President Byerly sent a message to the campus community today, in which she outlined the Board of Trustees’ endorsement of her vision for creating a unified and comprehensive residential program that connects and integrates residential, co-curricular, and academic experiencs for all students. In this new model, fraternities, sororities, and other academic interest-based and social residential groups will become a part of an enhanced vision of a living/learning community. Reaccreditation of existing groups, and applications from current students for new groups, including Greek organizations, theme houses, living-learning communities, and social houses, will be considered in the context of whether they are consistent with and advance the overall values and objectives of the College’s integrated residential life vision. The administration will begin implementation of this new structure for building campus community immediately, and will develop next fall a rigorous application process for all proposed groups, including Greek organizations.
The draft version of the IAGGL report is now available for public review and comment. To facilitate community feedback, two open forums will be held to discuss the draft and to answer questions regarding the data or recommendations:
- Monday, April 21, 7:30 p.m. in Colton Chapel – students
- Tuesday April 22, 4:15 p.m. in Hugel 103 – faculty, staff, and other interested members of the community
Members of the community may also submit questions and comments directly through the IAGGL website. I will respond to all questions and will incorporate the common themes that emerge from the discussions and questions into the final version of the report that will be shared with the trustees in May.
Several groups including the Faculty Committee on Student Life, Student Government, AISB, and current fraternity and sorority presidents have already discussed the draft report. We hope to meet with several other groups of students in the coming weeks. The dialogue has been collaborative and helpful, and some themes have already emerged as a result of these meetings. All discussions have focused appropriately on ways the College can support students by providing a robust and diverse residential experience that encourages all students to find their place at Lafayette. I am exceedingly grateful for the energy and good will that have been directed at these discussions and am heartened by the knowledge that faculty, staff, students. and alumni are unified in our desire to provide the best possible educational and social experiences for Lafayette students.
Some important next steps are underway even as the draft report circulates. The accreditation program that is included as a recommendation in the report has already been in use by our organizations during this academic year. The groups will present their accreditation materials during the week of April 21. If you are interested in attending those sessions please let me know via the email address below.
The College is also in the process of securing the software program to collect and disseminate information regarding men who are interested in recruitment (another recommendation in the draft report). This will allow us to have a complete understanding of membership demand. It will also help us to streamline the educational records release process so organizations can be certain that the men they recruit meet the high academic and conduct standards the groups have embraced. This means that men and women will use the same mechanism for collecting information about interested students. It is not anticipated that the recruitment process itself will change — women will continue to use a formal process and men an informal one. The software is merely a tool for creating a standard set of information about all prospective members that will help organizations get the information they need about the students interested in membership.
The draft of the IAGGL report and recommendations will be available for comment until Wednesday, April 23, 2014. The report will remain on the website after that time, but in order to compile and organize comments into related themes, this deadline is necessary. We expect to finalize the report during the next month, slightly ahead of the June 2014 deadline.
As we continue to discuss issues that are important to our community, I am hopeful that we will refine and clarify the College’s firm commitment to the highest quality experiences for our students in class, on campus, and in the wider world. If you have any additional thoughts or suggestions, please feel free to send them through the comments section of the IAGGL website or directly to me at diorioa@lafayette.edu.
Thank you.
Annette Diorio
Vice President for Campus Life and Senior Diversity Officer
The Implementation and Assessment Group on Greek Life met for the final time on March 14, 2014. The committee reviewed data related to achievement of the four objectives, implementation of the recommendations from the Greek Life Working Group, and formulated a set of recommendations (in draft form) for the “President concerning the Greek Life system at Lafayette based on the metrics established to measure the four criteria outlined by the Board in their directive” (as outlined in the charge to the committee).
The draft report was discussed at the Board Committee on Student Life at its March meeting. Following the meeting, the draft report was distributed to Student Government, the AISB, the Faculty Committee on Student Life, and the current fraternity and sorority presidents. Discussions were held or will be held in the next week with those groups to receive feedback on the recommendations.
Late next week, the draft report will be made available on the IAGGL website for all members of the Lafayette community to provide feedback. Two open forums will be scheduled in late April to receive additional comments from the community. The final report, with themes and observations from the feedback received from all constituencies, will be submitted to the Board this May.
