Spring Break
Forum addresses 2nd-year living
Fraternities express concern about possible effects of housing proposal
Megan Weiland, Senior Staff Writer
Issue date: 11/28/06 Section: Campus
|
The forum was held in response to a report released by Miami University's Second Year Residency Committee, which was created to look at enhancing the experience of sophomores at Miami - including the possibility of an on-campus living requirement.
Some fraternity representatives at the forum voiced their concern that sophomore men would be more apt to rush fraternities with houses to avoid the on-campus housing requirment.
"We just want to know if there is any plan to protect fraternities, such as us, who are recognized by the university but don't have a house," said Chris Heiden, vice president-elect of Chi Psi. "With this, there would be bigger incentives for freshmen to rush the bigger fraternities that meet the requirements and have houses. I feel like it would go great lengths to eliminate us from campus."
In response to institutional research showing student GPAs and engagement rates are lower during their sophomore year, Student Affairs Vice President Richard Nault created this committee to look at what has been coined the "lost year."
While some see the benefits of the on-campus housing requirements, others are less confident.
"Small fraternities are afraid," said Charles Berg, treasurer of the Acacia fraternity alumni board. "They're afraid that this is going to affect things in a way that will make them disappear."
To apply for the exemption to allow sophomores to live within the off-campus houses, it is proposed that fraternities would have to meet certain requirements, such as a live-in adviser and alcohol-free environments.
"There are elements of the argument, pros and cons, that need to be looked at very carefully," Berg said. "Maybe this needs to be implemented rather than dumped …We'll get the job done without tremendous disruption to the campus culture."
