AFA Perspectives Fall 2008

Practical Skills for the Sorority and Fraternity Professional: Developing cultural competence, emphasizing assessment, and approaching risk management through values

in this issue:

An Update on Alcohol-Free Housing | Review of the Fraternal Relevance Institute | Annual Meeting Update

– Jay Anhorn, 2008 President

The 1st Annual First-Year Student Wine Tasting Freshmen Orientation Weekend Meet and greet your professors and sample the wines of the south.

Saturday, August 25th at 4:00 p.m. in Smith Hall

Can you imagine if this was real?

S

ince the mid 1980s, when the drinking age in all states shifted from 18 to 21 as a result of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act passed by Congress, the conversation has continued as to why, at age 18, young men and women could vote, buy tobacco products, and go to war for our country, but not have a beer. Supporters of raising the drinking age, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), argued that statistics showed young drivers were more likely to be involved in fatal accidents resulting from alcohol consumption. Over the last 2-3 years, two initiatives that call current legal drinking age policies into question have gained momentum. Supporters of Choose Responsibility have cited the failure of Prohibition in the United States and its repeal in December 1933 in their movement to reinstate the right of 18, 19, and 20-year olds to consume alcohol using a multi-faceted system of education and certification. Even more recently, a group of college and university presidents and chancellors formed The Amethyst Initiative and publicly voiced their collective opinion that the current legal drinking age of 21 is not working as intended and is actually heightening risks to young people’s welfare, calling for investigation and debate of current policies and possible alternatives.

As fraternity/sorority professionals and those in support of the fraternity/sorority movement, we are directly affected by this issue as we work with students in a mixedage environment. Generally speaking, about 75% of students beginning the academic year on college campuses are under the age of 21. The resulting challenge has been how to provide a healthy and safe environment where alcohol is present but only legally available to those over 21.

Some campuses allow alcohol on campus in fraternity houses or other buildings if organizations follow certain BYOB procedures or catering policies. Others have on campus pubs or bars where alcoholic beverages are sold by the drink – in some situations where only 21 and older students may be present, and in others where a mixed-age crowd is involved. With such a variety of approaches and enforcement techniques, consistency among states, cities, and campuses is an issue.

If we could wave the proverbial magic wand and allow everyone on a college campus to be of legal drinking age, what would happen? How would the student, alcoholrelated issues we face be impacted? Would such a change make drinking not so taboo and allow for a normal social environment with young adults making responsible choices? Would risk management efforts be made easier or more difficult? Would the number of incidents involving excessive consumption decrease or increase?

Over 130 college and university presidents and chancellors have signed on to The Amethyst Initiative. With over 800 campuses with fraternity/sorority communities, are we uniquely positioned as an association to make our voices heard and participate in this discussion? Are we all on the same page as individual members? What do we think?

In an election year for the United States, we reflect on our values, our purpose, and our priorities for this country. Issues such as funding for higher education become a major point of contingency for voters. Just like we, as an association, have rallied around the Collegiate Housing Infrastructure Act (CHIA) to allow for tax deductions for donations that support fraternity and sorority housing, it is also important for us to be educated on the issues of drinking on college and university campuses.

Will 130 presidents and chancellors be enough to make headway on Capitol Hill?

I wish I knew the answer. I do know that this issue is hitting hard with our interfraternal partners, and especially the students we advise. The fraternity/sorority community is always targeted as the epicenter for social life on campuses and, as such, the environment that breeds alcohol abuse.

We can either sit back and complain that fraternities and sororities are always being “picked on,” or we can channel our energy to have the right conversations. continued on page 4

We need to initiate conversations with our colleagues, decide how we can tackle the deeper issues of drinking among college students, and see how fraternity and sorority membership influences the campus culture.

2

Perspectives / Fall 2008

– Kurtis Foriska, Editor

I

have found that many people often have ideas of how to best advise sororities and fraternities. Sorority and fraternity professionals sit in campus-wide meetings and politely receive suggestions on how to improve the community or how a process might work better if only sorority and fraternity members would do more of some things or less of others. Professionals attend conference and national convention sessions on better approaches to addressing the challenges facing sororities and fraternities. Then there are, of course, those who make or influence decisions that impact sorority and fraternity communities even though the decision makers may not directly advise these organizations. I have resolved that there are lots of ideas and that most people just want to be heard.

Perspectives strives to give voice to the profession by publishing practical articles supported by evidence. It is not the intent of the editorial board to censor articles or change their core purpose, but the board has been reluctant to allow submissions which may be more editorial commentary rather than research based. In an effort to allow contributors to express their points of view more explicitly, Perspectives will begin featuring a final column in each issue called From My Perspective. This one-page column will allow writers to share views, criticisms, and accolades of the fraternal movement from the author’s perspective and experience.

The Fall issue provides members several opportunities to share ideas of pushing the fraternal movement forward. Participants who attended the Fraternal Relevance Institute share their experience and share how holding ourselves accountable can help chapters become relevant on campuses. Articles on gaining cultural competence, using values to address risk, and building a culture of assessment help readers improve their professional skills.

in this

issue

6 C reating a Culture of Assessment: The “Top Ten” List 10 T en-Plus Years: Alcohol-Free Housing within Phi Delta Theta

13 A FA Annual Meeting: Peak Performance 18 T o Cultural Competence and Confidence: One Step at a Time

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:

Kurtis Foriska 2008 Editor Assistant Director, The Ohio Union The Ohio State University The Ohio Union @ The Ohio Stadium 1961 Tuttle Park Place Columbus, OH 43210 foriska.1@osu.edu 614-247-5878 Fax: 614-292-6061

Perspectives is published four times per year.

Submission deadlines: Winter 2009 November 15, 2008 Spring 2009 February 1, 2009 Summer 2009 May 1, 2009 Fall 2009 August 1, 2009 Send address corrections to AFA: Association of Fraternity Advisors 9640 N. Augusta Drive, Suite 433 Carmel, IN 46032 317.876.1632 Fax 317.876.3981 info@fraternityadvisors.org

Board 2008 Editorial

Michael Hevel, University of Iowa Megan Johnson, University of Iowa

regular columns From the Top.................................................................. 2 Editor’s Notes.................................................................. 3 Putting It In Perspecitve................................................. 14 Core Competencies....................................................... 20

Justin Kirk, Delta Upsilon Fraternity Ray Lutzky, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Georgianna Martin, University of Iowa Monica Miranda Smalls, University of Rochester Todd Sullivan, University of Connecticut Nathan Thomas, Bradley University Robert Turning, The Johns Hopkins University

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

3

continued from page 2 What would alcohol education look like in the fraternal movement? College students seem to be immune to the words “binge drinking.” Scare tactics do not seem to work for most audiences.

Humor can be viewed as not taking the issue seriously, and can offend people who have experienced tragedy. I tried all of these tactics in risk management sessions for fraternities and sororities this past September, and the evaluations based on learning outcomes proved that:

We need to initiate conversations with our colleagues, decide how we can tackle the deeper issues of drinking among college students, and see how fraternity and sorority membership influences the campus culture.

• If you are one of our valued Associate members, have you thought about how this issue will affect your company or how you can help bring this topic up with your customers?

1) S tudents understand the laws and university policies.

For more information on Choose Responsibility go to http://www.choose responsibility.org/, and for more information about The Amethyst Initiative go to http://www.amethystinitiative.org/.

My point is this. Yes, we are very much impacted by the work of Choose Responsibility and The Amethyst Initiative. If the legal drinking age were to be lowered, it could significantly change the campus/organizational culture with the potential of all students on a campus being of legal drinking age.

Fraternity/sorority advising professionals need to be part of these conversations.

3) T hey are aware of personal safety concerns.

• If you work on a campus, have you brought this topic up to your president?

• If you work as an employee or volunteer for an inter/national organization, has this become a topic among your leadership?

• If you are a graduate student, is this a discussion in your classes among your peers and faculty members?

4

Perspectives / Fall 2008

2) T hey understand steps to take in a crisis situation.

4) T hey think I would make a good stand-up comic (unintended learning outcome).

We need to do our research. We need to do something. For now, I am going to hold off on printing the invitations to a wine tasting during freshmen orientation, and save them for alumni weekend.

Veronica Hunter Gives Back by Donating to the Foundation Ever wonder if it would be possible for you to become a member of the 1976 Society? After all, $200 sure sounds like a lot of money. But think about breaking it down into little pieces, and it becomes a really manageable gift that makes an enormous difference in the AFA Foundation’s ability to offer Annual Meeting scholarships, sponsor nationally known speakers, and provide grants for the Graduate Training Track and scholarships for the Mid-Level Management Institute.

So, what would an automatic deduction on a debit card for $16.67 per month look like?

