University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Student perspectives on identity development: describing the experiences sorority members perceive influenced their identity

(USC Thesis Other)

Student perspectives on identity development: describing the experiences sorority members perceive influenced their identity

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
STUDENT PERSPECTIVES ON IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT:
DESCRIBING THE EXPERIENCES SORORITY MEMBERS PERCEIVE
INFLUENCED THEIR IDENTITY

by

Virginia Sarkissian

______________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2008

Copyright 2008 Virginia Sarkissian

ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Hrair and Anoosh Sarkissian, for their
love, wisdom, patience and support.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It has been a great pleasure working with the faculty, staff, and students at the
University of Southern California during my tenure as a doctoral student.
I would first like to thank the members of my dissertation committee:
Associate Dean Rodney K. Goodyear, Dr. Courtney L. Malloy and Dr. Charles A.
Espalin. They have generously given their time and expertise to better my work and I
thank them for their contributions. A special thank you to my dissertation advisor
and committee chair, Dr. Rodney Goodyear for his guidance and patience throughout
the course of this project.
I acknowledge the many friends, colleagues and professors that assisted and
supported my work. In particular, I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Stuart
Gothold and Dr. Michael F. Escalante for their mentorship. I would also like to thank
Mrs. Najwa Nabti Hanel, Carol Fox, and the USC Town and Gown Committee for
their support and encouragement. Dr. Surendra Verma, Dr. Jane Robb, Dr. Shantanu
Duttahmed and Dr. Armen Tashchian- thank you for your guidance and support.
I am most grateful to the National Panhellenic Conference and its members
for granting me permission to study members of their organization. I express my
thanks to Beth Saul, and the Presidents of the sorority chapters for assisting me with
accessing the participants. I am especially grateful to the participants of this study
who honestly, candidly, shared their experiences to broaden our understanding of the
complex processes of identity development in college.

iv
Last, but not least, I wish to thank my family. I am grateful to the Sarkissian,
Norhadian, Ouzounian and Akashian families for their love and support. My parents,
Hrair and Anoosh Sarkissian, have always supported and encouraged me in all my
endeavors. My siblings, Rema, Adrine and Joseph have played a significant role in
helping me complete this work. Thank you for motivating me and keeping me
focused. I also acknowledge the contributions of my late grandparents, Smbat and
Markarite Norhadian. and Vazgen and Assia Sarkissian. I hope that this work makes
them proud.

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ………………………………………………………….. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ………………………………………………. iii
LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………… vi
ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………. vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ………………. 1
CHAPTER TWO: CONCEPTUAL AND EMPIRICAL
FOUNDATIONS FOR THE STUDY …………………………………. 10

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ……………………………… 53

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ………………………………………… 58
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION ……………………………………... 76
REFERENCES ………………………………………………………… 107
APPENDICES …………………………………………………………. 122

vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Themes with Abbreviations, Number of Incidents, and Mean
Positivity Ratings ……………………………………………………………. 60

Table 2. Comparison of Mean Positivity Ratings …………………………… 74

Table 3. Study Themes by Key Factor ………………………………………. 80

vii
ABSTRACT
This qualitative study examined the college related sources of impact that
sorority member students perceived affected their identity development. A variant of
Flanagan’s (1954) Critical Incident Technique was used to ask sorority members
(n=70) to describe one or two critical incidents that they believed had affected their
sense of self, and then to rate the immediate positivity of the incident, as well its
eventual effect on their sense of self. Three doctoral students reviewed the 100
obtained incident reports, from which they developed 14 themes: Participating in
rush an/or joining a sorority; Being elected or serving in a sorority leadership
position; Dealing with crisis; Receiving the support of sisters with in the sorority
network; Being elected or serving in a leadership position in a campus related
organization; Learning about myself as a result of a romantic relationship; Making
an important, independent decision for myself; Making a commitment to community
service and outreach; Sorority affiliated judgment or rejection; Having an
experience of failure; Making the transition from home to college; Studying abroad;
Receiving personal or career guidance from others; Engaging in a selfless act of
compassion. The findings of this study provide valuable insight and knowledge to
the potential benefits of sorority affiliation in regards to college women’s identity
development. The findings also support previous research on women’s identity
development and suggest gender specific developmental pathways. In congruence
with student development research and theory, experiences related to student
involvement, relationship, autonomy and crisis were prevalent in the participant

viii
responses. The limitations of the study, recommendations for future research and
implications for higher education practice are also presented.

1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
A considerable volume of research has focused on the effects of college on
student development. Pascarella and Terenzini (1991, 2005), in their landmark text,
How College Affects Students identified over 2,600 studies that had been conducted
during the previous 20 years. The weight of evidence supports the significant
impacts that attending college has on students’ psychosocial, moral and cognitive
development (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).
Research reveals that student involvement in extracurricular activities is
positively associated with personal development and learning. In order to accurately
assess student involvement and its impact on student development outcomes, student
sub-cultures must be researched. The types of college campus subcultures students
choose to be a part of may have a profound effect on student development. Previous
empirical research, however, has neglected the effects of student subcultures as
sources that influence psychosocial development.
Alexander Astin (1993) defines peer groups as “any group of individuals in
which the members identify, affiliate with, and seek acceptance and approval from
each other” (p.401). Astin posits that the single most powerful influence on growth
and development during college is the student’s peer group (Astin, 1993, p. 398).
Greek organizations, as visible peer groups on many college campuses, have the
potential to influence student growth, as well as identity development. Research
reveals that Greek organizations score significantly higher when compared to non-

