Oracle | Volume 15, Issue 1, Summer/Fall 2020

Vo l u m e 1 5 , I s s u e 1 , S u m m e r / Fa l l 2 0 2 0

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 a

TABLE OF CONTENTS iii

EDITORIAL TEAM

iv

GENERAL INFORMATION

v

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

1

STUDENT INVOLVEMENT AND GRADUATION RATES: A QUANTITATIVE STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF ADDING A FRATERNITY AND SORORITY COMMUNITY AT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES IN THE UNITED STATES Ronald Yates, College of Southern Nevada The National Panhellenic Conference recognized 33 colleges and universities in the United States as having added a fraternity and sorority community between 2000 and 2015. Graduation rate data from these institutions were collected from before the addition of fraternal organizations, and from six years later.

Graduation rates after the addition of fraternities and sororities (M = 57.00) were higher than before (M = 52.97), (t [32] = -4.42, p < .01). The results of this study suggest that the addition of a fraternity and sorority community can have a positive overall influence on student and institutional success.

14

AN EXAMINATION OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY DYNAMICS IN LATINX/A/OBASED CO-EDUCATIONAL FRATERNITIES Crystal Garcia, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Antonio Duran, Auburn University Centering the stories of Queer People of Color, this critical narrative inquiry project examined the dynamics around gender and sexuality in Latinx/a/o-based fraternities. In particular, the narratives of two Queer Women of Color and a queer non-binary individual revealed how these participants decided to join their organization and what their experiences were like once they were affiliated.Through two semistructured interviews and a reflection journaling project, participants shared how they often encountered moments of exclusion despite occasionally feeling a sense of inclusion in their chapters/organizations.

Implications for research and practice are then offered.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;¢ Summer/Fall 2020 ii

2020 EDITORIAL TEAM EDITOR James P. Barber, Ph.D. William & Mary

EDITORIAL ASSISTANTS Johann Ducharme William & Mary

ASSISTANT EDITOR Kahlin McKeown FARMHOUSE Fraternity

ASSOCIATE EDITORS Kate Steiner, Ph.D. Radford University

David Harger William & Mary T.J. Horan William & Mary

DIRECTOR OF MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS Andrea Starks-Corbin Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors

PEER REVIEW BOARD Cassie Barnhardt, Ph.D. University of Iowa

Jodi Jabs, Ed.D. Campbell University

Tara Leigh Sands Lycoming College

J. Patrick Biddix, Ph.D. University of Tennessee

Steven M. Janosik, Ed.D. Virginia Tech

Denny Bubrig, Ph.D. University of Southern Mississippi

Matthew Johnson, Ph.D. Central Michigan University

Pietro Sasso, Ph.D. Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

Daniel Bureau, Ph.D. University of Memphis

S. Brian Joyce, Ph.D. Dartmouth College

Mari Ann Callais, Ph.D. Delta Delta Delta

John Wesley Lowery, Ph.D. Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Trace Camacho, Ph.D. California State University, Long Beach

Travis Martin Northwestern University

Adam McCready, Ph.D. University of Connecticut

Katherine Carnell, Ph.D. University of Mount Union Brandon Common, Ph.D. Illinois Wesleyan University Charles Eberly, Ph.D. Eastern Illinois University Michael Giacalone Rhode Island College David L. Grady, Ph.D. University of Alabama Dennis Gregory, Ed.D. Old Dominion University

Malinda Matney, Ph.D. University of Michigan Gentry McCreary, Ph.D. Dyad Strategies, LLC Andy Morgan, Ph.D. Indiana State University Kimberly Nehls, Ph.D. University of Nevada, LasVegas Eric Norman, Ed.D. Purdue University FortWayne

Joshua Schutts, Ph.D. University of West Florida Michele D. Smith, Ph.D. Missouri State University Dianne Timm, Ph.D. Eastern Illinois University Anthony Vukusich Delta Tau Delta Educational Foundation Jerry Whitmore, Jr., Ph.D. Boston University Carolyn Whittier, Ph.D. Valparaiso University Viancca Williams University of South Florida Robert Wood, Ph.D. Joint Staff, Department of Defense

Scott Radimer, Ph.D. University of Houston

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 iii

GENERAL INFORMATION Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors advances the study of college fraternities and sororities through a peer reviewed academic journal promoting scholarly discourse among partners invested in the college fraternal movement. The vision of Oracle:The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors is to serve as the premier forum for academic discourse and scholarly inquiry regarding the college fraternity and sorority movement.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors is published biannually. Past issues of Oracle are available on the AFA website. The ISSN is 2165-785.

Copyright: Copyright Š 2020 Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, Inc. (AFA). All material contained in this publication is the property of AFA. The opinions expressed in Oracle do not necessarily reflect those of AFA. Requests for permission to reprint should be sent to the AFA Central Office at info@ afa.1976.org or 970.797.4361.

Submissions: Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors accepts submissions focused on articulating research involving fraternity and sorority members at the collegiate, alumni, inter/ national organization, and volunteer advisory levels. Manuscripts should be written for the student affairs generalist who has broad responsibility for educational leadership, policy, staff development, and management. Articles on specialized topics should provide the generalist with an understanding of the importance of the program to student affairs overall and fraternity/sorority advising specifically.

Research articles for Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors should stress the underlying issues or problems that stimulated the research; treat the methodology concisely; and, most importantly, offer a full discussion of results, implications, and conclusions. In the belief that AFA readers have much to learn from one another, we also encourage the submission of thoughtful, documented essays or historical perspectives.

Visit www.afa1976.org for more detailed submission guidelines.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 iv

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR James P. Barber, Editor | October 13, 2020

Greetings from Williamsburg, Virginia. As I reflect on the time that has passed since our last issue was released, it is hard to comprehend just how much our world has changed. We are seven months into the COVID-19 global pandemic that has fundamentally altered daily life. Social unrest and racial reckoning sparked by the murders of unarmed Black people, including Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, and too many others, fuel protests, activism, and conversation across the country. And we are just days away from a presidential election that is expected to be controversial and may be without a clear outcome on election night.

Each of these events have influenced the ways that fraternities and sororities operate. Organizations with core values centered on building community and bringing people together are mandated to meet virtually on many campuses due to concerns about the pandemic. Fraternity and sorority houses across the country are under quarantine due to outbreaks of COVID-19. Movements such as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Abolish Greek Lifeâ&#x20AC;? seek to convince fraternity and sorority members to renounce their membership and disband in response to egregious offences of sexual violence, racism, and hazing. The economic downturn brought on by the pandemic threatens higher education institutions as well as fraternal organizations as financial resources tighten.

Many of these circumstances related to the pandemic were unimaginable just a year ago as we prepared to meet in Anaheim for the AFA Annual Meeting. Yet other elements of our current environment related to racial discrimination are not surprising, the product of over 400 years of oppression. This current moment also prompts reflection on the origins and evolution of the fraternity and sorority community. As I teach students in my first-year seminar course, Virtue andVice: Fraternities, Sororities, and the American University, Greek-letter organizations were founded on exclusion and discrimination based on sex, race, and religion. Although many of the statutory restrictions on membership have been removed in recent decades, the legacy of exclusion lives on in wealth, resource, and membership disparities between organizations on most campuses today. The ways in which our governing bodies are organized detail the lines along which fraternities and sororities historically divided students.

How do we reconcile the harmful aspects of fraternity and sorority with the positive elements of personal development, lifelong relationships, and academic support that are also a part of the complicated legacy of fraternal organizations in the United States? We must acknowledge the complexity. Research can help us to document, examine and critique the experience of fraternity and sorority, and ideally prompt positive change in fraternity/sorority communities.

Two research articles are featured in this issue of Oracle, and they illustrate this aim of documenting, examining, and critiquing the experience to reveal complexity. The first is a quantitative study

by Ronald Yates that explores the ways that the addition of a fraternity/sorority community can influence student and institutional success. The second article is a qualitative study by Crystal Garcia and Antonio Duran examines the dynamics around gender and sexuality in Latinx/a/o-based co-ed fraternities. Student participants shared how they most often felt exclusion from their organizations, despite an occasional sense of belonging.

These studies exemplify the effects that fraternal organizations have on the college experience at both broad institutional and profoundly individual levels. Enjoy reading these two works of scholarship; I trust you will find they add to our understanding of the complexity of the fraternity and sorority experience.

In closing, I want to acknowledge some important transitions on the Oracle Editorial Team. As I Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 v

shared in my letter last issue, Dr. DJ Mitchell has completed his term as Associate Editor. With this issue, we welcome Dr. Adam McCready as Associate Editor, Kahlin McKeown as Assistant Editor, and Dr. Kate Steiner moves to Associate Editor after three years of service as Assistant Editor. David Harger and T.J. Horan join us as Editorial Assistants this year. Lastly, this marks the final issue for Johann Ducharme after nearly three years as Editorial Assistant. Best wishes to Johann as he works to complete his dissertation study this year. Thanks to you all for your dedication to Oracle; I appreciate your work, intellect, and fellowship.

Stay well and take care in these uncertain times.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 vi

STUDENT INVOLVEMENT AND GRADUATION RATES: A QUANTITATIVE STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF ADDING A FRATERNITY AND SORORITY COMMUNITY AT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES IN THE UNITED STATES Ronald Yates, College of Southern Nevada The National Panhellenic Conference recognized 33 colleges and universities in the United States as having added a fraternity and sorority community between 2000 and 2015. Graduation rate data from these institutions were collected from before the addition of fraternal organizations, and from six years later. Graduation rates after the addition of fraternities and sororities (M = 57.00) were higher than before (M = 52.97), (t [32] = -4.42, p < .01).The results of this study suggest that the addition of a fraternity and sorority community can have a positive overall influence on student and institutional success.

A substantial amount of research has shown that the students who are involved in campus activities are more likely to persist in their studies and graduate from their college or university (Winston, 2003; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Astin, 1999, 2005; Tinto, 1998). As a means for improving student engagement, fraternities and sororities provide opportunities for students to participate in campus activities, interact with other students, and to create a connection to the institution as a whole (Pike & Kuh, 2005; Long, 2012). It has been found that membership in fraternities and sororities leads to higher levels of involvement in, and satisfaction with campus life, as well as predicting higher rates of persistence and graduation (Walker, Martin, & Hussey, 2014). The addition of a fraternity and sorority community to campuses that did not previously include this entity may be an avenue to help students and institutions achieve greater levels of success (Schroeder, 1994).

This study investigated the graduation rates at colleges and universities in the United States before and after the implementation of a fraternity and sorority community on campus.

The intent of this study was to develop a better understanding of the impact that the addition of a system of fraternities and sororities can have in regard to the graduation rates of the students enrolled at an institution of higher education.The

aim of this study is to provide insight into how fraternity and sorority communities can directly impact both student and institutional success.

These results may be valuable for colleges and universities as decisions are made regarding the extracurricular programs that are available for students.

