[24432] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Proposed: Older Undergrads as advisors?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brad Barnett)
Wed Sep 8 14:49:53 2004
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 14:49:43 -0400
Reply-To: Brad Barnett <loaapres@apoloaa.org>
From: Brad Barnett <loaapres@apoloaa.org>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <Pine.PMDF.3.95.1040907232313.543163143A-100000@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
Hey Randy!
I don't normally reply to the listserv but this has caused my interest to be
perked.
I think the inherent problem with this is that sometimes older,
undergraduate brothers are not always far enough removed from being an
active to be an effective advisor. The problem lies in the fact, where do
you draw the line? An advisor is there to advise, and the danger is that it
becomes problamatic in a lot of cases for the older undergraduate brother to
remove themselves from chapter affairs. I found that in myself as well. I
also find that true with some new(and hell, some old alumni as well.) It's a
hard thing to remove yourself in that way in something that you've put a lot
into. I think it's just human nature.
To quickly sum up, I think it would be a huge mistake to make that change.
Others thoughts?
Fraternally,
Brad Barnett
Section 92 Chair
-----Original Message-----
From: Alpha Phi Omega Discussion List [mailto:APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU] On
Behalf Of Randy Finder
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 11:34 PM
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Subject: [APO-L] Proposed: Older Undergrads as advisors?
I mentioned this before, but now with the deadline approaching, I'd like to
hear more opinions.
The proposed amendment would change the last sentence of Article III,
Section 2, (4) Advisory membership from "Such Membership may not be
conferred upon undergraduate students." to "Such Membership may not be
conferred upon undergraduate students younger than age 23."
A brother returning to college for a second undergraduate degree or a
student trying for a first degree after having all of her children reach
school age might feel more comfortable as an advisor than as an active
brother.
Note, this does not remove any choices from the chapters, but does give an
additional possibilitie
(Note making the proposed change as 23 allows any amendment of this age
upwards to remain in scope. An amendment of that age downward would not be
in scope. I personally think the age should be a little older than that, but
would like to give the most latitude for consideration.)
Looking for comments, possible support, opinions on why this will destroy
western civilization...
YiLFS
Randy finder
--
Leadership, Friendship and Service - Alpha Phi Omega
