AFA Perspecitves Summer 2006

速

速 2

Perspectives / Fall 2005

in this

issue – Allison Swick-Duttine, Editor

S

ummer is here. A time to relax and catch up on personal and professional projects that we never seem to have time for when students are on campus. It is also a time for many professionals and volunteers to participate in national leadership conferences and institutes that challenge fraternity and sorority members to act in congruence with their fraternal values and rituals.

A FA

The First 30 Years

8

I believe that there is no change initiative more effective than simple conversations with young adults about what they and their organizations value and how their behaviors align with (or are antithetical to) these beliefs. My philosophy is that an hour spent challenging a student through a passionate discussion about ritual and fraternal values may (and usually does) save many hours confronting counterproductive behaviors later.

During my eight years as a fraternity/sorority professional, I have attended many presentations that have made me more adept at facilitating values-based conversations. One of the presenters to lead me to some of my own “a-ha” moments was Dr. Mari Ann Callais, Theta Phi Alpha National President and nationally recognized speaker about living the ritual. Therefore, I have asked Mari Ann to share some of her tips for promoting dialogue and reflection about ritual. As Mari Ann stated, “Open, honest dialogue is the surest way for sisters and brothers to take pride together in ritual, their chapter, and all that their fraternity or sorority experience has to offer.”

Following are some ways that Mari Ann suggests to generate dialogue about ritual: • As part of a chapter development program or retreat, encourage the chapters that you work with to place the ritual equipment in the middle of the room and discuss what those symbols mean in their everyday lives.

• Encourage members to read the ritual book on their own. Remind them that anyone can read the ritual unless otherwise designated by their inter/national organization. Many members do not know that they can read ritual documents; they often believe that only officers have access to the ceremonies.

• Invite alumni to discuss the meaning of the ritual ceremony and how they are living the ritual values in their daily lives. Ask them to discuss the connection between fraternal ritual and lifetime commitment.

• Help undergraduates analyze their mottos, creeds or things that are open to the general public. Take each line from these and help them to examine it intensely. continued on page 5

+

11

BRANDING + VALUES = CONGRUENCE

A Cure-all for Fraternity/Sorority Life?

12

The Challenge of Values Congruence

15

The Power of Service!

A N I N V I TAT I O N T O V O L U N T E E R

&

16 Values & Action Congruence

Value 18

?

ARE FRATERNITIES AND SORORITIES TEACHING THE OF COMMUNITY SERVICE

regular columns The Mighty Quill ...................................... 3 From the Top..............................................4 Core Competencies ....................................6

In the Summer 2005 issue article: Two Roadmaps to One Destination, Part 1 (p. 13), portions of New Mexico State University’s fraternity/sorority community strategic plan were used and the reference was omitted. We apologize for the oversight.

SSAOs’ Perspectives ..................................14 A Must Read ............................................21

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

3

Perspectives is the official publication of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, Inc. (AFA). Views expressed are those of the individual authors/contributors/ advertisers, and are not necessarily those of the Association. AFA encourages the submission of articles, essays, ideas, and advertisements. All Perspectives correspondence and submissions should be submitted to:

Allison Swick-Duttine 2006 Editor Director of Fraternity/Sorority Life & Leadership Development State University of New York College at Plattsburgh Angell College Center 204 101 Broad Street Plattsburgh, NY 12901-2681 allison.swick@plattsburgh.edu 518.564.4825 Fax: 518.564.4839 Perspectives is published four times per year.

Submission deadlines: Fall August 15, 2006 Winter November 15, 2006 Send address corrections to AFA: Association of Fraternity Advisors 9640 N. Augusta Drive, Suite 433 Carmel, IN 46032 317.876.1632 Fax 317.876.3981 info@fraternityadvisors.org

2006 Editorial

Board Monica Miranda Smalls AFA Vice President for Resource Development University of Rochester Jim Barber, University of Michigan Dan Bureau, Indiana University Kurt Foriska, Ohio State University Tim Haskell, Santa Clara University Michael Hevel, Willamette University Megan Johnson, Dartmouth University Kirsten Siron Young, Jacksonville University Melinda Sutton, University of Texas, Tyler

4

Perspectives / Summer 2006

Using Organization Values – Dr. Ron Binder, AFA President in Decision Making

O

ne of the challenges facing chapter presidents is deciding what ideas or projects the chapter will pursue. They work with many members who have good ideas; ones that will take their chapter in many different directions. Their challenge is to decide to which ideas they will commit chapter resources (members and financial). Some think they can “do it all” and work on multiple projects; while others are paralyzed by the choices in front of them (the “deer in the headlights” phenomenon). The key to navigating this challenge is having a core set of values to guide the decision-making process. Once you know your values, the rest generally falls into line.

Some of you may recall the Tylenol scare a number of years ago where bottles were tampered with and people were poisoned.

The decision to pull all Tylenol bottles from store shelves was made by mid-level managers, acting in accordance with the company’s stated values. To them, they were simply applying the values of the company to their everyday decisions.

Many of us make every day decisions that ultimately reflect our core values and those of our organizations. They influence which ideas or projects we pursue, and to which areas we will commit our resources. While most people think of resources as fiscal, the most important resource is human. And like the chapter president who wants to do it all, we too have limited resources, particularly as it relates to staff time. We must intentionally pick and choose the ideas that are deserving of precious resources.

Much like the chapter president, we also need a set of guiding principles to help us make these increasingly tough decisions. Ideally, our chapters turn to their organization’s Ritual.

Strong chapters use the Ritual on a regular basis and it becomes the essence of their organizational culture.

For fraternity/sorority life offices and inter/national organizations, these guiding principles can be found in a solid mission statement upon which operations are based.

Organizations that have a clear set of values generally experience more success because the projects they undertake reflect their mission and directly relate to their core values and priorities. These are generally called missiondriven organizations. Those that do not have a clear set of values can frustrate their constituents by the changing nature of their work or by appearing to be arbitrary in their decision making. They also have staff that suffer from high burnout as they try to be the “end all” when it comes to serving constituents.

Ultimately, it comes down to determining core values and acting upon them. Often times we see this clearly with other groups – the chapters we work with for instance – but have trouble when it is our own organization. This is human nature. The trick is to stand back and ask if we have clearly defined the values that should guide our decisions, and then to ask if our actions and decision are congruent with those values. If we are open about our values, our constituents will let us know if we are being incongruent. Problems arise when we are unclear or uncommunicative about our values, leaving our constituents little upon which to judge our congruency. Being transparent allows mission-driven organizations to be held accountable.

As an organization, AFA invested its resources over the past two years to develop our mission, vision and strategic goals. They reflect the core values of the Association and our desire to be the essential resource for professionals and volunteers who advise fraternities and sororities.

The ultimate value of our strategic-planning process lies in the well-defined “road map” we use to guide our decision making and our work. As we progress as an organization, we are counting on everyone to hold us to the values reflected in the Strategic Plan and ask the question, “Are we operating in congruence with our stated values?” As with many things in life, time will tell if this is true. We are working hard to ensure that the answer to this question is a resounding “Yes!” We hope you will too.

continued from page 3 • When working to teach chapter officers about how to hold members accountable for their actions… rather than telling the member that they violated a rule or standard, suggest that the standards/discipline board place their initiation promises or oaths in front of them and ask them which ones they have not lived up to as promised.

• Sponsor ritual/creed/motto discussion nights where a small group of students get together and discuss the meaning of these.

“We have to teach fraternity and sorority members that it is okay to talk about what ritual means without revealing the details of the ceremony,” Mari Ann said. “Fraternity and sorority professionals, staff, volunteers, and alumni have all taught fraternity and sorority members that ritual is secret – now we need to teach them how to make the words in the ritual come alive and have meaning.”

What has repeatedly struck me about Mari Ann Callais’ message is that the answer to our problems as a fraternity/sorority community may be quite simple. We simply must have conversations about what we value as fraternal organizations.

A couple of years ago, Kaye Schendel of University of Wisconsin – LaCrosse (and one of my dearest sorority sisters) referred to me a book by Margaret Wheatley. The essence of the book is that change will happen when we start having honest conversations with each other about what we value rather than creating policies and procedures in reaction to behaviors. The essence of Wheatley’s book sums up my feelings about this issue of Perspectives: “I believe that we can change the world if we start listening to one another again. Simple, honest, human conversation. Not mediation, negotiation, problem solving, debate, or public meetings. Simple, truthful conversation where we each have a chance to speak, we each feel heard, and we each listen well.” (Wheatley, p. 3).