2
members in regards to school involvement. Ironically, students in Greek letter
organizations constitute one subgroup that has been especially overlooked in student
development literature.
Statement of the Problem
A paper published in the Oracle, a research Journal of the Association of
Fraternity Advisors, focused on the lack of sound empirical research in regards to the
college Greek community. Molasso (2005) conducted a content analyses on research
articles published in regards to Greek organizations in the two journals that Kuh and
Bursky (1980) identified as primary to the student affairs profession: the National
Association for Student Personnel Administrators Journal (NASPA) and the Journal
of College Student Development (JOCSD). Molasso (2005) concluded that Greek
organizations are significantly under-represented in these journals: over the last
decade, few articles had been published in regards to the fraternity or sorority
community: Only 3% of NASPA journal articles and 2% of JOCSD articles focused
on Greek organizations (Molasso, 2005).
If research on Greek organizations is insufficient, research on the subset that
sororities comprise is also scant. Tripp (1997) describes sororities as neglected
variables, stating that the overwhelming amount of research in regards to Greek
organizations has focused primarily on all male fraternity groups. Tripp (1997)
noted that only 2 of the 39 articles he identified for a review article focusing on the
role of Greek organizations in student development dealt exclusively with sororities.

3
Sorority members and alumni claim over 3.6 million members and alumnae
worldwide. To date, there are 26 national women’s sororities affiliated with the
National Panhellenic Conference. These 26 national women’s sororities boast 2900
chapters and over 300,000 undergraduate members on 629 college and university
campuses in the United States and Canada (www.npcwomen.org). The paucity of
sound empirical research in regards to the sorority member exposes a deficiency in
resources and knowledge necessary to adequately serve this college community.
Greek organizations, as a subculture of university campuses have been
scrutinized in regards to many of the negative aspects associated with membership,
as well. Molasso (2005) also concluded that what research existed on this subgroup
focused primarily on negative issues. These issues include substance abuse, hazing,
and gender violence affiliated with Greek letter organizations. Little research in
regards to Greek organizations exists outside of these boundaries. Although it is
important that we understand the extent and impacts of these issues, research on
these topics should not preclude research and knowledge dissemination on other
issues relevant to the student development of Greek member students. Even with all
this scrutiny, few studies have been conducted in regards to the educational
experiences and identity development of sorority members. Thus, when sororities
are studied, there is little exploration of the potential benefits of membership, as well
as their place within the university setting.

4
Significance of the Study and Research Questions
In relation to psychosocial development, student development theorists
consider identity formation the central developmental task during adolescence
(Erikson, 1968). Kuh (1999) surveyed students in four time periods in regards to
their personal development. His study revealed that three-quarters of the students
surveyed reported significant growth in self understanding during college. Pascarella
and Terenzini (2005) maintain that the impacts of out of class experiences on identity
development have seldom been studied. Even fewer studies consider the perspective
of the student regarding their development in college.
Research suggests that female students may possess distinct developmental
needs and use different developmental pathways during identity formation (Douvan
& Adelson, 1966; Straub, 1987; Straub & Rogers, 1986).
Sorority member women are a sub-culture within the women college student
population that share similar developmental needs, and pathways as their non-
member women counterparts. However, in contrast to the general college women
population, the data suggests that sorority women have more positive outcomes with
regards to self-confidence, leadership skills and opportunities, as well as academic
and cognitive outcomes (Kilgannon & Erwin, 1992; Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Pike &
Askew, 1990; Pascarella, Flowers & Whitt, 2001). It is to our benefit to review the
sources of impact on the identity development of the sorority subculture as they may
provide clues to the environmental factors that positively enhance college women’s
personal and academic development. To date, there are no research studies that

5
examine the identity development of the sorority member student. This study adds to
that paucity of knowledge by taking into account, and further investigating the
sources of impact on the identity development of sorority member students.
The college development of female sorority students may differ from that of
independent female college students. Students in sororities are more highly involved
in college when compared to non-sorority students (Pike & Askew, 1990; Baier &
Whipple, 1990). Involvement has been positively associated with student
development outcomes (Bialek & Lloyd, 1998; Astin, 1993; Hood, Riahinejad &
White, 1986; Hood, 1984). Little research has been done on the identity development
processes of the sorority member student and a need for empirical research in regards
to this sub-culture is long overdue. To properly understand the sources of impact on
these students, it is important to examine the students’ perspective of what events or
situations in college have been especially important to her identity development.
Therefore, this study aimed to address the identity development of sorority member
students with the following research questions:
1. What experiences in college do sorority member students report as having
been particularly important to the development of their sense of self?
2. How positively did participants perceive these experiences?
3. What was the perceived eventual positivity of the experience on their
sense of self?

6
Methodology
The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore sorority members’
perceptions of the sources of impact during college on their sense of self. Hunt &
Rentz (1994) in Greek-letter Social Group Members’ Involvement and Psychosocial
Development, identified several aspects of psychosocial development that were
significantly related to sorority member involvement in the junior and senior year of
college. Pike (2003) also found that the effects of Greek affiliation were more
pronounced in the senior year of membership. For this reason, this study focused on
sorority members with junior and senior class standing. The National Panhellenic
Conference (NPC) provided the researcher with written permission to solicit
participants from sorority chapters affiliated with this organization. Thus, the
sorority member participants were recruited from those chapters affiliated with the
NPC.
A variant of Flanagan’s (1954) critical incident technique (CIT) was used to
solicit incidents or events in college that participants perceived to have affected their
sense of identity. Doctoral student raters then created common themes based on these
incidents. The CIT provides a record of specific behaviors from those in the best
position to make the necessary observations and evaluations (Flanagan, 1954). Thus,
sorority members were asked to “describe themselves and their social world” as it
related to their identity development (Patton, 2002, p. 250). Participants were also
asked to rate the degree to which they experienced the incident or experience as
positive, as well as the eventual positivity of the incident on their sense of self.