Literature Review Upcraft and Schuh (1996) asserted that, “for about 350 years, our citizenry accepted as a matter of faith that… higher education was doing its job, and doing it well” (p. 5). However, there has become an increasing demand for colleges and universities to provide an environment in which students can be successful in achieving their academic goals, and graduation rates have become a common and significant measurement related to student and institutional success. Several states have implemented “college completion agendas” to increase educational achievement (Zumeta, Breneman, Callan & Finley, 2012), and many states have moved toward a performance-based funding model for colleges and universities. The theory behind these funding structures is that taxpayer dollars are best used to finance outputs, in the form of degrees, rather than inputs, in the form of enrollments (Hillman,Tandberg & Gross, 2014), and that this approach will incentivize

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 1

institutions to graduate more students. Given that only half of all undergraduate students that attend public four-year colleges earn degrees within six years, it has become a primary concern of policymakers to develop strategies for improving college completion rates (National Student Clearinghouse, 2012).

The programs managed by student affairs divisions have become key components of enrollment management, as they impact student retention, student success, and institutional wellbeing (Seidman, 2005). Research has shown that students who are involved in activities and experiences on campus are more likely to persist through graduation, and report a higher level of satisfaction with their collegiate experience (Winston, 2003). With regard to the impact of fraternity and sorority communities, Biddix, Matney, Norman, and Martin (2014) point out that several findings overwhelmingly suggest that the opportunity for students to belong and connect with their peers through fraternal organizations serves as a powerful method for retaining students.

Student Involvement Research has continually shown that students who are more fully involved in collegiate activities, both in and out of the classroom, gain greater educational benefits, are more successful, and are more satisfied with the overall experience (Astin, 1977, 1993; Kuh, Schuh, Whitt, & Associates, 1991). Tinto (1975) points out that students who voluntarily leave college tend to do so because they have not become integrated into the academic or social activities associated with the institution (Creamer, Creamer, & Brown, 2003), and evidence consistently reveals that student involvement, academically and socially, is related to persistence into the next academic year (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).

Braxton, Sullivan, and Johnson (1997), along with Astin (1993), reiterate that levels of student involvement and integration into any of the academic and social systems of an institution are

critical factors in determining whether a student will persist.

The actions taken by an institution of higher education play a key role in student success. As Astin (1985), asserts, â&#x20AC;&#x153;the effectiveness of any educational policy or practice is directly related to the capacity of that policy or practice to increase student involvementâ&#x20AC;? (p. 36). Restating this notion, Pike and Kuh (2005) point out that with regard to the impact an institution has on student achievement, the most important factors are the policies and procedures that are implemented for the purpose of increasing levels of student engagement. Students who depart from college without achieving a degree often feel alienated and uninvolved (Creamer, Creamer, & Brown, 2003), and in general, the more that students interact and form relationships with faculty, staff, and other students, the more likely they are to persist in their studies (Mallette & Cabrera, 1991; Tinto, 1998). The creation of a feeling of connectedness and integration into the campus culture are key components of student satisfaction, academic success, and retention, and are a vital part of the successful college experience (Jorgenson, Farrell, Fudge, & Pritchard, 2018). In working toward these goals, student affairs divisions are charged with the tasks of planning, offering, and implementing programs that will enhance the college experience for all students on campus (Council for the Advancement of Standards, 2006). Fraternities and sororities contribute to the psychological sense of community that is experienced by students and increases levels of social involvement (Pike & Askew, 1990), and a system of fraternities and sororities can be a positive component of the extracurricular offerings of an institution (Schroeder, 1994).

Fraternity and Sorority Communities Fraternity or sorority membership predicts higher levels of involvement in campus activities (Pike, 2000), which is correlated with higher grades and greater levels of satisfaction with the

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 2

overall college experience (Astin, 1999). Long (2012) stated that research consistently shows that membership in a fraternity or sorority has a positive overall impact on student learning, and determined that “the fraternity/sorority experience was excellent at producing gains in sense of belonging and peer interaction, and good at developing respondents’ study skills, critical thinking, commitment to service, management skills, and career skills” (p. 21). Research has indicated that those joining fraternities and sororities sought membership to meet people and to feel a sense of belonging on campus (Case, Hesp, & Eberly, 2005; Fouts, 2010). As an opportunity for immediate involvement, joining a fraternal organization provides members with instant access to a supportive peer network (Biddix, Singer, & Aslinger, 2018). Additionally, fraternities and sororities provide members with a small and intimate community within the context of the campus, which allows members to meet new people, establish close friendships, empathize with others, and resolve interpersonal conflicts (Long, 2012). This type of social integration into the campus culture is positively associated with overall levels of persistence (Allen, Robbins, Casillas, & Oh, 2008; Lohfink & Paulsen, 2005), and as Biddix, Singer, and Aslinger (2018) determined, membership in a fraternal organization had a positive impact on critically important first-year retention.

Pike (2000), concluded that members of fraternities and sororities showed greater gains than their nonaffiliated counterparts in communication skills, interpersonal skills, and critical thinking, and it has also been found that membership in fraternities and sororities is associated with gains in general education, and practical competence (Hayek, Carini, O’Day, & Kuh, 2002). Focal points for fraternities and sororities include developing the character and leadership skills of their members, serving the community, and creating lifelong friendships (Gregory, 2003). As a means for accomplishing these goals, fraternities and sororities offer

several opportunities for members to develop as they serve in leadership roles (Hallenbeck, Dickman, & Fuqua, 2003), as well as providing the ability to participate in a variety of community service projects (Astin, 1993; Kuh, 1982). When overall student development is considered, research shows that membership in fraternities and sororities correlates to growth in the areas of scholarship, leadership, service, and friendship (Long, 2012). As added benefits for institutions, the presence of a fraternity and sorority community helps to engender an active and supportive alumni base beyond the collegiate years (Walker, Martin & Hussey, 2014), along with fostering higher levels of alumni donations (Nelson, 1984; Tyler 2012).

Regarding student success, it has been determined that fraternity and sorority communities serve as a beneficial resource to members, and as a model for broader efforts that are designed to maximize student retention and degree completion (Walker, Martin, & Hussey, 2014). Several traits that are positively associated with retention and graduation are evident in the students who are members of fraternities and sororities. Moving away from home to go to college, living with a group of peers, and striving for status are all characteristics that are emblematic of the students who join fraternities and sororities, and each of these attributes is also positively correlated with improved graduation rates (Astin, 1993). In conjunction with these traits, research has steadily shown that membership in fraternities and sororities is associated with higher levels of interaction with peers (Pike & Askew, 1990), increased rates of persistence, and academic success (Astin, 1977, 1984; DeBard, Lake, & Binder, 2006; DeBard & Sacks, 2010). Severtis and Christie-Mizell (2007) found fraternity/sorority membership increased the odds of college graduation by 370% compared to nonaffiliated students.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 3

Research Approach The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect on graduation rates after a college or university added a fraternity and sorority community as a new component of their campus environment.

Definitions The following definitions are provided for this study: • Graduation Rate: The percentage of the students at a college or university who complete their degree program within 150 percent of the published time for the program. At the four-year institutions used in this study, this refers to the students who complete and are considered graduates within six years of enrolling (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019).

• Fraternal Organizations: An inclusive term encompassing both fraternities and sororities.

• Fraternity and Sorority Community: A group of fraternities and sororities that are associated with a college campus and are social in character.

• National Panhellenic Conference: Established in 1902 to assist collegiate and alumnae chapters in cooperating with colleges and universities and to foster interfraternal relationships, the NPC is the premier advocacy and support organization for the advancement of the sorority experience (National Panhellenic Conference, 2019).

• Newly Added Fraternity and Sorority Community: These have been identified by the National Panhellenic Conference.

NPC recognizes a fraternity and sorority community establishment date as the time when two or more NPC member organizations exist on campus.

The North American Interfraternity Conference does not maintain a record

of dates of establishment. As a result of these factors, it is possible that some institutions in the study may have had fraternities or sororities on campus at some point prior to the establishment date stated by NPC. These institutions may have been without the requisite number of member organizations for NPC recognition, or they may have had a fraternity and sorority community that became inactive, and then returned on the date provided by NPC. Methodology This study used a deductive framework and quantitative methodology to investigate graduation rate data from institutions of higher education. The National Panhellenic Conference identified 33 colleges and universities in the United States as having added a fraternity and sorority community to their campus between 2000 and 2015, and all 33 of these institutions were included in this study. To obtain the dataset, a formal request was submitted to the Measurable Outcomes Committee of the NPC. This research proposal was reviewed and given approval by the NPC, who then provided a list of institutions and the corresponding dates when two or more NPC member organizations were fully established at those institutions.

Since official graduation rates at four-year institutions are calculated based upon a six-year time frame, for each of the institutions, graduation rate data were collected from before the addition of fraternities and sororities, and from six years later. This data set was analyzed to determine whether the addition of fraternal organizations had a significant impact on graduation rates. A list of the institutions that added a fraternity and sorority community between 2000 and 2015 is shown in Appendix A. The data for, and characteristics of the institutions that were included in the study is provided in Appendix B, and Appendix C is a key to the abbreviations that were used in the data set.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 4

Table 1 t-test: Paired Two Sample for Means Variable 1

Variable 2

Mean

52.97

57.00

Variance

399.09

347.81

33

33

Observations Pearson Correlation

0.97

Hypothesized Mean Difference df

0 32

t Stat

-4.42

P(T<=t) one-tail

5.35

t Critical one-tail

1.69

P(T<=t) two-tail

<0.01

t Critical two-tail

2.04

Statistical Analysis A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine whether there was a difference between the graduation rates that were present prior to the addition of a fraternity and sorority community when compared with graduation rates after this entity was added to the campus environment. As shown in Table 1, the results of the paired-samples t-test shows the graduation rates before the addition of a fraternity and sorority community (M = 52.97) were significantly different than that same data from six years later (M = 57.00), (t [32] = -4.42, p < .01).

Research Findings and Practical Significance Overall, the results of this study revealed that the addition of a fraternity and sorority community on a college or university campus correlated to a positive impact on graduation rates. These results are in alignment with Astin’s Theory of Student Involvement (1977, 1984, 1993) and Tinto’s Theory of Student Departure (1975, 1987, 1993), which state that as students become more involved with the academic and social communities of a college campus, they are more likely to persist in their studies and

graduate from their institution. Further, and in harmony with the works of Astin and Tinto on student success, Walker, Martin, and Hussey (2014), found that “participation in a Greek organization leads to significantly higher levels of involvement with campus life” (p. 217).

Research has also revealed that membership in fraternal organizations has a positive impact on student development and learning (Hayek et al., 2002; Long, 2012), and is a predictor of higher graduation rates (Severtis & Christie-Mizell, 2007;Walker, Martin, & Hussey, 2014).