We are very pleased to announce that the 10 Greek organizations will present their accreditation materials from the first year of the new accreditation program on April 21, 22, and 23. Each group will have an opportunity to give a multimedia presentation to capture how they live their values that will be a supplement to any written materials submitted. The entire submission will be evaluated and feedback provided to each group regarding strengths and areas for improvement. The results of the accreditation program will be posted on the fraternity and sorority website. This is a very significant step in terms of transparency and one that I hope the community finds helpful.
As always, I remain willing to answer any questions you may have about this process.
Annette Diorio
Vice President for Campus Life and Chief Diversity Officer
diorioa@lafayette.edu
IAGGL met Friday, Jan. 24, 2014. President Byerly joined the group and participated in a productive discussion about progress made to date.
The group discussed a proposed time table to finish its work in March, and the potential for additional meetings beyond the two scheduled in the coming month. The goal of the next meetings is to produce a document, to be shared with the president and trustees at the end of March, that summarizes the successes and challenges experienced by fraternities and sororities in meeting the four broad objectives for the Greek organizations. Those four objectives are:
- Fraternities and sororities must provide open access and engagement opportunities to all students at Lafayette (non-discriminatory in selection of members).
- Fraternities and sororities must facilitate demonstrated learning opportunities for students and provide benefits to the College as a whole.
- The academic performance of students affiliated with fraternities and sororities must be comparable to the student body as a whole.
- 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.
The specific metrics established by IAGGL during the first year will inform this work, but the finished product will also incorporate other sources of information, including committee discussions and information received from alumni during the process.
The meeting included a discussion of a draft of the accreditation program and a review of historical membership and conduct statistics as well as fall grade reports.
The accreditation program was still in draft form at the time of the meeting as it had yet to be shared with students and alumni for comments. The committee agreed last year to transition from the previously outlined metrics to a more robust, annual accreditation program. The document has been shared with the AISB Board and with the fraternity and sorority presidents during their January retreat. This document represents significant streamlining and revision from the Fraternity and Sorority of Excellence program discussed by the committee last spring. The organizations are completing this program for the 2013-2014 academic year.
The accreditation program includes categories for Scholarship, Leadership, Service/Philanthropy, Chapter Development, and Administrative Duties. Definitions for minimum standards are provided and additional information regarding how organizations can achieve bronze, silver or gold status are succinctly and clearly articulated. The benefits of the program are that it documents organizational commitment to their own core values in addition to the College’s goals for the organizations. It allows each organization to showcase their strengths and receive ongoing coaching regarding areas for improvement but it is forward looking and reflects what good practice looks like for the organizations.
The committee received three pieces of information related to historical conduct information, fall grades, and historical membership data. The fall grades from the organizations were quite good and demonstrate a continued effort in regard to academic achievement.
The membership statistics were provided to place in context the current numbers of affiliated students within a historical context. The number of men affiliated with fraternities had declined, which is consistent with the loss of groups over the corresponding time period. However, the committee understands that the total number of men interested in joining fraternities is not known for any given semester, because the recruitment process is far less structured than for the women. It is uncertain whether the decline in membership for men’s groups is solely a factor of the fewer available groups or if fewer men are expressing interest in joining organizations. The number of women’s organizations has remained the same, but the total for each group has risen slightly over the past decade, allowing for more women to become affiliated. The number of women who express interest in joining an organization is known as are the numbers of students who withdraw or are released from the process.
Finally, historical conduct data were distributed. Overall, the percentage of Greek-affiliated students who violate College policy is lower than the percentage of Greek-affiliated men and women in the overall population. More detailed analysis of these data will be provided in the next update.
The committee next turned to a longer discussion regarding impressions of the process and observations regarding the campus climate. A productive discussion followed including helpful feedback that has been received by members of the committee from both affiliated and unaffiliated students regarding their perceptions of the process.
IAGGL met for the first time this fall on Friday, November 22. There has been some turnover on the committee due to faculty and students rotating off and graduating. The agenda for the meeting included reviewing the original committee charge to ensure the group is on track to meet the objectives established in 2011.
The Committee welcomed Dan Ayala, who was hired in August as the Associate Director of Residence Life and Adviser to Fraternities and Sororities. Dan discussed his experiences with fall recruitment and the committee discussed a variety of ways to enhance transparency in that process for students.