7
Conceptual Framework
Chapter two will describe the conceptual models of five noted theorists that
have contributed to the understanding of identity development. Erik Erikson deals
with the formation of identity throughout the human lifespan, while Chickering &
Reisser focus on the development of college students. Alexander Astin’s theory of
involvement best describes the sorority student in her element. Josselson and
Gilligan’s theories relate specifically to sorority students as they focus on the identity
development of women.
Organization of the Study
This study will begin with the literature review. Pertinent theory and previous
empirical research in relation to the study will be reviewed in Chapter 2. Chapter 3
will address the methodology of the study including the participants, measures, and
procedures. Chapter 4 will describe the results of the study, which include
descriptions of the 14 themes and the mean positivity ratings of the incidents.
Finally, the discussion section of the study will offer insight into the important
findings of the study, as well as link previous theory and research to the results.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are utilized in this study:
Alumni/Alumnae: Initiated fraternity or sorority members who have
graduated from college.
Bid: An invitation to join a fraternity or sorority.
Brother: A term used by fraternity members to refer to one another.

8
Chapter: A local group of the larger national organization, designated by a
special Greek name.
Greek: Any member of a Greek-letter social or community service
organization.
Fraternity: A social group of male undergraduates designated by Greek
letters.
Independents: Students that attend college, but are not affiliated with Greek
organizations.
National Panhellenic Conference (NPC): National organization
representing 26 national sororities.
North American Interfraternity Conference (NIC): National organization
representing 71 national fraternities.
Pledging: The period following membership selection, during which new
members learn about the fraternity or sorority. Pledging prepares individuals for
initiation into full membership in the group.
Rush: The period during which men and women visit and become acquainted
with fraternities and sororities. At the end of the rush period bids (invitations to join)
are distributed.
Sister: A term used by sorority members to refer to one another.
Sorority: A social organization of women students at a college or university.
Similar to fraternities, sorority organizations are usually designated by Greek letters.
Women’s fraternity: Another term for a sorority.

9
*For the purposes of this study, the term “fraternity” refers to male chapters
while “sorority” refers to female chapters.

10
CHAPTER TWO
CONCEPTUAL AND EMPIRICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR THE STUDY
The literature review for this study will be divided into six sections. First,
Erikson and Chickering’s theoretical perspectives on identity development will be
explored. Second, Astin’s involvement theory and empirical research on Greek
organizations will be reviewed. The next section will describe empirical research in
regards to differences within Greek organizations, as well as gender differences in
regards to development. The theoretical perspectives of Josselson and Gilligan, as
well as research in regards to women’s identity development will follow. Next,
research on women on college campuses will precede empirical research on sorority
organizations and social capital. The final section will review research on sorority
students and factors that may influence their identity development.
Theories of Identity Development in College
Psychosocial theorists posit that individual development is reliant on the
accomplishment of a series of developmental tasks (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).
According to Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) individuals face developmental
challenges as they grow older, and are influenced by socio-cultural or environmental
influences (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005, p. 20). Two psychosocial theorists in
particular are reviewed in the next section. Erikson (1968) provides stages of
identity development throughout the human lifespan in his theoretical model.
Chickering (1969, 1993) provides seven vectors of development specific to college
age students.

11
Erikson
Erikson, (1968) a well known theorist of psychosocial development, is
commonly cited for his identity development model of the human lifespan. He
posited that identity is developed through a series of psychosocial crises throughout a
person’s lifetime. He outlined seven stages of identity development that are
sequential, biological, and psychological and may be shaped by environmental
influences. Erikson posited that development is contingent on a series of crises,
where the individual is challenged or threatened (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005, p.
20). These threats are indicative of each stage.
Erikson (1963) defined identity as the “ability to experience one’s self as
something that has continuity and sameness, and to act accordingly” ( p. 42). Erikson
(1968) asserted that the central task of adolescence is the formation of self-identity.
Erikson’s fifth stage of development, identity vs. identity diffusion, pertains to the
development of traditional age college students and is most relevant to the concerns
of this study. During this stage, students strive to define the self when transitioning
between childhood and adulthood (Evans, Forney & DiBrito, 1998, p. 55).
Chickering and Reisser
Whereas Erikson (1968) provides for the psychosocial development at all
stages of the human lifespan, Chickering (1969) focused his psychosocial
development theory on the traditional college age student. Pascarella and Terenzini
(1991) noted that Chickering is the most influential psychosocial development
theorists for college students. He (1969, 1993) viewed identity establishment as the