1 movie with popcorn and a soda (actually...that may be more than $16.67) 1 Starbucks latté per week 1 large pizza a month 2 paperback books at Border’s per month 1 XBox, Wii or Playstation game a quarter 3 new pairs of shoes in a year $16.67 per month may be something you can easily manage. Perhaps you can do more, or maybe you are on a tight budget and can do less. Whatever works for you works for the AFA Foundation!

Every dollar makes a difference in the kind of professional development programming the AFA Foundation provides. Make your monthly pledge today at www.fraternityadvisors.org and click on the AFA Foundation page. It’s easy, affordable, and gratifying. You’ll be happy you did it and you might not even miss that extra latté during the week!

The Foundation’s Mission To secure, invest, and distribute the necessary resources to support the educational objectives of the Association of Fraternity Advisors.

As a registered 501(c)(3) organization, the Foundation raises money through individual, organizational, and corporate donations to provide the highest quality professional development opportunities for AFA members. Gifts are taxdeductible to the extent the law permits.

A

s a new professional attending the 2007 Annual Meeting in Cincinnati, Veronica Hunter wanted to take advantage of the many professional development and networking opportunities that week. She looked forward to meeting other professionals, attending educational programs, and connecting with interfraternal leaders. While there, she also took the opportunity to give back to the Association that had already provided tremendous support to her in her brief career.

Veronica spoke with Michelle Guobadia, another young professional and a member of the AFA Foundation Board of Directors. She learned that the Foundation provided scholarships for graduate students and professionals to attend the Annual Meeting as well grants to the Association for the Annual Meeting Opening Session and the Graduate Training Track. In 2007, the Foundation provided over $20,000 in financial support through scholarships and program grants.

“Because the Association has provided a great professional foundation for me, I feel as though it is my obligation to invest and give back so that those professionals who come after me can reap the benefit of faithful donations,” said Hunter, who at the time was in her first year as the

Greek Life Coordinator at Lehigh University. “AFA has opened many doors for me as a young professional, including networking opportunites, professional writing and presentations, as well as meaningful and long lasting relationships, and for that I am truly grateful.”

Hunter took advantage of the Foundation’s monthly automatic debit option to make her donation easier to manage on the budget of a young professional. “I donate every month by having it taken out of my checking account,” she said. “I had already made the decision to donate, but this option definitely sealed the deal, as I don’t have to worry about it every month and it made it easier.”

Veronica Hunter (left) with AFA Foundation Board Member Michelle Guobadia at the 2007 Annual Meeting.

How Can I Help?

There are several ways you can make a gift to the AFA Foundation: 1. Annual cash gift (check or credit card).

To make an annual gift online, please visit: www.fraternityadvisors.org/foundation.aspx 2. Set-up automatic monthly or quarterly credit card installments.

3. List the AFA Foundation as a beneficiary in your will, individual retirement plan, or life insurance policy.

4. Endow a gift to the AFA Foundation.

For recurring credit card charges or information on estate or life insurance gifts, please call the AFA Foundation at 678-654-6207.

Please consider making a gift of $25, $50, $100, or more and mail to: AFA Foundation, 9640 Augusta Drive, Suite 433, Carmel, IN 46032

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

5

Creating a Culture of Assessment: – J ason Bergeron, Allison Foster, and Andrea Gaspardino Kovachy

T

he necessity to be transparent in higher education has pushed assessment into the forefront of fraternity and sorority community operations and practices. The role of assessment is growing to help the professionals in the field evaluate the fraternal experience and find new and different

ways to support values integration. The profession’s “assessment model” continues to gain momentum as one of the most effective methods of fraternity and sorority development. There are a variety of ways to incorporate assessment practices into daily advising operations. However, many practices seem to emerge as foundational pieces of a culture of assessment. With that, provided herein is a “Top Ten” list of practices, behaviors, and friendly reminders about how to support the assessment of student learning.

10. Learning outcomes must come first.

9. P rogram evaluation is a part of assessment, but does not define assessment.

As simple as it sounds, assessment is only effective if those undertaking it have an acceptable knowledge of what needs to be assessed. A common pitfall is not beginning the process with established learning outcomes for all assessment initiatives.

The American Association of Higher Education identified the importance of learning outcomes in its efforts to define assessment within higher education, stating that “assessment requires attention to outcomes but also and equally to the experiences that lead to those outcomes” (Astin et al., 1996).

Many professionals often define their assessment capabilities by how often they evaluate the programs provided. While program evaluation is an important part of assessment, it does not define assessment within student affairs. The struggle with only engaging in program evaluation is that it only takes into account learning experiences that are offered by the office, the councils, or the institution. Program evaluation does not take into account the learning experiences that may be happening outside of those programs, or help in determining if students are applying the knowledge they learn from various programs.

Students can certainly learn within the confines of provided experiences and structure. However, a great deal of learning also happens outside of those structured experiences in their daily lives as students and as fraternity/sorority leaders. Learning outcomes assist professionals in recognizing those venues where they may not have direct control as equally important as those experiences they can intentionally structure. If one is assessing without having created learning outcomes (they may be for fraternity/sorority life, student involvement, and/or the overall student affairs program), this becomes a great opportunity to begin the dialogue regarding the outcomes creation process.

For a simple introduction to the process of creating learning outcomes, reference the “Assessment Tools for Daily Practice” resource developed by the AFA Assessment Committee, which can be found on the Association’s website in the Knowledge Center.

6

Perspectives / Fall 2008

The role of the fraternity/sorority professional as an educator becomes critical in demonstrating the importance of avoiding this pitfall. Apple & Krumsieg (1998) help professionals understand how their roles as administrators of assessment take a different shape when dealing with learning outcome-driven assessment versus program evaluation. Assessment is often reflective in nature, assisting students in reaching internally created goals and outcomes, while program evaluation tends to detail if a student has met externally prescribed standards. While evaluation is important in the scope of meeting program standards, continual reflection assists students and administrators in making meaning out of their experiences.

The earlier the tone is set for transparency with activities, programs, and development, the more time there is to create a culture of honest and open feedback.

8. Q uantity vs. quality – Use multiple types of assessment and research.

Fraternity/sorority professionals continually struggle with the most effective way to collect information. Stakeholders may focus on the statistical data of the fraternity/sorority community (average chapter size, number of service hours reported, number of expansions within the past year, etc.) when gauging its success. The purpose of this article is to challenge those professionals to look beyond the “numbers” to the true impact on student learning that can be documented through quantitative and qualitative methods.

To generalize, qualitative research manifests itself through dialogue and observation and is typically used to explore and “to understand the meaning people have constructed” (Schuh & Upcraft, 2001, p. 28). Quantitative-based methods provide measurements, assign standard measures to varying perspectives and experiences according to predetermined response categories (Schuh & Upcraft, 2001), and are generally better for confirming and clarifying qualitative data. Put simply, qualitative methods will provide descriptions, while quantitative methods will provide more numerical data. Placed within a community service and/or service-learning perspective, qualitative data may come from reflections, thoughts, and phrases students may offer about their service experiences. On the other hand, quantitative data may include the number of hours completed, the likelihood, on a scale, that the student will participate in the future, or a numerical assessment of achievement of a predetermined learning outcome.

Qualitative assessment, unfortunately, is often viewed as more overwhelming and time-consuming. The challenge exists in incorporating qualitative measures of values integration into the daily operations of the fraternity and sorority community or organization. Focus groups, open forums, reflections, interviews, and one-on-one meetings are some basic ways to incorporate qualitative assessment into daily practice. Finding themes within this data can be a tool in gauging whether students are connecting with the values of their organization and of the community.

7. One size assessment does not always fit all. Know the connections between the nuances of the community and the approach to assessment.

Assessment within fraternity and sorority life is, in some ways, about credibility. Fraternity/sorority professionals ask students and other stakeholders to share information about their knowledge and experiences, and they must make every attempt to ensure that the information is reported truthfully. It is important that students, advisors, volunteers, and others see assessment strategies as meaningful in supporting real student learning and as a method to look for data about the issues that are meaningful to students.

Collecting information from students and others that does not address the defined goals, values, and outcomes has the potential to communicate to others that there is a lack of understanding of the issues they face in advancing fraternal values. For example, using an assessment instrument that places a strong focus on the chapter facility experience would be ineffective on a campus primarily of commuter students or on a campus with no official fraternity or sorority housing. Additionally, using a community/ organization-wide assessment that fails to address alcohol use and/ or abuse in a community/organization has the potential to side-step data collection on an important issue. It is important to find the balance between the information the professional needs to know and what stakeholders feel is important to know. continued on page 8

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

7

continued from page 7

6. C an you handle the truth? Buy-in for assessment helps to obtain valid data and create meaningful partnerships.

Assessment can be frightening for both students and administrators. For students, the challenge lies in being open and honest regarding activities and/or practices within the chapter and/or community. For administrators, the challenge lies in creating a culture where honest and open dialogue can translate into assessment practices. In this spirit, however, fraternity and sorority professionals sometimes forget to communicate the how and why of assessment and to emphasize early the value of assessment and self-reflection with students. Stating that the purpose of assessment is simply to collect data about the community/organization and its chapters can be seen by students as both an exercise in futility and a threat to their success, with looming questions such as “why does the university need to know that?” or “that’s not an issue here.” Framing conversations around ideas of how organizations identify areas of growth (how to determine what is not working) can be a great place to introduce the idea of student support for assessment. This potentially requires some vulnerability on the part of the institution, recognizing when assessment data may demonstrate that they are “missing the mark” and intended learning outcomes are not being reached at an appropriate level. The earlier the tone is set for transparency with activities, programs, and development, the more time there is to create a culture of honest and open feedback.

