The University's decision last fall to include residential alcohol offenses as grounds for Probation I starting this year posed an obstacle for many fraternities during the rush season this year. The number of students on Probation I has increased because of the new policy, and pledge classes are smaller because many candidates were deemed ineligible to join a fraternity.
Disagreements between a number of fraternities and the administration during the rush process arose when the InterGreek Council (IGC) proposed a constitutional change regarding rush eligibility. The revision would eliminate the existing IGC rule, which states that students on Probation I cannot participate in rush or pledge a fraternity or sorority.
Members of the IGC had hoped to revise their rule because they felt that the University's new policy to include minor alcohol offenses in Probation I was too restrictive. Many felt that a single residential alcohol citation was not a serious enough offense to warrant exclusion from the rush pool.
Although the Greek system is independent of the University, and therefore has the right to modify its rush eligibility requirements, it must inform the administration of these changes. When administrators voiced concerns over the fairness of the proposed revision, the IGC voted to withdraw the proposal and keep its original policy.
"We stepped in this time because it seemed unfair to make the change after one whole system, the sorority system, had already completed their rush process," Dean of Students Bruce Reitman said.
The last-minute change would also have been unjust for many Probation I students who withdrew from rush before the week began because they knew they were not eligible to pledge.
"The Greek system came to the decision [to modify the rule] a little too late, and at that point it was too late to reopen rush," Reitman said.
Some fraternity presidents did suggest the possibility of reopening rush, which would allow fraternities and sororities to include students who were initially ineligible to participate because of their Probation I status. However, prolonging rush week would have conflicted with national rules and regulations.
According to the IGC, fraternities experienced a decrease in the number of rush candidates this spring, and many attribute the smaller rush pool to the stricter probation policy. The number of students placed on Probation I increased across the board as a result of last fall's decision, according to Reitman.
The IGC was concerned that students likely to rush are those most likely to commit alcohol offenses, and having a large number of pledges on Probation I would therefore reflect poorly on the Greek system. However, the IGC believed that the percentage of Probation I students who would have rushed was no larger than the overall percentage of students on Probation I across campus.
A task force will review the current Probation I parameters towards the end of this year to see whether or not minor residential alcohol offenses should in fact be included. "It's definitely something we can examine down the road," Reitman said. "A review will happen, and that could potentially lead to change."
Regardless of whether the University changes its policies, the IGC is fully eligible to revise its policies regarding rush for next fall's round. "All they have to do is make it known," Reitman said.
Fraternity presidents are generally in favor of changing the IGC's rush eligibility rules for next year.
"This didn't become an issue for us this year because the guys that rushed here were all eligible, but I think in general it's a good change," Zeta Psi president John Sunkin said. "Not being able to rush because of a single alcohol offense seems a bit harsh."
"I agree with what was done and I'm confident that the necessary changes will be made for the future," Sigma Epsilon Phi President Bill Lane said.