REFERENCE Wheatley, M.J. (2002). Turning to one another: Simple conversations to restore hope to the future. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Gamma Sigma Alpha honors the top 1% of fraternity and sorority members nationally, and members receive the unique opportunity to network with other outstanding students, as well as faculty and administrators

Gamma Sigma Alpha

Striving to uphold the highest ideals of scholastic achievement Gamma Sigma Alpha Sevices for Fraternity and Sorority Professionals: Recognizing Scholars Graduate Scholarships Faculty Advisor Resources Annotated Bibliography on Academic Achievement Research Initiative on Academic Achievement Academic Resources Regional GPA Awards

Gamma Sigma Alpha National Honor Society Committed to the academic achievement, leadership and excellence of fraternity and sorority members everywhere. For more information call 213-740-2080 or check out our web site at gammasigmaalpha.org. Membership Requirements: Students are eligible for membership based on grade point average and active membership in a fraternity or sorority recognized by their university or college.

Only students with a cumulative grade point average of 3.5 or above at the start of their junior year or a grade point average of 3.5 or higher in any semester during their junior or senior years are eligible.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

5

Building the Human Environment PA R T N E R S H I P S A N D C O A L I T I O N S • Establishes and maintains trusting relationships with all constituents; • Brings together the various undergraduate segments of the fraternity and sorority community on a frequent basis to build a shared understanding; • Serve as a liaison to colleagues and upper-level administration to develop an understanding of fraternity and sorority community needs for organizational development; • Seeks opportunities to build and strengthen partnerships across the campus, the community, and the profession (AFA, 2003).

Parent phone call at 9:00 a.m. Meeting with student leaders at 11:00 a.m. Lunch with a colleague at noon. Walk through of chapter houses at 2:00 p.m. Meeting with a chapter consultant at 4:00 p.m. Council meeting at 7:00 p.m.

How many days do you spend with a similar schedule, running from meeting to meeting with different groups or individuals who all hold an important stake in your fraternity/sorority community? The various constituencies that are involved in a campus fraternity/sorority community form a complex network of relationships, often connected in unforeseen ways. Strange and Banning (2001) discuss the idea that human aggregates, the individuals who constitute a group, influence and even create the surrounding environment.

The people who make up a community have a great impact on the organizational culture of that community. Efficiency, effectiveness, and the ability to make values-based decisions (or any decisions at all) depend greatly on the people in the group and how they interact. The human aggregate contributes to the environment and passes it along to future generations.

The dominant features of an environment depend at least partially on the characteristics and interactions of the people who inhabit that environment (Holland, 1973; Strange & Banning, 2001). This environment in turn determines who is comfortable within a group, who is uncomfortable, who decides to leave, who chooses to stay, and who decides to join. The human environment is very important in the culture and continuity of an organization or community.

Many fraternity/sorority professionals have utilized personality typologies such as the Holland types (1973) and the MyersBriggs Type Indicator (MBTI) (Myers & McCaulley, 1985), and are familiar with the idea of categorizing people according to personality, vocational interest, campus involvement, or any number of other characteristics captured by a survey instrument. For purposes of exploring AFA’s Core Competency of

6

Perspectives / Summer 2006

– James P. Barber

partnerships and collaborations, what is more important than the specifics of the various typologies is that these systems illustrate the difference between environments that are dominated by just one type (or similar types) of people and environments that include a broad range of interests and perspectives. Groups that are focused and homogeneous tend to be resistant to change and reinforce the status quo, while groups that are heterogeneous and less focused are generally more open to change within the environment (Strange & Banning, 2000).

Human aggregate theory can be a lens used to examine fraternity and sorority communities on a number of levels – the chapter executive board, the chapter itself, the governing council(s), the national organization(s), professional associations, etc. Taking an in-depth look at the campus fraternity/sorority community can be an important exercise in understanding and improving your skill level in our Core Competency of partnerships and coalitions. Examining the long list of the constituents included in the Core Competency document indicates the complex nature of this task: “members; prospective members; parents; alumni; volunteers; fraternity and sorority headquarters’ staffs; chapter house directors; university faculty, staff and administrators; local and campus community; and vendors” (AFA, 2003). So, how do all these stakeholders come together to form the human aggregate for your fraternity/sorority community?

The task of a fraternity/sorority professional is to build the relationships with and between these groups and engage them in the community to a level appropriate for your campus (e.g. a neighbor from the community may be less frequently involved than an undergraduate leader or chapter advisor). A good place to start stock-taking is to look around and assess who is around the table – or on the e-mail list – when important discussions take place. Are alumni advisors invited to attend governing council meetings? How informed are house directors or faculty members about the latest initiatives within the fraternity/sorority community? How are parents and families engaged in important issues? The next step is to question how the dynamics of meetings or decision-making processes might be different if all perspectives were represented. How would the inclusion of different voices change the human aggregate and possibly affect the outcome of the conversation?

As student-centered practitioners, it is important to maintain strong student participation and leadership, even as changes may occur to the human aggregate to include a broader range of stakeholders. One element of the partnerships and coalitions competency is to bring the undergraduate segments of the fraternity and sorority community together frequently. Human aggregate characteristics also have a noticeable effect on our undergraduate organizations. The homogeneous environments that can be, result from our status as (mainly) single-sex organizations, and the historical divisions along racial and cultural lines that are evident in the structures of governing councils on

many campuses can have great impacts on the human aggregate in fraternity/sorority communities, and thus on the experience of individual members.

Again, a process of stock-taking is a useful starting point for assessing progress in this Core Competency. Do undergraduate councils have the opportunity to meet together and have meaningful interaction, or does the campus Interfraternity Council meet separately from the National Pan-Hellenic Council, Panhellenic Association, or Multicultural Greek Council(s), coming together only briefly each year for an event such as “Greek Week” or the annual awards ceremony? Moving out once again from the undergraduate level, what about the chapter volunteers and house directors? Are there opportunities for these important advisors to build relationships across governing council lines? Are there any points of interaction with faculty members or upper-level administrators? In order to be successful in building and strengthening partnerships across the campus, community and profession, sometimes it is not enough to seek opportunities for such collaboration. Often, we as professionals must be the ones to create these opportunities.

Building the partnerships and coalitions vital to a successful fraternity/sorority community is a difficult task no matter which role you may play in the human aggregate. Whether you are a campusbased professional, a chapter advisor, or a headquarters staff member, this core competency is an important part of succeeding in your position. It is also important to note the interconnectedness of our Core Competencies; partnerships and coalitions do not stand alone in any community. Maintaining these relationships requires communication, earning trust and respect from all constituencies’ calls for adherence to ethical standards, and so on.

REFERENCES Association of Fraternity Advisors (2003). Core competencies for excellence in the profession. Retrieved June 16, 2006, from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/Business/ CoreCompetencies.aspx.

Holland, J. L. (1973). Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Myers, I. B., and McCaulley, M. H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Strange, C. C., and Banning, J. H. (2001). Educating by design: Creating campus environments that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

– James P. Barber is a doctoral student and research assistant in the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education at the University of Michigan.

The human environment is very important in the culture and continuity of an organization or community.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

7

afa The First 30 Years

This is the third installment in a fourpart series about the evolution of the Association of Fraternity Advisors.

– Dan Bureau

YEARS

OF

PROGRESS (1982-1990)

“

In retrospect, during the late 1980’s, the Association was very much like an adolescent. Collectively, we were seeking to understand our profession as well as the appropriate role for AFA (a sense of identity). In addition, we were struggling with the issues of independence (or interdependence) – from organizations such as the National Interfraternity Conference, the Fraternity Executives Association, and the National Panhellenic Conference. At the same time, we sought validation from the larger, significant professional student affairs organizations – ACPA and NASPA. Essentially, we were very much struggling to ‘mature.’ Given a very strong and patient membership, thoughtful leadership, and understanding friends from the organizations mentioned above, the maturity eventually evidenced itself.

”

– Gary Bonas, 1987 AFA President

“

An ongoing focus for AFA was marketing. We knew there were (fraternity/sorority) advisors out there who may not know about AFA and what we had to offer. We wanted to ensure that all individuals working with (fraternities and sororities) had the wonderful professional development and mentoring opportunities offered through membership in AFA.

D

uring the 1976 annual meeting of fraternal associations in Williamsburg, Virginia (led primarily by, then known as, the National Interfraternity Conference (NIC)), a group of campus professionals with responsibilities related to fraternity and sorority advising discussed the formation of a professional association. The Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) was born. The December 1976 issue of the Fraternity Newsletter stated “the association will be designed to represent campus advisors/deans, provide input to the NIC and FEA [Fraternity Executives Association], organize in-service training for a highly mobile group of student personnel members, and encourage research and publications benefiting the field” (p.3).

As the 1980s progressed, the Association and its leadership were stable. The financial status of the Association was healthy. The Association continued to host well-attended Annual Meetings with workshops facilitated by campus professionals as well as fraternity and sorority executives. The vision of the individuals who gave life to AFA was being realized. Accomplishments include the effort to professionalize fraternity and sorority advising, addressing membership needs, and AFA’s historical relationship with the NIC. However, this success was not without challenges.