5. Don’t recreate the wheel. Look for (and share) assessment resources.

While it is recommended that some assessment practices (specifically the creation of learning outcomes) be more organic, there are a variety of established tools and practices available. Educators are prone to sharing resources, assisting one another, and developing programs collectively. As previously mentioned, the AFA Assessment Committee has created tools that provide an overview for beginning assessment, inclusive of instruments for daily use, an overview of learning outcomes, and a standards packet for a fraternity/ sorority community. These models are suited to be translated to other institutions and various positions within student affairs. Many of the greatest assessment and student learning resources find their home outside of fraternity/sorority life as well. Below are samples of some of the tools that are available to aid with assessment.

AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment (http://www.webebi.com/_AsmtServices/FratSoro/AFA.aspx) Center for the Study of the College Fraternity (http://www.indiana.edu/~cscf) Fraternity/Sorority Coalition Assessment Project (http://www.nicindy.org/information/assessment_project/) ACPA Commission for Assessment and Evaluation (http://www.myacpa.org/comm/assessment/) NASPA Assessment, Evaluation and Research Knowledge Community (http://www.naspa.org/ communities/kc/community.cfm?kcid=24)

8

Perspectives / Fall 2008

4. Listen…

And do it often.

Student learning has the potential to occur in all environments, activities, and conversations. It makes sense to treat them as such.

Each interaction has the opportunity to demonstrate whether or not learning outcomes are being met. This data can only be useful if the right questions are asked to encourage reflection with students and if important moments from those conversations are documented. The simple “what did you learn from that experience?” or even a weekly “what have you learned this week?” in conversation can be a powerful tool in collecting meaningful narrative that supports outcomes. Additionally, finding time to pose questions to students about what they are learning from their fraternal experience can be the catalyst to deeper dialogue and reflection about their learning experiences.

3. Know when to generalize and when to avoid generalizations.

In data comparison with other fraternity/sorority communities, it can be difficult to make meaning of the similarities or differences between institutions and within subpopulations of a specific institution. It is crucial to have knowledge of the culture of the institution/organization before making attempts to analyze and compare assessment data across institutions/organizations. For example, data from a commuter campus might not necessarily be comparable to data from a residential campus. Similarly, variances in size, ethnic demographics of the student population, and geographic locations are other examples of factors that might differ from one institutional environment to the next. Looking at assessment from a perspective of an ethnically and culturally diverse fraternity/sorority community, one would not be serving students well to assume that assessment data in the form of survey responses would be reflective of the general thoughts, feelings, and experiences of the entire fraternity/sorority community. This may not provide the campus with meaningful data and may also disengage students from participating in the assessment culture.

Over-generalizing has the potential to assume students always speak as a community voice instead of recognizing subgroup or individual voices.

Benchmarking can be a powerful tool in this respect. While analyzing data for inter/national trends, it is important to identify campuses and organizations that most reflect the culture of the subject institution/organization/group and analyze similarities and differences with those benchmarking characteristics in mind.

Student learning has the potential to occur in all environments, activities, and conversations.

2. Don’t be a gatekeeper of assessment data and practices. Get the information off the bookshelf!

This is often the most challenging aspect of assessment. Once assessment data is collected, the most important thing to do is use it and share it with others. Data can be used to shape programs, daily work practices, and conversations with colleagues, supervisors, students, and other volunteers. Create opportunities to identify new ways to incorporate assessment data into student learning. A student may not have the time and/or desire to read a full assessment report, but will be more engaged with small, meaningful pieces of empirical data that may support ideas or suggestions. Take learning outcomes, for example. Using assessment data to shape what students should learn while assessing what they actually learn demonstrates the true intention of assessment within the student affairs environment. One can evaluate the success of advising approaches and whether or not they should continue.

1. Use assessment data to drive philosophy on student learning and engagement.

As they continue to collect assessment data, professionals should use that data to identify the gaps in the achievement of stated or desired learning outcomes. This is a driving force behind why fraternity/sorority professionals work to establish effective assessment practices within fraternity/sorority communities – to find out how students can gain competencies through their fraternal membership. The approach to student learning should be framed using learning outcomes that can be created and communicated by stakeholders. Collected data, both qualitative and quantitative, should be able to support each experience provided, policy supported, or initiative sponsored. Advising approaches which fail to support stated learning outcomes challenge professionals’ ability

to be intentional educators and take time, funds, and other resources away from better learning opportunities. Planning and organizing opportunities with the primary purpose of being fun or relying on “gut instinct” about a program or initiative instead of data focused on outcomes achievement diminishes the credibility of the profession and fails to support the educational missions of the host institutions.

– Jason Bergeron is the Assistant Director of Student Activities for Greek Life and Leadership at Michigan Technological University and is a member of the AFA Assessment Committee.

– Allison Foster is the Assistant Director of Campus Life at Florida International University and served on the AFA Assessment Committee.

– Andrea Gaspardino Kovachy is the Associate Director of Campus Life at Florida International University and is a member of the Assessment Committee.

References: Apple, D. K. & Krumsieg. K. (1998). Process education teaching institute handbook. Lisle, IL: Pacific Crest.

Astin, A., Banta, T., Cross, P., El-Khawas, E., Ewell, P., Hutchings, P., et al. (1996). Principles of good practice for assessing student learning. Retrieved June 15, 2008 from http://www. facet.iupui.edu/resources/AAHE%20Principles.pdf Schuh, J. & Upcraft, M. (2001). Assessment practices in student affairs: An applications manual. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

9

Ten-Plus Years: Alcohol-Free Housing within Phi Delta Theta – Robert J. Turning and Nathan P. Thomas

This article is the second in a two part series on alcohol in fraternities. This piece is a reflection on the 10th anniversary of the Alcohol-Free Housing initiative of Phi Delta Theta written by two members and past staff of Phi Delta Theta Fraternity.

I

t has been over ten years since the Phi Delta Theta Fraternity announced that all chapter facilities and properties would be alcohol free at all times and under all circumstances by July 1, 2000. In the fall of 1997, the first chapters to “go dry” were each rewarded with $10,000 grants from the General Fraternity and the Phi Delta Theta Educational Foundation for educational chapter house improvements.

Since then the policy has had its challenges and critics, but Phi Delta Theta is arguably better off for making the change.

In the spirit of full disclosure, both authors are members of Phi Delta Theta. Both worked at the General Headquarters in Oxford, Ohio and were on staff for the implementation of the policy in the late 1990s.

They continue to volunteer as province presidents (regional volunteers) and work with chapters to enforce the Alcohol-Free Housing Policy at the volunteer level. Both are intimately involved with the Fraternity and have many close friends who work in Oxford or volunteer with the Fraternity. The following is based on the authors’ view of the progress and information shared by Phi Delta Theta International Fraternity.

• • • What is alcohol-free housing?

This question of defining alcohol-free housing was asked thousands of times in 1997 and continues to be the most asked question regarding the policy. The answer is simple: there is to be no alcohol in any chapter house or on any chapter property. Whether intended or not, the policy provides a dichotomous understanding of black and white answers similar to the cognitive duality explained by Perry’s 1968 theory, leading to the simplicity of understanding what the policy states (Evans, Forney, & Guido-DiBrito, 1998). Either there is alcohol in the house, and the chapter or brother is in violation of the policy, or there is not alcohol in the house, and no one is in violation of the policy. Twenty-five other fraternities have some form of an alcoholfree housing (AFH) policy: for discipline purposes; incentive for good performance or meeting criterion; expansion initiative for new chapters; or as a way to secure loans for house improvements. However, only Farmhouse, which has always had alcohol-free housing, and Phi Delta Theta have maintained a uniform alcohol-free policy for all chapters.

10

Perspectives / Fall 2008

• • • AFH – Enforcement In practice, the policy has had its critics. Some may say Phi Delta Theta chapter houses are not really dry, because even though the chapter does not host parties there, members still drink in the house. In other words, those who question the policy often question the enforcement of the policy. It could be argued the policy has, at the very least, established an expectation that alcohol not be in the chapter house. If it is found, chapters are given the opportunity to govern themselves, hold those who break the rules accountable, and correct the problem. If they choose not to do this, chapters are held accountable by the General Fraternity’s disciplinary process. Of course, if the behavior is widespread or particularly egregious, more aggressive action will be taken. In an investigation, the province president and headquarters staff make a recommendation to the Fraternity’s General Council for action.

