June 14, 2012

Before the summer gets too far along, I want to provide an update as of our last meeting.   On May 24, IAGGL reviewed the feedback from community members regarding the proposed metrics for “an open and transparent member selection process.”  Based on your feedback, the final metric will now read “Do organizations provide current members/advisers in recruitment and selection processes with written guidance as to the value of a well-balanced membership?  Yes or No.”

This concludes the first part of IAGGL’s work—the metrics are now established and are listed below.  If additional suggestions are submitted during the summer, however, IAGGL can certainly choose to revisit these in the fall.

My thanks go to everyone who helped with feedback and suggestions, and who followed our progress this year.  It has been a very productive experience and consensus-based effort among all IAGGL members.

IAGGL will not meet over the summer but will reconvene in the fall.  I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to all members of IAGGL as they have been outstanding colleagues who have been willing to embrace a very large task with care and insight.  As we move into the implementation phase, our next update will be in late September.

Best wishes for an enjoyable and productive summer.

Celestino Limas
Chair, Implementation and Assessment Group on Greek Life
Vice President for Campus Life & Senior Diversity Officer

==========================================

Fraternities and Sororities at Lafayette:  Objectives and measurement of progress (metrics)

Objective 1: Fraternities and sororities must facilitate demonstrated learning opportunities for students and provide benefits to the College as a whole

1. Does each Greek organization plan/host 2 academic programs per year?
2. Do each of the 2 programs meet the following criteria: open to the campus, and one led by faculty and the other by an outside expert (including alumni) or faculty member?
3. Are the events not social as the primary focus?
4. Are the events directly planned by Greek organizations?
5. Are the events approved by the director of fraternity and sorority life?
6. Do the events have active member participation?
7. Do the events have clearly defined and measurable learning outcomes?
8. Are Greek members actively involved in a leadership role of one non-Greek organization (total cases)?
9. Are Greek members actively involved in a leadership role of one non-Greek organization (ratio)?

Objective 2: The academic performance of students affiliated with fraternities and sororities must be comparable to the student body as a whole

1. GPA 1st semester students
2. GPA 3rd semester students
3. GPA 5th semester students
4. GPA 7th semester students
5. Major distribution
6. Major distribution ratio
7. Academic probation total cases
8. Academic probation ratio
9.  EXCEL Scholar total cases
10. EXCEL Scholar ratio
11. Theses participation total cases
12. Theses participation ratio
13. Dept. honors participation total cases
14. Dept. honors ratio
15. Study abroad participation total cases
16. Study abroad ratio
17. Other honor recipients/Dean’s List total cases
18. Other honor recipients/Dean’s List ratio
19. Co-curricular (academic major) organization membership total cases
20. Co-curricular (academic major) membership ratio

Objective 3: The disciplinary profile of members of fraternities and sororities, as well as the individual organizations, must be comparable to the student body as a whole and other student organizations

1. Conduct probation of individuals total cases
2. Conduct probation of individuals ratio
3. Conduct violations total cases
4. Conduct violations ratio
5. Recidivism of individuals total cases
6. Recidivism of individuals ratio
7. Sanctions issued
8. Administrative hearing cases by group
9. Administrative panel cases by group
10. Sexual assault public safety reports total cases
11. COMPASS compliance

Objective 4: Fraternities and sororities must provide open access and engagement opportunities to all students at Lafayette (non-discriminatory in selection of members)

1. Do organizations publish ahead of time their selection timeline? Yes or No
2. Do organizations publish ahead of time their selection process? Yes or No
3. Do organizations publish ahead of time their criteria used to select members? Yes or No
4. Do organizations publish ahead of time the exit points of their process? Yes or No
5. Do organizations publish ahead of time the criteria used at each exit point in their process? Yes or No
6. Are there documented ways that organizations recruit prospective members that are similar to current members? Yes or No
7. Are there documented ways that organizations recruit prospective members that are dissimilar to current members? Yes or No
8. Do organizations notify prospective members when their active status in that group’s process changes to not active? Yes or No
9. If organizations weight their criteria, do they publish this and make it clear which exit points in their process it applies? Yes or No
10. Do organizations publish the range of spots available in their process ahead of time? Yes or No
11. Do organizations have advisers present at each meeting in their selection process? Yes or No
12.Do organizations provide current members/advisers in recruitment and selection processes with written guidance as to the value of a well-balanced membership? Yes or No