The results of this study support the work of Shonrock (1998), Whipple and Sullivan (1998), and DeBard and Sacks (2011), who found that colleges and universities with an existing system of fraternities and sororities should work to cultivate and strengthen the relationship between the chapter houses and the institution. Biddix et al. (2014) state that campus administrators and professionals should assert a more significant influence on fraternity and sorority members, pointing out that while campus professionals often attend to the riskier behaviors that take place, there is a lack of effort with regard to creating a healthier vision for the organizations.

Biddix et al. (2014) continue, providing an overall philosophy for institutions by stating that, “connecting fraternities and sororities

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 5

to the philosophical and practical mission of higher education would empower students to make broader educational gains within these organizations while potentially reducing highrisk behaviors and adverse media gathering events” (p. 112).

Fraternal organizations strive to shape men and women into responsible adults and ethical leaders (Earley, 1998; Whipple & Sullivan, 1998), and student affairs divisions can take advantage of these principles when collaborating to create academic and behavioral standards for the fraternities and sororities on campus (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). An approach that incorporates both goals and concerns from students is necessary to create buy-in and ownership from the members of the fraternities and sororities (Biddix et al., 2014). When an environment of trust and cooperation is established between the fraternity and sorority community and the student affairs office, these entities can work together to achieve the goals of the institution, and to create an environment that is conducive to positive student development and student success (DeBard & Sacks, 2011; Shonrock, 1998;Whipple & Sullivan, 1998).

Limitations Generalizations drawn from the results of this study were based upon specific years and a finite number of institutions. The study is also limited by the definition of “Newly Added Fraternity and Sorority Community” that shaped the dataset.

As detailed earlier, the institutional list dataset provided by the National Panhellenic Conference included institutions with newly recognized fraternity/sorority communities based on their definition of two or more NPC organizations.

Additionally, the data used for comparison in this study were the overall graduation rates at colleges and universities, and it is difficult to identify any single action as the direct cause of an increase or decrease in those rates. While the results of this study may add to the literature that is available

for college or university administrators, student affairs personnel, and other interested parties, the results may not generalize to all situations or institutions.

Opportunities for Future Research Future studies could be conducted to determine the characteristics of institutions where the addition of a fraternity and sorority community has the greatest positive impact on student success. This research could include investigating the Carnegie Classifications of institutions, the number of students who are enrolled, the level of selectivity with regard to admissions, or whether the institution consists of a student body that is primarily residential or nonresidential. Other areas for investigation could include the impact that the addition of a fraternity and sorority community has on student recruitment or retention, overall student satisfaction scores, and contribution levels from alumni. Additionally, in keeping with Astin’s Theory of Student Involvement, the level of participation in other extracurricular activities that are available on campus could be investigated as a possible predictor of improved graduation rates. Any or all of these characteristics of colleges and universities could be studied, which would provide information for individual institutions that are making decisions related to the extracurricular opportunities that are available for their students, including the addition or presence of a fraternity and sorority community.

Conclusion The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the addition of a fraternity and sorority community on a college campus and a subsequent change in the graduation rates of the institution. It was determined that the addition of fraternities and sororities on campus correlated to a significant positive impact on

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 6

graduation rates. The results of this study suggest that the inclusion of a fraternity and sorority community can help to promote student achievement, resulting in improved graduation rates for the college or university. As institutions of higher education take steps to give students the best chance to be successful, this research suggests that colleges and universities that do not currently offer membership in fraternities and sororities may want to consider whether their institution would be a good fit for the addition of these organizations on campus. Additionally, colleges and universities that currently have a fraternity and sorority community should take steps to develop, improve, and enhance the existing relationship between the leaders of the institution and the chapter houses.These findings may prove helpful to college and university administrators, student affairs professionals, and other interested parties when the overall program of available extracurricular activities is considered, designed, and implemented for the purposes of promoting both student and institutional success.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 7

References Allen, J., Robbins, S. B., Casillas, A., & Oh, I. S. (2008). Third-year college retention and transfer: Effects of academic performance, motivation, and social connectedness. Research in Higher Education, 49(7), 647-664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008 9098-3 Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years: Effects of college on beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297-308.

Astin, A. W. (1985). Involvement: The cornerstone of excellence. Change 17(4), 35-39. https://doi. org/10.1080/00091383.1985.9940532 Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529.

Astin, A. W. (2005). Making sense out of degree completion rates. Journal of College Student Retention, 7(1/2), 5-17. https://doi.org/10.2190/7pv9-khr7-c2f6-upk5 Biddix, J. P., Matney, M. M., Norman, E. M., & Martin, G. L. (2014). The influence of fraternity and sorority involvement: A critical analysis of research (1996-2013). ASHE Higher Education Report, 39(6). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20012 Biddix, J. P., Singer, K. I., & Aslinger, E. (2018). First-year retention and National Panhellenic Conference sorority membership: A multi-institutional study. Journal of College Student Retention, 20(2), 236-252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025116656633 Braxton, J., Sullivan, A., & Johnson, R. (1997). Appraising Tinto’s theory of college student departure. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (107-158). New York, NY: Agathon.

Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. (2019). Institution lookup. Retrieved from: http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/lookup/lookup.php Case, D. N., Hesp, G. A., & Eberly, C. G. (2005). An exploratory study of the experiences of gay, lesbian and bisexual fraternity and sorority members revisited. Oracle:The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, 1(1), 15-31.

Chronicle of Higher Education. (n.d.). College completion:Who graduates from college, who doesn’t, and why it matters. Retrieved from: https://collegecompletion.chronicle.com Council for the Advancement of Standards. (2006). CAS professional standards for higher education (6th Ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Creamer, E. G., Creamer, D. G., & Brown, K. S. (2003). Applying quality educational principles to academic advising. In G. L. Kramer & Associates (Eds.), Student Academic Services (205-222). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

DeBard, R., Lake, T., & Binder, R. S. (2006). Greeks and grades: The first-year experience. NASPA Journal, 43(1), 56-68. https://doi.org/10.2202/0027-6014.1571 DeBard, R., & Sacks, C. (2010). Fraternity/sorority membership: Good news about first-year impact. Oracle:The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors,5(1), 12-23.

DeBard, R., & Sacks, C. (2011). Greek membership: The relationship with first-year academic performance. Journal of College Student Retention, 13(1), 109-126. https://doi.org/10.2190/ cs.13.1.f Earley, C. (1998). Influencing ethical development in Greek letter organizations. New Directions for Student Services, 1998(81), 39-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.8104 Fouts, K. S. (2010). Why undergraduates aren’t “going Greek”: Attraction, affiliation, and retention in fraternities and sororities. Oracle:The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, 5(1), 24-33.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 8

Gregory, D. (2003). The dilemma facing fraternal organizations at the millennium. In D. E. Gregory (Ed.), The administration of fraternal organizations on North American campuses: A pattern for the new millennium (3-25). Asheville, NC: College administration Publications.

Hallenbeck, D. A., Dickman, M. M., & Fuqua, D. R. (2003). Dimensions of leadership and motivation in relation to residential setting. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 32(2), 23-31.

Hayek, J. C., Carini, R. M., O’Day, P. T., & Kuh, G. D. (2002). Triumph or tragedy: Comparing student engagement levels of members of Greek-letter organizations and other students. Journal of College Student Development, 43(5), 643-663.

Hillman, N., Tandberg, D. & Gross, J. (2014). Performance funding in higher education: Do financial incentives impact college completions. The Journal of Higher Education 85(6), 826-857. https:// doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2014.0031 Jorgenson, D. A., Farrell, L. C., Fudge, J. L., & Pritchard, A. (2018). College connectedness: The student perspective. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 18(1), 75-95. https://doi. org/10.14434/josotl.v18i1.22371 Kuh, G. D. (1982). Enhancing the quality of Greek life. Bloomington, IN: Center for the Study of the College Fraternity.

Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates. (1991). Involving colleges: Successful approaches to fostering student learning and development outside the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lohfink, M. M., & Paulsen, M. B. (2005). Comparing the determinants of persistence for firstgeneration and continuing-generation students. Journal of College Student Development, 46(4), 409428. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2005.0040 Long, L. (2012). Unchallenged, professed core values: Do undergraduate fraternity/sorority members actually benefit in the areas of scholarship, leadership, service and friendship? College Student Affairs Journal, 30(2), 15-30.

Mallette, B. I., & Cabrera, A. (1991). Determinants of withdrawal behavior: An exploratory study.

Research in Higher Education, 32(2), 179-194. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00974436 National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). Compare institutions. Retrieved from: https://nces. ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/InstitutionByName.aspx National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Glossary Results. Retrieved from: https://surveys. nces.ed.gov/ipeds/VisGlossaryAll.aspx National Panhellenic Conference. (2019). Mission,Vision and Purpose. Retrieved from: https://www. npcwomen.org/about/mission-vision-and-purpose/ National Student Clearinghouse. (2012). Completing college: A state-level view of student attainment rates (No. 4). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.

Nelson, W. T. (1984). A comparison of selected undergraduate experiences of alumni who financially support their alma mater. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington.

Pascarella, E. & Terenzini, P. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pike, G. (2000). The influence of fraternity or sorority membership on students’ college experiences and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education, 41(1), 117-139. https:// doi.org/10.1023/a:1007046513949 Pike, G., & Askew, J. (1990). The impact of fraternity or sorority membership on academic involvement and learning outcomes. NASPA Journal, 28(1), 13-19.

Pike, G. R. & Kuh, G. D. (2005). A typology of student engagement for American colleges and universities. Research in Higher Education 46(2), 185-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-0041599-0 Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 9

Schroeder, C. C. (1994). Developing learning communities. In C. C. Schroeder, P. Mable, & Associates (Eds.), Realizing the Educational Potential of Residence Halls (165-189). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Seidman, A. (2005). College student retention: A formula for success. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Severtis, R., & Christie-Mizell, C. (2007). Greek letter membership and college graduation: Does race matter? Journal of Sociology and SocialWelfare, 34(3), 95–117.

Shonrock, M. (1998). Standards and expectations for Greek letter organizations. New Directions for Student Services, 1998(81), 79-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.8107 Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543045001089 Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177.

