaker Showcase, which will allow members the opportunity to hear sample programs from several of our Associate Members who speak and present on college campuses. As always, there will be opportunities for relationship building and networking – something we do well at the AFA Annual Meeting! An undisputed benefit of attending the conference is the opportunity to connect with colleagues and rejuvenate professionally. We hope that you join us in New Orleans! We will be located in the historic French Quarter, a prominent location with superb accommodations, amenities and proximity to some of New Orleans’s favorite traditions and attractions. Additional information about the Annual Meeting and registration can be found at http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/AnnualMeeting.aspx. Please join us as we celebrate 30 years of our strong foundation, and take part as we explore the new possibilities that lie ahead for us in the future.
W E W I L L N O T O N LY H O N O R T H E “ S T R O N G F O U N D A T I O N ” O F T H E A S S O C I AT I O N , B U T A L S O T H AT O F T H E C I T Y O F N E W O R L E A N S . Fall 2006 / Perspectives
11
virtual interfraternalism – Emily Perlow
I
s technology a bane or a boon? As a fraternity/sorority professional, sometimes it is hard to decide. Today when students are posting incriminating photographs on Webshots.com – the equivalent of today’s college student bulletin board – rivalries are fueled using technology, members advertise parties on Facebook, and students instant message each other down the hall, it can be difficult to see the many opportunities available for fraternity/sorority professionals to use technology to our benefit. What happened to the days when fraternity and sorority members eagerly waited for the chapter meeting to catch up on the latest gossip, learn about upcoming events, and to interact socially with other members? Have the days of yore been replaced as the superfluity of communication technologies create a 30-second sound-byte student culture completely reliant on these technologies? Face it. The days of the face-to-face communication are fading. It is estimated that nearly 40 percent of Internet users are between the ages of 18 and 26 (Strange & Banning, 2001, p. 181). Now fraternity and sorority members check their e-mail multiple times a day and most likely have 350 “friends” on Facebook, in many instances only a fraction of whom have they ever met in person. The Pew Internet & American Life Project (2005, ¶ 3) asserts, “Today’s American teens live in a world enveloped by communications technologies; the internet and cell phones have become a central force that fuels the rhythm of daily life.” As our world becomes more dependent on communication technologies such as Internet, e-mail, and instant messaging, fraternity and sorority professionals must ask the question: With the rise in technology usage as a communication forum, are members of fraternity/sorority chapters more or less connected to each other?
Developing Virtual Community Computer-mediated communication (CMC) is the use of computer aided technology to communicate between humans. Strange and Banning, authors of Educating by Design, maintain that CMC is “rapidly ingraining itself into the college campus among faculty and students alike” (2001,
12
Perspectives / Fall 2006
p. 181). This is clearly evidenced by the fact that e-mail communication continues to rise as a preferred mode of communication. Jon Bartelson, Assistant Director of Computing Services at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), estimates that at WPI – a campus with 3,400 students, faculty, and staff members – more than 110,000 e-mails are transmitted daily (personal communication, July 24, 2006). With a comparable volume of e-mails transmitted each day on college campuses across the continent, campus community members are certainly communicating with each other. Yet is this use of computer-mediated communication as a forum within our fraternity/sorority chapters providing the opportunity for meaningful connection? When chapter members e-mail each other about a conflict or roommates in the chapter facility instant message each other rather than turning to talk face to face, are we losing the sense of brotherhood and sisterhood that has sustained fraternity and sorority chapters for centuries? One fraternity man is quick to recount the decline in brotherhood his chapter encountered when the organization installed Internet in all rooms in the chapter house: “Members never came out of their rooms.” According to Jerry Michalski, current president of Sociate, a technology consulting firm. “Technology is either destroying our way of life by obliterating all meaningful connections between people, or opening new possibilities for connection, new ways of building communities that can enhance and enrich our non-technological lives” (1995, p. 259).
The Challenges of Online Community Building There are many challenges associated with developing a sense of community – a sense of belonging and participation – within fraternity/sorority chapters, as well as, between chapters through virtual communication. One of the clear impediments is the lack of visual and audial cues; body language, tone of voice, inflections, and facial expressions. One can easily misperceive tone within an e-mail or chat board posting. Additionally, through online communication, individuals tend to be more direct in communication and can disregard the impact of inflammatory statements. This sense of distance from
the receiver of these inflammatory messages can negatively impact brotherhood or sisterhood within chapters if chapter members distance themselves from the core values of their organizations, losing sight of the courtesy one should provide members of the same organization in face-to-face communication. As Kristina Das, a junior majoring in Public Health Social Sciences at Johns Hopkins University and sorority member says, “Although it may be helpful to simply send out an e-mail to inform everyone of an upcoming event, generally it is always nicer to actually meet and discuss with someone face to face. I think the decline of face-toface interaction is seen not only in various chapters, but in our society as a whole” (personal communication, July 20, 2006). Recently, Lynn Smith-Lovin of Duke University, lead author of a study that documents social isolation in American society, found that in 1985, Americans reported that they had an average of three people whom they considered close friends. In 2005, research shows that Americans only have an average of two people whom they consider confidants. This sharp decline is surprising to Smith-Lovin, who indicated in an interview on National Public Radio, “We don’t usually see big social changes like this over a 10 to 20 year period.” She attributes this to “changes in the way that we live” and positively, indicates that “we didn’t find that using the Internet, or e-mail, or the Web a lot influenced whether you had more or fewer close ties.” Despite Smith-Lovin’s findings that reliance on e-mail communication did not impact personal ties, the findings suggest that exchanging e-mail with someone creates a different level of friendship than developing a friendship through face-to-face experiences. It is difficult to develop trust online without first having established trust with an individual through personal interaction and even more difficult to foster the deep friendship that develops through shared experiences and emotions. The person with whom you develop a virtual relationship is not likely to visit you in the hospital; we are not likely to develop the type of friendship with people met online that will land them in a bridal party or as godparent to a future born child. In this capacity, over-reliance on computer-mediated communication within chapters can have
a detrimental impact on the sense of close personal connection, thereby impacting brotherhood and sisterhood as well as connection to the organization post-graduation.
The Benefits of Online Fraternity/Sorority Community Building One might assert that the rise in online communications is an addition to traditional methods of communication rather than a detriment. The founders of interfraternal organizations did not have the ease of jotting a quick e-mail to all members with the certainty that they would see the message and reply in 24 hours. The rapidity at which messages are transmitted in modern society allows for increased timeliness in communication and improved sharing of information. Despite some of the challenges inherent in computer-mediated community building within interfraternal organizations, there are also clear benefits to using computer based technologies to build virtual interfraternal community. Das states “Technology is a very solid way of communication. When using technology as a mode of communication [in my chapter], it is usually in the form of mass e-mails… sent out to the whole organization. All people are able to respond. It’s basically like a long-term chat room… Personally, I love getting e-mails from sisters in my organization. The e-mails range from important e-mails to lighter ones wishing good luck on finals. We even have a few girls [sic] who are studying abroad that send out occasional e-mails about their experiences overseas. I think it’s a great way to keep connected with one another even when we are not geographically close” (personal communication, July 20, 2006). For many chapters, computer-mediated communication is an excellent method to stay connected with the activities of the chapter for those who may not be engaged directly in the day to day business of the chapter. Another benefit of virtual communication, Strange and Banning (2001) assert that computer-mediated communication can break down hierarchal barriers caused by race, gender, socio-economic status, or ability. Through the use of e-mail, message boards, or instant messaging tools, fewer cues are given regarding demographic information, which places all participants on an equal level. This benefit has valuable implications for fraternity and sorority professionals as they seek to build community between chapters, battling the complacency that inhibits sharing of information and resources among chapters.