12
most important developmental issue students deal with during their college years. He
asserted that in order to establish a self-identity, students must go through seven
vectors or developmental tasks. Students do not necessarily move through these
vectors sequentially and may skip to a higher vector of development or regress to a
lower vector. The mobility implied by his theory is dependent on the successful
completion of tasks in the current vector.
Chickering and Reisser (1993) describe the vectors as “major highways for
journeying towards individuation...” (Chickering & Reisser, 1993, p 35). The first
vector is labeled achieving competence. Chickering posits that intellectual, physical
and manual skills, as well as individual and interpersonal relations are strengthened
during the college years (Chickering & Reisser, 1993, p.62). Managing Emotions,
the second vector, involves the challenge of dealing with a gamut of emotions that
include anxiety, depression, guilt and shame. During this developmental frame,
students gain the capacity to control their impulses, as well as develop appropriate
solutions to cope with disruptive emotions (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005, p.21). The
development of self-sufficiency, as well as interdependence is the focus of the third
vector, Moving through autonomy toward independence.
According to Pascarella and Terenzini, this vector involves developing a
“balance between the need to belong and the need to be independent” (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 2005). The Developing mature interpersonal relationships vector reflects
the notion that peer interaction provides for a learning environment and helps shape
the student’s personal identity. The fifth vector involves establishing a strong sense

13
of self and is labeled establishing identity. Developing purpose, or developing some
sense of purpose in relation to one’s identity is the sixth vector. The seventh and last
vector involves developing integrity. In this vector, personal values and beliefs are
defined, clarified and internalized.
Chickering also contends that educational environments influence student
development (Evans et al, 1998). Chickering outlined seven factors that influenced
student development: institutional objectives; institutional size, student faculty
relationships; curriculum; teaching; friendships and student communities; student
development programs and services (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005, p. 23). For the
purposes of this study, friendships and student communities, Greek organizations in
particular, will be explored.
In summary, the theoretical perspectives of Erikson (1968) and Chickering
and Reisser (1969, 1993) provide a psychosocial framework for understanding
adolescent identity development. Erikson (1968) posited that identity development
is influenced by psychosocial crises throughout one’s lifespan. Erikson’s fifth stage
of development, identity vs. identity diffusion is most applicable to the college
student population. Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) seven vectors of development
focus solely on the college age student.
The aforementioned developmental theories of Erikson’s (1968) and
Chickering and Reisser (1993) are prominent theories of psychosocial development,
but do not encompass all of the present developmental theories addressing college
students. The theories described here, however, are most applicable to the specific

14
issue of identity formation in college students. Many other theories with respect to
psychosocial, cognitive, and student impact development have been conceptualized.
The described theories, however, are most applicable to the identity formation of
college students. The following section explores a student impact model, Astin’s
involvement theory, and empirical research studies involving Greek member
students.
Student Involvement Theory
Astin
The Report of the Study Group on Excellence in American Higher Education,
cited involvement as the most important condition for improving undergraduate
education (Abrahamawicz, 1988). Hood, Riahinejad and White (1986) found that
growth in confidence was related to involvement in campus groups and recreational
activities. Hood (1984) also found that participation in student organizations had a
positive affect on the quality of students’ interpersonal relationships. According to
Astin (1984), involvement is key to a student’s persistence, satisfaction and success
in college. His theory of student involvement follows.
As mentioned previously, psychosocial theorists, such as Chickering and
Reisser (1993) view individual development as related to developmental tasks
(Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). College impact theorists, as opposed to psychosocial
theorists, do not concentrate on any particular developmental tasks, but rather focus
on the origins and processes of change (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Alexander

15
Astin (1984) was one of the first theorists to propose a college impact model that has
served as a paradigm in student development theory.
Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) confer that Alexander Astin’s taxonomy of
outcomes influenced the content and scope of their landmark text How College
Affects Students. Astin (1985b) proposed his theory of involvement to explain the
development of students during college. According to Astin (1985b) “students learn
by becoming involved” (p. 133). His theory consists of five postulates in regards to
involvement: 1) involvement consists of the investment of physical and
psychological energy in various objects, such as tasks, people, or activities; 2)
involvement occurs along a continuum whereby the amount of energy invested, as
well as the objects of investment will differ; 3) involvement consists of both
quantitative and qualitative features; 4) the amount of student learning or
development is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of involvement in the
task; and 5) the educational effectiveness of any policy or practice is directly related
to the capacity of the policy or practice to induce student involvement (Astin,
1985b).
Astin (1985) posits that the student is responsible for initiating, as well as
capitalizing on opportunities for involvement with new people and experiences. He
also asserts that the institutional environment is critical in providing students with
the opportunities to become involved (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005, p.53). Astin
identified such sources of involvement as honors programs, academic groups,
athletic associations, as well as roles in student government.

16
Chickering and Reisser (1993) also argue that student development is
influenced by educational environments such as friendships, student organizations,
as well as student communities. Hood, Riahinejad and White (1986) found that
involvement in campus activities was positively related to identity development.
One such way to become involved within an educational environment, as
advocated by Astin (1984) and Chickering and Reisser (1993) is to join peers in
student sub-cultures and organizations. Greek organizations consistently have been
found to provide higher levels of student involvement than other campus contexts.
The following section will review research concerning student involvement and
Greek affiliation.
Greek Affiliation and Student Involvement
Members of Greek organizations are significantly more involved in college,
participate more often in clubs and student professional organizations, as well as
have higher levels of interaction with other students. In a study of 6,646
undergraduate seniors at a major public southeast university, Pike and Askew (1990)
found that Greek member students have significantly higher levels of involvement
when compared with non-Greek students. Kaludis and Zatkin (1966) obtained
similar results, finding that members of Greek organization had higher levels of
academic and social involvement than non-Greek members, as well.
Hayek, Carini, O’Day, and Kuh (2002) conducted a study that compared the
engagement levels in college of Greek students as opposed to non-Greek students or
independents. Two thousand one-hundred eighty-two undergraduate students at 192