8

Perspectives / Summer 2006

”

– Bridget Guernsey Riordan, 1989 AFA President Fraternity and sorority advising is a relatively young phenomenon in the world of college student personnel. From its very origin, AFA accepted the onus to advance advising fraternities and sororities as a profession throughout North American colleges and universities. This commitment was affirmed through a resolution that “encourages colleges and universities to provide a professional staff member to serve as fraternity/sorority advisor, whose time is spent in fraternal affairs in commensurate with the needs of students and chapters on their campuses” (AFA, 1993).

Fraternity and sorority advising was perceived by some with merit, but by others as rudimentary in the greater purpose of higher education. In his State of the Association speech, President Vic Boshini offered that fraternity and sorority advising “is not now, and will probably never be, a top priority with too many university/college presidents… We are not in the mainstream of higher education… We need to admit that we augment a good education; we do not initiate it” (1985).

Some argued that the undermining of the profession’s credibility was often due to its own members’ actions. Doug Lange (1983) and Larry Lunsford (1979) shared these thoughts in their presidential remarks and

President Shelley Sutherland (1984) stated: “I have learned that we… are responsible for the development of our students. This includes teaching respect and responsibility, and yet… one of the most frustrating points... has been the lack of the latter qualities among our own colleagues...

How can we teach our students to be responsible if we ourselves are not?”

In addition to the Association presidents, members also found forums to convey their thoughts. Patrick H. Deese, a member of AFA, wrote in The Fraternity Newsletter “[M]any within AFA may be experiencing a role identity problem: are we administrators and educators or are we (fraternity/ sorority) advocates and (fraternity/ sorority) apologists? [U]niversities hire us to lead, manage and improve our systems, not just respond to crises and promote a better image. We must address honestly and vigorously those substantive ills which exist in every Greek system, and we must make a quantifiable difference in substance, not just image” (1985, p. 12).

As AFA approached its 10th anniversary in 1986, membership continued to increase.

This provided a challenge of balancing programs and services for those fraternity and sorority professionals engaged in advising for less than five years and those

who have served longer in such positions.

A 1988 survey conducted by the Association reflected a growing perception that AFA needed to address the needs of its tenured members (Robel, 1988). Responses included the need for research as well as a certification program to enhance the credibility of the profession. One respondent also offered “I think one of the biggest services that AFA could offer to senior managers... is sessions on staying involved with the Greek System while not being responsible for it” (p. 3).

Between 1982 and 1990 AFA hosted senior management institutes and forums for research. AFA assisted the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) in soliciting articles for a special edition of the NASPA Journal dedicated to fraternity and sorority issues (Robel, April/May 1989). Providing services to meet the needs of tenured membership provided a challenge for the Association throughout the 1980s. Although some progress was made, the dilemma is one that surfaced regularly for the association throughout its history and continues today.

As the start of the final decade of the 20th century approached, AFA owed much of its success to the efforts and assistance of both the FEA and the NIC. These associations assisted AFA with resources throughout its first 10 years; however, the FEA Advisory Board ended its formalized assistance in 1981 and the NIC was left to evaluate how it would support the Association. In addition, AFA came to question whether or not its dependence on the NIC for its Annual Meeting should continue. AFA and the NIC had offered joint meetings for close to 10 years, but in 1985 President Barb Robel stated “[A] move such as this [separating] could… be a sign of maturity for our association” (Executive Committee Meeting Minutes, 1984).

REFERENCES Association of Fraternity Advisors (1993, December). Resolution regarding fraternity/sorority advising and support services. Retrieved June 16, 2006 from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/ Resolutions/Advising.aspx.

Bonas, G. (1987, October/November).

From the president. The Fraternity Newsletter, 16(2), 1.

Boschini, V. (1985, February). Report of the president. The Fraternity Newsletter, 12(6), 5-8.

Deese, P.H. (1985, January). The 8th AFA conference: Some observations by a novice. The Fraternity Newsletter, 7(5), 11-12.

A committee was formed to address the nature of the relationship with the NIC. Various charges were posed to this group including an overall evaluation of the timing and location for annual meetings.

The Executive Board viewed this as an opportunity to not only assert itself as a “mature” association, but also to reflect on the many decisions that could set a new direction for AFA (Executive Committee Meeting Minutes, 1984).

This was not the only point of contention between the NIC and AFA. In 1987, AFA President Gary Bonas addressed the NIC on their new program, Interchange, stating, “it is a program whose purpose is to provide support for campus IFCs [Interfraternity Councils]… [However it is] prohibitive to all but the wealthiest of IFCs” (Bonas, 1987, p. 1). AFA leadership had hesitations about the program’s implementation, yet they remained on its advisory committee.

While AFA and the NIC finally reconciled differences concerning Interchange and decided to continue to host jointly sponsored annual meetings, the relationship between AFA and the NIC became more and more complicated. Decisions made to continue a joint meeting and support the programs of the NIC became opportunities for the leadership of AFA to reflect on their codependence throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s. This matter would be addressed throughout the remainder of the 20th century and into the new millennium.

As 1990 approached, many accomplishments had occurred for AFA: addressing the geographical needs of members through establishing elected representation of regional vice-presidents on the Executive Board; the development of an advisors manual; noted progress in the areas of inclusion and addressing plurality in fraternities and sororities, illustrated through the resolutions

Executive Committee Meeting Minutes (1984, July 7). Retrieved from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives. AFA. Proceedings.

MS-364. Box 5 Executive Committee minutes/reports 1985-1986.

Guernsey, B. (1989). State of the association.

Retrieved from the Bowling Green State University Library Student Life Archives.

AFA. Officer Files. MS-364. Box 1 Bridget Guernsey. President.1989-1990.

Guernsey Riordan, B. (2003). The role of the Association of Fraternity Advisors.

In Gregory, D.E. (Ed.), The administration of fraternal organizations on North American campuses (179-195).

Asheville, NC: College Administration Publications Inc.

passed in the late 1980s; the formation and nurturing of partnerships with other higher education associations such as NASPA and the Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS).

Planning for the future became a priority with the emergence of a strategic plan in 1985 (Guernsey Riordan, 2003).

As the 1980s ended, an emerging issue called “risk management” became a focal point for fraternity and sorority professionals. In her State of the Association address, President Bridget Guernsey wrote, “While our members welcome the standards set by the fraternities dealing with risk management, they are concerned about the enforcement of these policies…

Involvement and education in these areas will be continued to better assist our members” (Guernsey, 1989).

Looking ahead to the 1990s and a new millennium, risk management was one of many challenges emerging for AFA. The Association continued to contribute to the advancement of the fraternal movement in collaboration with higher education and interfraternal partners. New challenges presented opportunities to prepare for the future. Entering the Strategic Planning and Decision-Making Years (1990-2001) and the Evaluative Years (2001-present day), the Association stood poised to evolve into what it is today: the essential association for persons invested in the fraternal movement.

In the next installment, Bureau examines the final two phases of the association and provides predictions for the future of AFA.

– Dan Bureau is a PhD student in the Higher Education Student Affairs program at Indiana University and a facilitator for CAMPUSPEAK. He served AFA as the 2004 President.

Lange, D. (1983, January). State of the association address. The Fraternity Newsletter. 11(5), 5-8.

Lunsford, L. (1979, December). State of the association address. The Fraternity Newsletter, 7(5), 5-7.

Robel, B. (Ed.). (1989, April/May). The Fraternity Newsletter, 16(4.1), 9.

Robel, B. (Ed.). (1988, June). The Fraternity Newsletter, 15(7), 3.

Sutherland, S. (1984, January). State of the association. The Fraternity Newsletter, 6(5), 2-6.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

9

Sex

Under the Influence

In college, Joel Goldman was a model student... fraternity president, involved in all the activities, knew all the administrators.

But when it came time for parties, Joel learned to mix sex and alcohol. Like many students, most of Joel’s sexual encounters came under the influence.

Alcohol gave him the extra courage he needed that night, and a justification the next morning. The pattern continued after graduation, and as a result Joel is living with HIV today. His program is part alcohol awareness, part sexual health lesson. In “Sex Under the Influence,” he encourages students to help their friends make smarter decisions surrounding sex and alcohol.

In the 25th Year of AIDS:

Joel has been educating young people for 15 years and has spoken to a million students. He has been recognized for his commitment to young people in his field with AFA's Jack Anson Award, the NIC Silver Medal, and the Ryan's Angel Award from The Ryan White Foundation. Joel has served 15 years on Sigma Alpha Mu's professional staff and Board of Directors including two terms as International President.

■ 50% of new HIV infections in the U.S. are diagnosed in people under the age of 24

In addition to his program,“Sex Under the Influence,” Joel is willing to lead discussions, round tables, and in-services about the evolution of HIV on campus when visiting your campus this year.

For booking information and availability, please call 303.745.5545 or e-mail info@campuspeak.com

10

Perspectives / Summer 2006

■ 40 million people are living with HIV/AIDS ■ 25 million people have died from AIDS

+

B R A N D I N G + VA L U E S = C O N G RU E N C E

A Cure-all for Fraternity/Sorority Life?