Tyler, A. (2012). 15 revealing stats on the current state of greek life. Retrieved from: http://elitedaily. com/news/world/15-revealing-stats-current-state-greek-life/ University System of Georgia. (n.d.). Graduation rate report: Bachelor degree six-year rates, first-time freshmen Fall 2003 cohort. Retrieved from: https://info.usg.edu Upcraft, M. L., & Schuh, J. H. (1996). Assessment in student affairs: A guide for practitioners. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Walker, J. K., Martin, N. D., & Hussey, A. (2014). Greek organization membership and outcomes at an elite, private university. Research in Higher Education, 56(3), 203-227. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11162-014-9345-8 Whipple, E. G., & Sullivan, E. G. (1998). Greeks as communities of learners. New Directions for Student Services, 1998(81), 87-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.8108 Winston, Jr., R. B. (2003). Stimulating and supporting student learning. In G. L. Kramer & Associates (Eds.), Student Academic Services (3-26). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Zumeta, W., Breneman, D., Callan, P., & Finney, J. (2012). Financing American higher education in the era of globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Author Biography Dr. Ronald Yates is a professor of mathematics at the College of Southern Nevada and is co-author of the textbook “When Are We Ever Going To Use This Stuff? College Mathematics for the Liberal Arts Major.” He earned a Ph.D. in higher education leadership from the University of the Cumberlands and is a member of the Sigma Chi fraternity, where he has served as Balfour Fellow, Faculty Advisor, and Ritual Peer.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 10

Appendix A Institutions that added a Fraternity and Sorority Community, 2000-20151 Institution

State

Year

Plymouth State University

NH

2002

The College of New Jersey

NJ

2002

John Carroll University

OH

2002

California State University - Northridge

CA

2003

Santa Clara University

CA

2003

Quincy University

IL

2003

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (Arizona)

AZ

2005

Iowa State University

IA

2006

University of Wyoming

WY

2006

St. Norbert College

WI

2006

Lake Forest College

IL

2006

Lycoming College

PA

2006

Fitchburg State University

MA

2006

University of Arkansas - Fort Smith

AR

2007

University of Texas at El Paso

TX

2007

University of Colorado at Colorado Springs

CO

2008

Franklin & Marshall College

PA

2008

State University of NewYork College at Geneseo

NY

2009

Boise State University

ID

2009

Augusta University

GA

2009

Sacred Heart University

CT

2009

Pace University - NewYork City

NY

2009

University of Michigan - Flint

MI

2010

Pratt Institute

NY

2010

Indiana University - Purdue University at Indianapolis

IN

2010

University of California - Santa Cruz

CA

2010

University of Virginia at Wise

VA

2011

Fairleigh Dickinson University - Metropolitan

NJ

2011

California State University - Stanislaus

CA

2011

New Jersey Institute of Technology

NJ

2012

University of San Francisco

CA

2012

Brooklyn College

NY

2012

Rogers State University

OK

2012

No institutions added Fraternity and Sorority Communities in 2000, 2001, 2004, 2013, 2014, 2015. Source: National Panhellenic Conference 1

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 11

Appendix B Institutions and Graduation Rate Data Institution

State

Type

Enroll

Carnegie

Profile

Plymouth St Univ

NH

Pub

4855

Mstr Lrg

H Und

The College of NJ

NJ

Pub

7409

Mstr Lrg

VH Und

John Carroll Univ

OH

Priv

3688

Mstr Lrg

H Und

Cal St Northridge

CA

Pub

40131

Mstr Lrg

Santa Clara Univ

CA

Priv

9015

Quincy Univ

IL

Priv

1279

Embry-Riddle Prescott

AZ

Priv

Iowa St Univ

IA

Pub

Adm

Setting

GR Before

GR 6 Later

Chg

Incl

Pr Res

45

52

7

M Sel

Hi Res

83

85

2

M Sel

Hi Res

75

80

5

VH Und

Incl

Pr NR

32

44

12

Mstr Lrg

M Und

M Sel

Hi Res

85

85

0

Mstr Md

VH Und

Sel

Hi Res

46

42

-4

2035

Bacc Div

VH Und

M Sel

Pr Res

61

57

-4

34435

D Highst

H Und

Sel

Pr Res

66

71

5

Univ of Wyoming

WY

Pub

12820

D Higher

H Und

M Sel

Pr NR

56

54

-2

St Norbert College

WI

Priv

2169

Bacc AS

VH Und

M Sel

Hi Res

72

75

3

Lake Forest College

IL

Priv

1626

Bacc AS

VH Und

M Sel

Hi Res

68

71

3

Lycoming College

PA

Priv

1353

Bacc AS

Ex Und

Sel

Hi Res

67

65

-2

Fitchburg State Univ

MA

Pub

6810

Mstr Lrg

H Und

Sel

Pr Res

52

51

-1

U of Arkansas - Ft Smith

AR

Pub

6830

Bacc Div

Ex Und

Incl

Pr NR

18

23

5

Univ of Texas - El Paso

TX

Pub

23079

D Higher

H Und

Incl

Pr NR

29

40

11

Univ of Colo - Colo Springs

CO

Pub

11761

Mstr Lrg

H Und

Sel

Pr NR

46

47

1

Franklin & Marshall College

PA

Priv

2209

Bacc AS

Ex Und

M Sel

Hi Res

79

87

8

SUNY Geneseo

NY

Pub

5658

Mstr Sml

VH Und

M Sel

Hi Res

78

82

4

Boise St Univ

ID

Pub

22227

D Mod

VH Und

Sel

Pr NR

26

39

13

Augusta Univ

GA

Pub

7988

D Higher

M Und

Sel

Pr NR

21

30

9

Sacred Heart Univ

CT

Priv

7781

Mstr Lrg

M Und

Sel

Hi Res

66

64

-2

Pace Univ

NY

Priv

12857

D Mod

M Und

Sel

Pr Res

58

53

-5

Univ of Michigan Flint

MI

Pub

8574

Mstr Lrg

H Und

Sel

Pr NR

39

37

-2

Pratt Institute

NY

Priv

4690

SF Arts

M Und

M Sel

Hi Res

62

70

8

IUPU - Indianapolis

IN

Pub

30690

D Higher

H Und

Sel

Pr NR

34

46

12

UC Santa Cruz

CA

Pub

17866

D Highst

VH Und

M Sel

Hi Res

74

77

3

Univ of Virginia - Wise

VA

Pub

2183

Bacc AS

Ex Und

Incl

Pr Res

39

46

7

Fairleigh Dickinson Metro

NJ

Priv

8777

Mstr Lrg

M Und

Incl

Pr NR

41

39

-2

Cal St Stanislaus

CA

Pub

9045

Mstr Lrg

H Und

Incl

Pr NR

49

53

4

New Jersey Institute of Tech

NJ

Pub

10646

D Higher

M Und

M Sel

Pr NR

54

64

10

Univ of San Francisco

CA

Priv

10689

D Mod

M Und

M Sel

Pr Res

70

77

7

Brooklyn College

NY

Pub

17390

Mstr Lrg

H Und

Sel

Pr NR

48

58

10

Rogers State Univ

OK

Pub

4030

Bacc Div

VH Und

Incl

Pr NR

9

17

8

Sources: Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (2019), Chronicle of Higher Education (n.d.), National Center for Education Statistics (n.d.), University System of Georgia (n.d.).

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;¢ Summer/Fall 2020 12

Appendix C Key to abbreviations used in Appendix B Type Pub - Public Institution Priv - Private Institution Enroll - Enrollment Carnegie - Basic Carnegie Classification Bacc AS - Baccalaureate Colleges: Arts & Science Focus Bacc Div - Baccalaureate Colleges: Diverse Fields Mstr Sml - Masters Colleges & Universities: Small Programs Mstr Md - Masters Colleges & Universities: Medium Programs Mstr Lrg - Masters Colleges & Universities: Larger Programs D Mod - Doctoral Universities: Moderate Research Activity D Higher - Doctoral Universities: Higher Research Activity D Highst - Doctoral Universities: Highest Research Activity SF Arts - Special Focus Four-Year: Arts, Music & Design Schools Profile M Und - Majority Undergraduate Population H Und - High Undergraduate Population VH Und - Very High Undergraduate Population Ex Und - Exclusively Undergraduate Population Adm - Admissions Standards Incl - Inclusive Admissions Standards Sel - Selective Admissions Standards M Sel - More Selective Admissions Standards Setting Pr NR - Primarily Nonresidential Pr Res - Primarily Residential Hi Res - Highly Residential GR Before - Graduation Rate before the addition of a fraternity and sorority community GR 6 Later - Graduation Rate 6 years after the addition of a fraternity and sorority community Chg - Change in Graduation Rate over time

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 13

AN EXAMINATION OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY DYNAMICS IN LATINX/A/OBASED CO-EDUCATIONAL FRATERNITIES Crystal Garcia, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Antonio Duran, Auburn University Centering the stories of Queer People of Color, this critical narrative inquiry project examined the dynamics around gender and sexuality in Latinx/a/o-based fraternities. In particular, the narratives of two Queer Women of Color and a queer non-binary individual revealed how these participants decided to join their organization and what their experiences were like once they were affiliated.Through two semi-structured interviews and a reflection journaling project, participants shared how they often encountered moments of exclusion despite occasionally feeling a sense of inclusion in their chapters/organizations.

Implications for research and practice are then offered.

Latinx/a/o1 student organizations serve an important role for Latinx/a/o students as they transition to college and navigate postsecondary environments, providing familial ties of support (Luedke, 2019). This sense of familia also manifests in the siblinghood centered in Latinx/ a/o-based sororities and fraternities (Estrada et al., 2017; Garcia, 2020). Findings from studies on Latinx/a/o-based sororities and fraternities highlighted the role of these organizations in facilitating students’ transitions and experiences within institutions as they often face racial microaggressions and racism on college campuses (Arellano, 2020; Garcia, 2019a; Orta et al., 2019.)

Although Latinx/a/o sororities and fraternities provide vital assistance to Students of Color, scholarship generally focuses on these in a monolithic way, highlighting the ways these organizations affirm students racial/ethnic identities. Yet, it is important to note that not all Latinx/a/o students may feel as though they fit into Latinx/a/o-based organizations (Banda & Flowers, 2017). Furthermore, fraternal culture can be hostile to individuals that are queer and gender nonconforming (Duran & Garcia, 2020; Garcia & Duran, 2020; Case et al., 2005; DeSantis & Coleman, 2008). Therefore, individuals cannot assume that queer Latinx/

a/o students’ sexualities would be affirmed in Latinx/a/o-based sororities and fraternities.

As an alternative to single sex/gender sororities and fraternities, co-educational fraternities emerged in the 1960s and continue to be part of FSL communities (Torbenson, 2009). However, little scholarship focuses on co-ed fraternal organizations and even less on those that are both co-ed and culturally-based.

As single sex/gender organizations become more gender inclusive and as co-ed fraternal organizations look to the future, it is important to examine students’ interest in and experience within these organizations. This study answers this call by examining how queer Latinx/a/o college students make sense of issues of sexuality and gender in co-educational Latinx/a/o-based fraternities. The two guiding research questions for the study were: 1. What motivates queer Latinx/a/o college students to join co-educational culturally-based organizations?

2. How do queer Latinx/a/o college students navigate issues of sexuality and gender in co-educational culturallybased organizations?

We recognize the use of the terms Latinx, Hispanic, and others are contested and each hold particular meanings (see Salinas, 2020). We chose to use Latinx/a/o to represent the diversity of gender identities in this population.

