Hello from College Hill.  As you undoubtedly know, the last week of the semester was a difficult one for all of us at Lafayette.  In spite of this, I want to update you as promised on the work of IAGGL since our April 19 Virtual Town Hall meeting.  In addition to the feedback from that meeting, we received 85 comments to the proposed metrics we posted. Based on the feedback, the following revisions were made:

  • For “demonstrated learning opportunities,” the number of academic programs organizations are to complete annually was reduced from 5 to 2
  • Only one of these two programs will need to involve faculty. The other can either involve faculty, alumni, or outside experts
  • For these two programs, organizations will need to create written learning outcomes for the events
  • For “academic comparison,” we are adding first term GPA to ensure Greek and non-Greek GPAs are comparable heading into sophomore-senior year comparisons

I would also like to share with you the draft of the metrics for the fourth and final objective—”an open and transparent member selection process.”  These allow each organization to have autonomy over their process without introducing homogeneity of content into the selection processes of sororities or fraternities.

  1. Do Greek organizations publish ahead of time to prospective members their selection timeline?
  2. Do Greek organizations publish ahead of time to prospective members their selection process details?
  3. Do Greek organizations publish ahead of time to prospective members their criteria used to select members?
  4. Do Greek organizations publish ahead of time to prospective members the exit points for prospective members in their process (i.e. is it known clearly when cuts are made)?
  5. Do Greek organizations publish ahead of time to prospective members the criteria used at each exit point in their process (i.e. how they make cuts when they make cuts)?
  6. 6. Are there documented ways that organizations recruit prospective members that are similar to current members?
  7. Are there documented ways that organizations recruit prospective members that are dissimilar to current members?
  8. Do organizations notify prospective members when their active status in that group’s process changes to not active?
  9. If organizations weight their selection criteria, do they publish this to prospective members and make it clear which exit points in their process it applies?
  10. Do organizations publish ahead of time to prospective members the range of spots available in their process?
  11. Do organizations have advisers present at each meeting in their selection process?
  12. Do organizations provide current members and advisers in selection meetings with written guidance as to the value of a well-balanced membership?

The last meeting of IAGGL will be this Thursday afternoon. Please complete the feedback form on the “Submit Comments” page by noon this Thursday, May 24th, so your thoughts can be considered.

Thanks for your interest and support.  We will keep you posted.

Celestino Limas
Chair of IAGGL


Please submit your comment here