When the investigation is complete, the General Council may levy educational and/or punitive sanctions including monetary fines, varying levels of probation, and even charter suspension.

Much like with allegations of hazing, when information is presented to the Fraternity, the Fraternity will act. Unlike hazing, alcohol use is much more socially accepted and often occurs openly. Outsiders see it happening and choose to ignore it, do not know it is unacceptable, or fail to report it to the institution or headquarters.

In cases where a violation has been reported to the headquarters, action has been taken. In 1997, headquarters staff and the General Council anticipated they would lose chapters because of the AFH policy; they considered losing 10% of total chapter dues to the new policy – a conservative estimate. Since 2000, chapters at the University of Richmond, Pennsylvania State University, the University of the South, and others were closed for non-compliance. Recent colonizations at the University of Wisconsin and Boston University were withdrawn. The chapter count on June 29, 2000 was 167. As of the 2008 Convention, Phi Delta Theta lists 160 active chapters, five colonies, and four interest groups.

The comparison demonstrates that the AFH policy has had little negative influence on the number of chapters of the Fraternity.

Chapters such as Cornell University and the University of Virginia were closed, then immediately restarted with new members and new alumni boards, and flourish today. Chapters at Central Methodist University in Missouri and Monmouth College in Illinois have returned, because of the positive reputation of Alcohol-Free Housing, after being dormant since 1878 and 1884, respectively.

• • • Benefits realized from AFH Many within the Fraternity believe AFH contributes to the overall success of the Fraternity. In 2007, data collected by the Fraternity Executives Association showed the size of the average Phi Delta Theta chapter was 54 men, while the overall average fraternity size was 35. Over a ten year period from 1998-2008, the average Phi Delta Theta chapter size was 44 and the overall fraternity average size was 40. Not only is Phi Delta Theta’s average chapter size larger than the overall average, their average has increased while the overall average has decreased over the same time period (R.A. Biggs, personal correspondence, April 11, 2008). According to a report posted on phideltatheta.org, “a recent study conducted by the Fraternity Executives Association detailed that Phi Delta Theta had colonized and chartered the second most chapters since 2000 of all fraternities.”

In addition, more members, staff, and volunteers say the AFH policy has helped Phi Delta Theta recruit better quality members by avoiding undesirable potential members. The policy can be likened to “The Club” you might put on your car. It does not necessarily stop someone from breaking into cars, but it makes your car less desirable to criminals. A measure of this for Phi Delta Theta is the number of “#1 Scholarship Awards” the Fraternity recognizes each year. In 1997, eight chapters were ranked #1 on their campus in either the fall or spring semesters.

In 2007, thirty-six chapters received the award. The average chapter GPA since 2000 has risen from a 2.73 to a 2.93. continued on page 12

Many within the Fraternity believe AFH

contributes to the overall success of the Fraternity.

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

11

continued from page 11 Another reason Phi Delta Theta moved to AFH was to reverse the rapid rise of liability insurance premiums for undergraduate members. According to the James R. Favor and Company insurance company, nearly 90 percent of insurance claims made against the Fraternity involved alcohol in some way, and 73 percent of those claims took place in the chapter house (J.R. Favor, professional presentation, February 2007). At their zenith, insurance premiums for Phi Delta Theta members were set at a base rate of $160 per man. Today, Phi Delta Theta members pay an average of $97 per man for liability insurance, while the FEA fraternity average is $163 per man. In the 1997-1998 academic year, Phi Delta Theta had 12 claims that paid out $211,251. Since 2005, the Fraternity has only had four claims and paid out $1,449 in damages (R.A. Biggs, personal correspondence, April 11, 2008).

The move to AFH was also made to re-involve alumni who had become indifferent to, or even worse, disillusioned by the Fraternity. Some hypothesized a return to the core values of the Fraternity would energize disengaged alumni. Many of these alumni eschewed what they saw as an alcohol-dominated culture – one where the measure of a great chapter was no longer the sum total of the accomplishments of the brothers, but how gigantic a booze-soaked party they could throw. In 2008, there are 48% more chapter advisors and advisory board members than there were in 1997. To date, there are 113 recognized alumni clubs, with 14 started in the last two years. In addition, seven of the best years for alumni giving to the Phi Delta Theta Foundation have been recorded in the 10 years since the implementation of AFH.

• • • Most recent challenge to AFH Most recently, the AFH policy and Phi Delta Theta prevailed in the first real challenge to the policy, its implementation, and its enforcement. The chapter at Pennsylvania State University was disciplined for multiple violations of the policy. After incidents ranging from beer pong tournaments witnessed by Interfraternity Council officers to pregame football parties with a full bar, the General Council voted to suspend the charter. Active members were moved to alumni status and new members were released from any obligation to Phi Delta Theta.

The chapter was closed. A 1905 deed to the property stated Pennsylvania State University could buy the property and house should the Pennsylvania Theta chapter ever cease to hold a charter of Phi Delta Theta. In an effort to preserve the chapter and chapter house, the chapter, with help from alumni, filed a lawsuit against the Fraternity.

Essentially, Pennsylvania Theta’s claim was that the AFH policy was enacted without following procedures outlined in the Code of the Fraternity or without a vote being conducted at a Convention.

A Pennsylvania judge upheld the Code of the General Fraternity and its statute providing the General Council the ability to “make such policies and appointments as may be necessary to promote the general welfare of the Fraternity.” The enactment of the AFH policy was ruled to have been conceived to do just that; protect members, both physically and from liability, and further promote the values of the organization: friendship, sound learning, and rectitude. Also entered into evidence were resolutions ratified (Burke, 2008) by the Phi Delta Theta Convention, the Fraternity’s legislative body of which undergraduates control a majority of the votes, in 1996 and 1998 supporting the AFH Policy, calling “upon all college Greek-letter societies and university faculty and administrators to join in support of alcohol-free housing within college fraternities” (R.A. Biggs, personal correspondence, April 11, 2008). At the 2008 convention, the Pennsylvania Theta chapter was anticipating engaging the convention floor in a discussion about a change to the AFH policy. However, they did not gather enough support to even have the matter brought to the legislative body of the Fraternity.

Throughout the Fraternity and its leadership, alcohol-free housing is an integral part of Phi Delta Theta. Like any major policy change, it has been and will continue to be met with its challenges, yet Phi Delta Theta is a better international fraternity today than it was ten years ago. The fraternity is stronger today in risk reduction, enforcement of all fraternity policies, academic rankings, and commitment to its fraternal values in large part due to the focus and emphasis on its Alcohol-Free Housing policy.

– Robert J. Turning is the Greek Life Coordinator at The Johns Hopkins University.

– Nathan P. Thomas is the Executive Director of the Center for Residential Living and Leadership at Bradley University.

References Burke, T.M. (2008, September). Phi Delta Theta’s Alcohol-free policy upheld (Fraternal Law September 2008). Cincinnati, OH: Manley Burke, A Legal Professional Association.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998).

Student development in college: Theory, research and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Like any major policy change, it has been and will continue to be met with its challenges, yet Phi

Delta Theta is a better international fraternity today than it was ten years ago.

12

Perspectives / Fall 2008

Peak Peak Performance Performance \pek\\p \p (r)-for-m n(t)s\ highest highest levelororgreatest greatestdegree degree execution executionof of an an action action \pek\ (r)-for-m n(t)s\ level e e

The 50 AFA volunteers central to planning the Annual Meeting – affectionately known as TEAM DENVER – have developed an experience of active and passive learningcentered programs for meeting attendees.

Opportunities to connect, reconnect, and mentor are plentiful. Through new initiatives and traditional events, the Annual Meeting brings together and to life the dynamic elements of the Association.

Why should members attend the Annual Meeting? Simple. The Annual Meeting is a reunion, a training camp, and a climbing expedition all in one.

Here are a few highlights of what to expect at the 2008 AFA Annual Meeting: Developmental Resource Center: The reinvigorated DRC will showcase the best practices, programs, and interventions from AFA members. Categorized by the Core Competencies for Excellence in the Profession, this resource center will embrace sustainability efforts by providing on-site viewing of materials with the opportunity to download copies from the AFA website during or after the Annual Meeting.

Educational Programming: The 2008 meeting boasts more educational programs

e e

T

he 2008 AFA Annual Meeting seeks to provide attendees with an experience unlike any before. Situated at the Hyatt Regency Denver at Colorado Convention Center in the heart of downtown, meeting attendees will be surrounded by new ideas, intriguing colleagues, and the bustle of this friendly city. As the premier professional development program of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, the Annual Meeting truly is a chance for members and partners to listen and learn, to discover and teach, and to gather the tools that can help elevate their work.

than ever before. The Call For Content process drew in program proposals and feedback from members about their educational needs and wants during the Annual Meeting. With 11 blocks of programs, attendees will be able to choose from a wide variety of topics and presentation styles that aim to help elevate the level of discourse within the Association.

