[17982] in APO-L
Re: service programs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeffrey White)
Mon Dec 15 11:02:12 1997
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 11:00:14 -0500
Reply-To: Jeffrey White <jcteach@ARCHES.UGA.EDU>
From: Jeffrey White <jcteach@ARCHES.UGA.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <199712132243.RAA23928@archa9.cc.uga.edu>
Amy,
Sounds like you're facing a problem that almost EVERY chapter has faced in
the past. A common symptom of "initiation withdrawal" (meaning going from
a pledge to a brother--let's not re-open the debate about ceremony names)
is lack of attention from the chapter--because the chapter's efforts are
no longer focused on you as a pledge and on your pledge class, and instead
on some new group of pledges, many newly-initiated brothers feel very left
out. The two chapters that I have been involved in have faced most of
their attrition from brothers within one or two quarters/semesters of
initiating. The question is, how do you keep the focus on those brothers
and allow them to remain active, when they don't want to put in as much
time because they don't feel as if they are as needed in the past?
The contractual idea sounds great in theory--each pledge/brother deciding
how much time they can put in--but there are a couple of foreseeable
problems. 1) Some brothers WILL feel slighted because they have contracted
to do X hours of service, but another brother has contracted to do only Y
hours, yet they still reap the same benefits as the harder-working
brothers. This can cause some MAJOR dissention and rifts in your
brotherhood. 2) What about those brothers who make less than a minimum
commitment to the chapter? Is there a line that will be drawn that no
brother can do less than X hours? If so, THAT should be your requirements.
The schedules of college students change for an infinite variety of
reasons--financial status, living status, enrollment status, interest in
another organization--and sometimes those changes do not mesh with the
student's ability to remain active. That is why there is Associate status
as written in the National By-Laws.
I guess my suggestion is to find a service requirement that applies to all
brothers, and STICK WITH IT. If it turns out that it is driving away more
brothers than you are recruiting, lower it. Instead of penalizing low-hour
brothers, reward high-hour brothers. As long as a brother completes the
MINIMUM requirements, they can remain a brother, however active or
inactive they feel like being. But those brothers who really put in the
effort should also be recognized for such efforts--awards, special
incentives (i.e. reduced fees, reduced admission to chapter events, etc.).
Just my two cents; hope it helps.
Jeff White
DK Alum
BZ Advisor
Athens, GA
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Amy C. Masters wrote:
> I have a question (that, thankfully, has nothing to do with gender). A
> bit of background first:
> My chapter has experienced SERIOUS growing pains in the last year or so.
> We didn't recognize them at first, or at least didn't deal with them
> properly, and we're down to a smaller membership than I've seen in three
> years of membership. The general opinion in the chapter is that the last
> EC went on a power trip and made our bylaws and policies too strict,
> particularly those pertaining to our service program. This year's EC is
> looking at ways to revamp our service program, in hopes of "fixing
> whatever's broken."
> My school (University of Louisville) is mostly a commuter school-- over
> 80% of the students live off campus. The majority of students are
> nontraditional, with the average age of a student somewhere around 26 or
> 27. Most of us work full-time or close to that.
> Part of the problem, IMHO, has been that people pledge while they live
> on-campus, then move into an apartment, and don't have the ability to make
> the same time commitment to APO.
> As things stand now, we have a requirement of 20 hours per semester for
> pledges and actives, a minimum of 5 of which must be fundraising, and
> pledge requirements to sit on a committee (service, fellowship, internet,
> rules and regs, membership...), as well as organize as a class at least
> one service, fellowship, and fundraising project. What we're considering
> now are contractual agreements between individual brothers and the chapter
> for service, by hours, committee involvement, or whatever else they can
> do.
> I'd like some feedback on all of this, particularly from either people who
> were involved with chapters at similar schools to mine, or who had similar
> service contracts. Tell me if they were great, awful, unenforceable,
> saved your collective hides, or whatever. Also, if you have some other
> very novel setup in your program that you think would work for us, I'd
> like to hear about those as well. Thanks--
> YiLFS, Amy Masters
> Sectional Rep, Delta Theta
>