The use of computer-mediated communication also has important implications for many inter/national organizations. The prevalence of posting on fraternity and sorority targeted chat Web sites illustrates that fraternity and sorority members are looking for opportunities to interact with other fraternity and sorority members outside their own chapters. Through the use of online posting forums and messaging capabilities, fraternity and sorority members can share ideas, challenge statements, and forge support networks. Many inter/national organizations have tapped into this desire to build community and have created opportunities for members across the world to network. For example, Alpha Omicron Pi recently launched inCircle™, a forum for alumnae to re-connect, make new connections, or network professionally. It allows for users to interface using chat functions, join groups, post photos, and advertise events. As fraternity/sorority professionals have seen repeatedly within chapters, peers have tremendous influence among peers. Braxton and Caboni (2005, p. 2) assert that, “Day-to-day interactions with the college environment give rise to normative preferences espoused by student peer groups. Such interactions take place in residence halls, fraternities and sororities, campus organizations, and classrooms.” Normative behaviors can compel a student to drink excessive amounts of alcohol during a new member activity or to commit hours to a large scale service or philanthropy project. The use of online communication technologies as a norming mechanism can be both positively and negatively powerful. Interfraternal organizations, acting in conflict with their organization’s values, whether through the groups created on Facebook or photos made available for public view, create a negative norming influence within communities.
In contrast, well moderated online chat boards can serve as a valuable forum where students challenge perceptions, engage in lively discussion, and encourage normative behaviors. The brash honesty facilitated by online communication can serve as a benefit in these situations. As Braxton and Caboni (2005) suggest, using student norms to establish acceptable behavior standards is essential to compliance with policies and expectations. Creating policy with established norms within the interfraternal community will only result in short term compliance. Developing peer buy-in can have important long term implications. Another valuable benefit in using virtual community building activities is that is allows participants to determine a level of participation parallel to level of comfort. James Banning (1997) uses the metaphor of a campus “porch” to describe virtual communities. A porch serves a variety of purposes – it protects from the elements and serves as the connection between the outdoors and the indoors. According to Strange and Banning (2001, p. 198), “one can view the social world from a porch, or perhaps leave the porch to join and participate with others.” While Strange and Banning use this metaphor to describe the computer as a “porch” for the college campus, the technologies used everyday by fraternity/sorority communities serve as this porch. Members can read postings on a chat forum and choose to respond. Students can read e-mails or engage in the dialogue. This also allows for potential new members, through access to chapter and university fraternity/sorority life Web sites to act as passive recipients to information available online. One important note, fraternity/sorority professionals have often heard it said of fraternity/sorority membership that “you reap what you invest in membership.” The same is true of participation in online communities. The more positively engaged students are in online communities, the greater benefit from these communities.
Table 1: Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) to Build Community in Interfraternal Circles Benefits
Challenges
• Rapid transfer of information
• Fewer close personal ties
• Allows for communication even when geographical proximity prevents face to face communication
• Inability to read visual and audial cues that come with in-person communication
• Participants determine level of participation
• CMC users are more direct in communication style
• Helps members see fraternity/sorority life as larger than their own chapters
• Difficult to develop trust and deep friendship using CMC solely
• Peer norming takes place as virtual community members are more comfortable challenging perceptions
• Negative behaviors can create a negative norming pressure for others to demonstrate negative behaviors continued on page 14 Fall 2006 / Perspectives
13
continued from page 13
Our society, however, is not losing the ability to communicate in person, but rather one must learn to navigate in two worlds – the world of online networks and the world of social gatherings. used to broadcast meetings, educational speakers, and workshops. • Internal portals – Using internal portals, such as a Blackboard or other portal systems, create groups to which students can subscribe, post online messages, manage databases, and interact with other students. For example, recently Worcester Polytechnic Institute underwent the NPC expansion process. Because many students go abroad each year, the expansion presentations were videotaped and made available online, a message board was created, and forms and evaluations were placed online.
Using Computer-Mediated Communities to Build Community Community within chapters can be damaged through over-reliance on communication technologies and community among chapters can be built using the same technologies. How can we as fraternity/sorority professionals strike a balance? Virtual communities are different than traditional communities in a variety of aspects. One can speculate that the founders of interfraternal organizations did not imagine a world where the majority of communication among chapter members takes place with a computer monitor and keyboard. However, different is not necessarily detrimental. The first instinct of a fraternity/sorority professional may be to reject any opportunity to use computer-mediated communities as a method of communication, but one must first recognize that today’s student grew up in a 30-second sound-byte world and expects immediate gratification. Virtual communication is the way our students know how to communicate. Students must first be met where developmentally they are before face-to-face communication can be fostered and supported. There are a number of ways fraternity/sorority professionals can use online communication beneficially: • Constituent-based communication – Create online newsletters to communicate with constituents – potential new members, alumni, current members, and parents. • Podcasts – Podcasts are a method of distributing multimedia files. These can be 14
Perspectives / Fall 2006
• RSS feed of fraternity/sorority events – RSS feeds are formats for transmitting news to portable formats such as cell phones and palm pilots. Work with your university or organization webmaster to establish an RSS feed of your events calendar. • Virtual office hours – Establish online office hours using instant messaging technology during which you are available for constituents to ask questions and receive responses. • Chat forums – Create a fraternity/sorority life chat forum for potential new members to ask questions of current members.
ability to communicate socially. Our society, however, is not losing the ability to communicate in person, but rather one must learn to navigate in two worlds – the world of online networks and the world of social gatherings. A truly prepared college graduate will be bilingual of sorts, able to exist in both the world of technological interface and the world of face to face human interaction. To accomplish this educational goal, professionals must dip into the rich histories of interfraternal organizations. Fraternities and sororities have always served as a forum for preparing young men and women to excel as leaders in modern society. Today’s leaders must be able to communicate on multiple levels using a variety of formats. Interfraternal organizations must rise to the challenge of preparing these exceptional leaders for the technological age. *Specific software or programs mentioned in this article do not imply endorsement by the author or AFA. – Emily Perlow is the Assistant Director of Student Activities & Greek Life Programs at Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
REFERENCES • Never underestimate the value of face-toface communication – There is always an appropriate time to reach out to students, inviting them to communicate with you or others in person.
Navigating a two-pronged world Computer-mediated communities can help accentuate an already existent sense of community within chapters, but it cannot replace it. It can also serve as a connecting point in creating community between organizations. In the same regard, relationships developed solely through computermediated communities are not likely to develop into the confidants one might enlist, according to Smith-Lovin. As more and more students become technologically savvy and adept at using computermediated communities to communicate, those who work on college campuses have expressed fear that students are losing the
Banning, J. H. (1997). Designing for community: Thinking “out of the box” with porches. The Journal of College and University Housing, 26(2), 3-7. Braxton, J., & Caboni, T. (2005). Using student norms to create positive learning environments. About Campus, 9(6), 2-7. Elliot, D. (2005, June 24). Social isolation: Americans have fewer close confidantes (Radio program segment). In EXECUTIVE PRODUCER(S) All things considered. Washington, DC: National Public Radio. Retrieved July 21, 2006, from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php? storyId=5509381 Michalski, J. (1995). The role of technology. In K. Gozdz (Ed.), Community building: Renewing spirit and learning in business (pp. 259-269). San Francisco: New Leaders Press. Pew Internet & American Life Project (2005, July 25). Teens forge forward with the internet and other new technologies. Retrieved July 5, 2006, from Strange, C.C., & Banning, J.H. (2001).
Gamma Sigma Alpha honors the top 1% of fraternity and sorority members nationally, and members receive the unique opportunity to network with other outstanding students, as well as faculty and administrators .
