1 Running head: GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP

Exploring the Connection between Greek-Life Involvement and Leadership Emily T. Callahan and Katie C. Stephens Loyola University Chicago April 25, 2013

2 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP Abstract The researchers in this study will explore connections between Greek life and leadership on the U.S. college campus. The literature review provides an overview and brief history of Greek life and the potential for these groups to positively affect student development of members and support leadership skills. Participants from a diverse sample of institutions will participate in this study of mixed methodology involving the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale as the quantitative component and individual interviews as the qualitative method. Introduction Sororities and fraternities have been a staple of the American Higher Education system since their establishment back in 1776 (Mauk, 2006). However, from their initial establishment, students and administrators alike have all demonstrated conflicting view points on these organizations. Supporters of the Greek Life system continuously acknowledge the tradition, potential of leadership opportunities, philanthropy and community service, and connections to a strong mission and values; critics focus on the stereotypes of hazing, exclusionary tendencies, binge drinking, and sexual assault (Mauk, 2006). Nonetheless, the nine million American college students that affiliate with a sorority or fraternity continue to be an appealing population to study (Glass, 2012). These organizations are controversial in nature and often are highly visible on a college campus (Pascarella, Flowers & Whitt, 2009). Furthermore, unlike studies that focus on one student population, sororities and fraternities encompass a vast amount of identities. Therefore, studies on this population may entail elements such as race, gender, sexual orientation, and previous life experiences. The unique nature of these organizations continues to draw in various researchers. For this particular

3 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP study, this population is also appealing because some of the evidence found in the literature is contradictory. While studies of this population often include moral decision making, correlation of membership and academic success, and sexual assault, there is a great deal of literature regarding the effects of Greek-life membership on student development. Given the fact that a student further along in their development process may ultimately have the competency to be a better leader, it is important to use this literature as a framework when exploring leadership tendencies of this population (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton & Renn, 2010). Theory of Involvement and Psychosocial Development Since the study is looking to study a population that is involved with activities on their college campus, Astins theory of involvement provides a solid foundation (1984). Astin (1984) defines a student with a high level of involvement as one who devotes considerable energy to studying, spends much time on campus, participates actively in student organizations, and interacts frequently with faculty members and other students (p. 518). Foubert and Grainger (2006) took Astins (1984) theory of student involvement, and sought to understand how it impacted students as described by Chickerings theory of psychosocial development (Evans et al., 2010). This is particularly important, as psychosocial development entails pieces of development that directly relate to leadership, including developing purpose, competence, and integrity, as well as managing emotions (Evans et al., 2010). Each of these components, when strongly developed, can build stronger levels of leadership. Foubert and Grainger (2006) concluded that by the end of a students senior year, those involved in clubs and organizations had statistically higher levels of development in establishing and clarifying purpose, educational

4 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP involvement, career planning, lifestyle management, and cultural participation than they had earlier in their college career (Foubert & Grainger, 2006, p. 175). Most important, these students also demonstrated higher levels of development than their peers that were not involved (Foubert & Grainger, 2006). Given the findings from Foubert and Grainger (2006), one may posit that since sorority and fraternity members are members of groups that are typically highly involved on campus, that they would be further developed and ultimately better leaders. However, this thought is based off limited evidence, as this information focuses only on general involvement on campus, and not specifically in Greek organizations. This data does not distinguish between these organizations and other general clubs on campus. Furthermore, given the unique nature of fraternities and sororities, it is not wise to assume they would apply similarly to this theory. Pike (2000) conducted a study of the effects of fraternity and sorority life on student development. He implied that Greek-life membership focused too highly on social involvement, which he defined as involvement with clubs, involvement with campus residence, and peer interaction, which ultimately had a negative effect on development (Pike, 2000, p. 123). Pike (2000) stated without an appropriate balance of social involvement with academic involvement, defined as use of the library, writing experiences, and faculty interaction, students may miss out on developmentally beneficial co-curricular experiences (p. 122). Using this evidence, fraternity and sorority life would not be a vehicle for positive growth in psychosocial development, and ultimately the establishment of leadership. Randall and Grady (1998) agreed with Pikes findings, as they stated that the homogenous nature of sororities and fraternities hindered student development. Often, students

