IN THE late '90's, deferred rush was a hot topic across Grounds. The faculty were advocating that rush be deferred till second year. Then-Dean of Students Bob Canevari invited the IFC fraternity men to consider a variety of ways to strengthen the system as he made his decision about deferred rush. He challenged them to comply with IFC policy eliminating alcohol at rush events; comply with their headquarters' risk management policies; commit to returning to their founding ideals; and to shorten the pledge period -- all moves designed to create a stronger, more beneficial fraternity system. At the time, the students did not respond positively to Dean Canevari's challenge, so rush was deferred.
When I arrived as dean of students in the fall of 1999, it was clear the University would need time to assess the impact of deferred fraternity rush. What I have learned from students, resident staff and colleagues throughout the University is that many stakeholders feel that the move to second semester rush has provided tangible benefits. (ISC sororities, BFC fraternities and sororities and MGC fraternities and sororities all maintain policies of deferred rush.)
Many believe that deferred rush gives students the chance to acclimate to college life, make friends within the first-year or residential college community, and establish themselves academically. Residential communities can become stronger without the immediate fragmentation into Greeks and non-Greeks. Those who choose to rush are more likely to join for the right reasons and over the long term may stay involved in their chapters through their fourth year. The fraternities themselves have a better opportunity to evaluate the assets that individual men will bring in terms of leadership, scholarship, and service.
The most common argument against deferred rush is that it is unfair to treat membership in fraternities as fundamentally different from that in other student organizations. The truth, of course, is that fraternity and sorority membership is fundamentally different. It is meant to be a lifelong bond, entered into with due consideration. Its financial consequence exceeds that of most other types of organizations. The process of fraternity rushing and pledging a Greek letter organization is a time-intensive activity that often precludes other involvements, at least temporarily. Fraternity rush is overseen by the IFC, and we value and uphold the merits of student self-governance. Yet, rush and pledge activities often occur away from Grounds unsupervised by the IFC, which has led both to documented problems and disturbing rumors.
Since my arrival in 1999, I have watched the IFC and fraternity men struggle with the effects of deferred rush. I understand concerns about financial stress. I recognize concerns about the costly practice of "dirty" rush in the first semester and the differential resources among the chapters to compete in this unfair way. Yet many IFC chapters have responded creatively to the policy of deferred rush. Some have succeeded in increasing the number of upper-class men living in the chapter houses, leading to greater house leadership and stability. Others have recruited second- and third-year men and transfer students through fall semester informal rush. Still others have chosen not to bear the financial and facilities burden of providing near-open parties.
Three years ago, asked by the Board of Visitors to examine the ways in which the University supports fraternity and sorority life, President John T. Casteen III appointed the Fraternity Working Group, which I chaired. That group of students, alumni, faculty and administrators made a series of recommendations to strengthen the system that the Board of Visitors accepted in full. One recommendation was the establishment of the Office of Fraternity & Sorority Life, a unit within the Office of the Dean of Students, to support the ways in which our fraternities and sororities strengthen their organizations through student self-governance. They are willing and able to help any organization that would like to improve its membership recruitment activities. Another recommendation was the establishment of a University Committee on Fraternities and Sororities, to continue to bring together students, faculty, alumni and administrators to share perspectives and insights into ways in which fraternity and sorority life can be enhanced. That group is now up and running and will advise the University on matters pertaining to fraternity and sorority life. While day-to-day finances remain the province of the individual chapters, the BOV has also authorized substantial financial support in the form of a facilities loan program to help these organizations surmount long-term structural deficiencies and invest in facilities renovation.
One of the things I learned even before I began my job as dean of students was the enormous gratitude that our alumni have for their fraternity and sorority experiences. I clearly see the benefits that fraternity and sorority affiliation provide. I also acknowledge the accomplishments and the distinguished legacy that these men and women have left on Grounds and know that part of the University's distinctiveness is the strength of these organizations. Yet my role requires that I also balance the perspectives of faculty, of resident staff, of concerned parents and of University risk managers. With these broad-based perspectives in mind, I believe the University community is best served by continuing to defer rush till the second semester of the first year.
(Penny Rue is the Dean of Students.)