C

orporations know that a strong brand is essential to a successful communication strategy. For fraternities and sororities, a brand can be more than a logo and a tag line; a brand can become an ideal for the community itself.

Organizations that use and communicate a values-based brand through their public relations efforts, recruit individuals who espouse those values, creating a paradigm shift away from the established normative culture of hazing and alcohol misuse.

An early form of “branding” for fraternities and sororities is the coat of arms. Derived from European families who used a coat of arms to identify themselves on the field of battle, fraternities and sororities use a coat of arms for values identification, immediate association, and recognition. However, the form’s relevance to the average undergraduate diminished to the point where today a coat of arms or crest are more revered for their decorative qualities and less for their ritualistic significance.

A successful, campus-wide brand should incorporate a key message about the campus fraternity/sorority community, as well as an element of shared values.

Many inter/national headquarters concentrate efforts on developing and updating brands for their chapters but find resistance to these campaigns from chapters that do not completely buy into their own fraternal values. These groups dismiss the branding as “what ‘Nationals’ wants us to do” rather than embrace it as an accurate reflection of their values. Their resistance may stem from a lack of understanding their own fraternal rituals or a complete rejection of the stated values. There is a disconnect between what values sororities and fraternities should be branding and what they actually brand, resulting in poor decision making and public regard for fraternities and sororities.

Without clearly defined values, it can be difficult for a chapter, council, or fraternity/sorority community to synthesize the elements of an appropriate brand. When chapter t-shirts and promotional materials reflect a lack of respect for women, a culture of alcohol, or another warning, values are not fully integrated into the chapter.

For a community that believes “image is everything,” most cannot agree on what that image should be. The declining interest in fraternity/sorority life is a natural and understandable reaction to a community that often says one thing and does another.

At this point in the history of fraternity/sorority life, simply promoting values congruence may not be sufficient. We should recognize the importance of strong, local, values-based brands that can serve the future needs of fraternity and sorority chapters. While some individual groups can benefit from their own branding efforts, community-wide brands can be more effective. In addition to drawing more potential new members into the fraternity/sorority community as a whole, the brand can be used by administrators internally to align the chapters with the campus mission. This results in increased accountability of those chapters who do not uphold the values of the entire community, separating them as an anomaly rather than part of the normative culture.

– Ray Lutzky

A successful, campus-wide brand should incorporate a key message about the campus fraternity/sorority community, as well as an element of shared values.

A 4-step process can help students identify the message behind their campus-wide brand.

[1]

S.W.O.T. Analysis: Examine the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that fraternity and sorority members perceive in an open, free-form discussion. The purpose of this discussion is two-fold; the students will be on the same page about how they perceive the community around them and they will generate a list of “publics” they interact with regularly. This can also help engage student in the process of developing a community brand.

[2]

Direct Linkages: From the results of the S.W.O.T. analysis, ask students to identify the publics with a direct connection to the fraternity and sorority community. Draw a circle with the fraternities and sororities at the center, with branches leading off to other circles containing the identified publics. This helps students prioritize the publics of the highest concern and recognize those with a direct connection to their success.

[3]

Public Values Identification: After the students have prioritized their publics and are able to select one or two with the highest priority, they need to understand them better. Have students brainstorm what they believe are the values of the publics identified; if possible, incorporate members of that public into the discussion (for example, having a professor present to discuss faculty values).

The commonly used phrase “know your audience” is critical at this step.

[4]

Messaging: The results of the public values identification must then be compared to the shared values of the fraternity/sorority community. The points of congruence will produce the best messages to correspond to the public. A certain amount of creativity is required here, and the message should go through a few drafts after being presented to a few “test” members of the public. The message should be basic and easily understood and communicated in as few as one or two words.

Once the brand is created and designed, it must be incorporated throughout the fraternity/sorority community. A brand does not become a “living, breathing” part of the campus until it is repeated and recognized by the campus community. If a brand is popular, it will become a mantra, inspiring students to live up to the ideal it represents in addition to their own fraternal beliefs.

In addition to branding, a community or chapter can create a values-based public relations campaign by making some changes that, while simple, require an adherence to basic fraternal values.

• Chapter officers: The public relations chair/officer should be focused on the core values of the chapter, not just in getting the chapter’s “name out there.” In effect, they become the “chief ethics officer” and should be charged with instilling a certain amount of responsibility into the chapter for its own values. This means when a potentially dangerous decision comes before the chapter leadership, the public relations chair responds with “that doesn’t match our values” versus “that might make us look bad.” continued on page 13

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

11

>>

The Challenge of Values Congruence

– Dana R. Becker

National News • A corporation with over $100 billion of supposed revenue files for bankruptcy after being discovered for accounting fraud.

• A media mogul spends time in prison after being found guilty of securities fraud.

• A political leader admits to infidelity after having sexual relations with a woman other than his wife.

• A celebrity marries a childhood friend on a whim and less than three days later has the marriage annulled, blaming the irrational behavior on Las Vegas.

• Several police departments in cities throughout the U.S. capture Internet predators trying to arrange sexual encounters with children.

Fraternal News • Two young fraternity men who have been taught to keep “careful watch over their personal conduct” break into another fraternity’s chapter house and vandalize property.

• A group of fraternity men whose chapter values “integrity… in all relationships and pursuits” chants about rape and drinking during a recruitment event.

• Sorority women who believe in the ideals of “Christian womanhood” encourage new members to dress like prostitutes for a fraternity/sorority mixer.

A

merica, not just colleges and universities, clearly faces a values crisis today. Many institutions, businesses, and organizations are grappling with a lack of commitment and a shift in focus from what is best for the team to what is best for the individual. Society sends distorted values messages like “don’t drink until you’re 21 – but if you do, drink responsibly” or “marriage is a lifetime commitment – but if you don’t like it, divorce is always an option.” Even in the world of education, both primary and secondary, emphasis is placed on helping students pass a test rather than actually educating students.

No clear reason is evident as to why the ways people actually live have shifted so far from the espoused values of society.

While there is no obvious explanation

12

Perspectives / Summer 2006

for the change, there are reasons to support making a shift back to a more values-focused society.

Project DEEP, (Documenting Effective Educational Practices), (Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, Whitt & Associates, 2005) examined 20 colleges and universities that are most successful at engaging students. The study concludes that schools adhering to their mission and values are most likely to engage students. Their “institutional philosophies… are threads woven into the institution’s conscience that help people determine how to spend their time and energy in pursuit of the institution’s mission and purposes” (p.27). Students know what to expect when they choose to attend those institutions and have a clear understanding of expectations.

Because of the consistency between what is on paper and what is actually in practice, students typically excel.

Most recently, in the wake of the men’s lacrosse team controversy at Duke University, President Richard H. Brodhead sent a letter to the Duke community outlining a “campus-culture initiative” to examine “our institutional practices, to assess the extent to which they do, or do not, promote the values we expect students to live by” (Lipka, April 14, 2006). Brodhead’s statement casts light on the disparities between student actions and the values the college espouses.

Weeks later, a review board of the student judicial process at Duke recommended “that the university’s honor code should focus on citizenship, not just academic work” in light of the scandal (Lipka, May 2, 2006).

On a recent episode of Meet the Press dealing with faith in America just days after Brodhead’s letter went out, the overall sentiment from various religious leaders indicated that a disconnect exists in society between what people say they value and where they actually spend their time, money, and other valuable resources (Fischer, April 16, 2006).

From just these examples alone, one cannot question the importance of teaching values congruence. It should come as no surprise that many college students are stuck in Lawrence Kohlberg’s pre-conventional level of moral development where they only do what is right to get rewards (or awards – sound familiar?) and will adhere to a policy

only because of fear of sanctions (Crain, 1985). Many students are terrified of breaking academically-focused honor codes; they do not cheat on exams or plagiarize term papers because they know the ultimate consequences may be severe.

They do not relate that same honor code to having a fake ID, drinking under-age, vandalizing college property, using racial slurs, being disrespectful to staff and administration, or any other action(s) with a more “social” focus. Unfortunately, these are also the more real-life values they are lacking. Teri Cugliari, Area Coordinator and Coordinator of Greek Life at Presbyterian College, recently stated that an essential responsibility of college and university administrators and advisors is to “teach our students that there is a difference between actually living honorably and abiding by an Honor Code” (Cugliari, 2006) The challenge of teaching values congruence within fraternity and sorority communities is in helping students better understand themselves so they are prepared to fully commit to an organization with similar values. Adopting a modified version of the Social Change Model of Leadership Development can help fraternity and sorority advisors reduce “the widening gap between the rhetoric of (fraternities and sororities) and the reality of their practices” identified in the Call for Values Congruence (Franklin Square Group, 2003). The Social Change Model itself lays out seven C’s to creating change: consciousness of self, congruency, commitment, collaboration, common purpose and controversy with civility. Teaching the model through active participation from students can help them to apply such lessons to their respective organizations. In examining the Social Change Model, three components are essential for fraternity and sorority communities to enact values congruence.