Gamma Sigma Alpha
Striving to uphold the highest ideals of scholastic achievement Gamma Sigma Alpha Sevices for Fraternity and Sorority Professionals: Recognizing Scholars Graduate Scholarships Faculty Advisor Resources Annotated Bibliography on Academic Achievement Research Initiative on Academic Achievement Academic Resources Regional GPA Awards
Gamma Sigma Alpha National Honor Society Committed to the academic achievement, leadership and excellence of fraternity and sorority members everywhere. For more information call 213-740-2080 or check out our web site at gammasigmaalpha.org. Membership Requirements: Students are eligible for membership based on grade point average and active membership in a fraternity or sorority recognized by their university or college. Only students with a cumulative grade point average of 3.5 or above at the start of their junior year or a grade point average of 3.5 or higher in any semester during their junior or senior years are eligible. Fall 2006 / Perspectives
15
Sex
Under the Influence
In college, Joel Goldman was a model student... fraternity president, involved in all the activities, knew all the administrators. But when it came time for parties, Joel learned to mix sex and alcohol. Like many students, most of Joel’s sexual encounters came under the influence. Alcohol gave him the extra courage he needed that night, and a justification the next morning. The pattern continued after graduation, and as a result Joel is living with HIV today. His program is part alcohol awareness, part sexual health lesson. In “Sex Under the Influence,” he encourages students to help their friends make smarter decisions surrounding sex and alcohol.
In the 25th Year of AIDS:
Joel has been educating young people for 15 years and has spoken to a million students. He has been recognized for his commitment to young people in his field with AFA’s Jack Anson Award, the NIC Silver Medal, and the Ryan's Angel Award from The Ryan White Foundation. Joel has served 15 years on Sigma Alpha Mu’s professional staff and Board of Directors including two terms as International President.
■ 50% of new HIV infections in the U.S. are diagnosed in people under the age of 24
In addition to his program,“Sex Under the Influence,” Joel is willing to lead discussions, round tables, and in-services about the evolution of HIV on campus when visiting your campus this year.
For booking information and availability, please call 303.745.5545 or e-mail info@campuspeak.com
16
Perspectives / Fall 2006
■ 40 million people are living with HIV/AIDS ■ 25 million people have died from AIDS
Twenty-five Years of AIDS
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE
– Joel Goldman
I G R A D U A T E D H I G H S C H O O L I N M A Y , 1 9 8 1 . There were no ATMs, Internet, e-mail, cell phones, and no Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS); however, between high school graduation and Indiana University’s freshmen orientation for the class of 1985, the world, and subsequently my life, was changed by a new virus called “HIV,” and the syndrome it caused called “AIDS.”
T
he first statistic I remember hearing about HIV/AIDS was that “only one out of every 10,000 college students would ever get this – it’s not a disease of the educated.” I believed it. Throughout the 1980s, scientists and politicians kept amending the information about HIV/AIDS in an effort to inform society about the ways HIV was transmitted. Even with the increased information, I still kept the thought that “This couldn’t happen to me, I’m educated” in the back of my mind. It was there every time I was sexually active. Spending the last 14 years talking to undergraduates about issues involving sexual health and alcohol, I have learned that they are no different than I was and in light of all the information we have received during the last 25 years on HIV and AIDS, their actions may be even worse than mine.
As the 1980s progressed, HIV and AIDS began to impact the fraternity/sorority world. I remember attending an AFA/NIC Annual Meeting towards the end of the decade and hearing whispers about a fraternity national president who had died from AIDS. A year later it hit close to home when an interfraternal colleague and friend told me he was moving home to die of AIDS near his loved ones. He was afraid that others would find out, and he did not want to shame his fraternity. I was saddened by his words. The Creed of my fraternity, Sigma Alpha Mu, states that brothers are there for “mutual moral aid and support” of one another. His fraternity’s creed must have similar sentiments. But a lack of education and understanding at that time transcended oaths and mottos. Soon after my friend’s death, 1987 AFA President Gary Bonas broke ground at conferences and on campuses with his educational session on HIV/AIDS. In 1988 the Association passed a resolution calling for increased education and awareness (AFA, 1988). In 1989, my fraternity brother Paul Michael Glaser (TV’s Starsky & Hutch) shared his family story. His wife Elizabeth had been infected through a blood transfusion during the birth of their daughter, Ariel. Elizabeth passed the virus on to both of her children and Ariel passed away at age seven from AIDS. Elizabeth, a member of Alpha Epsilon Phi, and her sorority sister, Susie Zeegen, founded the Pediatric AIDS Foundation in order to save the life of Paul and Elizabeth’s son Jake (who is now 21 years old and living with HIV). To support one of our fraternity brothers and to demonstrate living by our creed, Sigma Alpha Mu unanimously adopted the Pediatric AIDS Foundation as its national philanthropic project. Alpha Epsilon Phi pledged the same support. Along with supporting the cause of AIDS research, both organizations made HIV/AIDS part of their educational programming.
A few years later, I started to exhibit classic symptoms of those infected with HIV. My doctor suggested that I take an HIV test. In the summer of 1992, my life changed forever when that test came back positive. At the time, my doctor told me that I probably had three to five years to live. I was 29, time was ticking, and I had to make my infection mean something. The first step was to figure out how this happened to me. I determined that alcohol and the sexual choices that I made under the influence led to poor decisions. Alcohol was frequently identified as the cause of many problems on campuses including sexual assault, self esteem issues, pregnancy, and car accidents, but few programs at the time made the connection between alcohol and the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. I wanted to use my diagnosis to bring this connection to the forefront. Within months of my diagnosis, I had not only told everyone in my life about my HIV status but also of my intention to educate college students about the dangers of mixing sex and alcohol. I was actually terrified of public speaking. Ironically, I received a “C-” in Speech 101 at Indiana University and I was not rushing towards a lecture podium. However, three months after being diagnosed with HIV the podium found me. My friend Scott Horton who was the fraternity/sorority advisor at Texas Christian University (TCU) asked me to share my story on his campus. The school’s alcohol awareness week committee was looking for a speaker who could connect alcohol and sexual decisions. I was petrified, but my friend T.J. Sullivan coached me through that speech. T.J. told me to find common ground with the audience and show how my life and choices were not much different than the ones they were making every day at TCU. As I sat down to make my “common ground” list it hit me that I was a Jewish guy from the North, and these were Christian students from the South. However, beyond the surface of religion and geography was the common denominator of alcohol use and abuse. I decided to be candid and open about my mistakes. In fall of 1992, I clutched the podium at TCU with my knees shaking and began to tell my story to 500 students. It was empowering for me to speak to an interested audience. As I finished, they stood and cheered. Speaking at more than 1,000 campuses since my time at TCU, I have yet to greet a longer line of students after a program. Some said they would pray for me and many said they admired my courage to share my story. I had connected with the students and had the drive to try public speaking again. continued on page 18
Fall 2006 / Perspectives
17
continued from page 17 In the following weeks I received letters from many of the TCU students. They were moved by the speech and felt sorry for me, but they did not think it could happen to them. They wrote to me about their friends and asked how to confront and encourage safer
infections in young people has yet to peak. Millennials, those born between 1981 and 2005, have never known a world without AIDS and they are not as afraid of it as those in my generation, Generation X, were. My hope is that as this generation learns of
Alcohol was frequently identified as the cause of many problems on campuses including sexual assault, self esteem issues, pregnancy, and car accidents, but few programs at the time made the connection between alcohol and the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. I wanted to use my diagnosis to bring this connection to the forefront. behavior. I realized that in 1992, college students were not ready admit HIV could happen to them, but could talk about it in the third person, their “friends.” The presentation “Friendship in the Age of AIDS” was born and students heard through humor and some tears the effect of my diagnosis on my friend and co-presenter T.J. Sullivan.They could identify with T.J., and together we taught how to confront their friends who may abuse alcohol and make a poor sexual decision.
their peers who are HIV positive, the fear that existed in the last two decades will be resurrected.
At the 1992 AFA/NIC Annual Meeting, T.J. and I announced our program to a lukewarm response. Many friends in the association said, “I can’t bring this topic to campus. I’ll lose my job.” The year 1993 was a turning point for “Friendship in the Age of AIDS” when the Interfraternity Institute (IFI) included it as a keynote topic. Nearly every fraternity/ sorority advisor in attendance brought us to campus within the year and other campuses would soon follow. Fraternity men talking about AIDS was novel, even gaining the lead story on the Memphis evening news that first year. There are more than a thousand news clippings and news videos about our presentation that I have saved in two large containers from our 800-campus, seven-year journey together. In the most recent seven years I have only spoken at approximately 200 campuses and barely filled a shoebox of articles.
