[21159] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] What is our "Bread" abd "Butter"?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lisa M. Covi)
Tue Sep 12 12:47:18 2000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0009121145520.26418-100000@scils.rutgers.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:43:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Lisa M. Covi" <covi@SCILS.RUTGERS.EDU>
From: "Lisa M. Covi" <covi@SCILS.RUTGERS.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Hayim, Michael, Peter and others,
Hayim writes:
>What do we need to do to retain a competitive place on the campuses
>of our colleges and universities?
I think this may be a good topic to raise at the convention. A
resolution about positioning nationally would be very appropriate.
Some ideas that I have suggested and discussed include:
Alpha Phi Omega develops leadership and promotes friendship
through volunteer service
Alpha Phi Omega trains students to conceive, organize and run
volunteer service project (not just providing human
resources like other clubs)
Alpha Phi Omega provides the training ground for management
skills by providing a supportive forum for practical
leadership development
Hayim writes:
> If we are failing on our campuses, why are we failing on our campuses?
>If we are failing to attract entusiastic people, where are the enthusiastic
>people?
Pete writes:
>I have been told that the reason why
>students today do not get more involved is clear... they need to work in
>order to go to college.
This sounds to me like frustrated and desperate thinking. If we go
back to the basics we will find that chapters succeed through
membership recruiting, education and retention throughout the college
career. Many chapters organize their service and leadership programs
around their pledge program and some have marginalized service into a
requirement for being "active" (meaning voting, running for office,
having a little, etc.) like credits they need to graduate. What makes
chapters work is sharing among the full membership a committment to
leadership, friendship and service on campus. Sometimes things go
wrong, but going back to the committment will help the chapter work
through things. I think each chapter needs to have at least one
enthusiastic, charasmatic and positive person to remind others that
this is fun. The bottom line is that if APO is worthwhile, students
will make the time for it.
Michael writes:
>I have been considering these questions since I pledged Alpha Phi Omega in
>fall 1998 and I always seem to land at one resounding answer: Nationals have
>gone overboard on their standards.
Although I agree that the convention has voted in many overspecified
policies and requirements over the years, policies preventing hazing
and illegal alcohol use are two that have caused chapters to fold,
campuses to no longer welcome APO and threaten the suvival of the
National fraternity through lawsuits (the legal fees alone have
crippled our financial health in the past).
Michael writes:
>hazing. I believe that telling a pledge 'you can not talk to your pledge
>brothers during voting' is not out of line, however apparently nationals has
>decided it is.
I'm not sure what you mean by not talking to pledge brothers during
voting means. However, the "nationals" you refer to is the national
convention made up of active members of APO. The volunteer staff
carry out the wishes expressed by the convention. I've heard of
chapters who have asked their pledges not to speak to anyone except
chapter members during the last week of pledging or not allowing
pledges out of a building during pledge reviews. A strict
interpretation of the membership standards, would suggest it falls
under the example given:
3) Participation in activities that restrict such normal social
functions as eating, social contacts, or personal hygiene;
My question is why would you want someone not to speak to another? Is
it common courtesy. Aside from loyalty and unity, what educational
purpose does it serve? How does this help an individual become a good
brother?
Michael writes:
>Frankly, it makes APO look like less of a fraternity than a student
>organization. We wouldnt even have to drink; we could all drink soda.
>However, the overly oppressive risk management act forbids any of this
>activity.
Are you serious? Do you have to drink to have fellowship? I admit
that many college students like to drink but have you ever considered
what a drinking party is like for students who have to take
medication, students who are recovering alcoholics or students who
prefer not to drink alcohol (all of which I've seen in APO chapters)?
Sure you can say they don't have to drink, but have you been to some
of these parties sober? I have heard that students find them much less
fun than you'd expect.
Michael writes:
>The fact that APO cant rush in a bar has hurt us a great deal. The fact that
>we cant hold a fellowship where a few of us go down town and have a few
>drinks has hurt the brotherhood as well. I would love to go downtown with my
>letters on just to spend some time with my brothers.
I hope you are kidding with this one. Do you really think it is
desirable or in the best interests of your chapter and the National
Fraternity to have an image as a "drinking" fraternity? Bars are not
the most hospitable places to people who do not like cigarette smoke
and loud music/talking. How well can you get to know prospectives in
bars and what does that say about their dedication to leadership,
friendship and service?
Michael writes:
>I believe that pledges should be treated as lesser than brother, despite
>what our national bylaws proclimate. It seems almost like it is better to be
>a pledge for this fraternity than a brother.
I'm curious about why you would say this. Pledges are more important
than brothers because they are the future of your chapter and our
fraternity. However, our supreme purpose is service and if that is
not enough for members to stay active, you might ask how well your
chapter is serving your campus.
Pete writes:
>The process of becoming a chapter has become too difficult and conains too
>much red-tape. ... They may not be able to do the type of projects
>that are deemed "appropriate" and "quality." What is considered
>"appropriate" or "quality?" You cannot use a cookie cutter
I've heard this discussion in a variety of membership arenas - the
idea is to go for "quality" in brotherhood (all the way from actives
coming back from associate status to the judgement of petitioning
groups) rather than "quantity." One thing you might consider is that
without quantity, you have no chapter, petitioning groups or national
fraternity. This is precisely what is threatening our fraternity
currently. Chapters who don't register students who have been
"initiated," chapters who choose not to have a spring pledge class and
chapters who tone down rush because of having enough people all do
themselves, their campus and the fraternity a disservice. Making a
decision about a pledge or a petitioning group who has not quite met
all the requirements might entail a discussion of what the
requirements are supposed to demonstrate. Maybe the individual or
group has demonstrated the principle in other ways. What risks does
APO face in allowing a pledge or petitioning group who does not meet
all of the requirements become active or charter pose to the future of
the chapter and the fraternity?
Good discussion for a convention year!
Lisa Covi, Hirsh '81
