Student orgs need to open doors

Involvement is so hot right now. Leadership is even hotter, with loads of money waiting to be allocated to leadership classes, student organizations and other motivated groups.Tossing large chunks of capital around demands that the current system of organizational involvement and recruitment face careful scrutiny. Many of the already involved probably fail to note any flaws in the status quo, but vast amounts of anecdotal evidence suggest otherwise.

General feeling on campus seems to be that if you aren’t involved in something by your second year, you don’t have much hope to become involved in something down the road.

This problem can be especially challenging for the out-of-town co-op student, who has a disjointed five years to commit to an organization, or the transfer student who is thrown into the heap halfway through their college career (excluding standouts like our own student body president).

It’s hard to take the big push for campus involvement seriously when it’s being pushed by those already super-involved, by the organizations whose membership includes the same 100 people that also belong to every other “high-level” organization.

It’s hard to take the push seriously when one can’t break the organizational bubble his or her second year and when experience seems to count more than potential, passion, time availability and demonstrated ability in places other than extracurricular activities. This is, of course, not referring to honor societies and the like with specific previous-experience requirements.

I’ll admit, I could probably be considered a part of this “organizational elite” that I’m describing, having been a member of stereotypical “it” groups, like Freshman Council (FC) and a sorority, among others. So please take my words from the vantage point of someone who’s become frustrated with the system and has grown old enough to realize that there’s a better way to accomplish things around here.

Speaking of freshman organizations, general opinion seems to indicate that FC, FreShGA and FAB (the “Top Three Freshman Orgs”) are elitist and self-serving groups that exist solely to act in their own self-interest. They act as feeder organizations to the “Big Time” organizations. The Big Timers-high profile groups plagued with organizational inbreeding-seem to reward names associated with these “prestigious” freshman groups, regardless of individual effort.

Beyond the fact that the process of becoming a part of the Top Three is arbitrary at best, the idea that their members have some sort of assumed talent and extraordinary ability over their peers who are not members is ludicrous.

The thought that the Top Three do much more than just develop their members is just part of the hype; the Top Three mostly serve to connect their members with the organizational elite and breed them to become the next class of the elite.

I loved my time with Freshman Council, and wouldn’t trade it even though it is associated with so many negative connotations. At the same time, I recognize it for what it was. FC helped me find my direction at Tech and gave me the tools to follow that direction. The travesty, though, is that not every freshman receives such an opportunity for discovery.

Extracurricular activities should be an outlet for students to grow as people, to discover their passions and to develop a support system of friends and confidants, while contributing to the goals of the organization, not to serve as resume fodder or a way to shake the “right” peoples’ hands to get to the “right” place.

Understanding that it’s not that simple, that organizations are of a limited size for very good reason-monetary, operationally, feasibility-there must be ways to make the recruitment process more fair.

There must be a way to change the stereotype that older students, transfer students and co-op students are not welcome within the organizational hierarchy of this campus.

Organizations can take steps to change their memberships’ mindset and to begin actively seeking potential instead of rewarding bulleted lists of previous involvement. The details of your group’s recruitment process should be made open to the members of the organization such that, when possible, each member has input in membership selections. Perhaps the written application should be taken more seriously as a reflection of what each applicant has to offer and employ group, task-based challenge interviews.

Change will only happen if each of us takes it upon ourselves to search for the elements of a good member in the ability and promise of the applicants both inside and outside other student organizations.

It’s hard to have hope for change when most organizations are made up of elites serving elites, and today’s leaders reap the benefits of the current system’s structure. But I think we can do it. I think we can positively impact the negative perception of “power,” pop open the student organization bubble, and show the campus that everyone with genuine interest and a willingness to work is welcome.

In the meantime, students interested in getting involved should accept the fact that the flawed status quo exists, but they can begin their involvement by contributing to groups that do not limit membership. Some such organizations include: all student publications, service organizations (like MOVE), SGA committees, campus political parties, GT Student Foundation and sports clubs, just to name the few that immediately came to mind.

If we, as campus leaders, continue to shut the door on excited potential members with a willingness to commit, we are merely shutting the door on an opportunity for growth. We’re not only slamming shut an opportunity for our organizations to grow, but also an opportunity to afford individuals the chance to grow. And isn’t that the greatest purpose an organization can have?