The Membership Exploration Week website did a better job explaining when events would be held but the group acknowledged that some additional work could be done to help students understand what organizations are seeking in new members.
Dan and Annette discussed the work that has been ongoing with Administrative Information Systems (ITS) to enhance the types of information being stored in Banner. This has allowed for more accurate reporting of items such as Excel Scholar participation, academic honors and participation in study abroad. Future enhancements to the way information in stored in Banner include keeping track of more club and organization membership for students (currently participation is only recorded for Greek affiliations and varsity athletics).
Dan discussed briefly the work on the new accreditation process that is replacing COMPASS.
A timeline for future meetings was also discussed and it was determined that the Committee would benefit from inviting President Byerly to attend the next meeting.
Also on the agenda for the next meeting is a thorough review of achievement on the metrics to date. A draft document was distributed to the committee for comment.
Annette Diorio, Ed.D.
Vice President for Campus Life
and Senior Diversity Officer
The Implementation and Assessment Group on Greek Life met recently to complete the review of progress made on the recommendations adopted by the Board of Trustees in 2011. Access the implementation grid below. It demonstrates at least partial achievement of a number of items.
At our March meeting, the discussion included reviewing the numerous recommendations related to reducing high-risk alcohol use by students. The members of the IAGGL received information about the efforts made both by the organizations and the College to address the serious issues of high-risk alcohol use. A separate committee, formed in September, has been tasked with developing a comprehensive strategic plan related to reducing high risk alcohol use. As a result of the excellent and detailed work of the Alcohol and Other Drug Oversight Committee, some of the initial Working Group recommendations affecting Greek organizations may be amended.
This should not be construed as a lack of progress in addressing alcohol use on campus. There have been several, significant partnerships that have emerged between the College and Greek organizations including sponsorship of late night alcohol free events at several fraternity houses and co-sponsorship of events during high-risk periods such as Homecoming and Lafayette-Lehigh. The College has made funding available to assist in defraying the cost of these events to the organizations. The College also arranged for appropriate training related to alcohol service (TIPS, RAMP) to those groups interested in holding events with alcohol.
The Committee will meet for the final time in the coming weeks and will welcome Greg Meyer, Director of Student Development, to provide background on how the conduct process works for individuals and organizations, including an overview of training, newly implemented this year, for members of the conduct committee.
Annette Diorio, Ed.D.
Vice President for Campus Life
and Senior Diversity Officer
An Update from the Chair
The Implementation and Assessment Group on Greek Life met on Wednesday February 20 for the first regularly scheduled meeting of the semester. Two additional meetings are planned for the spring.
Topics of discussion included a summary of the report made to Board during the January meeting. An excerpt of the Student Life Committee Docket (in italics) is provided below relative to this report.
The Committee met three times during the fall semester. Discussion started to shift from the metrics to the feasibility of implementation of the recommendations outlined in the report accepted by the Board of Trustees in 2011. There has also been substantial work completed on an annual review and recognition program to replace “COMPASS,” which was used for a number of years, but does not adequately reflected the objectives on which the organizations were asked to focus.
The Office of Institutional Research was asked to provide updated information on academic performance and diversity of the Greek organizations and updated conduct data was available from the Division of Campus Life. Several observations regarding these data are noted below.
The chart below provides the cumulative GPA at graduation for the classes of 2010-12. There is no gap for women. There is a .09 lag between the fraternity men and non-affiliated men.
The chart below illustrates semester grade point averages for the sophomore, junior and senior classes (first-year is excluded), broken down by affiliation. The fall and spring grades typically following a valley and peak pattern, with women nearly identical regardless of affiliation. The semester grade point average for the fraternity men equaled the non-fraternity men in the spring of 2012.
The chart below displays the semester grade point averages for the incoming classes of 2009-2011. Breaking these data out focuses on the recent academic performance of the groups. These data include the current sophomores, juniors and seniors. The sophomore recruitment semester continues to be a low point in terms of academic achievement, but both sorority women and fraternity men close the gap by the spring of the junior year, with fraternity men slightly outperforming their non-fraternity peers (Class of 2013 Greek affiliated men earned a 3.38 and non-affiliated men earned a 3.28 in the spring of 2012).