Fear of the unknown is always worse than reality so I always do my best to convince those who are worried enough to come talk to me to get an HIV test. I give out my email address and let them know they can keep in touch no matter which way the results come back. I heard from two students after WRGLC, both juniors and Presidents of their respective campus governance councils. Both had put themselves at risk for HIV in the last year. The fraternity man’s HIV test came back negative, but the sorority woman’s came back positive.
The “novelty” of HIV/ AIDS has worn off. My current program “Sex Under the Influence” is often selected because of the alcohol component despite the fact that HIV amongst young adults (14-24) is at an all time high, accounting for 50 percent of new cases in the United States. Twenty-five percent of the more than a million Americans living with HIV are not aware they have it. The National Institute of Health suggests the wave of new
18
Perspectives / Fall 2006
Recently, I spoke to approximately 500 students at the Western Regional Greek Leadership Conference (WRGLC). After my session, the thoughts and feelings of the dozens of students who approached me provided me hope that awareness is not dead and individuals are still aware of how HIV and AIDS can impact them.
This newly HIV positive 20-year-old has stayed in touch and knows I am writing this article. She has told me she was never afraid of contracting HIV. It was a health class chapter in both middle and high school, it was a commercial on MTV, but that was years ago. She cannot recall reading about it in her campus paper or seeing a program on it until my presentation at WRGLC in her third year of college. The awareness has subsided and for this student, the lack of awareness resulted in a life changing diagnosis. She is doing all the right things to take care of herself and has great family support, and I believe because of modern medicine she will be okay as I am. Her wish, like mine, is that with the media highlighting the 25th anniversary of AIDS there will be renewal of a commitment to bring the issue to the forefront once again. – Joel Goldman is a speaker with CAMPUSPEAK, Inc. He is a past National President of Sigma Alpha Mu Fraternity and the 1994 Winner of AFA’s Jack Anson Award.
REFERENCES Association of Fraternity Advisors (1998). Resolution on acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Retrieved September 17, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/Resolutions/AIDS.aspx.
[ S E N I O R S T U D E N T A F FA I R S O F F I C E R S ’ P E R S P E C T I V E S – PA R T I ]
Technology: The Long View – Debbie Heida Student affairs professionals spend a great deal of time planning for technological change: how to pay for it, how to manage it, and how it is changing our communities. This column highlights the response of the following Senior Student Affairs professional to technology and its impact on our work: Shannon Ellis Vice President of Student Services, University of Nevada, Reno; Dudley Long Vice President for Student Affairs, Birmingham Southern College; Don Mills Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, Texas Christian University. How has technology’s use in student affairs changed over the last 10 – 20 years? Ellis: When I entered student affairs work in 1978 as a fraternity/sorority advisor, I called students in by leaving messages with pledges or physically going to their houses to catch them or leave notes. I even mailed them letters to call me. THEN this amazing machine appeared – the answering machine. It was truly technology at its finest. I could actually leave a message for a student. Now it is easy to reach students via email, text messaging, cell phones, and voice mail – so the fact that we communicate so much more easily and frequently is wonderful. I know others will give you sexier answers about personal computers and hand held devices and data bases and software, but the answering machine was the start of something revolutionary. Our ability to keep track to students and to know so much about them is also intensified and we use it to improve our services, to intervene with students, to write grants, to get money, to develop and assess programs to help students. Mills: Technology has been primarily responsible for three dramatic changes in Student Affairs. First, the ability to collect and analyze information aids in the decisionmaking purposes. We are now able to know more about our students’ attitudes, beliefs, and values than ever before. Technology’s second great use has been communication. Individual communication (e-mail, text messaging), desk-top publishing, and easy research into various topics have changed
the way we deal with ideas and with people. We can communicate with groups that we choose, create specific groups for various topics, and provide very specific information aimed at very narrowly defined sub-groups. Third has been technology’s ability to ease certain tasks from housing assignments, admissions, class scheduling, to operational work orders. Many personnel intensive tasks have now become assigned to technology making it possible for persons to engage in higher order activities. How has technology impacted the fraternal movement, the benefits and the drawbacks? Long: Although for us, hand matching and computer matching bids takes approximately the same amount of time, the lists are more accurate, distribution in parties is better, and invitations are conveniently printed for you. However, being at a small school, it was an asset to me to become familiar with the names of new students as I called them out over and over again. I had a clearer picture of what actually happened with each participant. I also think that I was able to spot trends better. Ellis: The fraternal movement has been at the forefront of technology for chapter use – from alumni data banks to collegiate recruitment – membership selection (is all on computers, keeping track of potential members, billing and business transactions – all on line. Everything is smoother, more organized, faster and there is a wonderful “paper” trail via the cyber world. Mills: Technology has affected the fraternal movement in much the same way that it has affected Student Affairs in general. On balance, this has been a positive development. Facility management, food service, recruitment, and budgeting are all enhanced by technology. This should provide more accurate and more effective services to members. What are the current areas of information technology that occupy your thinking and planning for your student affairs area? Mills: The areas that occupy my thoughts these days are identification and access issues. Protecting student identity while still expanding use of identification cards presents a significant challenge. It is, frankly, the same challenge that faces credit card companies.
At its core, this may be a storage information problem, but as more information is available to skilled users (hackers), it becomes increasingly crucial to protect data. It is my hope that privacy can be protected while still offering considerable advances in technology and information storage. Ellis: Student privacy is a technologyrelated concern for me. It seems to be an issue that students neglect. They will turn over their personal information for a bank t-shirt or some other freebie. What advice do you have for young professionals about technology use, training needed, and issues to be thinking about, etc? Long: Think before you click the send button, cool down and evaluate your response for appropriateness. They should also be knowledgeable with online communities and use them to their advantage. Ellis: Young professionals need to treat technology as an accelerator to doing their job with students and with other administrators. It is not an end in itself – which many people mistake it for – but it is a method to achieve fraternalism, smooth membership selection, positive image and marketing and so forth. Keep current but keep your senior administrator current, too, so she or he can advocate for your needs with knowledge and confidence. Do not assume that we know! Mills: It is my view that a young professional does not need to be a technology expert unless that is an area of special interest. But young professionals should have a general understanding of technology and what it can do. The issues that should be of concern are privacy, costs, and effectiveness. I am especially worried that professionals will lose the sense of “art” in student affairs services and programs. I wonder if we have become so devoted to technology and the newest invention that we have lost the essential insight that ours is a people business and that it is people touching people that ultimately leads to transformational educational experiences. – Debbie Heida is the Vice President for Student Affairs at Barry University.
Fall 2006 / Perspectives
19
Easing the Quarterlife Crisis: A Lesson on Programming and Support for Graduating Fraternity and Sorority Students – Georgianna L. Martin and Jeffrey Raker
M
any fraternity and sorority advisors are familiar with the work of Alexandra Robbins from her controversial book Pledged: The Secret Life of Sororities (2004). This book raised a few eyebrows and perhaps even provided a wake up call for both professionals and undergraduate students. However, many may be less familiar with her earlier work, co-authored with Abby Wilner, titled Quarterlife Crisis: The Unique Challenge of Life in Your Twenties (2001). In this book, the authors take the reader through the experiences, frustrations, and questions of young adults in the middle of their own quarterlife crises. As the book explains, in Western culture, the phrase “mid-life crisis” is very familiar (Robbins & Wilner, 2001). In fact, it is often used to explain erratic behavior or sudden career and personal changes made by adults in their 40s. Society is less familiar with the notion of a quarterlife crisis as a valid stage of life for young adults in their early to mid-20s. It is a commonly held perception that life after college should be filled with fun, excitement, and hope for what the future holds. This is particularly held to be true since this age group is thought to have relatively few responsibilities such as a spouse, children, or a mortgage payment. However, what many college graduates encounter reveals a different picture. These young adults experience a time of overwhelming uncertainty, a fear of failure or risk taking, issues related to social adjustment, and the reality with which they are faced does not meet their expectations. How are student affairs professionals preparing students to meet these quarterlife transitions on college and university campuses? [SENIOR YEAR PROGRAMMING] Typically, significant financial and human resources are allocated to provide a variety of educational programming to address the many issues facing first year college students. Issues such as adjusting to collegiate academics, encountering diversity, and reconciling identity have become the focus of new student programming on most campuses. However, one issue related to college student development often overlooked in programming and resource allocation is the young adult transition to life after college. It may seem as if colleges and universities have become so focused on retaining new students that they have forgotten about the unique needs of our graduating students.
