In preparation for fall term's new member programs that will mark one year since the College overhauled its hazing policies, Greek Letter Organizations and Societies director Wes Schaub met with new Greek member educators Tuesday evening. Schaub outlined the College's definition of hazing and spoke with the students, who will oversee the upcoming pledge term, about the way hazing impedes community-building.
As of January, the College was investigating seven potential hazing cases from last fall, dean of campus life Kate Burke said in a previous interview. At the time, only one case involving Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity had been settled by the Organizational Adjudication Committee.
Yesuto Shaw '15 filed the report against Alpha Phi Alpha and described the house's initiation process in a column published in The Dartmouth's Mirror magazine on Oct. 19. After an investigation, Alpha Phi Alpha was sentenced to three terms of College probation. The fraternity was banned from engaging in new member recruitment or education until the following fall.
Dean of the College Charlotte Johnson said in a previous interview that the administration planned to release reports on closed OAC hazing cases at the end of each term, but a winter term report has yet to be released.
The fall 2012 report detailed the conditions that Alpha Phi Alpha must follow in order to resume recruitment activities. Failing to meet the conditions may result in the College revoking the house's recognition, according to the report.
Last fall, administrators overhauled the College's hazing policies after The Dartmouth published hazing allegations in an opinion column by Andrew Lohse '12, who alleged that Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity forced its pledges to engage in hazing practices that included swimming "in a kiddie pool full of vomit, urine, fecal matter, semen and rotten food products" and eating "omelets of vomit."
The new policies mandated pre-recruitment education sessions for students interested in joining a Greek house, where students would learn what actions constitute hazing and how to report violations.
During Tuesday's presentation to new member educators, Schaub explained that there are three different classifications of hazing, including "subtle hazing," "harassment hazing" and "violent hazing."
"Subtle hazing" includes minor acts of disrespect, while "harassment hazing" causes confusion or frustration and "violent hazing" results in physical or psychological harm and possibly death, Schaub said.
Hazing is exercised "whether or not the participants or others perceive the behavior as voluntary,'" according to the Undergraduate Judicial Affairs website. Hazing violations may occur on or off-campus and do not have to be part of an official organized event.
Schaub said that new member educators must combat hazing practices in their houses, ensure that new members' academic grades do not suffer and provide opportunities for them to become close with other members of the house. In addition, a pledge term may not last longer than six weeks, and educators must submit weekly descriptions of pledge activities to GLOS.
Hazing only divides houses and encourages "groupthink," Schaub said.
"New members are very vulnerable. The more social standing your organization has, the more vulnerable the new members are," he said. "Because they desire the status, they will do more things they normally would not do to gain entrance to the organization."
To avoid internal divisions, older members must be respectful to pledges. This respect cannot be taught, and members should prioritize building healthy relationships.
"Really, it's about power you have it, and they don't," he said.
Schaub confirmed that the College began investigating multiple hazing allegation reports during the fall and winter, and that many organizations have reexamined their new member programs in the wake of the policy overhauls.
Staff writer Zan Song contributed reporting.