Feature Session: Every year, Annual Meeting evaluations ask for general sessions with meaning, sessions that make attendees stand up and take notice. This feature session, sponsored by a grant from the AFA Foundation, will do just that. This incredibly dynamic program, led by Dr. Donald G. DiPaolo, will provide not a presentation, but an experience that engages participants in thoughtful conversation that digs deep and speaks to professionals and volunteers as advisors, friends, partners, and more.

Fireside Chats and the FSC Meet & Greet: The traditional 20-minute Fireside Chats will happen on the Friday morning of the meeting, while the informal Meet & Greet takes center stage on Thursday night with a longer, stand-alone opportunity for participants to connect.

Graduate Training Track: Funded by a grant to the AFA Foundation from Rho Lambda National Honorary, this intensive and interactive educational track is specifically designed for graduate students and will complement the educational experience of those seeking careers in advising fraternities and sororities.

Order of Omega Case Study & First-Year Case Study Challenge: Teams of two final-year graduate students are invited to compete in the feature case study competition generously sponsored by the Order of Omega, while first-year graduate students may elect to participate in the experiential learning of the Case Study Challenge.

Philanthropy Project: In congruence with the value of service and giving shared by many fraternal organizations, the Association has selected Project Angel Heart, one of two local service sites, as the philanthropic cause for this Annual Meeting. Donations will be accepted online, by phone at (800) 381-5612, or by mail to

Project Angel Heart, 4190 Garfield St., #5, Denver, CO 80216. Be sure to note AFA as the company connected with any donations. Please take advantage of this opportunity to leave Denver a little better than we found it.

Pre-Conference Opportunities: There are many choices on Wednesday, December 3 for pre-conference programming. Jump into tough topics at the National Hazing Symposium, or serve the host city by giving a few hours at a local food bank or area AIDS services agency. Or, learn more about true partnerships, effective conduct practices, curriculum development for the fraternity/sorority experience, or the many interfraternal partners central to the fraternal movement.

Project Job Search: Project Job Search has two exciting components. Potential job seekers may elect to participate in the PJS: Resumé Review & Mock Interview process while potential employers will have the opportunity to meet candidates and share information about available positions during the PJS: Employment Exchange.

Service Plunge: Meeting attendees have the opportunity to contribute to the work for Project Angel Heart, an agency providing comfort and compassion through meals and companionship to persons living with HIV/AIDS. Or, join about 30 AFA members at the Food Bank of the Rockies, lending extra hands to this very important organization. There are three different service plunge shifts from which to choose.

The AFA Connection: THE AFA CONNECTION is a program uniquely designed for first-time meeting attendees.

Through THE AFA CONNECTION, first timers will attend a kick-off and orientation event, be assigned a Connection Captain to assist them in navigating the Annual Meeting, and have the opportunity to join other first timers during meals.

Additional information about the Annual Meeting, including registration information and detailed information about participating in the programs listed here, can be found at http://www.fraternity advisors.org/AnnualMeeting.aspx. The regular registration deadline is October 31.

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

13

– Dan Bureau

Using Values Exploration

t o R at i o na l i z e R i s k M anagement P o l i c i e s

F

or almost 20 years, risk management policies have aided in countering negative behaviors in the fraternal movement (FIPG, 2008). While undergraduate members may have some awareness of policies, I believe that a collective understanding and appreciation of risk management guidelines by undergraduates has not been accomplished.

Dr. Lori Hart Ebert (2008) recently wrote a piece that offered how one national fraternity, Pi Kappa Phi, approaches alcohol education and risk management. She provided several outcomes appropriate to risk management, which included a common understanding of basic tenets of risk policies: follow the law, the organization does not provide the alcohol, know who your guests are, and no alcohol in the joining process. In a more basic paradigm, I believe policies ask participants to look out for each other, practicing a value germane to fraternities and sororities – friendship.

A u t h o r ’ s W o rk i ng P h i l o s o p h y I have written other articles encouraging readers to consider how the relevance of fraternal organizations could be in jeopardy unless professionals and volunteers better connect espoused mission and values to everyday actions of members (Bureau, 2007a; Bureau, 2007b; Bureau, 2006).

When considering risk management as a relevance issue, I also have some biases regarding this topic: 1) I first consumed alcohol when I was 14 years old. I became a regular user in high school. By the time I got to college, I had learned tactics to circumvent the law and had regular access to alcohol. I believe that I am not an exception and that many college students have similar experiences.

2) I believe peer governance is imperfect but, ultimately, can be effective if students are “enforcing” guidelines in which they are invested rather than those that have been forced upon them by external parties. When policies are mandated from external parties, discussions on the rationale behind the policies must immediately occur between those enacting the policies and those on which the policies have been enacted.

3) M ost professionals and volunteers in the fraternal movement are deeply committed to helping students have a positive experience; however, I believe that we are also inadequately prepared to deal with some of the most difficult student issues. How we attempt to address such challenges has to be more than “because the law says so.” We have to make a case that fraternal organizations should matter to students as more than social clubs during college. I believe if we go about this process with attention to mission and values then we not only help students recognize the greater worth of fraternities and sororities now but also help them connect to how the organizations may fit into their lives beyond college.

It is important to convey these biases because they influence how I approach risk management, which is different than how I approached it as an undergraduate member, as a young professional at the University of New Mexico (1998-2001), and as a more “seasoned professional” during my time at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (2001-2006). Today, I believe professionals have let policies bear the responsibility of helping students understand risk management violations. Enacting a mission and values approach may help students understand that policies are much more than efforts to monitor legal liability and follow the law; they help align actions with what members espouse as important benefits of fraternal organizations. This article provides an example of how to connect policy with values in an effort to challenge students to change their behavior. The manner in which we approach risk management has to change in order to have a more significant impact.

14

Perspectives / Fall 2008

The Activity In January 2008, I conducted a keynote and breakout session at a joint conference of two institutions in the Midwest. I was charged with providing values-based leadership for 200 students and then a workshop on risk management that was one of about eight workshops participants could attend during a one-hour time block.

The keynote was easy to plan, but the workshop was more difficult to develop. This is most likely because my biases referenced above have created a relatively skeptical view of risk management workshops that use policy as an educational tool. As I prepared to facilitate the workshop, it occurred to me to continue with the theme of values. This made sense, because the process of helping students discover how actions and values can be more congruent is really what drives my commitment to the fraternal movement after 12 years of work with these organizations. The workshop I led can be easily adapted to specific campus efforts to address risk management in a new way.

Materials Used. The individual values audit (available at the AFA Knowledge Center under Models and Samples: http://www. fraternityadvisors.org/Models_Samples.aspx); copies of the campus or FIPG Risk Management Policy (FIPG, July 2008); copies of individual chapter mission statements (taken from the websites of the organizations’ inter/national headquarters); flip chart; and markers. (Note: The FIPG Policy used was an older version of the policy that was revised in July 2008, but the order of the items remained the same as the previous version used in this activity.)

Process. During the keynote, students conducted their individual values audit. This activity provides a list of over 30 values and asks students to identify their top five values in a timeframe of about 10 minutes. In addition, they were each provided with a copy of their respective organization’s mission statement. When students came to the risk management workshop, I instructed them to sit in groups of four to five (the number is arbitrary and will vary on the workshop’s size and the ideal number of students for a small group). Their charge was to review their individual values audit and as a group determine their top five. Students could use whatever process they wanted to create group consensus. In an effort to compare how their workshop group’s values were common to those of their inter/national organizations, I had participants review their organizations’ mission statements and talk about overlap and potential incongruence. This accomplished the secondary goal of helping participants examine the alignment of individual and organizational values.

Participants were then given five pieces of newsprint and asked to write the name of one value at the top of each sheet. Once completed, I passed out copies of the FIPG Risk Management Policy and gave them five minutes to read and discuss. After completing the review, each group had 15 minutes to identify how each aspect of the risk management plan fell under the heading of at least

one of their values. They had five minutes each to report on their findings. Following their presentations, we took time to process the activity and connect it to potential actions when they returned to their chapters.

What happened? During group reporting, certain values emerged as common across groups. Integrity was a value that each group brought forth. Three of the four groups used accountability and respect. Other values mentioned once were compassion, justice, honesty, purpose, trust, friendship, diversity, responsibility, personal development, and achievement.

The FIPG Risk Management Policy includes five sections: Alcohol and Drugs, Hazing, Sexual Abuse and Harassment, Education, and Fire, Health, and Safety. Ten statements pertain to alcohol and drugs (A&D), one to hazing, one to sexual abuse and harassment (SAH), five to Fire, Health, and Safety (FHS), and one to education. A few of the commonly cited components of the policy that align with integrity include number two of A&D, “No alcoholic beverages may be purchased through or with chapter funds….” and number eight of A&D, “All recruitment or rush activities associated with any chapter will be non-alcoholic” (FIPG, 2008, p. 1).

