Following the Friday release of RGAC scores, fraternities and selective living groups are waiting to find out how they will be affected by their grades.
The Residential Group Assessment Committee completed a year-long evaluation of living groups under the current housing model. Soon after releasing numerical scores based on evaluations of each section, RGAC will recommend that certain groups with the lowest scores go before the Approval and Removal Committee, which can reward groups, put them on probation or remove their housing privileges. This procedure, called the Collaborative Housing Process, is an extended and more comprehensive form of the Residential Group Assessment Process that existed prior to this year.
“[Living] groups will probably know what groups are going to be referred to ARC sometime early this week,” said junior John Nelson, ARC student co-chair.
After receiving its recommendation from RGAC, the ARC will likely meet at the end of this week or early next week, Nelson said. The group aims to determine whether or not any groups will go on probation before classes end April 27.
RGAC scored groups on a scale ranging from zero to 200. According to the score report released Friday, Kappa Alpha Order received the lowest score at 60.5, and Chi Psi received the highest at 190. The report excluded scores for Delta Sigma Phi and the Language House, or Langdorm, because those groups have not received their scores, RGAC co-chair Ashley Jordan, a junior, wrote in an email Sunday. Jordan noted that the scores are subject to change due to data being received after the original report.
[Click here to download the scores for all groups.]
Sixty percent of the total RGAC score is based on “section stewardship,” which measures how well a group conducts itself in its residential section. The score includes an analysis of damages, cleaning charges and the group’s ability to fill all beds in the section, among other factors. The other 40 percent of the total score is based on “community interaction.” For this component, groups were asked to submit written reports and photos, showing that the group hosted at least three publicized, public events or ongoing programs each semester, among other criteria.
In a joint email Sunday, Jordan and sophomore Allison LeCavalier, RGAC vice chair, said they thought this year’s assessment was a success.
“It is our hope that the groups will take their raw scores as a reflection of what the administration, their peers and their neighbors feel that their contribution to campus is,” they wrote. “We want groups to use these scores as a starting point for improvement in the coming years.”
Although the ARC can make decisions independently of the RGAC’s recommendation, Nelson said he thinks the group will adhere to RGAC’s suggestions of who should be considered for probation.
“I’m sure there’s some give and take if there’s a group that needs to be included [in the probation discussion],” he added.
Junior Will Brody, president of Alpha Epsilon Pi, said he thinks his fraternity’s score—143—represents the group well, but he is interested in how scores may affect living groups under the new house model.
“I think there were certain criteria that were fair,” he said. “I think there is also room for improvement.”
How RGAC scores may be used under the new house model, however, remains unclear, said Joe Gonzalez, associate dean for residence life.
“[The] house model group hasn’t decided or really even talked about the specifics of how a group will get placed. It may or may not decide to use the RGAC scores,” Gonzalez said. “When RGAC was designed, it wasn’t designed with that use in mind. [It was] designed before that whole process... started.”
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.