These are consciousness of self, consistency, and collaboration (Higher Education Research Institute, 1993).

CONSCIOUSNESS OF SELF Students need to know and understand what they value – not necessarily what their parents or friends value. Clarifying their own values and beliefs will help them recognize those values in others. Because college is such an intense time of personal

>>> development, personal values may evolve somewhat over a student’s college career, but the core values will most likely remain the same from orientation to commencement.

To help an entire fraternity or sorority chapter create a “consciousness of self,” members need to have meaningful conversations about their creed, mission, ideals and purpose. Fraternity and sorority members often can deliver their creed from memory but cannot say in their own words what that creed really means or how its meaning affects them as members. Making that connection causes those values to change from being just words on paper to being a part of who they are and how they choose to live.

CONSISTENCY Consistency can be where so many students struggle because it is the act of living what they believe; walking the talk. In order for students to fully understand and apply what they are learning in a classroom, they are taught to Survey, Question, Read, Recite, and Review – the SQ3R method (Gardner & Jewler, 2000). Applying and reflecting on the information repeatedly makes the difference in students memorizing the information for a test and actually learning it. In much the same way, for chapter members to fully understand and appreciate the organization’s values, they should review and seek to apply them with consistency.

At the same time, members should realize in order for an organization to be recognized for its values, its members have to CONSISTENTLY demonstrate those values through actions. This is where fraternities and sororities err, resulting in negative public images.

Asking fraternity and sorority members to reflect on whether or not what they are doing is consistent with their values allows them to make the connection between thought, word, and deed. At the same time, knowing people are paying attention makes a difference. While it is important to live the organization’s values consistently, members will be more successful at this when held accountable by national headquarters, advisors, school administration, as well as their peers.

COLLABORATION

A true collaboration of fraternal organizations creates a stronger fraternity and sorority community overall. The adoption of a fraternity/sorority community brand, as has been done at Colorado State University or Drexel University, both winners of the AFA Outstanding Change Initiative award in recent years, allows all members, regardless of the fine line differences of their values and rituals, to establish a unique community congruent with their shared values. Students from various fraternities and sororities have a powerful experience when they sit together and discuss the very traits and characteristics for which they want to be recognized. They quickly realize the discrepancies between their values and actions when they are actively engaged in creating an ideal fraternity and sorority community.

Because of the society’s disparity in “practicing what we preach,” encouraging undergraduate members of fraternal organizations to live their values is no easy task. Without values congruence, however, fraternities and sororities are merely social clubs. Advisors can expect to be met with resistance and hesitation, but putting the Social Change Model into practice may help advisors send students out into the “real” world with a strong sense of character, a sense of commitment to their beliefs, and a desire to continue living a life of purpose within any community.

This goal is the ultimate reason why values congruence is so important.

continued from page 11 • Faculty: It can be difficult to determine which faculty members are fraternity or sorority members on any campus; however, there are at least a few easily identifiable allies (who may or may not be affiliated themselves). Bringing these individuals closer to the fraternity/sorority community, via an awards program or honor society induction, is an important step in creating a voice for a fraternity and sorority community that has credibility with the faculty.

• Athletics: Strong support of campus athletics is an easy way for a fraternity/sorority community to align themselves with the rest of the community. In addition to being enjoyable and communal, campus athletics are one of the purest forms of school spirit. Highly public, spirited participation at college sports events can elevate image; however, it can reinforce old stereotypes if alcohol or inappropriate behavior are involved.

When creating a new image for fraternity/ sorority life, we must acknowledge that there is already a brand. It is beer and wings, Animal House and Old School, hazing and sexual assault. Images like those are difficult to overcome, but that is why a comprehensive branding strategy is even more important. As stereotypes become self-perpetuating in some chapters’ misguided pursuits, more damage will be done (probably beyond what we have already seen or can imagine). There is only so much abuse the system can take before it is too late, and a values-based approach with a focus on messaging can bring about the beginning of a solution.

– Ray Lutzky is Marketing Coordinator for Marketing Management Analytics, Inc.

– Dana Becker is the Director of Student Activities and Greek Life at Presbyterian College.

REFERENCES Crain, W.C. (1985). Theories of development.

New York: Prentice-Hall.

Cugliari, T. (April 11, 2006). Public presentation.

Fischer, B. (Executive Producer). (2006, April 16).

Meet the press [Television Broadcast].

Washington, DC: NBC. Franklin Square Group. (2003). A call for values congruence. Retrieved June 16, 2006, from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/uploads/ PublicDocuments/CallforValuesCongruence.pdf.

Gardner, J. & Jewler, A. (2000). Your college experience: Strategies for success. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Higher Education Research Institute. (1993).

A social change model of leadership development.

University of California, Los Angelese: Author.

Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J., Whitt, E. & Associates.

(2005). Student success in college – Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Lipka, Sara (April 14, 2006). At Duke, turmoil over rape allegations brings underlying tensions to the surface. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Retrieved April 17, 2006, from http://chronicle. com/daily/2006/04/2006041404n.htm.

Lipka, Sara (May 2, 2006). Duke U. reports on lacrosse players’ conduct fault alcohol abuse and lax enforcement. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Retrieved May 2, 2006, from http:// chronicle.com/daily/2006/05/2006050202n.htm.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

13

[SENIOR STUDENT AFFAIRS OFFICERS’ PERSPECTIVES]

HOPE for Jaded Deans R

eflecting on the current approach to values and values congruence, I have thought about the past 25 years of conversations about values and “a return to values.” Haven’t we been “returning to values” long enough? This is not new territory for any of us. We have frequently called it different things and packaged it for promotion to a wide range of audiences (students, faculty, alumni, boards, etc.), but we have always talked about ways to narrow the gap between our ideals and our behaviors.

When I was a young professional talking about these issues, I desperately wanted a sense of optimism from my student affairs colleagues, faculty on campus, chapter advisors, students, and especially from my boss. And depending on the campus, the situation, the boss, and sometimes what seemed like the phase of the moon, I got responses that ranged somewhere between

We’ve tried it before and it didn’t work.

That’s the best idea since sliced bread.

Listening to all of the feedback I received as a young professional, I frequently ended up incredibly frustrated and feeling caught in the middle between stakeholders who believed a new paradigm could make a difference and those who were keen on proving why it would never work. This was particularly difficult with students.

New chapter and council officers are like the phoenix: confident they are rising from the ashes of poor leadership, abysmal finances, lack of follow-through, and an absence of judgment in key situations to finally set the chapter on firm footing for the future. The pendulum often swings from one leadership style to another and every chapter president seems to think the previous president “didn’t quite get it.”

Student affairs professionals must stay focused on the positives and continue to guide students toward the accomplishment of their goals and those of the organization they lead. Hope springs eternal for students and we would not have it any other way.

We are in the business of teaching students that they can make a difference and we count on the fact that they frequently do.

And now that I am one of those senior student affairs officers, I find myself asking some of the same questions. What is different this time as we address alcohol education when nothing seems to have made a significant difference in the past four decades? Social norming seems to work on some campuses or with some groups but the change does not always last. What is different in how we will address hazing that has not been tried before? While we tout fraternity and sorority grade point averages that are higher than the campus average, the research on academic engagement is not nearly so positive. How will we ensure ongoing alumni leadership for our chapters? For every chapter with an amazing chapter advisor, we have at least one that is struggling and without a visible and consistent safety net for support. Are we expecting too much? Are we just tired of being apologetic when there are high visibility behaviors that are antithetical to our values?

I define jaded as cynical to the point of severe sarcasm or finding the worst in a situation or an idea. Yet when I “Googled” definitions, the word I got was “exhausted” and that actually made

– Debbie Heida

me feel a bit better. There is more hope in weariness than extreme cynicism. And why should we be hopeful this time? What should get your attention and that of your senior student affairs officer’s?

While many of us who are battle tested may be a bit jaded, there are also good reasons for optimism.

The values congruence initiative that resulted in A Call for Values Congruence has been led from the beginning by college presidents.

Major initiatives that have had lasting impact on our campuses have received significant support from the top of the academic institution. While social change theory leads us to empower from all levels of the organizations, the pragmatists know that change led by presidents tends to actually happen. When presidents get involved, they mean business. If they can follow through on the contents of the Call for Values Congruence, maybe the rhetoric we have been espousing for years may become reality (Franklin Square Group, 2003).

No one entity is alone in this endeavor. University presidents, inter/national fraternity and sorority leaders, the umbrella groups, student affairs professionals, alumni, and students are all interested in being part of this initiative. It took the serious involvement of the presidents to make some of us want to be involved. For others, involvement was desired so that something was not done to us without it being done with us. For others, there is genuine enthusiasm for an initiative that is collaborative.