This same critique can be made of fraternity and sorority life programming. Both on the chapter level and at the institutional level, efforts to enhance new member education, services, and programs are abundant. These programs are worthwhile endeavors. However, seniors are also worth the investment. While programs focused on life after college adjustment and senior class unity are gaining visibility on college and university campuses, it appears that a valuable opportunity to help students translate their fraternal collegiate experiences into tools for the post college years may be overlooked. Many fraternities and sororities probably have a senior recognition week or night to honor their graduating brothers and sisters. Is this enough? Fraternity and sorority life professionals must consider what should, additionally, be done to facilitate a memorable, engaging, and reflective senior year for fraternity and sorority members.
20
Perspectives / Fall 2006
Gardner, Van der Veer, and Associates (1998) have outlined a well-developed rationale for attention to senior year issues in higher education. Their reasoning emphasized the importance of acknowledging that seniors are a captive audience with high expectations, understanding the developmental needs of seniors as students in transition, and recognizing that seniors will soon be alumni. They further summarized that the rudimentary needs for seniors include “opportunities for reflection on the meaning of the college experience, integration and closure, and holistic facilitation and support of graduating students’ transition to postcollege life” (Gardner, et al., 1998, p. 7). Some schools have found success with senior year programs such as educational workshops on financial planning or coping with depression. Social programs focused on class unity have also gained popularity. For example, the annual Senior Champagne Celebration and the Senior Service Project at Millsaps College have been well received from members of the graduating classes as well as from junior class leaders who look forward to planning it when their turn arrives. An additional project that targets senior involvement has been the organization of a fund raising campaign to purchase a senior class gift for the college. Senior gifts to Millsaps in recent years have included two benches donated in honor of all of those affected by Hurricane Katrina and a stained glass window placed in a prominent position in a residence hall to honor 30 years of service from a retiring chaplain at the college. The purpose of this project is two-fold. First, it serves to leave the seniors feeling like they have made a tangible contribution to the institution. Second, it helps seniors recognize the importance of alumni donations in increasing the quality of an institution’s programs and facilities. The response of the students on the fundraising committee as well as the many students who donate to the campaign has been overwhelming. This single project has created a healthy competition from year to year, with each new graduating class hoping to beat the total dollar amount raised from the previous year. The slate is clean for ingenuity and creativity with fraternity and sorority life senior year programming. Affiliated students may benefit from a senior retreat where graduating fraternity and sorority leaders are given a structured opportunity to reflect on their fraternity/sorority involvement and leadership. This also presents a prime opportunity to revisit the fraternal values and mission that each student’s organization espouses. Facilitating any opportunity for students to internalize their organization’s values is a step in the right direction. [LIFE TRANSITIONS AND T H E R O L E O F F R AT E R N A L VA L U E S ] Strong similarities exist between first year students and those about to graduate. Both groups feel the anxiety, hope, doubt, excitement, joy, and frustration that come with the termination of old life structures and the building of new life structures. Simply put, they are both groups in transition. They are looking for direction, purpose, and answers. Of course no one is able to give students all the answers, but fraternity and sorority professionals should be well equipped with resources and the knowledge of empowering others to discover the answers for themselves. Students preparing for life
after college are often asking many of the same questions in their final year of college that they struggled with during their first year. “Who am I?” “What is my purpose?” “What is right?” “How do I determine what is important?” “What does success mean?” “What if I fail?” These questions resurface as paramount issues for seniors (Robbins & Wilner, 2001). One question will continue to appear as young adults make meaning of their quarterlife experiences: How do I know if I am making the right decisions? The only real and true answer to this question is YOU DON’T! The formative young adult years are packed with elements of risk. This risk and uncertainty are the essence of the quarterlife crisis. The only way to get around them is to work through them. Fraternal rituals and customs provide a decisionmaking vehicle for reconciling such life decisions. While fraternity and sorority advisors and national leaders understand the lifelong impact fraternal values have, graduating students are often overloaded with options and may not have the time or support to make thoughtful decisions. Values-based decision-making is not a novel discussion in higher education or the fraternity and sorority arena. Campus advisors
and concepts seem evident to professionals, integrating a lesson on post-college life or providing a similar co-curricular workshop has the potential to positively impact students as they prepare for this major life transition. In discussing values and decision making with fraternity and sorority members, professionals can be constantly challenged by choosing the appropriate time to initiate a discussion about life after college. Students are either eager to discuss a recent job interview or anxiety ridden over the unknown that lies ahead. Below are a few starter questions to aid in facilitating a rewarding reflection and discussion: • As you complete your collegiate years, what are your greatest anxieties? How do you plan to cope with these once you have graduated? • How do you think college has prepared or not prepared you for “the real world”? • How has your involvement in your fraternity/sorority shaped your college experience?
[
]
Aiding students with T R A N S L AT I N G T H E I R E X P E R I E N C E S A N D K N O W L E D G E gained into application into life after college is one small way of ensuring their L I F E L O N G S U C C E S S .
and national headquarter staffs have daily conversations with students on the role fraternal values play in the decision making process. At the cusp of the college experience, graduating students are poised to have a critical question answered: how does this apply to life after college? It is in triggering this question that we have the opportunity to bring into light lifelong, values based decision-making. Multiple fraternal organizations have initiated programs that target training current members about their role as alumni. For example, Kappa Alpha Order’s Crusade program, a four-year member education program, includes a weekly, peer-led, small group discussion on life after graduation as a member of the organization. While discussions on career building skills are the focus, the overriding byproduct of the meetings is the development of a support network for discussing the common experience of life after college. This support network is useful in addressing real life issues that exist in chapters and that members face. Based on the experiences of the Crusade program, it is evident that providing the venue for small group discussions promotes peer-to-peer discussions of issues related to the concept of a quarterlife crisis. Another area to frame senior year programming within the context of fraternal values is through application of fraternity and sorority leadership courses. With continued fraternity and sorority life programming efforts focused on teaching leadership courses targeted at new members and newly elected officers, it would seem the resources needed to include a senior level course focused on life after college might be negligible. Many institutions, like Bowling Green State University, offer an academic course structure aimed at promoting a four-year fraternity and sorority experience; however, discussion topics primarily center on campus/college life and leadership issues. While the transferability of learned skills
• What three things will you take with you from your fraternity/sorority experience? • What value(s) of your fraternity/ sorority resonate most with you? Why? • How is this value(s) evident in your actions to those who are not members of your organization? • If this value(s) is not evident to those outside of your organization, why not? What actions can you take to live this value daily? • How will this value(s) help you in your future life decisions after college? The journey beyond college can be frustrating and disheartening at times. College educators have an opportunity to build a legacy through proactive support. Aiding students with translating their experiences and knowledge gained into application into life after college is one small way of ensuring their lifelong success. As the development of senior year programs occurs, a discussion on the impact of fraternal values on lifelong decision-making must be included. – Georgianna L. Martin is a Resident Director at Creighton University. Jeffrey Raker is a doctoral student at Purdue University.
