SOCIAL AND BROTHERHOOD CHAIRMAN
The Social & Brotherhood Chairman is not a position for the brother who only knows the social preferences and tendencies of the chapter. Rather the ideal candidate for the Social & Brotherhood Chairman position is a man who holds himself with high regard for his personal morals and can influence other brothers in this way in social situations. He must also have a strong understanding of the Fraternity's values and how these values underscore the concept of brotherhood.
In addition, the Social & Brotherhood Chairman must have self-discipline and strong organizational and financial management skills. He needs to have a thorough understanding of legal liability and the FarmHouse Risk Management program. Ideally, the chair is someone respected throughout the chapter that can unify disparate personalities, has the charm and social grace necessary to be an effective ambassador to outside groups, and finally is creative enough to make social events something more than simple “beer and music” gatherings. The Social & Brotherhood Chairman's duties include:
Promotes brotherhood, social, and moral development through the implementation of both
brothers-only and general activities
Coordinates all social functions of the chapter according to the wishes of its members.
Schedules, supervises and plans all social events, dinners, and exchanges throughout
the year.
Works with the VP – Finance to manage the costs of social activities; keeping them under
budget and saving all receipts and supporting documentation.
Ensures compliance with the FarmHouse Risk Management and Alcohol & Drug Policies
at all social events including holding brothers accountable for their choices and actions.
Plans special programs such as Founder's Day Dinner & Awards Banquet, Parents'
Weekends, Sweetheart dinner, Legacy Dinners, etc.
Assists the new member class in arranging mixers/exchanges with new sorority classes.
Ensures the housemother has an escort whenever she desires to attend functions
Keeps the chapter apprised of all college social events
Maintains an officer notebook that includes the budget and details of every event, and an
event evaluation.
Social Committee
Perhaps a brother with all of these talents does not exist in your chapter. Indeed – he could be hard to find in many places. That is why a functional and well-managed Social & Brotherhood Committee is vital. The Social & Brotherhood Chairman's main responsibility is to oversee the social calendar and ensure that all of the things necessary for a successful event are put into place. The Social Committee is tasked with assisting the Chairman in ensuring that this responsibility is met. Whatever other talents that the Social & Brotherhood Chairman may not possess should complement him on the Committee. In few other areas of chapter management is it so important to have a diverse representation from the brotherhood.
However the Social & Brotherhood Chairman chooses to delegate his responsibilities, it is important to remember that the Chairman is managing the big picture and for the fulfillment of those duties. Committee members will most often be responsible for on-site event management, preparation, and publicity for an event.
Social and Moral Development
To help facilitate developing members both socially and morally, the Social & Brotherhood Chairman must first understand how the two work together and how to foster this development in his brothers. The following information outlines the stages of the moral development theory most commonly used when working with college students. This theory was developed by Lawrence Kohlberg in 1958 at the University of Chicago. Kohlberg's theory holds that moral reasoning, which he thought to be the basis for ethical behavior, has developmental stages. Building upon Jean Piaget's previous work, he concluded that there are six identifiable stages of moral development. Later his model was revised and reduced to five stages given there was a lack responses in studies owning to a clear boundary of the last stage of moral development.
Stages
Kohlberg's stages were broken into three different levels: (1) pre-conventional, (2) conventional and (3) post-conventional. According to his model it is not possible to regress backwards in stages. It is also not possible to “jump” stages; each stage provides new perspective and is “more comprehensive, differentiated and integrated than its predecessors.”
Level 1: Pre-Conventional
The pre-conventional level of moral reasoning is especially common in children, although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners in the pre-conventional level judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of the first and second stage of moral development.
Stage one, individuals focus on the direct consequences that their actions will have for themselves. For example, they think that an action is morally wrong if the person who commits it gets punished.
Stage two espouses the “what's in it for me” position; right behavior being defined by what is in one's own best interest. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a point where it might further one's own interests, such as “you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.” Concern for others is not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect in stage two.
Level 2: Conventional
The conventional level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. People who reason in a conventional way judge the morality of actions by comparing these actions to social rules and expectations. The conventional level consists of stages three and four of moral development.
In stage three, individuals whose moral reasoning seek approval from other people. They try to be a “good boy” having learned that there is inherent value in doing so. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality of an action by evaluating its consequences in terms of a person's relationships.