Many students referenced most of the A&D policies as relative to accountability. More students were able to connect FHS policies to this value than to integrity.

Hazing was referenced by each of the three groups who cited respect as a common value. Students referenced that hazing itself is intended to accomplish respect. In turn I offered that while the perception of hazing results in respect, I reminded them that they recognize that the anti-hazing policy itself is intended to uphold the value of respect. Each group cited SAH as exemplifying respect as well. continued on page 16

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

15

continued from page 15 The values of purpose, friendship, responsibility, and trust were connected to all five of the policy’s headings, with at least two A&D policies cited. The values of personal development, achievement, diversity, honesty, compassion, and justice were all connected to hazing.

The discussion with students provided insight into how none had previously examined their values in relation to risk management policies. Many found the activities helpful and shared that the process of aligning values and policies could work with other members in their chapters. Two participants openly expressed their frustration with their chapter’s lack of adherence to risk management policies and acknowledged that connecting the rules to values most likely would not work in their chapter due to a strong culture of neglect toward risk practices.

Observations. This section highlights five observations from participant learning and my own learning during the activity.

Students felt challenged and disempowered to enact risk management policies, regardless of gender. Previously, I perceived women’s groups to be more in tune with risk management policies.

However, in this workshop, which had approximately the same number of men and women, there was little difference in how they faced great challenge in enacting policies. Each participant was struggling to implement risk management practices although campus and headquarters’ staff had instituted risk management education focused strictly on policy during the past semester.

Second, students often compartmentalized their values from their actions. As each group brought forth integrity as a shared value, and then connected the purchase of alcohol and the use of alcohol in recruitment activities as demonstrating a lack of integrity, something was clicking. Discussing how the intended outcome of respect from hazing actually exists in contradiction to friendship and respect of human beings provided insight into how students make sense of hazing and its impact on relationships.

Third, common values were a launching point for any discussion on the maladies of the fraternal movement. The connections students made not only to risk management practices, but to understanding the commonalities between individuals, as groups in the workshop, and as members of a fraternity and sorority community was fun to watch. When they shared their values, participants commented on the commonalities of integrity, accountability, and respect. Additionally, they understood how the range of other values was important to the general welfare of a fraternity and sorority community. Simply adding values to any discussion may not fix the problem, as other issues may be factored into these situations. A values conversation, however, is a way to focus on correcting behavior.

Additionally, student leadership can espouse the values paradigm somewhat easily, but others may have difficulty. Many participants acknowledged that this was a group influenced by their organization and leadership role (all were members of NIC and NPC organizations, and each was in a position that influenced risk management awareness in their chapter or community). They believed that a group of different members who were less engaged in risk management and leadership roles may have more difficulty making the connection between values and risk management policies in a meaningful way.

Finally, the power in open and honest discussion cannot be overstated. Often, the risk management discussion is one-sided –

16

Perspectives / Fall 2008

informing students about what cannot be done rather than focusing on understanding why. This renders students disempowered to translate this one-sided conversation back to chapter members in an effective way. Students said they shared their insight with me because I was not “in charge” of them and that talking honestly would not get them in trouble. If professionals can shift the paradigm of risk management education away from being strictly focused on discipline to incorporate the connection to values and their translation from chapter leader to general members, then we may be more successful in investing students in implementing risk management practices.

Conclusion. This article explained the process used to examine risk management policies through the lens of individual, group, and organizational values. This was attempted with a group of about 20 students at a conference attended by two different institutions. The results indicate that students found the connection of values to risk management policies as a potential way to challenge the norms in fraternities and sororities and shift the reasoning behind policy away from the law and policies toward the individual values and shared expectations of group members.

This activity was replicated at the Mid-American Greek Council Association (MGCA) meeting in February during the Judicial Pathway. It worked for some students and not for others.

However, during my first attempt with the workshop, I believe it demonstrated an effective way to shift the risk management discussion paradigm from that of policy to one of exemplifying our values. It was not perfect, but it was an attempt to do something different – an attempt I hope others are compelled to try with other students.

– Dan Bureau is a doctoral student in Higher Education and Student Affairs at Indiana University. He also serves as a consultant and facilitator for CAMPUSPEAK. He is an active volunteer in the fraternal movement and served as the 2004 Association of Fraternity Advisors President.

References Bureau, D. (2007a, Summer). Beyond the rhetoric and into the action of the values movement. Perspectives, 20-22.

Bureau, D. (2007b, Winter). Barriers to greatness: Using the concept of relevancy to create urgency for change. Perspectives, 8-11.

Bureau, D., Schendel, K., & Veldkamp, S. (2006, Summer). Values and action congruence. Perspectives, 16-17.

Ebert, L. H. (2008, Summer). Alcohol and risk management education: Pi Kappa Phi’s approach. Perspectives, 16-21.

Fraternal Information and Programming Group (FIPG), Inc., (2008, July). Risk management policy. Retrieved August 11, 2008 from http://www.fipg.org/fipg/fipg.nsf/vwPagesByKey/ Resources?OpenDocument Fraternal Information and Programming Group (FIPG), Inc., (2008). FIPG history. Retrieved August 13, 2008 from http://www.fipg.org/fipg/fipg.nsf/vwPagesByKey/ FIPGHistory?OpenDocument

Struggling to Grasp the Power of Assessment?

The National AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment Includes: t "MJHONFOU XJUI $"4 BOE -FBSOJOH -FBEFSTIJQ 3FDPOTJEFSFE TUBOEBSET t -FBSOJOH PVUDPNFT JOGPSNBUJPO t -POHJUVEJOBl analZTJT t #FODINBSLJOH BHBJOTU TJY FYUFSOBM QSPHSBNT t $IBQUFS lFWFl SFQPSUT

$PNQSFIFOTJWF $POรถEFOUJBM $PNQBSBUJWF $PTU &รฒFDUJWF "TTFTTNFOU $POUBDU .FMBOJF .POUFMFPOF t t ..POUFMFPOF!8FC&#* DPN XXX 8FC&#* DPN Fall 2008 / Perspectives 17

To Cultural Competence and Confidence: One Step at a Time – Dr. Darnell Bradley and Veronica Hunter

W

ithin the student affairs profession, competency does not lie within one particular focus area. Areas such as advising and helping, assessment, evaluation and research, and student learning and development are among the professional competencies that guide practice (ACPA, 2007).

Another vital area of importance to fraternity and sorority advisors is multicultural competence. As the growth of culturally based organizations signals a new era of fraternalism, the idea of cultural competence becomes even more important. Cultural competence is not a concept that is arrived at or acquired in a short time span. The confidence in one’s ability to interact across cultures takes years of intentionality in practice, reading, and being a willing participant in the experience. There is no single solution or training workshop available to help advisors reach a specific level of attainment. This particular competency, as with many others, takes time, dedication, and patience to obtain.

The practice of cultural competence should be an intentional effort by professionals to move beyond a surface level understanding of the groups with which they work. The rapid expansion and growth of Asian American, Latino, Multicultural, and Native American fraternal organizations greatly supports this argument. These organizations afford any community the opportunity to build appreciation for diversity, inclusion, and cultural difference. An advisor not versed in the customs and practices of these populations, however, can hinder the realization of these opportunities. As advocates, advisors must move beyond the notion of just understanding the founding dates and institutions of fraternal organizations and dig deeper to understand the culture of which they are a part. Making oneself knowledgeable of the customs, beliefs, and practices of cultural groups is the beginning stage of attaining cultural competence. Subsequent stages include understanding the relevancy of cultural competence, the importance and need

18

Perspectives / Fall 2008

for critical conversations, and the value and necessity of collegial support (Hunter & Swalish, 2008).

Applying the basic concept of challenge and support (Sanford, 1966), advisors can use a developmental approach to build relationships with members of culturally based organizations. For the purpose of discussion, challenge will manifest through the advisor encouraging the students to achieve higher levels of performance within their organizations and councils. The idea of simply asking students to improve their grades, plan stronger programs, or to recruit more effectively may not be consistent with its results.

Only recently has there been an organized effort to develop students from culturally based chapters starting at their earliest stages of membership. Examples of such efforts include the NPHC New Member Institute and CAMPUSPEAK’s Intake Equation program, both of which serve as vehicles for students to prepare to make change in their chapters. For advisors, the two aforementioned programs provide a starting point for discussions of goals and outcomes. Efforts to make success and the stages leading to it an intentional process will result in positive change. In short, advisors have to employ creativity and a willful desire to learn about how to build bridges across cultures.

The notion of support becomes apparent as advisors seek to make themselves more visible and consistent in the activities and issues relevant to the culturally based council(s) and individual member organizations on their campuses.