Another reason to believe this could work is that it is assessment based. While we all have enough experience with standards models to have our concerns about them, the assessment movement is part of higher education at every turn. The public, our government entities, and our accrediting bodies are requiring that we document our success in meeting our objectives. The question for fraternity and sorority communities and those of us who are invested in this movement is “what are our values and are we teaching them?”

Assessment and benchmarking models assume that we are all striving to reach our goals and that measurement provides a guide to course correction and improvement. Assessment moves the focus to the students we serve and requires that we prove that they are learning, an integral outcome of engagement in fraternities and sororities within higher education.

And if the arguments above are not convincing, do we have anything to lose? We have tried many other things and to date we have not been satisfied with the results. When that happens in any other area of higher education, we do not throw up our hands and condemn the students or the organizations. Instead we study, we debate appropriate approaches, we determine the best course of action, and we act to improve. The higher education community has used this approach for faculty issues, for athletics, for civic engagement, and now for fraternities and sororities. It is a model that works. It energizes an entire higher education community in a positive way.

Why would we not want to try this? Are we jaded? Weary from the journey? Of course, we get tired from attempts to deal with the same problems and issues over and over again. But then again, we are in higher education where our community changes by at least continued on bottom of page 15

14

Perspectives / Summer 2006

The Power of Service!

A N I N V I TAT I O N T O V O L U N T E E R

V

olunteers are the heart of AFA. It is through the strength and commitment of our volunteers that the Association

remains responsive to its membership. AFA volunteers are an essential vehicle for identifying the opportunities and challenges facing the fraternity and sorority profession. Through our volunteer management program, leaders from all aspects of fraternity and sorority advising are brought together to help AFA make the best decisions in moving forward.

We invite you to join this innovative group of leaders. Your contributions will make a difference – to the Association, the profession, and the fraternal movement.

Why Participate?

Participating as a volunteer provides you a rare opportunity to truly influence our profession. The results of your contributions are tangible and will not only help shape the future of AFA, but will provide you with great personal and professional benefits.

AFA values the contributions of its many volunteers and encourages you to choose an area of interest and contribute your time and talents. There are many ways that you can participate: • Serve on a standing committee.

• Serve on an ad-hoc workgroup, task force, or thinking team.

• Write articles for AFA publications.

• Facilitate an educational session at the Annual Meeting or a meeting in your local area.

• Participate in discussions with peers in our Online Community.

Expectations of Volunteers Appointments for standing positions occur each September.

Volunteer leaders spend approximately two months prior to the Annual Meeting transitioning, training, and planning for their new positions, with new responsibilities beginning immediately following the Annual Meeting. Ad hoc workgroups are appointed throughout the year as needed to address specific needs or issues and may work for a few weeks or an entire year. Information about specific committees or positions, training opportunities, basic expectations, and the 2007 Involvement Form can be found in the Getting Involved section of the AFA website.

AFA is Your Organization Please take a few minutes to complete the 2007 Involvement Form and submit it online by September 8, 2006. Appointments will be made after election results are announced.

Candidates for elected office are encouraged to also complete an involvement form. Thank you in advance for your contribution to AFA.

Your contributions will make a difference!

continued from page 14 25 percent each year. We will have some of the same problems over and over again. Yet we are in the business of problem solving and we might just be on to something this time. This is a movement that requires the collective best thinking of the higher education community to support the learning and development of students.

The cause has presented itself. There are opportunities to lead, regardless of your place in the organization. Historically, these very situations have provided arenas for our best work.

REFERENCE Franklin Square Group. (2003). A call for values congruence.

Retrieved June 16, 2006, from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/ uploads/PublicDocuments/CallforValuesCongruence.pdf.

– Debbie Heida is the Vice President for Student Affairs at Berry University.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

15

&

Values & Action Congruence P

ractitioners and volunteers invested in the fraternal movement have long challenged fraternity/sorority members to live the values stated in their organizational mission statements. Far too often, undergraduate members espouse their high values but have difficulty living them. Alcohol misuse, hazing, a lack of respect, and a strong disconnect to organizational missions has spurred colleges and universities to take action against the very organizations many believe can provide the most well-rounded, personal and professional developmental experience.

The leadership of the Association of Fraternity Advisors (AFA) believes individuals concerned with the future of the fraternal movement should be engaged in creating solutions to the problems faced by today’s sororities and fraternities (Binder & Vojta, 2006). As we seek to understand the experience of students and the potential of fraternal organizations, one essential method is conducting qualitative research. Through qualitative research we can examine the reality of students and gain insight into the areas where invested constituents can be most effective.

Qualitative Research Overview Maykut & Morehouse (1994) identify eight components of qualitative research to consider.

• An exploratory and descriptive focus • An emergent design • A purposive sample • Data collection in the natural setting • Emphasis on human as instrument • Qualitative methods of data collection • Early and ongoing inductive analysis • A case study approach to reporting research outcomes

The first three components are related to the design of the study. In the first characteristic, an exploratory and descriptive focus, people’s experiences are typically the focus. In emergent design, the evolution of ideas and themes over time has provided the opportunity for gaining additional insight into the experience of subjects, often leading to important findings.

A purposive sample provides for the careful selection of participants, increasing the likelihood that common experiences will be represented in the data. According to Trochim (2002), “[w]ith a purposive sample, you are likely to get the opinions of your 16

Perspectives / Summer 2006

– Dan Bureau, Kaye Schendel, and Stevan Veldkamp

target population, but you are also likely to overweight subgroups in your population that are more readily accessible”.

The next three components are related to the data collection. The context of understanding what people experience is of particular interest to qualitative researchers. Creating a forum that feels appropriate to the participants is important, and is reflected in the collection of data in the natural setting. The emphasis on human as instrument enhances the ultimate goal of qualitative researchers to create understanding of experiences in order to shape practice. Typical qualitative methods will involve participant observation, group and individual interviews, and the collection of documents. Methods vary and include ethnographies, grounded theory examinations, and phenomenography (Norris, 2003).

The analysis and outcome components include early and ongoing inductive analysis and a case study approach to reporting research outcomes. Documents, individuals, and opinions are sought to help “illuminate the phenomenon of interest” (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994, p. 46) during the process of research development. Rich narratives are the results of qualitative research and provide the reader of the research information for understanding the research outcomes. These eight components can inform future research necessary to understanding students and the potential of fraternal organizations.

Examining Recent Values Initiatives The authors of A Call for Values Congruence, known as the Franklin Square conferees, “believe the cure for the maladies facing collegiate Greek chapters is a collaborative and proactive approach among stakeholders led by college and university presidents” (2003, p. 4). A Call for Values Congruence outlines a specific set of strategies for campuses to use which includes administrative and alumni involvement and an assessment process for each campus fraternity/sorority community.

The leadership of AFA and the NASPA Fraternity and Sorority Affairs Knowledge Community coordinated efforts to help bring to life the Call for Values Congruence document beginning in 2003. Additional meetings were held in conjunction with the AFA 2003 Annual Meeting and a National Greek Summit was held in Washington, DC in February 2004. Further discussion took

place at the NASPA National Conference in Denver in March 2004. Finally, the Greek Summit VIII hosted presidents representing the three main college and university associations (American Association of State Colleges and Universities, National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, and National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges) for an update. The presidential delegation announced its desire to create criteria and a process for the certification of fraternity/sorority communities.

The National Association of Latino Fraternal Organizations (NALFO), the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC), the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) and the North-American Interfraternity Conference have all unveiled standards documents since the Call for Values Congruence was presented.

Each of these documents reflects the common standards of member organizations and places responsibility not only on the umbrella association, but on member organizations to enforce the standards.

Evaluating mission performance using the Call for Values Congruence as a template One researcher sought to investigate the extent to which the Greek Experience: A Survey of Fraternities and Sororities, published by the Center for the Study of the College Fraternity, can describe, reflect, and reveal the concepts of the Call for Values Congruence document. In addition, the impact of the survey and the Call for Values Congruence on a small state university in the Midwest was evaluated.

Information obtained from the document analysis of the Greek Experience Survey was shared with five fraternity and sorority professionals. These individuals provided feedback on the survey relative to the Call for Values Congruence. The five individuals represented a high-level university administrator, an independent consultant and business owner, a staff member of the North-American Interfraternity Conference, a campus fraternity and sorority advisor, and a fraternity foundation director.

By utilizing the panel of experts, the document analysis of the Greek Experience Survey, and the data collected from the campus, questions were identified for the development of further tools to assess the values congruence of fraternity and sorority undergraduate members.

For example, the panelists identified 50 questions from the Greek Experience Survey that are applicable to positively affecting intellectual development, which is item one in the Call for Values Congruence.

In the area of scholarship, the survey asks numerous questions regarding scholarship programming, scholastic support, involvement of faculty advisors, and recognition.

This practice was completed for all action items included in the Call for Values Congruence, including values facilitation, alcohol use, leadership development, alumni engagement, faculty involvement, positive relationships (brotherhood and sisterhood), hazing, human dignity, and nurturing citizenship, service and outreach. The results indicate overlap between the Call for Values Congruence and the survey, but a retooling of the survey may allow for a more intentional method to evaluate success of fraternal organizations.

