Harvard to penalize students who join unrecognized non-coed social organizations

Parents Forum
41

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/05/making-harvard-a-campus-for-all/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=05.09.2016%20(1)

On a different (closed) site, a few parents are complaining about how horribly this affects their kids. One posted a picture of her daughter with her darling, supportive sorority friends: 8 girls, 6 blondes and 2 burnettes. Parent totally clueless as to how the racial divide doesn’t represent the demographics of Harvard and why someone might think that off campus group is not representing the school’s values.

It is a heavy handed move, but not inappropriate given the larger mission on education…

42

““Gender-exclusive clubs are a thing of the past, or ought to be. Harvard’s move to end discriminatory practices at final clubs is welcome and timely. I applaud the University’s leadership for taking this step,” said Deval L. Patrick, former governor of Massachusetts.”

Time to get rid of the Society for Women Engineers I guess?

43

^The Society for Women Engineers does not exclude men. Just as a point of fact.

44

“not inappropriate given the larger mission on education…”

which is what? social engineering or teaching a skill like how to be a chemist?

keep the heavy handed agenda driven stuff out of my adult life.
look if I spend 1000 years at harvard i would never join one of those “clubs” but it seems the power structure at harvard and most other schools have an agenda and they act like BIG BROTHER. this is not cool. it is creepy and wrong.

45

Education does not equal job skill, though I guess some people subscribe to “drill em, skill em, kill em.”

46

Looking things up on Wikipedia–if it isn’t accurate let me know–it seems the clubs don’t publish their membership lists.

Does Harvard really want to introduce a culture in which students are encouraged to denounce their peers for personal advancement? Really? Like a return to the good old days of the Soviets? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-483230/Traitors-family-Stalins-informers.html

The university may be able to do whatever it wants to groups under its control. These clubs are not under its control. They own property on Harvard Square, which means they are able to hire the best legal representation. Although admittedly, if they have long traditions of recruiting leaders of the debating societies, I’d assume they might have a long roster of alumni members who are Harvard trained lawyers. I can’t figure out if membership ends with graduation–there is some reference to “graduate members.” Does that mean graduate students, or alumni?

I’m not affiliated with Harvard. My children aren’t. I don’t personally care if any club is single sex or coed. If I were a member, though, there’s no way I would want to bow to such foolish orders from the administration.

It seems the policy including fraternities and sororities was included to give a fig leaf to cloak the fact that it’s a measure designed to “get” the finals clubs. Which is petty, misguided, and destined to fail–but not before it does a lot of damage. Does any house rented by a group of female or male friends fit the definition? If not, why not?

If you’re worried about a party culture at your college, in the heart of a city filled with other universities, and bars, it is beyond foolish to force the partiers underground and off your campus. If a (secret) sorority or fraternity member is sexually assaulted, or just very, very drunk, do you think they’re more or less likely to look for help from authorities under this plan?

Myself, I’d say the plan would force lots of things underground. People will suffer as a result, both because they will be unwilling to admit to their social activities, and because they will be unwilling to expose their friends as–gasp!–members of single-sex groups.

And realistically, very, very few students are in the running for the honors which would be reserved for the gutless. Membership in a finals club–again, not under university control–would potentially be much more valuable for long-term success than compliance with administrators’ diktats. So the division between the socioeconomic classes would be increased.

You cannot mandate Utopia.

47

“You can’t mandate Utopia”. We have been seeing over the past few years that there are many out there who would disrespectfully disagree.

48

I’m curious whether those on this thread think that a college or university ever has any right to do away with GLOs?

49

Private schools apparently do. Some, like Oberlin, Williams, and Amherst, have much more severe penalties than Harvard for joining fraternities or sororities, up to and including expulsion. Princeton, another school in Harvard’s athletic conference, prohibits frosh from joining them and strongly discourages others as well.

Public schools have derecognized chapters, but do not prohibit membership in unrecognized off-campus fraternities and sororities.

50

Of course colleges engage in social engineering. That’s a huge part of what they’re for. There was a big hue and cry in the 90s when Harvard randomized House assignment instead of letting students and houses pick who they wanted. Big Brother, the whole nine yards. Now it’s a big part of what people like about Harvard and Yale’s housing. Or if they don’t like it, they pick other schools, because we’re talking about kids who will have enviable options.

I think it’s good for schools to be different from one another. If you want to go to Stanford or Penn and have great academics with robust Greek life and theme housing, great. If you like the Harvard/Yale model better, also great.

As I said above, I don’t know what the effects of this policy will be, but if it works, it will make Harvard more different from some of its peers. Vive la difference.