1

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 14

Framework We relied on multiple concepts to make sense of our participants’ lived experiences. First, we recognized their intersecting identities as Queer People of Color and the corresponding systems of oppression using queer crit. Queer crit centralizes intersectionality, bringing the crossroads of racism and heterosexism to the forefront (Misawa, 2012). Queer crit entails six components: 1) the centrality of the intersection of race and racism with sexual orientation and homophobia; 2) the challenge to mainstream ideologies; 3) confrontations with ahistoricism; 4) the centrality of experiential knowledge; 5) multidisciplinary aspects; and 6) the social justice perspective. (Misawa, 2012, p. 242) Rather than focusing on individuals’ navigation of racism, homophobia, and heterosexism in siloes, queer crit recognizes the unique experiences of individuals that possess multiple minoritized identities.

In addition to queer crit, we also recognized gender as a social construct that is performative.

Butler (1998) detailed: Gender is in no way a stable identity or locus of agency from which various acts proceede; rather, it is an identity tenuously constituted in time—an identity instituted through a stylized repetition of acts. Further, gender is instituted through the stylization of the body and, hence, must be understood as the mundane way in which bodily gestures, movements, and enactments of various kinds constitute the illusion of an abiding gendered self. (p. 519) Gender and sexuality are often conflated terms, yet these are distinct identities (Nicolazzo, 2017). Thus, in addition to racism, homophobia, and heterosexism, we also recognize hostilities that emerge as a result of the socially constructed

nature of gender (Butler, 1998). Individuals’ genders and sexualities may be erased by normative expectations (Nicolazzo, 2017). This is often exacerbated in fraternity and sorority life (FSL) communities, which are predominantly single sex/gendered organizations (Nicolazzo & Karikari, 2018). As a result, we were interested in exploring these dynamics within co-educational fraternities.

Contextualizing the Influence of Latinx/a/o-Based FSL Organizations To examine the dynamics around gender and sexuality in Latinx/a/o-based co-educational fraternities, we first provide a historical overview of culturally-based FSL organizations, in addition to the values that Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations hold. Such context is necessary to understand the contemporary forms of culturally-based FSL organizations, and specifically those with an interest in Latinx/a/o communities. Following this tracing, we synthesize literature on experiences that students, and specifically those with multiple minoritized identities, have within Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations.

Historicizing the Role and Values of Latinx/ a/o-Based FSL Organizations It is imperative to first situate Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations in the larger history of culturally-based sorority and fraternity organizations. Namely, today’s culturally-based organizations, and specifically Black Greek Letter Organizations (BGLOs), first emerged at the beginning of the 1900s during a period where fraternities around the country actively discriminated along the categories of race and religion, meaning those who were not White Protestant men were excluded (Torbenson, 2009, 2012). The reason provided involved the belief that brotherhood could only be established with those who were alike (e.g., along racial lines).

Within predominantly white institutions (PWIs),

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 15

culturally-based sororities and fraternities were established to center and uplift Communities of Color as a response to these exclusionary practices (Torbenson, 2009, 2012), in addition to the hostile climates students faced (Gillon et al., 2019; Ross, 2000). Relevant to this project is the “similarity rationale” used by organizations to discriminate against those who identified with other races. Specifically, it challenged us as researchers to consider how culturally-based FSL organizations may reproduce cultures that are homogenous among other identity categories (e.g., gender and sexuality).

Aligning with the origin of race-based FSL organizations emerged in the early 1900s, Latinx/a/o FSL organizations entered the landscape in 1904 with the founding of Sigma Iota (Del Real, 2020). Sigma Iota later merged with Phi Lambda Alpha in 1931 to form Phi Iota Alpha, the earliest Latinx/a/o fraternity still in existence (Guardia, 2015; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009). Students at Kean University then started the first Latina sorority in 1975 (Guardia, 2015; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009), representing the growth of Latinx/a/o organizations. Mirroring larger social movements in the Latinx/a/o community, these organizations were founded to advocate for Latinx/a/o populations, especially within PWIs. Importantly, these Latinx/a/o FSL organizations sought to develop students both alongside academic and social domains (Guardia, 2015; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009).

In contemporary times, Latinx/a/o-based FSL groups continue to value cultural awareness and family. Miranda and Martin de Figueroa (2000) argued that chapters attempt to bolster the awareness around Latinx/a/o communities for their members and for campuses as a whole.

In addition, scholars regularly noted the value of family that these groups communicate through their practices (Estrada et al., 2017; Guardia & Evans, 2008; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009). For example, in a formative study on Latino fraternal members, Guardia and Evans (2008) found that these fraternities created environments where

brothers could show their love for one another, which in turn contributed to their ethnic identity development. Though scholarship exists about the historical trajectories and values of FSL organizations focused on Latinx/a/o cultures, little is known about Latinx/a/o co-educational fraternities, leading to a need to further explore the nature of these environments.

Student Experiences in Latinx/a/o-Based FSL Organizations Beyond the scholarship on the organizations themselves, scholars also examined the experiences that students have in Latinx/ a/o-based FSL organizations. One subset of literature, for instance, touched upon what motivates individuals to join Latinx/a/o-based fraternities and sororities (e.g., Arellano, 2020; Delgado-Guerrero et al., 2014; Garcia, 2020, 2019b; Orta et al., 2019). Many affiliate with a Latinx/a/o-based FSL organization because of feeling a sense of isolation on campus, especially at PWIs. Elucidating this point, Orta et al.’s (2019) study on Latina sorority women showed them encountering culture shock at their colleges and universities, which led them to surround themselves with people from a similar racial background. Arrelano’s (2018) research on why Latin@s join FSL discovered similar patterns, stating that becoming a member allowed students to develop connections with people who held similar cultural values and to “scale down” their large campus environments (p. 10). Highlighted in these studies, students articulate that Latinx/ a/o-based FSL organizations continue to have the impact intended since their founding.

Another topic in the Latinx/a/o-based FSL organization literature concerns the benefits that result from involvement in these groups (Orta, 2019). Specifically, scholars highlighted how affiliation with a Latinx/a/o-based fraternity or sorority contributes to leadership development (Guardia, 2015; Moreno & Banuelos, 2013), a sense of belonging (Garcia, 2020; Moreno & Banuelos, 2013), identity development (Guardia

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 16

& Evans, 2008), as well as educational success and persistence (Delgado-Guerrero & Gloria, 2013; Moreno & Banuelos, 2013; Orta et al., 2019).

Because of their dedication to uplifting Latinx/ a/o cultures, these organizations offer leadership roles (Guardia, 2015) and the ability to wrestle with questions of identity (Guardia & Evans, 2008). Additionally, by virtue of these subgroups’ ability to provide a sense of belongingness for students (Garcia, 2020), Latinx/a/o-based FSL organizations become a vital place where individuals develop support networks that bolster their persistence (Moreno & Banuelos, 2013).

However, scholarship oftentimes homogenizes the Latinx/a/o population, stopping short of exploring subgroups within the community.

Though limited, researchers questioned how the experiences of being a part of Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations differs when taking into account people’s multiple minoritized identities like sexuality (e.g., Del Real, 2020; Duran & Garcia, 2020; Garcia & Duran, 2020). For instance, participants involved in Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations in Garcia and Duran’s (2020) research on Queer Men of Color discussed paradoxical climates they experienced in these spaces. Although they encountered instances of support for their sexuality, they also described how members regulated sexuality by voting against potential members perceived to be queer and by creating climates that encouraged men to keep their sexualities secret. Similar to perspectives highlighted in Garcia and Duran’s (2020) scholarship, Del Real (2010) showcased how gay/queer men in Sigma Lambda Beta (a Latinx/a/o-based fraternity) encountered barriers in developing brotherhood with heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. These men responded to these challenges by creating a “queer familia” within the organization, connecting to others who identified as sexual minorities. Important to note is that these studies focused exclusively on the experiences of men within Latinx/a/o-based FSL organizations, leading to a question of how

those who identify as women or as non-binary view their places within these groups. For this reason, this particular study centered individuals with these identities.

Methodology A key component of queer crit is “the centrality of experiential knowledge” (Misawa, 2012, p. 242). We centered our participants’ lived experiences by using a qualitative, critical narrative inquiry approach. Narratives are a distinct form of discourse: as meaning making through the shaping or ordering of experience, a way of understanding one‘s own or others‘ actions, of organizing events and objects into a meaningful whole, of connecting and seeing the consequences of action and events over time. (Chase, 2011, p. 421) Narratives act as a means through which individuals engage in meaning making of their experiences while critical questions aim “to uncover assumptions, analyze issues of power that are visible and invisible, and examine omissions” (Swaminathan & Mulvihill, 2017, p. 6). To use a critical lens means to recognize that there are ways that power, privilege, and oppression operate in participants’ experiences that they may not be aware of or have the language to operationalize.

Data from this study came from a research project focused on the experiences of gender and sexual minorities in culturally-based FSL organizations and included participant interviews, demographic forms, and journal reflections. All participants were members of the same co-educational Latinx/a/o based fraternity situated within a large public research university in the Midwest with a Latinx/a/o population of about 4.5%. Over 10% of the student body at the university is part of the FSL community, which is divided into four councils: Multicultural Greek Council (MGC), National Pan-Hellenic Council, Panhellenic Council, and Interfraternity Council.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 17

There was another Latina-based sorority and a Latino-based fraternity within the MGC; however, participants were members of the only co-educational MGC chapter.

Participants completed a demographic survey when entering the study. Highlights of their identities are listed in Table 1. It is important to note that these individuals were not the only queer identifying members of the chapter, however they were the only members that participated in this work. Participants completed two semi-structured individual interviews, each

lasting approximately 90 minutes in length.

After the first interview, individuals completed a reflective journal. The journal consisted of four questions that prompted participants to reflect on ways their identities as Queer People of Color have been affirmed or erased in their fraternity as well as ways actors (e.g., advisors and national organizations) discussed queerness or gender norms. Participants’ journal entries were not used as raw data during analysis, instead they were used to construct the protocol and guide discussion for the second interview.

Table 1 Participants’ Profiles (Self-Reported on a Demographic Form) Namea

Pronouns

Sexuality

First Generation?

Ava-Marie

She/her

Bisexual

Yes

Second

Liz

She/her

Bisexual

No

Seventh or More

They/them

Lesbian

No

Fourth

Luna a

Semester in College

Pseudonyms used for research participants and their organizations

Analysis We engaged in data analysis from the start of data collection. We took notes and reflected on the participants’ experiences while conducting interviews (Bhattacharya, 2017).

After we received reflective journals from participants, we reviewed the documents for areas to explore during the second interview.

Once both interviews were completed, we reviewed interview transcripts and constructed thematic narratives for each participant that attended to experiences discussed in their interviews and journals (Bhattacharya, 2017).

These key experiences included encounters around gender and sexuality before college, the process of joining their fraternity, and ways gender and sexuality appeared in their fraternal experience. We coded the narratives separately and were attentive to how each person made sense of their experiences as well as similarities and differences among the participants (Swaminathan & Mulvihill, 2017). We refined codes into categories (Bhattacharya, 2017) and

then came together to discuss our analysis and to reconcile our interpretations.We then compared and contrasted our codes to refine themes that captured our participants’ experiences.