Use of Campus Evaluation Practices to Assess Action and Values Congruence One method to examine action and values congruence is to evaluate performance of chapters in relation to their espoused mission statements. Easily accessible at most fraternity and sorority websites, mission statements provide a glimpse into the purpose of the organization.

At a small private institution in the Midwest, an evaluation project allowed for action and values congruence to be a focal point for a community’s goal setting. Eleven organizations are affiliated with the campus. Each organization participated in a meeting with the evaluator to discuss their chapter’s performance. The objectives of these hour-long meetings were to examine the following: 1. What does your organization do well and what can you improve?

2. Examining your mission, what things do you think you are doing well and where can you improve?

3. Evaluating other organizations on campus, how well are they implementing their respective missions?

Each organization was broken into small groups. Depending on size, these groups ranged from three to four people in a group to seven or eight people. At least two groups were created at each organization. Reflecting on the organization of the evaluation session, starting with examining what they do well and how they can improve without connecting practices to their mission is important. The concept of mission-based organizations should not be immediately introduced. This allows for the evaluator to remind them they are mission-based organizations, a fact that far too often undergraduates fail to capture in addressing action and values incongruence.

Findings indicated it was an easy task for students to discuss what they do well. Once they were provided their mission as a template to evaluate their performance, the task became more difficult. Ending the meeting with asking them to look at other organization’s missions can be powerful because it allows them to catch a glimpse into other groups, recognize commonalities, and provide important feedback to these organizations.

Findings proved interesting. Rarely did organizations identify with their mission statements when they answered what they were doing well. When asked to evaluate their performance in comparison to their missions, many discussed how they were not fulfilling their mission as well as they could. Also, many identified other chapters performing even weaker in facilitating their respective missions. This experience provided insight into how students perceive their own experiences and those of others to reflect their organization’s mission.

Non-affiliated students, administrators, and alumni were also asked to participate in a meeting to discuss similar issues. Many cited a lack of understanding of organizational mission when asked about values and actions congruence. External parties could not connect the perceptions of these organizations to reviewed mission statements. Many said if the fraternities and sororities were cognizant of these missions, they may operate better and improve their public image.

Reports were compiled for each organization that included their members’ thoughts and the thoughts of others external to the chapter.

Individual and organizational identification was withheld to avoid obvious problems that can arise when fraternities and sororities provide feedback about each other. All the information was provided to chapters and student life staff. A full day retreat examining the primary areas needing attention was held to provide education on the necessary skills students must have in order to realize the potential of their organizations.

Recommendations Two methods to examine mission and action congruence have been provided in this article.

As stated, qualitative methods can give voice to the experiences of undergraduates. Some recommendations for future practice include: • Increased attention by fraternity and sorority professionals to assessing congruence through accreditation programs, reporting systems, and advising and consulting services; • Reference to standards documents during advising opportunities; • Inclusion of mission statements in awards programs;

• Partnerships with a wide range of stakeholders to improve campus-specific practices and incorporate headquarters’ standards evaluation models; • Collaboration with external consultants or campus institutional research boards to assess campus climate for mission and action congruence, as well as the success of organizations in fulfilling their missions; • Finally, the incorporation of qualitative efforts to give voice to quantitative data as well as provide guidance for policy and decision making.

Conclusion Accountability in higher education and the interfraternal world has never been more important. Challenging persons invested in the fraternal movement to examine how actions may reflect congruence with or disregard for the missions of their organization must be an adopted practice in efforts to reform undergraduate fraternities and sororities. For colleges and universities, the practice of qualitative research to examine current success and prepare recommendations for future practice can reflect institutional missions. Connecting mission and actions to create a more meaningful and developmental fraternal experience can be an essential practice for the long-term preservation of fraternal organizations.

– Dan Bureau is a PhD student in the Higher Education Student Affairs program at Indiana University and a facilitator for CAMPUSPEAK. Kaye Schendel is the Assistant Director of Student Activities at the University of Wisconsin, LaCrosse.

Stevan Veldkamp is the Director of Student Activities at Indiana University.

REFERENCES Binder, R. & Vojta, A. (2006, Winter). Presidential remarks delivered on Friday, December 2, 2005. Perspectives. pp. 4-5. Association of Fraternity Advisors. Carmel, IN. Franklin Square Group. (2003). A call for values congruence. Retrieved June 16, 2006, from http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/uploads/Public Documents/CallforValuesCongruence.pdf.

Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.

Norris, J. (2003). Qualpage. Retrieved May 13, 2006, from http://www.qualitativeresearch. uga.edu/QualPage/.

Trochin, W.M.K. (2002). Nonprobability sampling. Retrieved May 13, 2006, from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/ sampnon.htm.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

17

Value

A R E F R AT E R N I T I E S A N D S O R O R I T I E S T E A C H I N G T H E

?

OF COMMUNITY SERVICE – Sally Vestal

The U.S. Department of Education estimates during the 1999-2000 academic year more than five million college students gave 1,166,889,241 hours of their time to volunteer service. The monetary value of this time is estimated to be over 17.6 billion dollars (Campus Cares, 2001).

C

Overview of instrument: The AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment has 77 perception questions that utilize a seven-point Likert scale. The number one represents “very dissatisfied” and seven represents “very satisfied.” The perception questions are used to comprise 15 factors (or constructs).

A factor is a grouping of statistically related questions that describes a broad concept more completely than just asking a single question.

Fourteen of these factors are independent variables that, together, define overall program effectiveness, the dependent fifteenth factor.

There are also 14 categorical questions (e.g. gender, ethnicity, and class standing) asked of each respondent. In 2005, 27 colleges and universities participated in the assessment and submitted 15,600 responses from fraternity and sorority members.

Aggregate Results: (An analysis of responses from all participating institutions.) One of the fourteen independent factors is Opportunities to Participate in Community Service. The factor is composed of two questions that ask the degree to which the fraternity/sorority provided opportunities to participate in community service activities.

While both questions are high performing, Chart 1 reveals members perceived there were more opportunities within the college/ university than outside the college. The Opportunities to Participate in Community Service factor was one of the higher performing factors on the assessment. Only one of the fourteen independent factors, Interpersonal Relationships, had a higher mean than Opportunities to Participate in Community Service.

18

Perspectives / Summer 2006

question mean

6 5.8 5.6 5.4 outside the university

within the university

While the Opportunities to Participate in Community Service factor is a top performing factor, it is only a minor predictor of overall program effectiveness. In other words, providing opportunities to participate in community service has little impact on member perception of the effectiveness of the fraternity/sorority experience.

Chart 2: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/ With this in mind, it can be inferred that providing opportunities Sorority Assessment for volunteerism is not the same as teaching the value. It is necessary 100% to search further to discover if fraternities and sororities are teaching this value to their members.

75% 59% to Participate in Community Service In addition to the Opportunities 53% factor, there are two other questions on the assessment focusing on 50% issues related to community service. The first addresses the meaningfulness of the community service opportunities that are provided.

25% Chart 2 illustrates over half of the members were moderately to very satisfied with the meaningfulness of the community service 0% opportunities. meaningful community fraternity/sorority percent responding

Fraternities and sororities espouse service and volunteerism as an essential component of the experience of members, but are these organizations teaching members the value of community service?

Data from the AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment can aid in answering this question.

Chart 1: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/ Sorority Assessment – Opportunities to Participate in Community Service

service programs provided

contributed to

by the fraternity/sorority your commitment Chart 2 shows over half of the respondents reported theto fraternity/ community service 6 or 7 on sorority experience heavily contributed (responded a 7 point scale) to their commitment to community service. This indicates that more than half of respondents directly connected their membership in a fraternity or sorority to their current commitment to community service.

Chart 3: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment veness

ollege students who perform volunteer work are more likely to attend graduate school, donate to their alma mater, volunteer in their community after college, and socialize with individuals from different backgrounds. In the short term, volunteering while in college has a positive influence on a student’s academic development and influences time spent on classwork, problem- solving skills, and grades earned. Volunteering also has a positive affect on the student’s social development by increasing life skills such as leadership, self-confidence, and conflict resolution (Campus Cares, n.d.).