17
institutions participated in this study. The participants included 6,650 self-identified
Greek students (62% women, 38% men) and 35,622 independent students (65%
women, 35% men). The research findings revealed that on 11 of the 13 measures,
Greek member students on average both male and female, were more highly engaged
than non-member students. Greek affiliated students scored higher in the following
areas: time spent in co-curricular activities in a typical week, degree of community
service engagement, self-reported college gains related to personal and social issues,
frequency of student interactions with faculty and the frequency of student
participation in class and collaborative learning (Hayek et al., 2002). One measure,
time spent preparing for class in a typical week, favored non-member students, while
the effect size of the other measure, time spent relaxing and socializing in a typical
week (.04) was not statistically significant. The authors of this study also found that
the positive effects of Greek affiliation were similar across the 192 studied
institutions (Hayek et. al, 2002).
Baier and Whipple’s (1990) study also found several statistically significant
differences between Greek student involvement in campus extracurricular activities
as compared to independents. Their 1990 study on Greek Values and Attitudes: A
Comparison with Independents involved 904 male and female students (409 male,
493 female). This study also revealed four scales in which significant statistical
differences between groups were found: Specifically, Greeks were also found to be
more dependent on peers and family members than Independents, as well as more
involved in campus extracurricular activities.

18
Hunt and Rentz (1994) study on Greek-letter Social Group Members’
Involvement and Psychosocial Development found significant positive outcomes
between Greek members’ involvement and psychosocial development. They
concluded that “involvement, whether within the fraternity or sorority alone or in
conjunction with other organized campus activities, was significantly related to:
establishing and clarifying purpose; developing mature interpersonal relationships;
and establishing an intimate relationship with another based on trust, reciprocal
caring, and honesty” (p.293).
Leadership and Greek Affiliation
Research indicates that there is an increase in students’ leadership skills
during college (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Astin (1993) found that students
involved in leadership activities were associated with higher levels of education
attainment when compared to students that did not participate in these activities, as
well. Bialek and Lloyd (1998) found that experiences in student leadership resulted
in developing interpersonal and management skills, enhancing self-confidence and
professional poise that were evident at the post-graduate level. In addition, these
leadership experiences provided for opportunities to meet and interact with a wide
range of people and increased the student’s sense of pride and connection to the
perspective university.
Greek organizations provide members with leadership development and
volunteer opportunities (Astin, 1993; Kuh, 1982). Greek affiliated student have also
been found to exhibit leadership skills, as well (Dollar, 1966; Astin 1977). The 2002

19
Report on Research Results conducted by the National Panhellenic Conference and
the National Interfraternity Conference revealed that 82% of Greek females and 77%
of Greek males reported having joined Greek organizations for leadership training,
whereas 89% of Greek females and 68% of males became Greek affiliated with
expectations of community service opportunities
(http://www.nicindy.org/about_us/public_relations/results.php).
Research on Greek Student Development
Greek organizations are a visible and often controversial subculture of
college communities. Much controversy exists as to whether Greek organization aid
or hinder student development (Kuh, Pascarella, & Wechsler, 1996; Pike & Askew,
1990; Heida, 1990). The following section will provide a summary of research
findings in regards to Greek organizations. Both negative and positive aspects of
Greek life, as well as the impact of Greek affiliation on student development will be
addressed. Differences in regards to women and men within the Greek system will
follow.
Greek Affiliation and Negative Impacts on Student Development
Alcohol Abuse
Presley, Meilman and Lyerla (1993) are among the many researchers who
found that the majority of traditional-age college students use alcohol on a regular
basis. Research has also revealed that a substantial increase in the frequency and
level of alcohol consumption occurs in college in comparison to high school
(Johnston, O’Malley, & Bachman, 1994; Wechsler, Davenport, Dowdall, Moeykens

20
& Castillo, 1994). Many studies have correlated alcohol use with Greek membership
( Presley et. al., 1993; Tampke, 1990; Wechsler, Dowdall, Davenport & Castillo,
1995; Wechsler, Kuh & Davenport, 1996). In fact, 27% of all empirical research
concerning Greek organizations have focused on alcohol and substance abuse
(Molasso, 2005).
Wechsler et al. (1994) posit that fraternity membership serves as the single
best predictor of binge drinking in college. Wechsler, Kuh and Davenport (1996)
studied the alcohol use and associated behaviors of non-member students to
fraternity and sorority members at 115 institutions. One-hundred seventy-nine
colleges from the American Council of Education’s list of accredited 4 year colleges
and universities were selected. Several important findings were obtained: First, that
both fraternity and sorority members partake in binge drinking to a much greater
extent than college students in general (Wechsler et al., 1996, p. 272). Second, that
sorority women, as opposed to fraternity men, were at greater risk in regards to
acquiring binge drinking behaviors when in college, because they have the least
previous high school experience (65% less) with consuming alcohol (Wechsler et al.,
1996, p.272). Third, that one-fifth of sorority women and two fifths of fraternity
men indicated that drinking was important. Notably, a majority of both Greek
members and non-Greek members viewed heavy alcohol use as a problem on
campus (Wechsler et al., 1996).