Trustworthiness We took multiple measures to ensure the trustworthiness of this research. We collected multiple forms of data, providing the opportunity for participants to reflect away from the interview setting using reflective prompts, which provided rich data. After we constructed participant narratives, we sent these documents to them for member checking. Two participants responded with revisions, clarifying language, and providing additional details while the third did not respond to the opportunity. Finally, we engaged critical reflexivity, which “require the researcher to be acutely aware of, and interact with, the social locations that shape perceptions of the world, the self, and all elements of the study” (Swaminathan & Mulvihill, 2017, p. 99).

We articulated our positionality at the start of

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 18

this study and constantly considered ways our positionalities influenced the study design. We were careful to question bias that appeared in our protocols and worked together to craft critically focused questions (Swaminathan & Mulvihill, 2017). We also debriefed our interpretations of the participants’ experiences with one another, voicing occasions when we recognized our positionality influencing our understanding.

Research Positionality [Author One] identifies as a cisgender, heterosexual Latina and white woman. Her interest in this study stemmed from her experiences within FSL as a member of a sorority, a student affairs practitioner, and FSL researcher.

She shares experiences with the participants in being Latinx/a/o and a member of an FSL organization, therefore she related to their discussions of forming family-like bonds through FSL membership. However, she recognized that being heterosexual and performing her gender in normative ways meant that her life and FSL experience was very different from participants.

She never felt as though she did not belong because she did not meet her organization’s expectations around gender and sexuality.

Further, she was a member of a historically white sorority that restricted its membership based on sex to females. Because she is cisgender, her membership in the organization was never questioned or threatened, which she recognized is not the case for transgender people.

[Author 2] entered into this project by reflecting upon his simultaneous status as an insider and outsider relevant to the topic.

Notably, his interest in this research project stemmed from navigating minoritized communities as someone who is both queer and a Latino man. These experiences caused him to question how groups targeted toward a minoritized community (e.g., an organization founded to uplift Latinx/a/o individuals) create environments mindful of those with other marginalized identities. However, [Author

2] recognizes that his status as someone not affiliated with a Latinx/a/o-based fraternity also positioned him as an outsider to the practices, rituals, and bonds within organizations. When interviewing participants, [Author 2] asked follow-up questions to dive deeply into Latinx/ a/o-based fraternal cultures in addition to reading existing scholarship and speaking with current members. While analyzing data, [Author 2] spoke with his co-researcher about situating his view of participants’ experiences in larger histories rather than defaulting to harmful stereotypes about FSL organizations.

Findings The three participants’ narratives all revealed notable realities of what being a gender and/ or sexual minority means in Latinx/a/o fraternities. In particular, we highlight three overarching themes below: motivations to join their organization, as well as the ways in which gender and sexuality were simultaneously embraced but also targeted within these spaces.

Motivations to Join a Co-Educational Latinx/ a/o-Based Fraternity To begin, participants spoke about their motivations to join their respective Latinx/ a/o-based fraternity, including hoping to find empowerment in their identities and shifting perceptions of what FSL looks like.

Identity Shame and Empowerment. When reflecting on motivations to join a co-ed Latinx/a/o-based fraternity, participants discussed ways they felt shame about their identities as Queer People of Color growing up and within their college experiences. As Ava-Marie described, “I have never been proud of being a Mexican or being someone who is queer. I never got to be proud of that.” Luna shared similar sentiments and recounted an experience they had before moving to campus with their paired roommate after exchanging social media information:

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 19

An hour or so later, I finally got wifi again and I got to check my phone. And she said, “Luna, I saw on Facebook that you identify as bisexual...your values contradict my values, therefore I’m asking you to move out of our room and find a new housing space…I already have friends in this dorm and I’m sure you can find somewhere else to live.”

From this initial interaction, Luna thought, “Okay. Well, I guess [this state] is homophobic.”

Unfortunately, after their move, Luna was next paired with a racist roommate.

These experiences were in stark contrast to how participants felt when they learned about their fraternities. When Luna found their fraternity, they were excited to see that they were kind and welcoming: They were like the nicest people there.

They were the only people that spoke to me, wanted to get to know me more.

Like, “You’re a transfer student? Wow. Where are you from?” And it just looked like family. There was people kicking around a soccer ball, and there was music playing and they were like... laughing and playing around with each other. And it just felt like, “Oh, I could exist in this space.”

All of the participants reflected on the importance of the fraternity as a family. It was not until Liz’s junior year that she decided to pursue membership, but she was drawn to the familial aspect of the organization: I had my support system, but I still was missing that aspect of having that Latinx community or family kind of thing, so that was the biggest thing that got me to decide to join, because I really felt like I needed that support in that way at that time.

More specifically, the fraternity as a coed space was appealing because it provided participants the opportunity to connect with siblings. Liz recalled:

When I saw this one, that it was brothers and sister, I only have a little sister, so having those brothers....really attracted me, because it really felt like a family.

Guys, girls, whatever, at once, and having to compromise together, go out together, hang out together kind of thing. That’s really what sold me, that it was truly that family aspect of it all.

Thus, it was not only the familial aspect of the organization that attracted participants, but also that they would be able to engage with people across genders.

Bucking Preconceived Notions about FSL Involvement.

Participants were also drawn to their organizations because they broke against preconceived notions of what it meant to be in a fraternity or sorority.

Before college, Ava-Marie did not plan to join an FSL organization. She recalled, “I was like, “I’m not white.” Why am I going to join one? I just don’t know why I thought that someone who is in the LGBTQ community or someone of Color doesn’t belong there.” When Ava-Marie attended an informational for the fraternity, she “met a ton of people who were also queer and Latinx. It was shocking, in a way that my thoughts of what Greek life was so different from what it actually was.”

Like Ava-Marie, Liz also had racialized understandings of FSL membership: At first since you only really hear about mostly white sororities and white fraternities.... I just couldn’t see myself in a white sorority, per se. And just what I knew about the movies of being like, I guess, having all these standards of beauty when it comes to women, like makeup or being skinny...

As Liz noted, in addition to race, her preconceived notions around gender expression gave her worries about joining FSL. As a gender non-binary individual, Luna also shared these concerns. Both of these individuals were aware of a Latina sorority that existed on campus,

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 20

but neither thought they would fit into the organization because their gender expression was not feminine enough. Luna reflected: It was very much like I saw sororities as supremely feminine, incredibly focused on the femininity of it all…I see them like as people who are incredibly feminine, wonderful women of distinction, incredible. But I just don’t feel like I would ever fit in.

Liz recognized one Latina sorority that was “very Latinx based….And they’re all super nice, I really like all the girls that are part of it, but for myself I was like... I think just having sisters just wasn’t it for me.” Because of its nature as a co-ed organization, Luna and Liz saw their fraternity as more accepting of the ways they embodied their gender.

Moments of Exclusion within Inclusion: Gender All participants felt affirmed in their racial/ ethnic identities within the fraternity and each felt the fraternity empowered women and centered productive masculinities in some ways. However, within this space of inclusion, participants reflected on instances of exclusion for members that identified as gender non-binary such as Luna or whose gender expression did not meet the fraternity’s expectations such as Liz. For instance, although participants often used the word “siblings” in reference to the members of the fraternity, as Liz described, sisterhood and brotherhood were still the two dominant categories within the fraternity. When Luna joined the fraternity, they were unsure of how they would fit in as a non-binary person. They questioned, “Am I more of a brother or am I a sister?” Rather than having the option to identify as a sibling, Luna was assigned a role: It was like, ‘You’re a sister.’…. So, it was very much like basis of the letter that’s on your application, F or M. And I think it’s something that our fraternity as a whole, like on a nation-wide scale is trying

to change, but it was something that definitely was jarring…But yeah, there was a specific portion in the pledging process that involves that separation, and that really very much was uncomfortable for me.

By not offering a way for Luna to identify outside of a “brother” or “sister,” their identity as gender non-binary was erased, resulting in feelings of discomfort in the new member education process.

Once a member of the fraternity, Liz explained that some chapter members had a difficult time respecting pronouns for individuals that did not identify as men or women: Sometimes there might not be shown that respect because they don’t care enough to like... to use the pronouns or…learn more about it or ask questions or things like that. Sometimes it feels like it’s something that’s dismissed because I guess they feel like it’s not important.

That can be really hurtful.

Like Liz, Ava-Marie also noticed that particular members did not make an effort to use proper pronouns for transgender members.

However, she further observed that women in the organization were often more intentional with their pronoun usage than men were: Sisters are really cool with it… with brothers, because we are co-ed, it’s kind of an annoyance that it gets brought up a lot…. I guess a lot of the inactive brothers, some of them they’ll use the wrong pronouns and when they get called out on it, they’re like, ‘It’s not that big of a deal.’ …. you correct them and they’re like, ‘Oh, okay.’ Rolling their eyes.

Feeling excluded, Luna was encouraged by new members that made more effort to use their correct pronouns than some of the older members: I noticed that they go out of their way to use they, them, pronouns. It isn’t in a bad way where it’s cringy where they’re like,

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 21

‘Oh sorry.’ They stopped for a second.

And they take the moment to really think about it and remember and then…they change it. And it was really sweet of them and do that. I don’t know, a lot of other older members just, they say she, they say she, go ahead.

In addition to ways transgender members experienced forms of exclusion within the fraternity, participants also recognized ways the fraternity resisted and embodied binary notions of gender expression.

In terms of resistance, one reason Luna was drawn to the fraternity was that women within the organization did not always embody hyperfeminine characteristics: “The way that gender was presented was also, especially with the sisters, there was a variety. There were sisters that would wear full make-up, but there were sisters that would dress more masculine.”

Although their fraternity members pushed against hyperfeminine expectations for women, there were still times these surfaced, which caused individuals that did not perform to these standards to feel as if they did not belong. For instance, Liz embraced a more masculine gender expression, which she found was problematic when the fraternity did a group photo: My first photo shoot it was like, guys wear a white button up, black pants, tie, and dress shoes. And girls wear black dresses, heels.... Nothing was required or forced, but it’s that feeling of, if you don’t do it you’re going to stand out, or you’re going to be judged, or you’re just going to feel uncomfortable and like an outsider. So you end up following the things, following the rules…because you don’t want to be the sister that stands out or that doesn’t look like a sister, or you know....

Liz recalled there was one occasion when she decided to wear black pants and flats instead of a dress. Although she felt comfortable with the clothing she chose,

I didn’t feel comfortable during it. It was for me that experience, I just felt like an outsider, like I didn’t belong there, like I shouldn’t be in the pictures…You do that and you just don’t fit in with the sisters or with the brothers, so it’s like... You’re just kind of there.

Liz thought these norms were adopted from fears of losing potential members, “I think the main thing in their minds, it’s like we’re going to lose potential members if we don’t present ourselves in this role.” Luna and Liz’s reflections highlight how chapters can be affirming of some identities while excluding and further marginalizing others.