Fraternity and sorority life staff should be visible not only at major events, but at the smaller-scale programs that many of the organizations are required by national organizations to host. Taking an opportunity to lend professional expertise to help the members put on dynamic programming is an effective way to connect with the chapter members.

Often advisors feel hesitant to ask about certain aspects of culturally based organizations and feel intimidated by the feigned

incredulity that students often display after being asked something. Realizing that fraternalism and the accompanying values are universal, advisors can confidently build bridges across race or ethnic origin. Below are several ways to begin relationship building with culturally based organizations:

A.

A. Attend a series of events consistently.

Attend events and observe the dynamics.

Notice who is and is not in attendance.

A good portion of how the NPHC organizations view themselves and how they are viewed by the campus is determined at their social events. These social events are used to impress prospective members, meet new students, and show an aura of chapter prestige. The more an advisor attends these events, the better he/she will understand the students and their needs.

For example, if one chapter has great attendance at its parties, but their educational programming attendance is weak, there is an opportunity for the advisor to help the students learn to diversify their marketing and their image.

B.

B. Read scholarly information about cultural groups. The advisor should seek to be equally knowledgeable about the practices and traditions of all types of councils and chapters. Fortunately, there are a number of scholarly texts available to serve as a primer. Professional colleagues can also be great resources.

C.

C. There are no real “secrets.” Advisors have a right to know much of the information that students would deem “secret.” If the organization is following the rules set forth by the national leadership, there is rarely such a necessity for strict secrecy.

D.

D. Network and attend events with members of the supervising graduate chapter.

Knowing the chapter’s primary advisor is not enough – this person has, in some cases, a team of advisors with whom they work. Get to know this team, as well as the rest of the members of the graduate chapter. Seek to maintain regular correspondence with the supervising graduate

chapter leadership, the graduate advisor, and the chapter president. These three points of contact along with being present and visible at events will give you a decent picture of where the chapter is right now, and where they are striving to be organizationally.

E.

E. Attend culturally based fraternal conferences. Take advantage of opportunities to accompany students to regional conferences like WRGA, MGCA, NGLA, SEPC/SEIFC, the National Black Greek Leadership Conference (NBGLC), the NPHC New Member Institute, or the many other smaller institutes available.

The more opportunities an advisor has for learning and interaction with other councils and advisors, the more confident he/she will feel in his/her ability to advise these chapters. Many of these conferences also have advisor tracks that specifically

address the necessary skills and knowledge needed to advise NPHC and other culturally based groups.

F.

F. Ask vital and pertinent questions.

Many times, advisors are afraid to ask questions about things that they do not understand for fear of embarrassment.

However, doing so places them in a position to continue learning about the organizations with which they work. Not only does this show their commitment as a fraternity/sorority professional, it shows the students that they are actively making an attempt to know them beyond the basics.

The need and desire for the fraternity/ sorority advising profession to be held in higher esteem and to develop a higher level of professionalism will require all those involved to do this important work to develop cultural competence.

As previously mentioned, cultural competence is a skill that takes time to develop, and the way each individual chooses to go about the ongoing practice of such a skill is strictly personal. However, using the examples and suggestions provided may assist professionals in breaking through the surface to understand and build relationships with students, allowing them to better themselves as educators and learners.

– Darnell Bradley is an Assistant Professor in the College of Education and Leadership at Cardinal Stritch University in Milwaukee, WI. He can be contacted through email at darnelljbradley@gmail.com.

– Veronica Hunter is a Greek Life Coordinator at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, PA. She can be contacted through email at vmh207@lehigh.edu

Efforts to make success and the stages leading to it an intentional process will result in positive change. In short, advisors have to employ creativity and a willful desire to learn about how to build bridges across cultures.

References American College Personnel Association (2007). ACPA Document on Professional Competencies. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www. myacpa.org/au/governance/docs/ ACPA_Competencies.pdf Hunter, V. & Sewalish, C. (2008).

Cultural competence: more than just a buzz word. Essentials. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www. fraternityadvisors.org/Essentials/ 200802/Cultural_Competence.aspx

Brown, T. L., Parks, G. S., & Phillips, C. M. (2005). African American fraternities and sororities: The legacy and the vision. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.

Association of Fraternity Advisors Professional Development Committee.

(2004). The growth of multicultural organizations. Carmel, IN: Association of Fraternity Advisors.

Fine, E. C. (2003). Soulstepping: African American step shows. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Sanford, N. (1966). Self and society: Social change and individual development. New York: Atherton.

Garrod, A. & Kilkenny, R. (2007).

Balancing two worlds: Asian American college students tell their life stories.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

To better aid you in your understanding of culturally based organizations, please find below literature that will surely assist you in your professional development:

Garrod, A., Kilkenny, R., & Gomez, C. (2007). Mi voz, mi vida: Latino college students tell their life stories. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Adam, M. (1999). Greeks empowering Hispanics. Hispanic Outlook, 9(12), 17-19.

Guardia, J. R. (2007). Latino/a fraternitysorority ethnic identity development.

Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 17(24), 72.

Gilroy, M. (2008). Latina sorority membership linked. Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 18(10), 18-20.

Kimbrough, W. M. (2002). Guess who’s coming to campus: The growth of Black, Latino, and Asian fraternal organizations. NetResults: NASPA’s E-Zine for Student Affairs Professionals.

Kimbrough, W. M. (2003). Black Greek 101: The cultures, customs, and challenges of Black Greek fraternities and sororities. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.

Rodriguez, R. (1995). Hermandades on campus: Elite Latino secret societies and fraternities of the past give way to today’s “brotherhoods” and “sisterhoods”. Black Issues in Higher Education, 12(21), 26.

Ross, L. C. (2000). The divine nine: The history of African American fraternities and sororities. New York: Kensington Books.

Windmeyer, S. L. & Freeman, P. W. (1998). Out on fraternity row: Personal accounts of being gay in a college fraternity. Los Angeles: Alysun Publications.

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

19

– Monica Miranda Smalls and Emily Perlow

Fraternal Relevance – Be Part of the Movement

I

magine a world where fraternities and sororities are perceived as a valued and essential component of higher education and beyond. In this world, fraternities and sororities fill a niche on campuses and in communities that no other organization or activity satisfies. In this world, both campus-based and fraternity/sorority professionals take responsibility for their actions that may hinder our ability to brand fraternity/sorority membership as essential to the campus educational experience; they stop blaming everybody else for the challenges and problems we face, develop the courage to close chapters that need to be closed and replace them with values-based organizations, and have more intentional, educational conversations with collegians and alumni. Imagine if those involved with fraternities and sororities broke away from the status quo and challenged every member not to just espouse the founding values but to enact them on a daily basis. Imagine if we held members who failed to espouse the values truly accountable. If these things happened, the fraternal movement would be relevant.

Unfortunately, many fraternity/sorority professionals are frequently called upon to explain the reasons why fraternal organizations should remain on a college campus or to justify that membership in a fraternity is far more than what is depicted by popular media. There are those who view the fraternal experience as irrelevant. The thoughtless actions of some collegiate members or disengaged alumni are often to blame for the downfall of the fraternal experience. At the same time, fraternity/sorority professionals must embrace the opportunity to impact organizations and members at the grass roots level. Rather than blaming others, fraternity/ sorority professionals have an obligation to take ownership for influencing a relevant fraternal experience for members.

I was really taken by the question, “What would replace Greek social organizations if they ceased to exist?” The FRI allowed us to ask the difficult questions as opposed to remain[ing] comfortable with “business as usual.” Leaders, now more than ever, cannot afford to remain quiet or to support the status quo. Rather, they must be willing to work with others who understand that Greek social organizations have to be prepared to find out in what ways we are relevant and in what ways we need to be prepared to change.

Actions that Promote Relevance •

Present at conferences on relevance

•

Commit to greater values education in your community

•

utreach to constituents about the fraternal community, O including faculty/staff, community members, and alumni/ae

•

F oster partnerships with other departments and entities on campus

•

equire every chapter to have a faculty advisor and R simultaneously cultivate faculty advocates

•

Meet with athletic coaches

•

Develop a values statement and put it on everything your office produces

•

Talk to new members about values right from the beginning

•

ffer leadership development programs that focus on valuesO based decision making

• Determine the issues which counter the relevance of fraternities and sororities;

•

E nsure judicial hearing outcomes are tied to values – consider adopting a restorative justice model

• Learn and create new ideas to address relevance and improve the position of fraternities and sororities as valued in higher education and society;

•

end copies of positive fraternity/sorority articles from the S newspaper or organization magazines to the president of the institution

• Develop ideas and/or create plans to become more intentional in how we support fraternities and sororities.

•

sk chapters to set goals; hold them accountable to A accomplishing these goals; and offer recognition for positive progress toward goals.