21
Hazing
Hazing is a complex social problem on college campuses and is defined as
the mental and/or physical degradation of any person. The practices of hazing
accounted for 90 deaths in the 1990’s and 15 deaths in the year 2000 alone. Nuwer
(1999) reveals that 50 of these deaths have been associated with college fraternities.
Hazing in Greek organizations has been most prevalent during rush, the system
whereby new members are invited to join a given fraternity or sorority. Once
selected, the new members are often initiated through hazing practices. Ellsworth
(2006) conducted a study on hazing activities among selected student organizations.
The 114 study participants included fraternity and sorority members, student
athletes, ROTC members and members of the marching band of a large, public, four-
year research institution. The students were asked to identify activities they
considered to be forms of physical and/or psychological hazing. Although there were
differences among the types of hazing activities that were initiated across different
student organizations, there were ten activities that the entire sample, irrespective of
group affiliation, agreed to as hazing practices. These 10 activities are: forced to
consume excessive amounts of alcoholic beverages; struck by an object, such as a
ball, baton, fist or paddle; handcuffed or tied to a building or structure; receive a
brand or tattoo; drink or eat substances not intended for normal consumption;
deprived of beverages or food by others; perform sexual acts; participate in streaking
or other activities while naked; deprived of sleep by others; and stealing (Ellsworth,
2006). When comparing the mean score of participants, Ellsworth (2006) also found

22
that both fraternity and sorority members were more knowledgeable about hazing
activities than the general population of students.
Gender violence
Another negative correlation found within Greek organizations involves
gender violence. Fraternity membership has also been associated with sexual
aggression (Boeringer, Shehan & Akens ,1991; Koss & Gaines, 1993; Lackie & de
Man, 1997). Copenhaver and Grauerholz (1991) revealed that over half of the rapes
in their study were perpetrated by fraternity members or occurred in a fraternity
house. However, in a study conducted by Koss and Gaines (1993) when the affects
of alcohol was controlled, the association between sexual aggression and fraternity
membership disappeared (Adams-Curtis & Forbes, 2004). Tyler, Hoyt and Whitbeck
(1998) also found that fraternity membership is associated with physical force, as
well as verbal coercion, while sorority membership is associated with being the
victim of physical force, as well as alcohol and drug coercion. Sorority women were
also found to be overrepresented as sexual assault victims in a study by
O’Shaughnessey & Palmer (1990). Other negative behaviors associated with Greek
student membership include academic dishonesty McCabe & Bowers, 1996; Storch
& Storch, 2002) and eating disorders (Kurtzman, Yager, Landsverk, Wiesmeir &
Bodurka, 1989; Schulken, Pinciano, Sawyer, Jensen & Hoban, 1997) in sorority
women.

23
Greek Affiliation and Positive Impacts on Student Development
Positive impacts of Greek membership have been researched to a lesser
extent, but linked to several positive factors. As already noted, Greek organizations
provide members with leadership development and volunteer opportunities (Astin,
1993; Kuh, 1982). Greek member students exhibit leadership skills (Dollar, 1966;
Astin, 1977), possess greater self-esteem and self-confidence (Dollar, 1966; Hood,
Riahinejad & White, 1986 ), are more assertive, attain higher levels of social
orientation (Astin 1977; Baird, 1969) and feel more security and belonging (Astin,
1977). Greek students also function more effectively in groups as opposed to
independent students and experience greater gains in interpersonal skills (Hunt &
Rentz, 1994; Pike 2000). Greek member students also persist to graduation more
frequently than independents, are more satisfied with instruction, social life, as well
as college, overall (Astin, 1977).
Psychological Sense of Community
Sarason (1974) proposed the concept of psychological sense of community
(PSC) as a readily available, dependable, mutually supportive network of
relationships. McCarthy, Pretty and Catano (1990) found that undergraduate students
with increased PSC reported a decrease in student burnout, as well as physical and
psychological stress. Research also found that one sub-community within the
college campus in particular, Greek organizations, served the purpose of establishing
PSC (Johnson, 1972, Robson, 1966, Scott 1965). Lounsbury and DeNeui (1995)
argue that PSC is a primary goal of Greek organizations. Their study found that

24
sororities, as well as fraternities, reported higher levels of PSC than non-member
students (Lounsbury & Deneui, 1995).
In summary, Astin’s student involvement theory is implemented within most
Greek organizations at university campuses. Research reveals that there are both
negative and positive factors associated with Greek membership. Greek
organizations provide for a psychological sense of community and have been linked
to promoting self-confidence, assertiveness, leadership, and interpersonal skills as
well as higher levels of social orientation. As stated earlier, the negative influences
of Greek affiliation have been extensively researched and reviewed. Hazing, alcohol
and substance abuse, as well as gender violence, academic dishonesty and eating
disorders have been associated with Greek affiliation. In response to many of these
issues, the North American Interfraternity Conference (NIC) and the National
Panhellenic Conference (NPC) established a research partnership with the Center for
Advanced Social Research at the University of Missouri-Columbia to research the
effects of Greek affiliation on student’s college experiences, as well as other lifetime
experiences.
Differences within the Greek system
This study focuses on the students’ perceptions of impacts of college on the
identity development of sorority women. Unfortunately, many of the research
studies on sorority women involved research that combined both sorority women and
fraternity men as one subculture. It is important, however, to make a distinction
between the development of men and women within Greek organizations. As