7

commitment to community service

5.8 Chart 2: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/ Sorority Assessment within the university

75% 53%

50% 25% Chart 2: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/ meaningful community fraternity/sorority Sorority Assessment

5.5 5 4.5 4

5 Chart 3: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment 4.5

no

6.5

4

5.5

5

6

7 y

3

m

6

2

od er at el y

ta ta

ll

1

ex tre m el

4 7

4 y

ex tre m el

od er at el y

m

rall program effectiveness overall program effectiveness ve ry di ss no at ta isf ta ie d ll

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Chart 4: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment

6.5

fraternity/sorority contributed to commitment to community service

5.5 5

fie ys at is ve r

ne ut

ra l

d

Similarly,5.5 members who responded that the campus fraternity/sorority experience did not provide meaningful volunteer opportunities, 5 overall fraternity/sorority experience to be less effective, perceived the Chart 4:who 2005were AFA/EBI Assessment satisfied with the meaningfulness veryFraternity/Sorority while members 4.5 of the community service opportunities provided indicated that the overall4fraternity/sorority program is more effective as seen in Chart 4.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6

5

6

7

ys at is ve r

programming provided meaningful community service programs

Summary: Member perceptions on the community service factor indicate they are very pleased with the community service opportunities the fraternity or sorority provides. Members are satisfied with the level of meaningfulness of service programs provided and report their fraternity/sorority experience contributes to their commitment to community service. Those who indicated the fraternity/ sorority increased their level of commitment to community service also perceived the overall fraternity/sorority program as more effective. Given the apparent long and short-term benefits volunteer work has on college students, fraternities and sororities should be congratulated for imparting this value to their members. Fraternities and sororities with lower than average performance may be able to strengthen the quality of, and commitment to, community service by enlisting assistance from other university groups that commonly spearhead volunteer efforts.

EBI assessments are also available for college housing, college union/ student centers, first-year initiative programs and many academic areas in higher education. Please visit http://www.webebi.com/ for more information.

– Sally Vestal is the Production Manager for Educational Benchmarking, Inc.

6

6.5

4

Dave Butler, Project Director 302-286-0230 | Dave@webebi.com

4.5

7

3

For more information on this assessment or how your institution can become involved, please contact:

fraternity/sorority contributed to commitment to community service

5

2

fie d

1

75%

59% 53% “To what Chart 3 takes a closer look at the second question, 50% degree has your fraternity/sorority experience contributed to your commitment to community service?� Members who reported an extreme 25% contribution to their commitment on this question also Chart 3: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment perceived the overall fraternity/sorority experience to be very effective with a0% factor mean of 6.65. Conversely, those members that meaningful community fraternity/sorority indicated the did not make a contribution to 7 fraternity/sorority service programs provided contributed to their commitmentbytothecommunity service, responded less your commitment fraternity/sorority to favorably community service mean for on the overall factor 6.5 effectiveness factor. The aggregate this group of members was 4.53. As the chart shows, members 6 who experienced an increased commitment to community service perceived5.5 the fraternity/sorority experience as more effective. overall program effectiveness overall program effectiveness

6

ra l

100%

contributed to your commitment to community service

6.5

ut

service programs provided by the fraternity/sorority

7

at isf ie d

59%

0%

percent responding

overall program effectiveness

outside the university

yd iss

percent responding

5.4 100%

Chart 4: 2005 AFA/EBI Fraternity/Sorority Assessment

ne

5.6

ve r

question mean

6

REFERENCES Campus Cares: Solutions for Stronger Communities (n.d.).

Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.campuscares.org/.

Campus Cares: Solutions for Stronger Communities (2001).

National statistics on the community engagement of college and university students. Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.campuscares.org/resources/engagement.html.

programming provided meaningful community service programs Summer 2006 / Perspectives

19

20

Perspectives / Summer 2006

Good Guys: Eight Steps to Limitless Possibility in Fraternity Recruitment Mattson, M.G. & Orendi, J.A. (2006). Good guys: The eight steps to limitless possibility for fraternity recruitment.

Naperville, Illinois: Phired Up Productions, LLC.

W

hen I first read Good Guys: Eight Steps to Limitless Possibility in Fraternity Recruitment, I was impressed.

I thought that it captured in less than 200 pages almost everything a fraternity man (or even a sorority woman) needs to know about the why and how of values-based, continuous, dynamic recruitment.

But then I wondered, would students, to whom this book is targeted, feel the same? So I asked J.J. Reardon, our Interfraternity Council Vice President for Recruitment, to read Good Guys and co-author this review.

So, basically, we liked the concepts. We agreed that the examples used in the beginning do not fit every campus, particularly those that do not do a formal recruitment, and could be hard to relate to for some students. In fact, when J.J. first started reading Good Guys and I asked him how he liked it, he said that he didn’t. He just could not relate his experience at SUNY-Plattsburgh with the examples in the book. However, I encouraged him to keep reading and his opinion changed.

We believe that it is important to mention that if the reader does not read past the introductory chapter (which is frequently the reality among busy college students), they will miss out on the simple, yet effective concepts in this book.

In our opinion, if your students could absorb just a few concepts in Good Guys, they would be: • People and Purpose There are the two basic needs that make a fraternity tick. Almost all failed fraternity chapters can trace their failure back to a lack of focus on people and purpose. If 80% of a chapter’s energy was placed on people and purpose (rather than the current 20%), the quantity of quality members would increase dramatically. J.J. and I discussed problems that fraternities may have (e.g. recruitment, financial, filling a house, motivation, participation, disrespect, risk management problems, etc.) and were able to trace all of these problems back to a lack of people and purpose.

• Know your product. If you don’t know your product, you are not going to be able to sell it. J.J. and I talked about a recent fraternity retreat we both attended. When the fraternity was asked what set them apart from other fraternities, they said, “We have a tight brotherhood.” Funny… a different fraternity had said the exact same thing at a retreat the night before and another said the same thing at an IFC meeting the previous week! If you do not know what makes your fraternity different from the others, you will have difficulty convincing people to join.

– Reviewed by J.J. Reardon and Allison Swick-Duttine

• A.C.E. Your Values. This step states that achieving, communicating, and expecting fraternal values are key to recruitment.

Our favorite part was about the fact that fraternities are so afraid to disclose esoteric secrets that they rarely tell potential members anything about what their organization stands for.

The authors effectively explain that values must be embraced by all members, communicated every day through actions, and upheld through member accountability. J.J. and I discussed a member who has the fraternity motto tattooed on his arm, but truly does not understand the significance nor behave in congruence with the organization’s values. We discussed how his fraternity could prevent this problem by communicating these fraternal values during recruitment, teaching values through new member education, and holding members accountable when they do not live up to these values.

• Know Your Audience. This section is a reiteration of the tried and true “always, maybe, and never joiners” concept; however, it just works! J.J. was a maybe joiner who thought he was a never joiner. He did not join his fraternity until last April because he thought fraternities were stereotypical and would be of no benefit to him. Then he met a member of Alpha Chi Rho Fraternity and was sold. We liked this section because it demonstrates for many campuses that their fraternities are not living up to their recruitment potential. It also gives a practical exercise to demonstrate the point to those groups who refuse to believe in the concept.

One of our favorite things about Good Guys is that it is very practical. At the end of each chapter are “Do It” sections that give specific action steps and activities. Throughout the book are quotes, case studies, and exercises to help communicate the points.

One of our favorite suggestions was to create a “5 for 5 Challenge” where each member of a fraternity is required to meet five new people for five days. This exercise alone would increase a fraternity’s recruitment pool by 25 potential members per brother. J.J. plans to condense exercises like this to use for chapter recruitment director training.

The authors mention that, “In less than a month’s time, you could employ new patterns of behavior in your life to transform fraternity recruitment into a seamless part of your day” (Mattson & Orendi, 2006). J.J. and I agreed and are now devising our own experiment to implement with one of our fraternities next year – if they complete all of the sections that we teach them, we will give them a “sign on” bonus for each new member. Our theory is that their numbers will increase if they use the strategies in the book, and by reinforcing their behavior for one month, they will create new recruitment habits. Then, theoretically, other fraternities will follow their example and all recruitment numbers will increase.

Summer 2006 / Perspectives

21

“

In less than a month’s time, you could employ new patterns of behavior in your life to transform fraternity recruitment into a seamless part of your day

”

As J.J. and I spent hours discussing Good Guys, we had some epiphanies, developed several new goals, and came to some common conclusions. But most importantly, we had a meaningful, intense discussion about fraternal values. This book was a springboard to an extremely rewarding conversation with a student.

Good Guys will be a phenomenal resource for those students who basically “get it,” are already progressive leaders, or have a strong relationship with a national volunteer or a fraternity/sorority professional. Other students may need some help processing (and following through with) the concepts. Hand a copy to a student, ask him or her to read it, then sit down and have a conversation about values-based recruitment. For me, Good Guys has not only cemented my belief in the power of a values-based conversation, it has reinforced a student/advisor relationship that I cherish.

– J.J. Reardon is the Interfraternity Council Vice President for Recruitment and Allison Swick-Duttine is the Director of Fraternity/Sorority Life & Leadership Development at the State University of New York College at Plattsburgh.

REFERENCE Mattson, M.G. & Orendi, J.A. (2006). Good guys: The eight steps to limitless possibility for fraternity recruitment. Naperville, Illinois: Phired Up Productions, LLC.

This review was originally published in the April 2006 issue of Essentials, AFA’s educational e-newsletter.

22

Perspectives / Summer 2006

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

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