Council considers early pledge policy

Author: Afsana Liza

Community Council convened on March 10 to discuss the topic of early pledging to the social houses on campus.

Early pledging would permit first-years to pledge social houses in their spring semester, which would enable them to reside in the social house in the fall of their sophomore year. Currently, students must wait until the fall of their sophomore year to pledge, which allows them to live in a social house in the spring of their sophomore year.

Members of the Council felt that it was important that first-years have informed responsibility and learn more about the campus before pledging to any houses. They believe that if first-years waited until sophomore year, they would have a year's worth of knowledge and experience on which to base their decisions.

"In your freshmen spring semester, you meet your real friends," said Community Council representative Canem Ozylidium '10. "However when pledging in a social house, you're supposed to eat with certain people and spend a certain amount of time every night at the house. It is not ideally the best time for freshmen to do something like this. The semesters as freshmen are not only about maturing, but are also about establishing meaningful friendships. You're forced to live in a large dorm with students you don't know, share the bathrooms and learn to make an effort to become friends with people."

Proponents of the early pledging idea argued that even if first-years are allowed to pledge a semester early, they still have the summer break to mature before they reside in the social house in the fall.

Members of the Community Council also felt that it was wrong to prevent people from making their own decisions and that it was not the place for the College to interfere.

However, other members of the Council questioned the importance of the social houses on campus. Community Council addressed the issue of early pledging two or three years ago but the idea was struck down.

Furthermore, during the mid-1990s, the Middlebury faculty debated the way in which the social houses chose their members at the time. One of the faculty members in the Council indicated that, "you join a social house not because of a common interest such as a language or an environmental issue, but because of certain social aspects."

Faculty members also stressed the importance of academic pressures and how living in a social house would affect students because pledging to a social house is time-consuming. First-years who pledge in their spring semester would be forced to invest considerable time into social pressures and events in the social house.

Many faculty expressed concern that it is better for first-years not to become over-involved because of the new educational burden of college.

However, current Kappa Delta Rho (KDR) social-house resident Antoinette Rangel '09 opposed this sentiment. "A fundamental part of pledging is that you cannot fail nor have bad grades," said Rangel. "There are also study hours in the social house so that students can maintain good grades."

"To keep in mind one important thing, the pledge is a dry pledge," said Student Government Association President Max Nardini '08. "The experience freshmen have is different. They aren't forced to do anything they don't want to do. This is why the nature of the pledge is substantially different."

"There are so many other things to join in your freshmen year, such as Riddim or sports team," said Rangel. "It's your decision to either pursue those activities or work on your paper. This is comparable to the social houses."

Members of Community Council also questioned the motives for acquiring members earlier on in the social houses. "Social houses are desperate for members," said Peyton Coles '08.5. "They only want to acquire members earlier. A healthy social house system would be able to retain students after their first year."

"Why aren't these vastly oversubscribed?" asked Assistant Professor of Physics Noah Graham. "Why aren't they turning down members? Is this an effort to hook students earlier on, before they would change their mind about social houses?"

"We want more students earlier on because we want to establish continuity," argued Rangel. "When sophomores pledge in the fall, they do not live in the houses until the spring. And once they become juniors, 60 percent study abroad and do not live in the social houses."

An important argument that was made within the Council was that the weakness was not in the membership of the social houses, but rather in the number of people willing to live in the social houses. Often when students return from studying abroad, they prefer better housing options than social houses.

"As a member of a social house, I believe that a couple of more dedicated members make the social houses stronger and a stronger core of students earlier on is better than later," said Rangel.

The Council believed that if the activities the social houses are doing are valuable, they should be supported. For instance, members agreed that if the social houses provided opportunities for leadership and personal growth, first-years should be allowed to pledge early.

"I do think the social houses feel that the administration is out to get them or are just not in favor of them," said Nardini. "The administration, however, is not trying to get rid of social houses. The social houses provide a social atmosphere without hard alcohol on campus. It's something that does not involve taking shots in your room."

Overall, the Council agreed that they do not want to weaken social houses.

Years ago, between 13 and 15 percent of the student body lived in the social houses, but that number has decreased to eight percent. Members of the Council questioned why the interest in social houses declined and what has happened to the social dynamics of the student body. Council representatives discussed the change in culture and the generational gaps that could have accounted for this difference.

Social houses are also no longer thought of as co-ed fraternities, which is part of the cause for the cultural change from about two decades ago since they are no longer considered part of a Greek life.

The Community Council decided to listen to another presentation of the social houses before reaching a decision. Council members were not comfortable making a decision at the meeting regarding first-years and pledge because the Council felt that it did not have enough information.