51

From a legal point of view, I think Harvard can do this without any real risk of a successful lawsuit from any of these organizations. On the other hand, I don’t think Harvard was at any risk of losing federal funds if it failed to do this.

I don’t like the finals clubs, and I don’t much like Greek organizations, either–but I still think Harvard shouldn’t have done this. It is, in my opinion, too much of an intrusion into the private lives and associations of its students. And where does it end? What will happen when a person seeking a leadership position or a fellowship is revealed to be a member of the Boy Scouts of America, or a men’s prayer group at his church, or the DAR? And what if it is revealed that such a person is living in a house with 17 other members of the same gender–will it matter that it isn’t technically a fraternity? And what happens if final clubs announce that membership is now open to women–but don’t select any women?

Enforcement will be very complicated.

52

The irony of that statement is Harvard’s new sanctions don’t mention race anywhere. If that group of 8 white girls was 4 white guys and 4 white girls the group is now a-ok and its members not subject to sanctions. 2 black girls, 2 asian girls, 1 hispanic girl, and 3 white girls - not ok and members subject to sanctions.

53

I’m not 100% sure but my understanding is that they are alumni. Only undergrads can be admitted and they become graduate members upon graduation. Technically still members but with different rights and responsibilities from the current students.

54

That is correct from what I’ve gathered from dozens of Harvard College alums and a few Profs/faculty members who taught there for decades.

Final Clubs usually select undergrads to be inducted sometime after sophomore year though I’ve heard from some that a few sophomores can be selected though that’s not common.

If one has not been selected by senior year or one has never attended Harvard College for undergrad, one’s out of luck to join even if one is a grad student at Harvard.

Then again, considering how such clubs were geared for undergrads and most grad students tend to be too busy or have graduate advisers who are inclined and yes…do have the power to discourage their graduate advisees to join/maintain memberships in organizations or participate in activities they feel may be detrimental to their grad studies/research work at the risk of some penalization…upto and including being kicked out of the particular graduate program*(Mainly PhD programs here).

  • A college classmate's older friend was kicked out of his STEM PhD program at a West Coast University because his adviser found out about his outside hobby of rock climbing and felt the hobby meant he was taking time away which could have been devoted to doing more research for adviser/candidate's PhD progress. Prof gave him the choice of dropping that hobby or leaving the PhD program. He chose to leave.
55

Perhaps they should read a little thing called…The United States Constitution. Or, perhaps just walk down to their incredible law school and simply ask a first year law student…

56

Actually, the US Constitution doesn’t apply in this case as Harvard is a private institution with its own right to assert its freedom of association through itself and its affiliates…including its students.

Now if Harvard was a public college and thus, an arm of the government, you would have had a point.

57

Harvard, as a private institution, is not required to respect students’ rights to free association (or speech, etc.). I think Harvard should do so, but it doesn’t have to.

58

Or worse, women do not apply to join, which means the clubs would be royally screwed. In either case, the false cry of discrimination will be made in an attempt to harm the clubs.

Been there, done that several times. My company got several federal and state complaints about not having enough minorities. Most companies would cower, not know how to respond and hire people that should not be hired. I simply sent a list of our standards, major requirements, and school requirements and said if you have any minority applicants who match or exceed these criteria, then I will gladly look at them. Never head a peep, yet from the get-go I was accused of being discriminatory based on the complaint.

59

“The irony of that statement is Harvard’s new sanctions don’t mention race anywhere.”

They don’t have to – just as the final clubs don’t have written rules preferring white, athletic membership. It’s a fact that the final clubs and sororities are mostly white and have the effect of socially privileging white members from upper-class backgrounds. That’s the context within which Harvard is making this decision.

There are all kinds of counterfactual scenarios where Harvard might have continued to leave the clubs alone – if the membership reflected Harvard socioeconomically, or ethnically, or if they engaged in community service and philanthropy like many fraternity chapters do, etc. etc. But they refused to even discuss adjusting to what Harvard has become. The new policy is a pretty drastic move, and Harvard knew it would make a lot of people angry and maybe not even work. It reflects the fact that Harvard thinks this is a big deal and no other kinds of action have made a dent in the problem.

Once again, Asian females can join and run for office in the Black Men’s Forum if they want to. Anyone who supports the mission of the organization can participate.

60

I’ve seen photos of one of the sorority chapters at Harvard. Not all white and not just a token minority, but very diverse. Same with this same national sorority at Yale. I’m not sure the male or female lax teams are so diverse.