REFERENCES Gardner, J. N., Van der Veer, G., & Associates (1998). The senior year experience: Facilitating integration, reflection, closure, and transition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Robbins, A., & Wilner, A. (2001). Quarterlife crisis: The unique challenges of life in your twenties. New York: Putnam.
Fall 2006 / Perspectives
21
– Dan Bureau
T
echnology continues to play an important role in the lives of students. In this issue of Perspectives, Emily Perlow examines “virtual interfraternalism” and the role technology plays in the experiences of building community among fraternity and sorority members. As we put this topic in perspective, many persons invested in the fraternal movement have thoughts regarding technology in the lives of students and how it impacts community building on campus. This article shares some of those thoughts and identifies four themes emerging from responses: impact on communication, relationship building, community building, and organizational management. Responses were solicited through the AFA listserv discussion and the AFA online community (http://www.fraternity advisors.org/PMB/). In addition, input from a variety of professionals with different experiences and levels of tenure in the fraternal movement was sought. The following persons responded: • Sam Centellas, Albion College; • Lori Hart Ebert Ph.D, Pi Kappa Phi and CAMPUSPEAK; • Kurtis Foriska, The Ohio State University; • Michelle Guobadia, George Mason University; • Timothy Haskell, Santa Clara University; • Bob Kerr, Oregon State University; • Mike McRee, Leadershape Inc.; • Josh Orendi, Phired Up! LLC.
Impact on Communication Responses vary when asked about how technology impacts communication. Most respondents addressed both the positives and negatives of the use of technology and on-line communities. Foriska states, “Technology can be good – if – there are reasonable expectations in place. Although I would argue technology has made us cold and isolated beings, I would suggest that technology has given us courage.” Guobadia echoed similar thoughts. “If used correctly, online communities can be a huge asset and a forum for information sharing...when used incorrectly, as it often is, we see and hear things that we and (inter/national) headquarters wish we never saw.” As a national consultant and speaker, Orendi has studied the phenomenon from a variety of settings. “Social networking groups consume hours of most under22
Perspectives / Fall 2006
graduate’s days, and it’s not uncommon for a student to instant message his roommate – while that person is in the same room! I’ve talked with undergraduates who tell me it’s not unusual to go days without leaving their living areas.” Guobadia addressed some of the struggles she has witnessed as a campus practitioner. “I watch students struggle with face to face conversations and being able to articulate to people their wants and needs. The computer or cell phone creates a barrier that is more comfortable, eliminating the need to assess facial expressions and conversational nuances.” Her response sent over email, reflects how our “language” has come to include symbols and codes often used over instant messaging or email: “Furthermore, confrontation skills have become non-existent, because the im [characters] :( has eliminated the need to truly express feelings.” Respondents were also quick to point out how technology has impacted not only the communication of students but also how fraternity and sorority professionals serve these students. McRee states, “Technology isn’t just impacting the students’ interactions. It’s impacting all of our interactions” Guobadia agrees, “Large chunks of my day are spent sending countless emails to the entire fraternity/sorority world...so I resent the fact the Blackberrys and their Trio friends are out there trying to attract me and my fellow colleagues in being permanently attached to our emails and in turn our students. With this mobile technology, work/life balance can never be achieved and we might as well move into chapter houses and serve as constant oracles of information!” Impact on Relationship Building Hart Ebert shared a recent experience. “Last fall I flew into Kansas City to speak at the University of Kansas for the new member orientation. ‘Bid day’ for the men and women had just occurred two days prior and in my discussions with the student giving me a ride to the program, he was telling me about bid day and said ‘They are just now getting on Facebook getting to know each other.’ It didn’t even phase him what he had said.” Orendi’s thoughts echoed the concern of Hart Ebert, but identified fraternities and sororities as presented with new
opportunities. “[T]echnology is producing a majority percentage of students who can talk on-line with 15 people at once, but lack the skills to shake a stranger’s hand with confidence. Thanks in large part to the effects of technology; life skills development is the next generation of fraternity/sorority life. Is your organization/community prepared?” Hart Ebert identified the evolving nature of how students are creating relationships. Interviews, a common practice among many fraternal organizations during new member orientation, used to be done face to face over lunch. Now, Facebook is the place people are going to learn information on their future brothers and sisters. Instant messaging is a forum to have discussions rather than over coffee. Many respondents felt this was a natural progression and should simply be embraced. Foriska states, “Many may argue that technology decreases the face-to-face interactions between students. I just haven’t seen it. Students still go out, attendance at our major campus events is up, not down, from the looks of most Facebook photos students are still social, and I have not heard a student say ‘I skipped class because I was in an intense AIM [AOL Instant Messenger] session.’ If there is a decrease in human contact, then it sure makes me wonder whom everyone is talking to on his or her cell phones walking to and from class.” Haskell also addressed the doomsday theme so many people have adopted when talking about technology. “I think there is a penchant (especially on the part of educators) to use them when it comes to online networking. Like anything else, involvement and participation in online communities can be a mixed bag. For some students, it supplements relationships, increases peer networks, helps them connect with other like-minded peers for critical support (i.e. first generation students, etc.). For other students, it encourages socially aberrant behavior, stunts conflict resolution skills, and isolates certain students. That said, all of the scientific research and anecdotal evidence that I review suggests that online communities, on the whole, supplement or increase relationships among users.” Yet, while this is a part of the evolution of how people build relationships, Kerr offered some words of caution. “Like all things, when on-line communities are abused (i.e. relied on solely for making
connections) there is a serious concern that the student can expose themselves to identity theft and worse. I believe caution should be the watchword when operating within all on-line communities.” Impact on Community Building An area that needs more attention in the form of research and evaluation is examining how technology and on-line communities create or prohibit community building. Those responding had many thoughts on how the process of forging community may or may not be influenced by the role of technology. Some feel that technology has a very positive influence. Foriska states, “Beyond understanding that the impact of technology on community building is situational, I argue that technology has the capability to enhance the opportunity to build community. Used in a positive manner, technology connects individuals with similar interests and facilitates [the ability] to find [an] intimate niche within the larger campus community.” Haskell identified the numerous ways in which community is already created, offering that technology should not be discredited as a community building tool. “Students create community on campus in so many different ways – through floor meetings, student organizations, classes, faith groups, off-campus housing, athletics, social issues, and more. Each of these has different forces and dynamics at play, but the value and purpose of the communities should not be discounted. The idea that online communities crop up in isolation is dangerously misguided. While some students may join groups that have no clear purpose or identity, the majority has a clear sense of group identity, norms, values, and contribute often in very positive ways to the culture and climate of other interconnected communities.” McRee has seen the impact that technology is having on how Leadership, Inc. approachs engagement, training and development, and relationship building, which are all facets of engaging persons in community building, “From working at LeaderShape, I can tell you that people think we are crazy for doing a six day program: ‘No one has that kind of time anymore’ or ‘Can’t you just do that in two days?’ If those statements were true, we wouldn’t be growing more than 20 percent per year. Students, now more than ever, lack real communication. Discussions about what really matters, what counts in the end, and what you really care about are not happening in their day-to-day technologically adapted lives. They need forums to make those conversations happen.” Foriska was quick to identify that while community can be built through technology, some of the actions students embrace because of technology may hinder or create chasms in communities. “Things students would never say to an administrator come easy
in an e-mail. A sarcastic written comment becomes misinterpreted and creates a wave of controversy. Potentially racist online groups formed that are created ‘all in good fun.’ I call this behavior fueled by ‘electronic courage.’ The challenge remains that students view these opportunities as free speech but do not want to be held accountable when they have disrupted the moral and normative expectations within the community. Students need to realize that they are accountable for their actions whether spoken or written.” Impact on Organizational Management As respondents were asked to examine how technology has impacted organizational development and management, many cited how technology has been used to not only enhance the member’s experience but also recruit new members into the community. Haskell wrote, “I cannot think of a community that I belong to that is not supplemented in some way by technology…The key is that in these communities technology is used to enhance the community experience, and does that without compromising the values of the group or the safety of its members.” Foriska cited an example of a chapter who embraced technology to aid in recruiting members with like-minded values. “Alpha Sigma Phi at The Ohio State University got it. They are a relatively small chapter, but have two Eagle Scouts. They created an Eagle Scout Facebook group and began to talk to the men that signed up. Soon, they introduced the fraternity and boom, bids extended. These potential new members identified as an Eagle Scout and already espoused the values the fraternity was looking for.” In the light of technology’s ever increasing role and ability to unite and disengage students, Orendi espoused the opportunities that exist for fraternal organizations with technology’s use. “[A]ll this adds up to opportunity. Fraternity/sorority life is once again positioned to become a value-added part of the campus and community. No other student organization is equally prepared to provide outside-the-classroom education and social development.” As campus professionals continue to advise organizations on managing technology, Centellas offered some thoughts addressing a fear of overresponding. “A problem I see with many student affairs practitioners today is that they are too caught up fighting technology and its negative attributes and forget to try and utilize many of its advantages. Take for example Facebook. Everyone is so busy telling chapters to take stuff down, edit pictures, and BE CAREFUL... that no one is telling students how to be safe and have fun on Facebook. So it turns into a bad thing they hide from us and we don’t work together on making it a positive interaction tool.”