5 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP learn and develop through experiences with diverse people, ideas and situations. Therefore, in frequent cases with heavy involvement with fraternities and sororities, students are not faced with these elements and ultimately do not develop the skills necessary for strong leadership (Randall & Grady, 1998). The implications from these findings are not necessarily applicable for students of color, which is discussed later. Studies Directly on Leadership Martin, Hevel, and Pascarella (2012) explored the impact of sorority and fraternity life on students socially responsible leadership. These researchers measured socially responsible leadership of predominantly White students across 24 institutions using eight values. These values included: consciousness of self, congruence, commitment, collaboration, common purpose, controversy with civility, citizenship, and change (Martin et al., 2012). Martin et al. (2010) determined that fraternity men scored higher in citizenship than non-members, and sorority women scored higher in common purpose and citizenship. Dugan (2008) directed a study which entailed solely of members of these groups and found that Greeks scored highest in commitment, and lowest in change. Both studies indicated that there is room for improvement in the Greek-system with regards to this idea of socially responsible leadership (Martin et al., 2010; Dugan, 2008). The prevalence of growth in the citizenship category is likely tied to the Greek-life propensities for participation in philanthropy and community service (Martin et al., 2010). While these results do indicate some positive effects that would distinguish the leadership capabilities for fraternity and sorority members, there were still no distinctions between them and non-members in the majority of the measured outcomes. Given the values of the organizations and the opportunities for

6 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP leadership, these areas should be further developed and recommendations for improvement should be highlighted (Martin et al., 2010). Limitations and Students of Color The general findings in this literature is that Greek life seldom has an overall positive impact on student growth, which leads to leadership capabilities; when it does have a demonstrated impact on members versus non-members, it is limited (Martin et al., 2010; Pike, 2000; Foubert & Grainger, 2006). However, most of these studies have been conducted on either a single institution, or on a group of institutions that are similar in demographics and geographic location. Furthermore, the students in the study are always predominantly White. When students of color are incorporated in the studies, the results have varied for these particular individuals (Martin et al., 2010; Pike, 2000; Foubert & Grainger, 2006). Therefore, it is important to consider if membership in sorority and fraternity life affects students of color the same, or if their overall leadership tendencies and capabilities are different from White students. Given these variations in study findings, Kimborough and Hutcheson (1998) conducted a study of 1,400 Black students, half Greek and half non-Greek, equally distributed between predominantly White institutions and historically Black institutions. The study found that participation in sororities and fraternities resulted in overall higher levels of involvement on campus. Black Greek-life members were inclined to not only be members of multiple organizations on campus, but to also hold leadership positions, more so than their nonmember counterparts (Kimborough & Hutcheson, 1998). Guardia and Evans (2008) explored membership in a Latino fraternity at a Hispanic Serving Institution, studying seven members. They found that students felt a particular

7 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP connection with this organization because it served as a home away from home (Guardia and Evans, 2008, p. 173). By being a part of this fraternity, members were able to practice their Spanish language skills and feel immersed in their Latino culture. McClure (2006) examined Black men in historically Black fraternities at a Predominantly White institution, by interviewing 20 members. She found that these members felt a strong connection to Black history, as the organization instilled racial pride. The students also expressed the significance of their organizations vast history. As with most institutions where the population is mostly White, students of color often struggle to find a place on campus. However, these students reflected that they felt a connection to the campus community through their membership in their fraternity (McClure, 2006). McClure (2006) also found that students benefited from being connected to the alumni network of their fraternity, both for opportunities during their college experience and beyond. McClure (2006) stressed through her finding from this research study, although limited to one organization as one institution, that on college campuses, the specific function of same-race support groups, in the form of Greek organizations, must be understood as separate and unique from traditionally white organizations they were initially modeled after (p. 1052). This is evident through both McClures (2006) and Guardia and Evans (2008); students of color join a multicultural Greek-organization to find a support system on campus. Therefore, given these findings, along with Kimborough and Hutcheson (1998), it is probable that exploring the effects of sorority and fraternity life on leadership would differ between white students and students of color. In these cases, the findings from Randall and Grady (1998) are not applicable. These researchers indicated that Greek-lifes homogenous populations kept students from facing situations of dissonance, and overall hindered their development and leadership capacities.

8 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP However, students of color, especially of a predominantly white campus, are already facing people, ideas, and situations that differ from themselves and their own, and therefore Greek-life would not eliminate these experiences. Implications for this Study There is limited research that directly includes students from a variety of racial groups and directly compares members and non-members of Greek organizations tendencies and capacities for leadership. Furthermore, none of this previous research accounts for the differences in types of institution, as this can particularly have an impact on students of color and may drive them toward involvement. While there are studies, though with skewed population samples, that specifically look at research on this matter, it is not entirely comprehensive (Martin et al., 2010; Pike, 2000; Foubert & Grainger, 2006). There are studies that attempt to measure students leadership capacity, and there are studies that look at Greek-life members involvement in other organizations, but there is limited research that explores the connections between these two ideas. These studies could be more comprehensive if they ultimately determined the number of organizations and leadership positions those students held, and if these circumstances are in fact linked or not linked to involvement with sorority and fraternity life. Even if Greek-affiliated students both measure higher on the socially responsible leadership scale, and indicate that they are involved with more organizations overall, there is no way of knowing if this is due to their membership in these groups. Therefore, this research study will address the following questions: do students involved with sorority and fraternity measure higher in their leadership capacity than their non-affiliated