Moments of Exclusion within Inclusion: Sexuality In their interviews, participants also spoke a great deal about the dynamics that they witnessed and experienced as it relates to issues of sexuality. Salient experiences included their new member processes, events put on by the organization, and intra-fraternal relationships.

Similar to their observations concerning gender, these individuals perceived simultaneously felt a move toward inclusion regarding sexuality while at the same time, noticing actions that ran counter to these values.

The participants all discussed their initial interactions with their Latinx/a/o-based organization as shaping their view of how affirming the space would be concerning sexuality – whether this perspective was positive or negative. Ava-Marie, for instance, shared stories about how they saw other members of the fraternity express their sexuality openly, in addition to having her own sexuality validated by current siblings.Though she was initially resistant to the idea of joining an FSL organization, she met siblings at a Taco Tuesday event who talked about their identities (e.g., bisexuality and AfroLatinx identity). Ava-Marie then followed up this comment by sharing: “My spring semester came and I went to an informational. I met a

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 22

ton of people who were also queer, and Latinx.

It was shocking, in a way that my thoughts of what Greek life was so different from what it actually was, I guess.” Ava-Marie interpreted these moments as showcasing a positive culture for queer individuals within this Latinx/a/obased co-educational FSL organization. This feeling was solidified when someone recognized a pin representing the bisexual community that she wore during the event: “And I’m like, ‘Dang.’ There’s people who identify as something other than straight coming to this thing. So, maybe this is a good decision.” By meeting those who disclosed their sexuality, Ava-Marie felt comfortable speaking about their sexuality within the context of her Latinx/a/o fraternal organization.

Luna encountered a similar instance of being able to talk about their sexuality during their initial engagement with their organization, but Luna remarked that this interaction showed them that their sexuality may not always be welcomed. At first, Luna was “very nervous about coming out in general” and they described their coming out during their “pledging process” as “interesting.” When probed to say more about this, Luna mentioned that they and other members had been asked to share about themselves by a current member. They sat next to Alana, a sibling, who divulged that they identified as non-binary and bisexual; this disclosure caused Luna to say, “Well, me too.

Bitch, the fuck?” Though initially excited to meet someone like Alana, another sibling named Isabel followed up Alana’s comment with “I don’t like that.” The silence that followed this moment was palpable and caused Luna to worry about their own place in the organization. As they stated, “So, I didn’t know if I trust them or if they trust me…there’s also that level of, ‘I already had someone that was supposed to be in my little family and that big family that already wasn’t accepting of that.’” Luna’s discussion of their little and big family suggests that although they found someone they could trust (i.e., Alana), this

was going to prove to be difficult in the larger coeducational chapter.

These experiences continued once participants joined their organizations. On one hand, participants discussed a growing culture of acceptance around queerness especially with newer members. Specific to their chapter, for example, Liz mentioned that more “members have been coming out…and so it’s more of a topic that is talked about now, and definitely recognized in everything.” Though Luna shared a similar sentiment, Luna also mentioned that they had struggled with older members of all genders to engage them with discussions of sexuality.

In particular, Luna offered the example of a program that they planned alongside the LGBTQ multicultural FSL organization on campus.

However, Luna’s organization did not support in the planning or execution of the event: I really worked very hard on it and it was up to my organization to put the word out, have people come by. They didn’t put the word out until the day of, which was a little frustrating. And then no one showed up. So it was just like four or five people from my organization and all of the people from [the LGBTQ multicultural FSL organization], which was really awkward.

In the question and answer period, the few people who did attend from their organization were silent and did not say much. In reflecting upon this program, Luna shared that this dynamic is representative of many Latinx/a/obased organizations: “I think that’s what ends up happening a lot with multicultural Greek letter organizations. They just want to focus on the one thing, at least from what I’ve seen in Latino things, they want to focus on the one thing like you’re Latino.” These types of interactions around sexuality also manifested when it came to intra-fraternal queer relationships.

During the time of the study, two participants (Luna and Liz) disclosed that they were in relationships with another member of their

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 23

Latinx/a/o-based FSL organization, experiences that revealed to them attitudes that some siblings had about queer relationships. For example, Liz mentioned that her initial fears of coming out to her siblings were allayed with their supportive demeanors: Waiting for responses was incredibly hard. And when I did get them, like all of them were positive and very supportive, so that won my heart and made me feel even more grateful and happy that I made the decision that I made to be in this fraternity...

However, Liz noted a remarkably different reaction once she started dating a fellow member, stating, “Sometimes being looked at differently, or thinking that we think a different way, or that we act a different way, or that we’re just one unit and that we’re not separate sisters kind of thing.” In particular, Liz described that sisters were less accepting than her brothers. Although her brothers will ask questions about their relationship, Liz mentioned the following about her sisters: “Even when we hang out together and stuff, it’s like, if we mention anything [about the relationship] they’re like, “Ew, gross,” or like things like that kind of thing. They might not be doing it intentionally, but yeah, it kind of hurts a bit when it comes to that.” These reactions felt like a double standard to Liz since she is usually one that people come to about their “boyfriend problems” but when it came to her, “we have to keep it to ourselves.”These dynamics thus showed Liz that the environment within her Latinx/a/obased co-educational FSL organization was accepting to a degree. It was when her siblings were confronted with seeing Liz in a romantic relationship that they outwardly expressed discomfort around queerness.

Discussion This study mobilizing queer crit (Misawa, 2012) provided a crucial look into Latinx/a/o co-educational fraternities, especially as it

relates to dynamics about gender and sexuality.

By centering women and non-binary individuals, this project represents a vital intervention into the current literature about Latinx/a/o student organizations and specifically those within fraternity and sorority life. To begin, findings revealed the motivations that the participants held when seeking to join their chapter, expanding upon the existing literature offering reasons people have to join Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations (e.g., Arellano, 2020; Delgado-Guerrero et al., 2014; Garcia, 2020, 2019b; Orta et al., 2019). From their founding, Latinx/a/o-based FSL organizations have existed to connect students to Latinx/a/o cultures (Guardia, 2015; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009) and to provide them with a sense of family within these groups (Estrada et al., 2017; Guardia & Evans, 2008; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009). In this particular study, Ava-Marie, Liz, and Luna all echoed these reasons to join their co-educational fraternity. Their fraternities represented a refuge from their predominantly white campuses where they experienced racist behavior, in addition to minoritization based on their gender and sexuality. Connected to this, learning about their organization changed their mind about the possibilities of fraternity and sorority life.Though they originally saw fraternities and sororities as predominantly white themselves, they quickly learned that culturally based FSL organizations could contribute to their cultural identities. In addition, this research project is unique in that it centered on co-educational Latinx/a/o-based fraternities. Thus, although other scholarship has named the importance of finding a sense of family within these organizations (Estrada et al., 2017; Guardia & Evans, 2008; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009), participants in this study spoke specifically about the value of connecting with people of different genders (e.g., having brothers, sisters, and siblings). Therefore, these stories extend past research by showing a motivation that students may have to join a Latinx/a/obased co-educational FSL organization.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 24

These individuals eventually came to learn the multifaceted nature of their organizations, especially as it relates to gender and sexuality.

Concerning gender, participants discussed how cisgender women in the organization oftentimes were those in leadership roles, showing how much brothers respected their ability to lead and contribute to their chapters. In fact, this pattern solidified the familial sentiment that these individuals felt within their Latinx/a/o-based coeducational FSL organization, a trend that exists in the literature (Estrada et al., 2017; Guardia & Evans, 2008; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009). However, from a queer crit perspective, it is evident that there were also some limitations placed around the culture of gender within their chapters.

Specifically, identities and expressions that felt outside of the gender binary were regulated.

Examples of this included Liz’ comments about incorrect pronoun usage for non-binary members or how normative feminine styles of dress were emphasized. Recognizing that gender is a performance (Butler, 1998) that is inherently policed by dominant groups (Nicolazzo, 2017), these insights showcases how the Latinx/a/obased co-educational FSL organizations in this study may privilege expressions of gender that reinforce a binary (e.g., cisgender, masculine and feminine).

Finally, this study sheds a light on how conversations about sexuality manifest within Latinx/a/o-based FSL organizations, building on the past work focused on Queer Men of Color (Authors, in press; Del Real, 2020). In particular, participants pointed to the changing environments within chapters as more queer people felt comfortable sharing their sexuality with siblings. However, at the same time, these chapters and organizations have room to improve upon according to the individuals in this research. For example, Luna’s story about the event they put on with an LGBTQ multicultural FSL organization showcased that they did not have support from their chapter around these issues. In their comments reflecting upon this

event, Luna points out a tension that could exist within Latinx/a/o-based organizations. By stating that these organizations have focused on advocating for Latinx/a/o cultures (Guardia, 2015; Muñoz & Guardia, 2009), Luna also mentions that this means they may overlook other issues that are relevant to the Latinx/a/o community. From a queer crit (Misawa, 2012) lens, this experience shows that communities of color may fail to address issues of heterosexism and trans oppression while fighting for racial equity. Furthermore, resembling the research of Authors (in press), certain forms of queerness are palatable within culturally based organizations. In stories like Liz’, it was identifying as queer until she entered a queer relationship. Ultimately, these examples display other ways that queers of color are minoritized within Latinx/a/o-based co-educational fraternities that may also convey inclusive attitudes.

Implications In reflecting upon the experiences shared by the participants, we find it necessary to honor their stories by sharing implications for research and practice that can better improve the climates in Latinx/a/o-based co-educational FSL organizations. From a queer crit lens, Latinx/ a/o-based FSL organizations can simultaneously attend to issues concerning race and racism, but may fall short in addressing matters of sexism, trans oppression, and heterosexism. These issues are not exclusive to Latinx/a/o-based FSL organizations, existing in FSL broadly, but it is imperative to bring to light how these spaces may be positioned to integrate these conversations based on their histories of exclusion (Torbenson, 2009, 2012).

Pertaining to research, there were limitations of this study that could be addressed with future work. Namely, we focused on the experiences of individuals within a single chapter at one institution. Future work can continue examining the role of culturally-based

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 25

co-educational organizations within FSL from the perspectives of different organizations and within different contexts. Additionally, another area of scholarship that is needed involves the operating of national fraternal and umbrella organizations themselves. Much of the literature that exists about culturally based organizations like those that are Latinx/a/o-based focus on experiences within individual chapters. Though participants in these studies frequently discuss their perspectives about their national fraternal and umbrella organizations, professionals would benefit from a more concerted look at these spaces. How is it that national organizations offer directives about centering matters of gender and sexuality? Additionally, beyond individual fraternal organizations, scholars would also benefit from an understanding of umbrella associations and their efforts around these issues.