Students and practitioners will continue to struggle with managing technology as a risk issue. As persons concerned with the fraternal movement struggle with this issue, it is important to remember that technology is impacting everything around us. If we choose to only approach technology as a detriment, we will ignore the important role it plays in communication, relationship building, community development, and the management of organizations. Final Thoughts How technology will continue to impact community building for fraternities and sororities will be closely monitored by all invested in fraternal organizations. While many themes emerged, a final concept that resonates loudly in many of the responses is what the fraternal movement will need to do to properly integrate technological communication into the experiences of undergraduate fraternal chapters. McRee sought to refocus the conversation to seize the opportunities that exist with using technology as a powerful communication tool. “[T]he question that we should be asking is how can technology revolutionize fraternity so that we are more closely aligned with our shared values?” Citing a natural inclination for movements to provide extreme shifts in how persons approach interaction, Orendi states, “There is a pendulum that swings between ‘social hermit’ and ‘we’re going streaking!’ In the center is a healthy mix of social development.” The challenge will continue to be whether or not the extreme generation will be able to develop this balance. Finally, Haskell asked that practitioners have confidence that while examples abound of how students may use technology poorly, more often than not, students can amaze those who work with them. This means, technology may become a powerful tool for realizing student development and ensuring the success of fraternal organizations. “The development of online communities provide some amazing and rich examples of how people come together around a set of shared values, create community standards, norms, and culture. Whether it is a fraternity/sorority chapter trying to connect its members and manage information or a group of students who want to stay connected after a powerful service experience, online communities are encouraging people to become dynamic, flexible, and connected. I am in awe of how students will create and then self-regulate groups in which they participate.” – Dan Bureau is a Ph.D student in the Higher Education Student Affairs Program at Indiana University. He also works for CAMPUSPEAK.
Fall 2006 / Perspectives
23
– Monica Miranda Smalls
Meeting Students Where They Are Through Technology
T
he AFA Core Competencies state that professionals proficient in the area of technology:
• Promote the practical application and effective use of technology. • Provide on-line information and maintains current websites. New advances in the technological age of communication are hot topics on college campuses. When I hear the words Facebook, MySpace, or Xenga or read of them in articles related to student affairs, more often than not, the article is written in a cautionary tone to ensure that students are being warned about the consequences of posting on these pages. However, I want to approach the topic of online communities from a different perspective. What might happen if we put a positive spin on the cyber-world? What about creating an online community environment with positive intentions? How can we truly “promote the practical application and effective use of technology”? What would that look like in practice?
On my campus, discussions on an online community aided the grieving process after the passing of two young alumni. The following messages were posted to comments sections on Facebook:
“In time where I don’t have the words or the answers, I think this sums up how I feel towards this whole ordeal. Your brother [Steven] is a man of action and a man who believed in what he said, meant what he said, and then followed through with what he said. I am honored to know him. I know that my family and myself are better people to have been taught by Steven and that I am a better person today because of him.” (posted as a message to the younger brother of the deceased) “It’s so hard to believe that you [Krystle] were taken away from us. You will always be in my heart. Thank you for all the great times we shared. God Bless Your Soul...” The quotes above are emotional, which is to be expected when a campus community suffers two tragic deaths within a 48-hour period. Individuals from University of Rochester’s Classes of 2000 and 2005 were recently killed in car accidents, and this is how some of our students and community members were able to grieve these losses. I believe if we are to meet the students where they are, it is our responsibility to support the technological advances that may help them heal, help them emote, help them move on, ultimately helping them initiate communication, while ensuring face-to-face follow up. In today’s technological age virtual expression seems to come easier to the millennial generation. While I do believe it is important to foster the personal communication opportunities it is also important to adapt to what the current generation of students does in such situations, and the new virtual communication tools may be the way to start that connection. After spending two hours with a student in a recent, in-person conversation about his fraternity, I was reminded how priceless face-to-face communication is. Nevertheless, we need to recognize the technology readily available to us is just as equally accessible, and sometimes more so, to the students with whom we work. Virtual communication is not only practical, but effective. It is time we start thinking of some positive ways to apply these new advances in technology in our daily work. – Monica Miranda Smalls is the Director of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs at the University of Rochester and the current Vice President for Resource Development for AFA.
24
Perspectives / Fall 2006 Winter 2006
NAVIGATING the new AFA Website – Amanda S. Bureau & Sue Kraft Fussell FA unveiled a new website in May and, hopefully, members have already begun to explore, learn, and participate in this exciting new virtual community. This memberfocused website contains valuable resources to meet the needs of fraternity/sorority advisors. Following is an explanation of some web features and the answers to frequently asked questions of our members.
A
Finding the Resources You Need The website has been designed with the user in mind. With a more intuitive navigation, a comprehensive site map, and a fully inclusive search feature, it is intended for the user to quickly find the needed resources. The Knowledge Center is a newly created feature. This section houses resources and services categorized by topical areas. While navigation of the old website was difficult, the new site highlights the many resources that are benefits of AFA membership. Also within the Knowledge Center is the Models & Samples section – a robust feature that relies on our members to develop and maintain. This section is a collection of ideas, templates, and examples shared by fraternity/ sorority professionals nationwide. Why reinvent the wheel? If a professional needs sample housing contracts, leadership class syllabi, risk management policies, intake or recruitment guidelines, or other resources to aid in the operation of fraternal organizations, they simply search Models & Samples to find examples contributed by colleagues. Those who have resources to share should send documents to KnowledgeCenter@fraternityadvisors.org or use the “Share A Resource” buttons found on several pages throughout the website and Online Community. The usefulness of this section relies on active participation of members. “Smart” Site Another benefit of the new website is that each member has a unique login – their member number and last name. The login will provide access to all parts of the website. Many of the online forms, such as the membership renewal form and the Annual Meeting registration form, will even recognize individual members and pre-populate contact information making the process simple and easy to complete. Online Community Aside from the Knowledge Center, a second new feature is the Online Community. While the listserv was active using YahooGroups, the time had come for the Association to include the entire membership in a more personal network. In the Online Community members can engage in discussion on topics of their choosing, within forums that are designed to manage/house the conversations that take place across the membership.