9 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP peers? Are members of these organizations more involved in other groups on campus, and hold more leadership positions than non-Greeks? Both of these previous two questions will be addressed while considering if there is a link between the two. Lastly, do students that are already highly developed and involved leaders choose to join Greek- life, or does Greek-life promote leadership and ultimately leader to more involvement on campus? Given that Greeklife, in previous studies, has not turned out to be an advantage to development, it is quite probable that the former is the more common case (Martin et al., 2010; Pike, 2000; Foubert & Grainger, 2006). Also given the literature, it is likely that students of color will score higher in their measures of leadership capacity (McClure, 2006; Guardia & Evans, 2008). Methodology After reviewing past studies conducted separately on leadership in higher education and Greek affiliation, it has been determined that both qualitative and quantitative methods have been used successfully (Martin et al., 2010; Pike, 2000; Foubert & Grainger, 2006). A quantitative measure of leadership positions among all students on a college campus (members and nonmembers of fraternity and sorority life) will be the first component of data collection and the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale (SRLS) will be the instrument used (Martin et al., 2010;
Dugan, 2008). As mentioned previously, the SRLS measures eight dimensions of leadership:

consciousness of self, congruence, commitment, collaboration, common purpose, controversy with civility, citizenship and change (Martin et al., 2010). The SRLS is conducted in the form of a questionnaire and contains skill statements that participants answer to determine their score. Sample statements for the measure of commitment include, I stick with others through the difficult times and I can be counted on to do my part (Wedel, Goodman, Chen, & Wingenbach, 2011, p. 8). The participant answers the statements using Likert-type scales (i.e. 1

10 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP = Strongly Disagree, 4 = Strongly Agree) and the answers in each dimension are added to determine the participants self-perceived leadership skills (Wedel et al., 2011). Additionally, because of the limitations associated with self-report and the fact that the definition of leadership will be relative to each participant, the qualitative component in this study will assist in helping to draw conclusions and make correlations between leadership and Greek affiliation. Participants Participants of this study will come from a variety of institutions across the United States and the goal amount of institutions to be included is 20, ensuring that all demographics are included. The variety of institutions refers to institution by means of: population size; the racial population that is served by the institution (Historically Black College/University, HispanicServing Institution, Asian Pacific American campuses, and Predominately White Institution) and the geographical location of the institutions campus. Given the information from McClure (2006) students of color are particularly drawn to joining fraternities and sororities on Predominantly White campuses, as they desire a powerful support system in an environment where they strongly feel the impact of being the minority. Therefore, since the campus environment can have an impact on a students motivation to join these organizations, and ultimately may enable to organization to have a different impact on them, this study will explore these varieties of institutions. Furthermore, given the fact that past studies have indicated different results between White and students of color involved in Greek-life, this study will carefully incorporate each of these identities. The participants surveyed will be in their fourth year at the institution, assuming that they are more fully developed in their principles and philosophies on leadership than younger students. From the institutions selected to participate in

11 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP this study, 50% of the student participants will be Greek affiliated and 50% of the student participants will be non-Greek affiliated. Instruments The first phase of the study will be conducted in a quantitative manner as a way to guide the qualitative data collection. The SRLS and a brief demographic survey will be sent to potential participants at each institution. The brief demographic survey will be a part of the same document as the SRLS and serve the purpose of identifying students based on their nonGreek/Greek affiliation status and if they are affiliated, they will indicate when they joined their schools chapter. The SRLS will be sent via electronic mail to all students on each campus in their fourth year of undergraduate study with the knowledge that not all of the potential participants will respond or wish to participate in the study. During this initial contact, students will also receive a letter to explain the basic premise of the study, why they were chosen as potential participants, and contact information of the researchers for any additional questions the students may have. After the data is reviewed from the SRLS, the researchers will select students from each campus to invite for interviews to collect qualitative data for the study. Each campus will have six representatives in the interview process, each scoring differently on the SRLS; two individuals that scored at the top of the scale, two that fell in the middle, and two at the bottom of the spectrum. From each of those classifications there will be one Greek-affiliated student and one non-Greek affiliated student; the demographic survey questions will serve to provide that information on affiliation for the selection process. Procedure

