The Relevance of Black Greek Scholarship II

Professor Matthew W. Hughey, PhD (Sociology, Mississippi State University) Professor Gregory S. Parks, JD, PhD (Law, Wake Forest University)

A few months ago a BGLO expert noted to one of the authors that s/he did not read the authors’ work, because this person found it to be “esoteric”—that it had little to do with the practical realities confronting BGLOs. This critique was not surprising, as it was analogous to another noted BGLO expert’s critique of our work on BGLOs—that it has been “ivory tower thinking” and “intellectual masturbation.”  As a concession, we acknowledge that our scholarship on BGLOs is quite “academic.” After all, we are both professors, and prior to becoming professors we were aspiring professors.  Our scholarship on BGLOs has partially been aimed at meeting the standards for good scholarship within our respective academic disciplines. We have not been writing how-to manuals on BGLO problem-solving.

But where our critics have gone wrong is their assertion that our work lacks practical application. Part of what we have banked our research on is that BGLO members are college-educated and can read information, extracting from what they read solutions to problems that BGLOs face.  Just in case we have overestimated BGLO members’ intellectual capacities in this regard—and we do not think that we have—we take this time to highlight how our “esoteric” scholarship is quite practical.

Our understanding of BGLOs, quite simply, is that they have a tripartite identity—academic achievement, brotherhood/sisterhood, and community uplift (see Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 2). If they are to remain faithful to this identity and guard against its degradation, there are some practical steps they should take in light of research on BGLOs.

While BGLOs extol the virtues of high academic achievement, scholarship, and intellectualism, hard data suggests that they fall short of these ideals in any real sense. In a forthcoming empirical study on BGLO undergraduate chapters and their academic performance during the spring 2008 semester, we know this: the average non-BGLO sorority G.P.A. is 3.1 while it is 2.86 for BGLO sororities. For non-BGLO fraternities, the average G.P.A. is 2.91 and 2.54 for BGLO fraternities. Within BGLOs, the relative G.P.A.s are: 2.91 (AKA), 2.89 (Delta), 2.85 (SGRho), 2.78 (Zeta), 2.77 (Alpha/Omega), 2.42 (Kappa), 2.40 (Iota), and 2.38 (Sigma) (see Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 6). Research suggests that one factor that works adversely against BGLO undergraduates academic performance is hazing (see African American Fraternities and Sororities: The Legacy and the Vision, ch. 16). A reasonable solution to significantly reduce BGLO hazing, its effect on academic performance, and other BGLO matters, might be to engage BGLO members on the real complexity and constraints around hazing (see Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 10). Also, and particularly within BGLO fraternities (BGLFs), one cannot escape the reality that homophobia may induce significant anxiety amongst the brothers about homosexuals within the membership that they reject anything that could be associated with being effeminate—including academic achievement (see Black Greek-letter Organizations in the 21st Century: Our Fight Has Just Begun, ch. 15). BGLOs—especially BGLFs—may not be able to adequately grapple with the academic performance issue within their organizations until they have an honest dialogue about homosexuality within their ranks.

BGLOs also tout the robustness of the concept of brotherhood and sisterhood within their ranks. To outsiders, BGLO membership may appear to make for special and enduring bonds, and to a great extent they do. But there may also be substantial chasms between different classes of members—i.e., college and alumni (see Black Greek-letter Organizations in the 21st Century: Our Fight Has Just Begun, ch. 19) as well as racial, religious, and sexual orientation majorities and minorities (see Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 7; Black Greek-letter Organizations in the 21st Century: Our Fight Has Just Begun, ch. 15). To make “fraternal” bonds within BGLOs, the organizations have to come to grips with how their processes of membership identification, selection, and training facilitate that end, because initiatory processes seem to matter a great deal with regard to commitment between and among organizational members (see Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 11; “Belief, Truth, and Positive Organizational Deviance” [work in progress]).

Finally, while BGLOs have been known as social change agents (see African American Fraternities and Sororities: The Legacy and the Vision, ch. 7; Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 8; Black Greek-letter Organizations in the 21st Century: Our Fight Has Just Begun, ch. 8 & 9; Black Greek-letter Organizations 2.0: New Directions in the Study of African American Fraternities and Sororities, ch. 2), it is arguable that much of what people know about their contemporary uplift activities is community service and philanthropy rather that civic action and shaping public policy (see Alpha Phi Alpha: A Legacy of Greatness, the Demands of Transcendence, ch. 9; Black Greek-letter Organizations in the 21st Century: Our Fight Has Just Begun, ch. 10). Casual observation suggests that BGLOs are not sending lawyers to argue civil rights cases before the U.S. Supreme Court or writing amicus briefs or even working in concert to have legislation passed that will benefit our communities like they once did under the umbrella of the American Council on Human Rights from the 1940s through the 1960s. The question remains: empirically, how much money do they really give toward charitable efforts? That’s the subject of an article one of these authors has slated for this year. To the extent that BGLOs are not as committed to racial uplift could have to do with members automatic/unconscious racial biases. Research suggests that a significant percentage of members—particularly younger members—harbor unconscious anti-black biases (see Black Greek-letter Organizations 2.0: New Directions in the Study of African American Fraternities and Sororities, ch. 8). And while there is no research indicating that unconscious anti-black biases predict less uplift activity on behalf of minority populations, research does suggest such. Furthermore, unconscious de-biasing can be done by, of all things, educating people about black history or presenting them with positive black exemplars—a case for prospective BGLO members having a deep understanding of and appreciation for their organizations’ history.

Our point here is simple: despite critics’ assertions that there is nothing practical about our work, it is highly pragmatic for those willing to think through its implications. While we use just a few examples of what our work might mean in practical terms, we would be hard-pressed to not be able to marshal all of our work—books, book chapters, blind-peer-reviewed articles, law journal articles—to make other arguments about BGLOs. We invite you along to read our work and the work of our colleagues and to also think through practical solutions to the problems BGLOs face.

Popularity: 23% [?]