AFA members value the networking component of the Association; it is now easier for members to connect with colleagues, share information and resources, and build relationships. The goal of the Online Community is to move closer to 100 percent engagement by the membership and to participate in discussions on issues and ideas that are meaningful to them. The Online Community allows this to happen in a user-friendly and dynamic way. All AFA members are automatically members of the Online Community. Users should visit the site and manage preferences and subscriptions to personalize the experience. Subscription Options: The Online Community allows members to manage the amount of email received by giving the option to subscribe to conversations that are important to them. Those subscribed to a forum (macro-level, broad conversation areas) will receive all emails within that forum or members can subscribe to specific topics within a forum (micro-level, specific conversations) if they are only interested in a specific aspect of that broad conversation. Other subscription options include new topic announcements (for those “urgent” or more timely requests) or weekly digests of all activity on the Online Community. All of these options are intended to allow members to personalize their participation based on interests. To change subscription options, members must simply log onto the Online Community using their member number and last name, and click the “Manage Subscriptions” icon. Organized Conversations: No matter the subscription settings, members can always read and participate in conversations online. Because the Online Community is organized into forums and topics members can easily see what may be of interest or helpful when browsing the site. The Online Community also highlights forums and topics that have had new activity since the last visit to help members get closer, faster, to the needed information. Search Feature: While YahooGroups had a search feature, it was difficult to manage. The Online Community allows much more flexibility in searching for information. No longer will there be a “black hole” of conversation – with thousands of messages and no organization or structure behind them. Now members can narrow results by keywords, forums, dates, or people. The result is a search that finds what is really needed, filtering out any extraneous information. Future Additions There is a great deal to be excited about on the new website… but there is more to come. Members will see many more new features and enhanced services in the next few months. Some of these include a “Shop AFA”
section to easily purchase resources; a greatly enhanced Job Placement section that will allow for greater information to be shared between job seekers and employers; private areas for AFA volunteers to conduct business; and much more. Log onto the AFA website today (www.fraternityadvisors.org) to explore, learn, and participate. The Central Office welcomes feedback about the new site. We are confident you will find the site both user-friendly and rich with content from the first click! – Amanda S. Bureau is the AFA Director of Member Services and Sue Kraft Fussell is AFA’s Executive Director. Fall 2006 / Perspectives
25
[ S E N I O R S T U D E N T A F FA I R S O F F I C E R S ’ P E R S P E C T I V E S – PA R T I I ]
The Impact of Technology on Student Affairs – Bob Kerr Every few months, an upgraded version of our familiar desktop personal computer hits the market, followed closely by laptops with wi-fi technology, and even smaller and more versatile Blackberries. The speed at which technology is created is almost faster than the capacity of higher education to respond to it and effectively lead with it.
ments. I have had to be more intentional about blocking time I don’t want booked, and entering commitments I’ve made when away from the office. Also, for many kinds of conversations, face to face meetings are preferable, and I have to coax people off of e-mail to achieve the human contact… sometimes just upgraded to a telephone call.
In an attempt to understand how technology has impacted student affairs, the following leaders in the profession gave their take on how technology has affected their work:
Roney: Workload is the biggest challenge. Email does not replace “snail mail” or telephone calls, it simple adds to the communication flow, which can be overwhelming at times. In some cases there tends to be an expectation that email will result in an immediate response, which is not always an appropriate expectation.
Dr. Barbara Short Hanson Vice President of Campus Life at American University; Dr. Marlesa Roney Vice Provost of Student Success at the University of Kansas; Dr. Larry Roper Vice Provost of Student Affairs at Oregon State University; Dr. Ed Whipple Vice President for Student Affairs at Bowling Green University. How has technology changed your level of interaction with students? Hanson: More students communicate directly with me by e-mail than would call or make an appointment for an office visit. This is true for their parents as well. Because I am on a number of e-mail lists, I have a better sense of the “chatter” on emerging campus issues than I might have had in earlier times. Conference calling facilitates meetings with groups of student leaders, allowing for full participation even when not everyone can be physically present. Roney: Online services and websites have changed the way many offices interact with students. Regular day-to-day business can be handled online which means that most inperson contact focuses on the exceptions and challenges rather than routine business, allowing us to provide more time and attention to these matters. Roper: It has increased the volume and frequency of requests – more information coming in, more going out. The expectation of immediate response has also been added (students can get to you without an appointment or my acknowledgement that I am the appropriate person to deal with an issue). Whipple: Communication is much faster – there are multiple ways today to contact someone. That can certainly be an advantage. However, the “face to face” interaction is easy to ignore which can be very detrimental in working with students. What was the most difficult thing to change, with technology, in how you do your work? Hanson: Probably moving to an electronic calendar accessible to others authorized to book my time for meetings and appoint-
26
Perspectives / Fall 2006
Whipple: Probably the increased pressure on multi-tasking and the pressure to move quickly on items. Technology, for me, adds a certain amount of pressure to the work place that I did not have prior. Also, people’s access to me has increased with the cell phone, computer, etc. which is not totally comfortable. What is the most gratifying change technology has brought to your work? Hanson: The ability to communicate quickly with selected populations of people has been of great benefit in emergency and “breaking news” situations. Getting an offer of help and instructions or resource information quickly to people who need it has been appreciated by students and their parents. Also, our ability to communicate a lot of vital information through our Web sites and enable students to complete many transactions efficiently on-line have been gratifying. Roper: Access to information. It is incredibly easy to research or retrieve information on new topics. Also, the ease with which I can communicate with friends and colleagues around the world. Whipple: Immediate access in crisis situations – it is very easy to get a hold of someone when needed. What changes to you hope technology brings to your work in the near future? Hanson: I hope it will continue to offer us new and more responsive ways to accommodate students with disabilities. Roney: Even more “self-service” options for students, faculty members and other constituents. Again, the more routine work that can be handled in this manner, the more time that can be available to work with non-standard requests and concerns. Roper: I am very interested in learning to work with voice recognition software. I think there is incredible potential there relative to producing scholarship. Whipple: An opportunity to balance the work. Right now I feel, as do many of my colleagues with whom I interact, that technology easily can be a burden and take us away from our real mission of working with students on an individual and personal basis.
What concerns have been created, because of technology, for your work? Hanson: Technology has made it possible for us to work 24-7. Staff are exhausted trying to keep up with non-stop mail, etc. We have to get more creative about the ways we handle this and our community’s expectation for instant attention. Roney: The initial major concern was the possible lack of human interaction. So far this does not seem to be much of a concern as I originally anticipated as students continue to seek face-to-face services and interactions. The financial concerns of maintaining equipment and upgrading software are significant, as is the need to provide the training and the technical support staff needed to use the tools available. Roper: The constant fear of my identity being compromised. I am not always confident in the security of systems and data I transmit. I am also concerned because of legal issues and the lack of discretion some colleagues and other officials have in the kind of confidential or inappropriate information they communicate. Whipple: Lack of personal involvement with students in certain cases. Also, security and privacy is an issue. Finally, increased parental involvement has been made easier because students can contact family members instantly. This is not necessarily good. With the increasing degree of change with technology, what advice would you offer young professionals to enrich their career? Hanson: Be diligent about creating an annual professional development plan and taking advantage of the many workshops offered by most institutions for keeping your skills up to speed. Roney: Understand that technology is a tool that will continue to be a significant component of your world from this point forward. Take opportunities to learn as much as you can, including the “bells and whistles” of standard software packages such as Microsoft Office. Always remember, that the next group of students is going to have even more technical experience and higher expectations than the previous. Be prepared to rethink business process to take advantage of technology in ways that will be meaningful to your students. And don’t forget to create opportunities for human interaction, too! Roper: Learn the importance of technology as an information sharing tool, but don’t confuse it with being an effective communication tool. In fact, when technology is used in challenging situations it can often fracture communication dynamics. Author’s Note: I want to thank all four of the participants and note that, with one exception, this article was created without direct contact by phone or face-to-face conversation. – Bob Kerr is the Coordinator of Greek Life at Oregon State University.
Association of Fraternity Advisors www.fraternityadvisors.org 9640 N. Augusta Drive, Suite 433 Carmel, IN 46032
Presorted First-Class U.S. Postage PAID Ames, Iowa Permit No. 307