For example, how does the National Association of Latino Fraternal Organizations (NALFO) dedicate time and resources toward issues of gender and sexual equity? Additionally, this study only included one person who identified as non-binary within their Latinx/a/o-based coeducational fraternity. Therefore, researchers should continue to highlight the experiences of those who identify as non-binary within spaces that function in gendered manners. Both of these lines of research would push these organizations toward equitable practices that align with their long-espoused values.

When it comes to practice, it is important for FSL life offices on college campuses to dedicate time and resources to culturally based fraternities and sororities as they seek to create better environments as it relates to gender and sexuality. Underscored in the literature about culturally based organizations is the reality that these groups and their members frequently feel underserved by FSL offices that cater to white student populations (Garcia, 2019b). However, doing the work of advancing justice that centers queer of color marginality requires financial and human capital. For instance, FSL offices would

need to maintain effective hiring processes for campus advisors who oversee culturally based organizations. In these hiring processes, search committees should ask questions about how they would support chapters toward attending to overlapping systems of oppression in their practices. Such questions would ensure that advisors are interested and drawn to expanding the vision of racial justice that culturally based organizations, especially those that are Latinx/ a/o-based, hold. Beyond the professionals themselves, FSL offices should encourage these conversations within chapters themselves.

What this would look like would be trainings for executive board members and for all active members to learn how to incorporate attention to gender and sexual equity within their practices (e.g.., how to plan a program focused on the interconnections between racism and heterosexism). Doing this kind of work would inevitably involve collaboration between Latinx/ a/o-based FSL organizations and other campus stakeholders (e.g., LGBTQ student services, womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s centers).

However, it would be ineffective to only consider FSL offices as sites for intervention around gender and sexuality within Latinx/a/ o-based FSL organizations. Namely, standards around new member processes and other regulations stem from national fraternal organizations themselves, meaning that work must be done on these levels. Therefore, national fraternal organizations represent spaces where these types of conversations must be had. Thus, it would behoove culturally based fraternal organizations to integrate issues of gender and sexual equity into their work, seeing it as interweaved with racial justice and not separate from it. What would it look for these organizations to create committees tasked with leading efforts on addressing issues of heterosexism, trans oppression, sexism, ableism, and more within the group? These committees could thus think intentionally about how to do this from new member processes and beyond.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 26

Changes led by individuals within culturally based fraternal organizations could potentially ripple out to all chapters and members, making it so that people feel their holistic selves valued within Latinx/a/o-based FSL organizations.

Conclusion Leveraging queer crit (Misawa, 2012) as a theoretical framework, this study revealed the differential experiences that participants encountered in their Latinx/a/o-based co-educational fraternity. Drawn to their organizations for numerous reasons, their fraternities began to occupy a complex place in participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; lives. Although their organization fulfilled the role of family, these individuals also encountered minoritization based on their sexual and gender identities. From a queer crit lens, this research underscores that though Latinx/a/obased FSL organizations provide many benefits for Latinx/a/o students, these organizations also can fall short of eradicating the multiple forms of oppression that some individuals face. Therefore, it is imperative that Latinx/a/o-based coeducational organizations take a critical look at their practices around gender and sexuality in order to uphold their values and create structures that support members from all backgrounds.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 27

References Arellano, L. (2020). Why Latin@s become Greek: Exploring why Latin@s join Latino Greekletter organizations. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 19(3), 280-302. https://doi. org/10.1177/1538192718778659 Banda, R. M., & Flowers, A. M., III. (2017). Birds of a feather do not always flock together: A critical analysis of Latina engineers and their involvement in student organizations. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 16(4), 359-374. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192716662966 Bhattacharya, K. (2017). Fundamentals of qualitative research: A practical guide. Routledge.

Butler, J. (1998). Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), 519-531. https://doi.org/10.2307/3207893 Case, D. N., Hesp, G. A., & Eberly, C. G. (2005). An exploratory study of the experiences of gay, lesbian, and bisexual fraternity and sorority members revisited. Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, 1(1), 15-31.

Chase, S. E. (2011). Narrative inquiry: Still a field in the making. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 421-434). Sage.

Delgado-Guerrero, M., Cherniack, M. A., & Gloria, A. M. (2014). Family away from home: Factors influencing undergraduate women of color’s decisions to join a cultural-specific sorority. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 7(1), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036070 Delgado-Guerrero, M., & Gloria, A. M. (2013). La importancia de la hermandad Latina: Examining the psychosociocultural influences of Latina-based sororities on academic persistence decisions.

Journal of College Student Development, 54(4), 361-378. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2013.0067 Del Real, M. (2020). Gay Latino Greeks: Finding a “familia” in a Latino fraternity. In J. G. Smith & C. W. Han (Eds.), Home and community for queer men of color: The intersection of race and sexuality (pp.

75-84). Lexington Books.

DeSantis, A. D., & Coleman, M. (2008). Not on my line: Homosexuality in Black fraternities. In G. Parks (Ed.), Black Greek-letter organizations in the twenty-first century (pp. 291-312). The University Press of Kentucky.

Duran, A., & Garcia, C. E. (2020). Post-undergraduate narratives of Queer Men of Color’s resistance in culturally-based fraternities. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/19496591.2020.1772083 Estrada, F., Mejia, A., & Hufana, A. M. (2017). Brotherhood and college Latinos: A phenomenological study. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 16(4), 314-337. https://doi. org/10.1177/1538192716656451 Garcia, C. E. (2020). Belonging in a predominantly white institution: The role of membership in Latina/o sororities and fraternities. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 13(2), 181-193. https:// doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000126 Garcia, C. E. (2019a). Climates for ethnic and racial diversity: Latina/o sorority and fraternity member perspectives. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/19496591.2019.1631836 Garcia, C. E. (2019b). “They don’t even know that we exist”: Exploring sense of belonging within sorority and fraternity communities for Latina/o members. Journal of College Student Development, 60(3), 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0029

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 28

Garcia, C. E., & Duran, A. (2020). “In my letters, but I was still by myself ”: Highlighting the experiences of Queer Men of Color in culturally based fraternities. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000167 Gillon, K. E., Beatty, C. C., & Salinas, C., Jr. (2019). Race and racism in fraternity and sorority life: A historical overview. In K. E. Gillon, C. C. Beatty, & C. Salinas Jr. (Eds.), Critical considerations of race, ethnicity, and culture in fraternity and sorority life (New Directions for Student Services, no. 165, pp. 9-16). Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20289 Guardia, J. R. (2015). Leadership and identity: Development through a Latino/a fraternity and sorority lens. In A. Lozano (Ed.), Latina/o college student leadership: Emerging theory, promising practice (pp. 65-81). Lexington.

Guardia, J. R., & Evans, N. J. (2008). Factors influencing the ethnic identity development of Latino fraternity members at a Hispanic serving institution. Journal of College Student Development, 49(3), 163-181. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0011 Luedke, C. L. (2019). “Es como una familia”: Bridging emotional support with academic and professional development through the acquisition of capital in Latinx student organizations. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 18(4), 372-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192717751205 Miranda, M. L., & Martin de Figueroa, M. (2000, Summer). Adelante hacia el futuro! (Forward to the future): Latino/Latina students: Past, present, and future. Perspectives, 6-8.

Misawa, M. (2012). Social justice narrative inquiry: A queer crit perspective. Proceedings of the Adult Education Research Conference (pp. 239–246). Retrieved from http://newprairiepress.org/ aerc/2012/papers/34 Moreno, D., & Banuelos, S. (2013). The influence of Latina/o Greek sorority and fraternity involvement on Latina/o college student transition and success. Journal of Latino/Latin American Studies, 5(2), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.18085/llas.5.2.y1113g2572x13061 Muñoz, S. M., & Guardia, J. R. (2009). Nuestra historia y futuro [Our history and future]: Latino/a fraternities and sororities. In C. L. Torbenson & G. S. Parks (Eds.), Brothers and sisters: Diversity in college fraternities and sororities (pp. 104-132). Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.

Nicolazzo, Z. (2017). Compulsory heterogenderism: A collective case study. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 10(3), 245-261. https://doi.org/10.1080/19407882.2017.1351376 Nicolazzo, Z., & Karikari, S. N. (2018). Amplifying the whispers: A critical gendered examination of fraternal culture. In C. J. Catalano, R. Wagner, & T. Davis (Eds.), Gender-aware practices: Intersectional approaches to applying masculinities in student affairs (New Directions for Student Services, no. 164, pp. 85-94). Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20286 Orta, D. (2019). Everything but racism: A critical analysis of Latina/o college sorority and fraternity research. Sociology Compass, 13(12). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12742 Orta, D., Murguia, E., & Cruz, C. (2019). From struggle to success via Latina sororities: Culture, shock, marginalization, embracing ethnicity, and educational persistence through academic capital.

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 18(1), 41-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192717719133 Ross, L. C., Jr. (2000). The Divine Nine:The history of African American fraternities and sororities. Kensington Publishing Corporation.

Salinas C., Jr. (2020). The complexity of the “x” in Latinx: How Latinx/a/o students relate to, identify with, and understand the term Latinx. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 19(2), 149-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192719900382 Swaminathan, R., & Mulvihill, T. M. (2017). Critical approaches to questions in qualitative research.

Routledge.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 • Summer/Fall 2020 29

Torbenson, C. L. (2009). From the beginning: A history of college fraternities and sororities. In C. L. Torbenson, & G. S. Parks (Eds.), Brothers and sisters: Diversity in college fraternities and sororities (pp.

15-45). Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.

Torbenson, C. L. (2012).The origin and evolution of college fraternities and sororities. In T. L. Brown, G. S. Parks, & C. M. Phillips (Eds.), African American fraternities and sororities:The legacy and the vision (2nd ed., pp. 33-61). The University Press of Kentucky.

Author Biographies Crystal Garcia (she/her) is an assistant professor in educational administration at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Her research critically examines the mechanisms by which racially minoritized college students experience campus environments, specifically focusing on campus climates and the role of student affairs in student experiences. Dr. Garcia is a member of Chi Omega Fraternity and serves as a chapter advisor for Kappa Delta Chi Sorority, Incorporated at Auburn University.

Antonio Duran (he/him) is an assistant professor in the administration of higher education program at Auburn University. Antonioâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s research agenda involves using critical and poststructural frameworks to complicate understandings of student development, experiences, and success for minoritized populations. Relevant to this investigation, Antonio is particularly interested in how Queer and Trans People of Color navigate culturally-based sororities and fraternities. Dr. Duran serves as the chapter advisor for Omega Delta Phi Fraternity, Inc. at Auburn University.

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 30

Editors of Oracle:The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Grahaeme Hesp, Ed.D. (Founding Editor, 2005-2006) Daniel Bureau, Ph.D. (Founding Associate Editor, 2005-2006) Eric Norman, Ph.D. (2007-2009) J. Patrick Biddix, Ph.D. (2010-2013) Georgianna L. Martin, Ph.D. (2014-2017) James P. Barber, Ph.D. (2018-Present)

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 31

Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors Vol. 15, Issue 1 â&#x20AC;˘ Summer/Fall 2020 32