•

ollect data about your fraternity community and share C it widely

The Fraternal Relevance Institute On May 21, 2008, 55 professionals, including four facilitators, descended on Morgantown, Indiana for the two-day Fraternal Relevance Institute (FRI). The program consisted of reflective exercises, large and small group discussion, and presentations grounded in a framework inclusive of student development theory, systems theory, and a number of conceptual models with the following learning outcomes in mind:

20

One FRI participant stated, “The chance to collectively answer the question, “Are we relevant?”…could not have come at a better time.” Another participant commented,

Perspectives / Fall 2008

Creating a Relevant Fraternal Experience Who can promote relevance? EVERYONE! Here are things professionals can do to participate in fraternal relevance: • E mbrace that relevance may be defined differently by different entities. A university Board of Trustees may determine relevance based upon retention of students and alumni dollars donated.

An organization’s alumni may determine relevance based upon the friendships they gained. Fraternity/sorority professionals may measure relevance based on learning outcomes. Once the definition is determined, then one can seek ways to demonstrate relevance to these entities.

• E spouse and enact the values of our fraternal organizations.

Creating a culture of accountability can assist in this effort.

• B e strategic. Have a plan for change in place before you start, and be prepared to capture the thoughts and ideas of your stakeholders. Remember that people support what they have helped create. Talk to the influential members of your community to generate investment in a shared movement.

• B uild your coalition. Utilize a wide variety of stakeholders such as faculty, staff, students, alumnae, and community members to further the fraternal relevance movement. Invite these stakeholders to assist you in developing the strategic plan for your campus fraternity/sorority community or your inter/national organization.

• D ream big. Be a trend-spotter. Take time to imagine what your fraternal community could be like. Take time to think about the “What ifs.” Rather than getting bogged in the day-to-day fires, develop a vision. Then adopt an action plan to achieve that vision.

• B ecome culturally competent. In order to effectively provide positive experiences for students from a wide variety of backgrounds, professionals must continually increase both their cultural competence and that of the students within the chapters. For campus professionals, this provides a great opportunity to partner with a number of offices such as International Student Services and Multicultural Student Affairs.

• S urface the dogmas. Ask students, faculty, or staff about the 10 positive things they believe they would never hear said about fraternities and sororities (e.g. fraternities/sororities are academically focused, manage alcohol maturely, are the safest places on campus, etc.). Ask why they do not hear these things, then work to make changes.

• F ind and tap into the stickiness factor. Malcom Gladwell, author of The Tipping Point (2000), borrowed this term from the media world. It is often used to describe how infectious a change can be. The higher the stickiness factor, the greater the likelihood that the change will stick. Think carefully about sending the stickiest message you have to convey that fraternities and sororities fill a needed niche on campus (Heath & Heath, 2007).

• C learly communicate the message. Whether it be community expectations, standards, programs, or values, clearly and broadly communicate them. Post them on your website, include them in your e-mail signature, or discuss them at a yearly “town” meeting.

• S tretch. Too often fraternity/sorority professionals become stuck in the “we’ve always done it this way” mentality. Ask why you do the same programs year after year. Are you doing them because you did them last year or because they are tied to clearly intended outcomes? Spend time thinking outside the traditional paradigm.

• L ook outside of fraternity/sorority life for successful models.

There are innovations happening in many industries outside the fraternal world. Read the latest business success book. Subscribe to magazines such as Fast Company that promote creativity.

Many of the “new” ideas in this world are merely borrowed from another professional arena.

• C ollect the data to support relevance. We are all guilty of first saying we value assessment and then declaring we are too busy to actually design an instrument, administer it, and analyze the data. Data supports relevance. Consider consulting with the institutional research office on your campus, or start with easy-to-track data such as four-year retention rates and judicial incidence rates.

• A ssess and develop your skill level in each of AFA’s Core Competencies for Excellence in the Profession. Some FRI participants shared how including the Core Competencies in their annual professional evaluations has assisted them in developing and assessing these skills.

Eight Steps to Creating a Relevance Movement (adapted from Kotter, 1996) Kotter’s (1996) Leading Change model outlines eight steps to turn a relevant fraternal experience into a movement. While some of these steps are similar to the aforementioned ideas of creating a relevant fraternal experience, these steps broaden the concept by involving a greater number of stakeholders. continued on page 22

essential to the existence of fraternal organizations,

Achieving relevance in higher education is

especially undergraduate chapters on college and university

campuses internationally.

Fall 2008 / Perspectives

21

continued from page 21 Step 1 – Perform an environmental assessment to determine needed changes. How relevant is your community today?

Can you help guide your community toward a better state?

Implementing the AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment and/or hiring an organizational consultant are two methods that can be utilized to analyze your organization or campus fraternity/sorority community. Use the data from these or other types of assessments to create a sense of urgency within the community. What must change in order for the community to be successful?

Step 2 – Identify your stakeholders and get them on board.

Think about whom will be your greatest advocates for change and your greatest adversaries. Think about how to demonstrate to the adversaries that a positive change has positive implications for them as well.

Step 3 – Develop a clear vision and strategy for accomplishing the vision. Communicate this vision widely. Help others see the reasons why changes are positive.

Step 4 – Communicate the vision. Do not assume one memo about your vision will reach each member of your community.

Estimate the number of ways you would communicate the message and then multiply it by a factor of ten.

Step 5 – Empower others. People support what they help to create.

Seek opportunities to involve students, alumni, faculty, staff, and community members in providing feedback and leading change.

Step 6 – Celebrate small wins. Often when people do not know what is happening, they assume nothing is happening. Capitalize on the small wins, and recognize those who played a role in achieving the small win. If the naysayers see others being rewarded, behavior may be positively influenced, prompting additional and riskier changes.

Step 7 – Consolidate improvements and use these improvements to propel change. While it is important to celebrate the small wins, make sure to use these celebrations as a way to discuss what still needs to be done to achieve relevance, thereby maintaining the sense of urgency.

Step 8 – Build the infrastructure necessary to institutionalize these changes. This helps to ensure that the cultural change lasts longer than the generation of college students who participated in the initial change.

When Will We Know We Are Relevant?

Each of us may measure relevance differently and, as a result, determining relevance will be based on the chosen measurements.

One FRI participant states, “As a result of FRI, I developed this vision: ‘I envision a world in which everyone is positively affected by the actions of a fraternity or sorority member.’ To me, that is compelling for individuals and organizations, and if people can say we have achieved that, then we are relevant.”

Achieving relevance in higher education is essential to the existence of fraternal organizations, especially undergraduate chapters on college and university campuses internationally. When undergraduate members do not just espouse, but enact positive values based on behaviors that supplement their curricular experience, we can be relevant. When alumni members recognize the value of their undergraduate experience, provide mentorship to younger members in their area, and support the development of values-based leadership programs, we can enhance our relevance in society.

When we, as members, do as we say we are going to do in our 22

Perspectives / Fall 2008

creeds, rituals, mission, and values, institutions of higher education might appropriately staff campus fraternity/sorority affairs offices.

When campus and fraternity/sorority professionals and volunteers are equipped with extensive knowledge of student development theory to serve as the basis for how they train and educate fraternity/ sorority members, we can be relevant to our surrounding communities. When the daily practice of founding values of fraternities and sororities becomes second nature, we can achieve relevance.

Now is our opportunity as a fraternity/sorority community, and everyone plays a role. Make a commitment to think differently, inspire others, and lead change. The actions on our campuses or within our organizations may seem small, but in the words of Margaret Mead, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Now is your opportunity; be part of the movement.

– Monica Miranda Smalls is the Director of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs at the University of Rochester. She volunteers as Chair for the AFA Membership Intake Resource Workgroup and the Chair of the Board of Trustees for Omega Phi Beta Sorority, Inc., continuing almost 15 years of involvement in the fraternal movement.

– Emily Perlow is Associate Director of Student Activities and Greek Life Programs at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts. She is Chair of the AFA EBI Assessment Committee and serves on the AFA Technology Committee.

She is also actively engaged as a Province Director for Alpha Gamma Delta.

References Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point. London: Little Brown and Company.

Hamel, G. (2002). Leading the revolution: How to thrive in turbulent times by making innovation a way of life.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Heath, C. & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. New York: Random House, Inc. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Celebrating Ten Years of Great Ideas!

CELEBRATION friday, december 5, 2008 8:00 pm–midnight tivoli turnhalle 900 auraria parkway denver, colorado

held in conjunction with the 2008 association of fraternity advisors annual meeting complimentary transportation to and from the hyatt regency for afa attendees free parking for all other guests :: please don’t drink and drive ::

co-sponsored by

chapter communications :: greek yearbook hazingprevention.org :: ics :: pa marketing mark sterner :: tgi enterprises

Live band, dancing, desserts, cash bar, gifts...and a few surprises Fall 2008 / Perspectives 23

Association of Fraternity Advisors www.fraternityadvisors.org 9640 N. Augusta Drive, Suite 433 Carmel, IN 46032

Presorted First-Class Mail U.S. Postage PAID Ames, Iowa Permit No. 307