During the 2011-12 academic year a total of 361 sanctions were issued for violations of student conduct rules and regulations. Greek affiliated students made up 19.3% of the students found responsible for violations of College policy. As a comparison, student athletes comprised 21.8% of the students found responsible for violations of College policy during that same time period. First-year students continue to be found responsible for the most violations of College policy, typically due to alcohol violations. The percentage of policy violations attributed to Greek- affiliated students seems to be in line with the percentage of the population that they represent. Five sanctions were issued to organizations during the 2011-12 year. Additionally, one organization was sanctioned at the start of the 2012 academic year for an incident that occurred in the spring of 2012.
The committee invested the remaining time together discussing an implementation grid that has been created to track achievement on the various recommendations made by the Greek Life Working Group. There are a number of very good items to report regarding student attendance at leadership and training events, efforts to provide alcohol-free programs and a plan to add a summer, graduate-level intern to assist with program planning. The implementation grid will be posted on the web page in the near future. Additionally, Metric 1, Fraternities and sororities must facilitate demonstrated learning opportunities for students and provide benefits to the College as a whole, will be updated to reflect values that enhance and extend learning rather than produce competition for college-wide programming venues.
Annette Diorio, Ed.D.
Vice President for Campus Life
and Senior Diversity Officer
The Implementation and Assessment Group on Greek Life met on Friday, November 9 to discuss a preliminary format for the required progress report from fraternities and sororities. This meeting followed a day-long session with advisors to the fraternities and sororities held over family weekend. The result is a plan to draft preliminary reports using data collected by the end of this semester.
Recall that metrics were established last year to demonstrate organization progress toward the four objectives articulated by the Board of Trustees:
Objective 1: Fraternities and sororities must facilitate demonstrated learning opportunities for students and provide benefits to the College as a whole
Objective 2: The academic performance of students affiliated with fraternities and sororities must be comparable to the student body as a whole
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
Objective 4: Fraternities and sororities must provide open access and engagement opportunities to all students at Lafayette (non-discriminatory in selection of members)
The metrics described by my predecessor in the June 14, 2012 update below must be streamlined because data is not available to support all of the items. The College will provide data on academic achievement and conduct of both individuals and groups. The groups will provide an executive summary of efforts to contribute to the overall learning environment and transparent recruitment and selection. A meeting between Stuart Umberger and the fraternity and sorority Presidents was held on Sunday, November 11 to discuss the reporting format, deadlines for submission and to answer any questions about the process.
It is anticipated that a format for the future will include a modified compliance document, similar to the previously used COMPASS program, coupled with a presentation by the organization leadership that will be open to the public. The committee remains focused on providing useful feedback to the organizations as well as a transparent process for the community.
Annette Diorio, Ed.D.
Vice President for Campus Life
and Senior Diversity Officer
With the start of the new semester, I assumed the position of Vice President for Campus Life and Senior Diversity Officer, and thus, became the chair of the Implementation and Assessment Group on Greek Life. For those who do not know, I have been at Lafayette for over twelve years in various campus life positions. After serving as dean of students, I took a position last fall in the Division of Finance and Administration. I thank the committee for the work they completed last year and I look forward to an open, productive relationship with members of the IAGGL and with Greek alumni and students.
As many know, the IAGGL, at the request of the Board of Trustees, concentrated its work last year on the development of assessment benchmarks, or “metrics.” We will take some time over the next year to review these so that Greek organizations can reasonably work toward the objectives the metrics seek to measure.
We will now begin the important work of implementing the recommendations endorsed last year by the Board of Trustees. The IAGGL group met on Friday, September 28 and discussed the first set recommendations in the report from the Working Group on Greek Life. These focused on improving the relationship between the College and the Greek community. In addition, the Committee engaged in conversation about various reporting mechanisms for the groups to demonstrate achievement of the four broad goals articulated by the Board. It was agreed that a reporting format utilizing open dialogue would provide the greatest learning opportunity for students and provide the most complete information to the assessment team.
The Committee will continue to meet during the fall semester to review the remaining recommendations from the Working Group Report. I will keep you updated as we progress.
Annette Diorio, Ed.D.
Chair
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