12 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP The SRLS will be distributed to all fourth year students at the 20 institutions that have been selected as a representative sample of colleges and universities in the United States. A deadline for return of the SRLS will be set for two weeks after it is distributed. To encourage student participation in this portion of the study, an incentive of a raffle for a $25 gift card to the campus bookstore will be offered on each campus for students who complete the SRLS within the given time. Once the data is collected and analyzed, the six students will be selected to be invited for interviews from each campus. In doing this we have the same amount of representatives from each institution and will have representations from all types of leaders, both Greek affiliated and non-Greek affiliated. The interview process will be conducted on an individual basis in order to avoid stereotyping that could be possible if the interviews were conducted by the focus group method. Potential participants in this process will receive a detailed briefing on the qualitative data collection portion in which they are being invited to participate that will be written in a way that is clear and concise for their understanding. If students decline the invitation for an interview, the researchers will then invite other potential participants that fit the same criteria, and this process will be repeated until six participants are found from each institution. An informed consent form will be provided to the students to make them aware that although their potential for harm will be extremely low, there is the slight possibility that they will be made uncomfortable from the probing nature of an interview, but that they have the power to decline continuing with the interview at any point of the interview session. Interviews are projected to last between 45 and 60 minutes, but this timeframe is tentative and relevant to the students openness to discuss, which may alter the length of the sessions. Sample questions that may be asked during the interview include:

13 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP What types of leadership positions do you hold on campus? Could you describe them in detail? Did you hold leadership positions during your secondary education experience? If so, please elaborate on those and indicate if the experiences guided your choices during your undergraduate experience. (For Greek affiliated participants): Why did you decide to join a sorority or fraternity? Did Greek-life influence your desire to be involved in other organizations on campus? Does your sorority/fraternity provide any tools for helping members build leadership skills? (For non-Greek affiliated participants): Did you have specific reasons as to why you did not join a sorority or fraternity? Data Analysis The first set of data to be analyzed will be the quantitative data collected from the SRLS. The sum of the scores from each dimension on a participants response will be compared with all of the other questionnaires that are returned to the researchers. Average scores will be generated from each institution to determine which six participants will be invited for the qualitative portion of the study. From the interviews, the researchers hope to find themes among the various conversations that will correlate with the leadership data to draw conclusions on the topic of Greek affiliation and student leaders. These themes, or lack thereof, will be the guiding principles in determining if the proposed hypotheses were proven valid or not. Threats to Validity

14 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP The threats to validity that this study will face are the reliance on participants to selfreport their leadership capabilities, as well as the fact that the definition of leadership is subjective. Cultural variance across the U.S. and from each institution is also a factor to consider as these values may shape opinions of participants and interpretations of the study. Furthermore, both of the researchers in this study are affiliated with a Greek organization. Given this fact, the potential for researcher bias is increased. Therefore, it will be crucial in the interview portion of the study to utilize the participant feedback technique, to ensure that the researchers did not have a skewed perception of the information shared by the students (Johnson & Christensen, 2010).

15 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP References Astin, A.W. (1999). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher education. development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Directions for Student Services, 81, 29-37.

Dugan, J. P. (2008). Exploring relationships between fraternity and sorority membership and socially responsible leadership, Oracle: The Research Jounal of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, 3(2), 16-25. Evans, N., J. Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student experiences and cognitive development. Research in Higher Eduaction, 41(1), 117-139. Foubert, J. D., & Grainger, L. U. (2006). Effects of involvement in clubs and organizations on the psychosocial development of first-year and senior college students. NASPA Journal, 43(1), 166-182. Glass, S. (2012). Examining the benefits of Greek life. USA Today College. Retrieved from: http://www.usatodayeducate.com/staging/index.php/campuslife/examining-the-benefitsof-greek-life Guardia, J. R., & Evans, N. J. (2008). Factors influencing the ethnic identity development of Latino fraternity members at a Hispanic serving institution. Journal of College Student Development, 49(3), 163-181.
Johnson, R. B. & Christensen, L. (2010). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and

Jossey-Bass.

16 GREEK-LIFE INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529. Kimborough, W.M. & Hutcheson, P.A. (1998). The impact of membership in Black Greek-letter organizations on black students involvement in collegiate activities and their development of leadership skills. Journal of Negro Education, 67(2), 96-105. Martin, G. L., Hevel, M. S., & Pascarella, E. T. (2012). Do fraternities and sororities enhance socially responsible leadership? Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 49(3), 267-284. Mauk, A. J. (2006). Students in Greek letter organizations. In L. A. Gohn & G. R. Albin (Eds.), McClure, S. M. (2006). Voluntary association membership: Black Greek men on a
mixed approaches (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Sage Publications.

Pike G. R. (2000). The influence of fraternity or sorority membership on students college Predominantly White Campus. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(6), 1036-1057.
Randall, K., & Grady, D. (1998). The Greek experience and critical-thinking skills. New

Understanding College Student Populations: A Guide for Student Affairs Professionals (239-265). National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. Wedel, L.R., Goodman, A.C., Chen, W., & Wingenback, G. (2011). Differences in Fraternal Organization Members Self-perceived Leadership Growth Levels. Research in Higher Education Journal, 12. 1-13.