For stage four, it is important to obey the laws and social conventions because of its importance to maintaining society. Moral reasoning in stage four is thus beyond the need for approval exhibited in stage three.
Level 3: Post-Conventional
The post-conventional level consists of stages five and six of moral development. Many scholars consider stage five and stage six of Kohlberg's original model simply as one stage now.
In stage five, persons have certain principles to which they may attach more value than laws, such as human rights or social justice. In this reasoning, actions are wrong if they violate these ethical principles. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than dictums, and must be changed when necessary (provided there is agreement). By this reasoning laws that do not promote general social welfare, should be changed. Democratic governments are ostensibly based on stage five reasoning.
In stage six, moral reasoning is based on the use of abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. One way to do this is by imagining oneself in everyone else's shoes, imagining what they would decide if they were doing the same. While Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he had difficulty finding participants who use it. It appears that people rarely if ever reach stage six of Kohlberg's model.
Example
Kohlberg used moral dilemmas to determine which stage of moral reasoning a person uses. The dilemmas are short stories in which a person has to make a moral decision. The participant is asked what this person should do. For instance, a dilemma that Kohlberg used in his original research was the druggist's dilemma:
A woman was near death from a unique kind of cancer. There is a drug that might save her. The drug costs $4,000 per dosage. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000. He asked the doctor scientist who discovered the drug for a discount or let him pay later. But the doctor scientist refused. Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
From a theoretical point of view, it is not important what the participant thinks that Heinz should do. The point of interest is the justification that the participant offers. Below are examples of possible arguments that belong to the six stages. It is important to keep in mind that these arguments are only examples. It is possible that a participant reached a completely different conclusion using the same stage of reasoning:
• Stage one (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine, because he will consequently be put in prison.
• Stage two (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine, because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence.
• Stage three (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine, because his wife expects it.
• Stage four (law-and-order): Heinz should not steal the medicine, because the law prohibits stealing.
• Stage five (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine, because everyone has a right to live, regardless of the law. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because the scientist has a right to fair compensation.
• Stage six (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because that violates the golden rule of honesty and respect.
Applying Kohlberg's Theory
The previous example applying Kolhberg's stages of moral development to a situation is a common method of understanding moral development and an individuals' role in society. As the Social & Brotherhood Chairman, the following scenarios proposed to the chapter before a social event or during a retreat or even at a general chapter meeting could lead to beneficial discussion on what it means to be have integrity and be a brother. The Total Member Educator should assist in moral development programming.
Scenario 1
A group of brothers have gathered in celebration of Jon's 21st birthday. You are a close friend of Jon's and know he does not drink very often. An older chapter member starts buying shots for Jon and announces loudly that no one is leaving until Jon has consumed 21 shots. What do you do as Jon's close friend? What are your new members thinking and how should they be acting in this situation? What should chapter leaders be doing in this scenario?
Scenario 2
The Director of New Member Education this year is very well-liked for his boisterous ways. During a new member activity, he starts yelling and screaming at new members in very demeaning ways. You are a new member—how do you respond? You are the president of the chapter—how do you respond? Your Little Brother in the chapter is a new member—how do you respond?
Scenario 3
You are the President of the chapter and sharing a room with a non-FarmHouse brother whom you have known since grade school. He is Muslim, a varsity soccer player, works two part time jobs to afford college, and declined a bid to join the chapter last semester. The Association Board Treasurer informs you that he can not live in the chapter house. The chapter is under capacity currently. What should you do? What do you say to your roommate?
Scenario 4
You are a recent alumnus of the chapter and currently serving as a chapter advisor. The president of the Delta Delta Delta chapter – your fiancée – confides in you that one of her new sisters was sexual assaulted by the FarmHouse Chapter President last night. What do you do? Who should you speak to? Does the situation change if the accused was not the Chapter President, but a new member? How does the situation change if you were not an alumnus.
You may wish to have members break into small groups and discuss the scenarios based on the various stages of Kolhberg's moral development theory or discuss the scenario as a large group. Brothers may even wish to create a scenario that is more relevant/applicable to a campus scenario they are struggling with currently. No matter which method that is chosen, your role as Social & Brotherhood Chairman in concert with the Total Member Educator is to encourage each brother to look within himself to find his own morals given a situation.