25
discussed in the previous section, research suggests that Greek affiliation affects
women and men differently. Differences concerning alcohol abuse and, gender
violence have been documented in empirical research (Kuh & Arnold, 1993;
Pascarella et al., 1996, Whipple, 1998).
Greek men and women differ in regards to their organizational structures and
operations as well. William McKee (1987) noted that most fraternities delegate the
day- to- day management of the chapters to paid staff, whereas national sororities
rely on board members, as well as volunteer officers to manage their perspective
chapters. Sorority national officers also have longer terms of office, four to six years,
as opposed to fraternity national officers whose terms of office run from two to four
years. McKee (1987) also states that a higher percentage of sorority members, as
opposed to fraternity members, tend to remain involved with their chapter after
graduation.
Parker and Gade (1981) found that sorority and fraternity members also
differed when it came to issues of independence. Fraternity members indicated more
independence, less traditional orientation and more competition than their sorority
counterparts. In her study on the social ecology of sororities, Risman (1982) found
that in contrast to fraternities, sororities act as loco parentis, a situation when a
person or organization is granted legal responsibility or assumes the symbolic
responsibility of a parent in place of the actual parent (www.wikipedia.org). Sorority
members refer to one another as sisters and often a “house mother” serves to help
sorority sisters in times of need. Zirkel (1992) also found that sorority member

26
women expressed anxiety in regards to developing independence from family and
sorority relationships. This may be attributed to the in-loco-parentis culture of a
sorority.
Hunt and Rentz (1994) identified differences in the psychosocial
development of men and women Greek members. Their study revealed a significant
correlation between the sorority involvement of junior women and their establishing
and clarifying purpose, developing mature interpersonal relationships and attaining
academic autonomy. No such correlations were found among junior fraternity
members, from having participated in their respective fraternities. Other differences
concerned research outcomes involving academic achievement, confidence and
cognitive outcomes and are described below.
Academic Achievement
A study of 6,636 undergraduate seniors at a major public southwestern
university, conducted by Pike and Askew (1990) revealed that when it comes to
academic achievement, sorority member students had higher grade point averages
(GPA) than independent women, Greek men, and independent men. Pascarella
(1984) and Ware, Steckler and Laserman (1985) posited that an important factor in
the development of interest in academic achievement is the encouragement of
women peers. Correspondingly, Stericker and Johnson (1977) found a significant,
positive association between achievement motivation and self-esteem in both
genders, however the strength of that relationship was significantly higher among
women. Pike’s (2003) study also revealed that sorority women reported greater gains

27
in personal development when compared to non-Greek women, as well as men, both
Greek and non-Greek.
Cognitive Outcomes
Although Pascarella, Edison, Whitt, Nora, Hagedorn and Terenzini (1996)
found negative effects of Greek affiliation on cognitive development by the end of
the freshman year of college, a more recent study found positive effects among
sorority member students. Pascarella, Flowers and Whitt (2001) published a study
entitled Cognitive Effects of Greek Affiliation in College: Additional Evidence. This
study involved 18 four year colleges in 15 states and 3, 331 Greek member student
participants. This study assessed the effects of Greek affiliation on five identified
end-of-second year cognitive outcomes. These outcomes consisted of: writing skills,
science reasoning, gains in understanding of the arts and humanities, gains in
understanding science, gains in writing and thinking skills. While the findings
revealed that male fraternity membership had negative effects on all five cognitive
outcomes, sorority membership had a statistically significant, positive effect on
writing and thinking skills, as well as understanding science.
Confidence
Women college students reported less confidence than their male
counterparts in college (Smith, Morrison & Wolf, 1994; Clark & Zehr, 1993).
Research findings reveal that the opposite is true within the Greek community. A
two year longitudinal study conducted by Kilgannon and Erwin (1992) examined the
impact, on one campus, of Greek affiliation on the moral reasoning and identity

28
development of Greek students. The participants were comprised of 371 Greek and
non-Greek students. Two hundred and nine women and 168 men at a midsized,
comprehensive institution in the mid-Atlantic region participated in the study. Their
findings revealed that Greek women scored higher on average in confidence levels
than Greek men. However, non-Greek women scored higher on average in regards
to moral reasoning when compared to Greek men and women.
As differences exist between research on women and men within the Greek
system, gender differences in identity development must also be explored. The next
section will review research on gender differences in identity development, theories
and research specifically related to women’s identity development, as well as
empirical data on the identity development of the sorority member student.
Research on Gender Differences in Identity Development
Many in the research community have echoed Gilligan’s (1982) view that
women’s identity development has been misunderstood, as well as incorrectly
aligned with the development of men. Sottile (1994) posits that most student
development researchers tend to generalize their findings to the experiences of
college men. Sottile (1994) states that “traditional theories of college student
development grew out of the male experience and the amount of literature and
research pertaining to the experiences of college females is limited and
unsystematic” (p. 21). Cramer (2000) also contended that research on identity
development has tended to focus on factors related to the development of the male
sense of identity. Indeed, theorists such as Erikson and Chickering have been

29
criticized for not taking into account diverse individuals, including women, when
describing identity formation (Gilligan, 1982; Josselson, 1987; Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1991). Chickering (1969, 1993) revised his theory, along with Reisser
(1993) in order to address the lack of applicability to diverse populations, including
women.
Although Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) refer to whether the effects of
identity development differ in relation to gender as an “unanswered question,”
research suggests that college affects men and women differently (Pascarella et. al
1996, Pike & Askew, 1990, Whipple, 1998). Erikson (1968) posited that identity
developed on two dimensions: intrapersonal identity, or the task of separation and
interpersonal identity, or the task of connectedness. In his research, Erikson aligned
intrapersonal dimensions with male development and interpersonal dimensions with
females. Generally, research studies concerning gender differences support Erikson’s
assertion.
Douvan and Adelson (1966) were among the first researchers to document
that female identity development may differ from that of males. They found that
females were more concerned with interpersonal identity, a sense of self as
connected to others, whereas males were more concerned with intrapersonal identity,
a sense of self that is separate and unique. Clancy and Dollinger (1993) found that
women were more likely to define themselves in terms of intimacy, empathy, and
physical proximity than men.

30
Cross and Madsen (1997) as well as, Baumeister and Sommer (1997)
contended that women and men use different types of relationships to sustain a sense
of connectedness. Lee and Robbins (2000) found that women search for
relationships that foster intimacy, enhance feelings of connectedness, and involve
physical proximity to others which provide for attachment, reliable alliance, as well
as opportunities for nurturance. Conversely, men seek relationships that involve
social comparisons and emphasize power and status in order to provide for a
reassurance of worth (Lee & Robbins, 2000).
Cramer (2000), too, found that females were characterized by connectedness
and social concerns, whereas males were characterized by self-definition and
autonomy. Others have found, however, that whereas male identity development is
more aligned with intrapersonal patterns as Erikson suggested, female identity
formation involves both interpersonal and intrapersonal issues. (Archer,1985; Lytle,
Bakken & Romig, 1997.) These findings suggest an association between the
development of autonomy and the establishing of relationships for women.
The importance of focusing on women’s identity development as a separate
process was outlined in the previous section. If the research community is to
accurately assess and progress in understanding the identity development of students,
then conceptual and empirical data must be differentiated by gender. That is, male
and female identity development should be studied as separate processes, for
empirical data suggests gender specific developmental pathways.

31
The following section will explore conceptual and empirical research on
women’s identity development. Two theorists, in particular, Josselson and Gilligan
have discussed ways in which the developmental pathways of women may differ
from that of men. Research in regards to women’s identity development and women
on college campuses will be reviewed, as well.
Conceptual Research on Women’s Identity Development
Josselson
Josselson (1987) adapted Marcia’s (1966) four status model of identity to
study women’s identity development. The first status, the Foreclosure status-
Purveyors of Heritage, deals with women who exhibit a commitment to identity, but
have not yet experienced an identity crisis. Women in the second phase, Identity
Achievers or Pavers of the Way, have formed separate identities by breaking away
from the psychological ties to their childhood. Daughters of Crisis or Moratorium
Status women comprise the third status of Josselson’s theory. These women are
searching for their identities. Identity Diffusion women, those in the final status in
Josselson’s model, are also referred to as Lost-Sometimes Found Women. In this
status, women have not yet experienced crisis and commitment, the two most
important variables in identity development according to Josselson and Erikson.
Josselson (1987) defines identity as the stable, consistent, and reliable sense
of who one is and what one stands for. Josselson posits that identity development is
heavily dependent on two variables: crises and commitment. A woman’s identity
formation is contingent on the absence or presence of these two variables. However,

32
Josselson views relationships as beneficial to prompting crises to occur, and
therefore aid in identity development.
Josselson’s research studies (1996) involved interviewing women about their
identities at different stages in their lives. Josselson focused on the process of
identity formation when interviewing 60 women in their senior year of college.
Twelve years later, Josselson interviewed 33 of these 60 women at age 33. The intent
at this stage was to search for developmental themes in identity development, as well
as differing pathways to identity chosen by the women. The third part of the study
came to fruition, 10 years later, when 30 of the women were interviewed at age 43.
This longitudinal study revealed two themes regarding women’s identity
development: connections and competence. Competence was defined as the regions
where a woman can “be effective and do things of value” while connections were
defined as the “people whom she chooses to make important in her life” (Josselson,
1987, p. 178). Josselson posits that making connections and exhibiting competence
are central to women’s identity development. Thus, she contends that a women is
concerned with how she is effective in the world, as well as how she is linked with
others (Josselson, 1996).
Gilligan
Gilligan (1982) theorized that women’s identity development emphasizes the
need for women to be bound by relationships. She asserted that female identity
development is based on connectedness and relatedness; whereas males tend to
define themselves in regards to their autonomy, females tend to define themselves

33
through their relationships with others. Lee and Robbins (1998) found that a lack of
connectedness had adverse developmental effects on the college women participants
in their study. These effects included lower self-esteem, less satisfaction with their
social relationships, less of a likelihood to assume a social identity in social
situations, and perceiving their environment as more threatening (Lee & Robbins,
1998).
Several studies have revealed the significant effect of student relationships on
identity development. Pearson and Bruess’ (2001) study of students’ perceptions of
factors which impact their identity and moral development revealed that
relationships were the most prevalent category cited by students in their study of
2,994 male and female college students with freshman and senior class standing.
Kroger and Green (1996) studied events associated with identity status change and
found that the majority of the study participants associated identity status change
with the relationships domain (67%) as well.
The issues of connectedness and relationship maintenance are contradictory
to the Eriksonian position that identity development precedes the development of
intimacy. Thus, Erikson’s model may be relevant when considering male identity
development, but not to that of women. The relationship between Chickering’s
(1969, 1993) autonomy vector, (renamed autonomy moving towards independence in
1993) and freeing interpersonal relationships,(also renamed developing mature
interpersonal relationships vector), will be explored in the next section which
concerns women’s identity development. The following section will review research

34
findings related to women’s identity formation including the dynamics of
interpersonal relationships and factors that influence their development.
Empirical Research on Women’s Identity Development
Two of Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) seven vectors of student
development pertain specifically to differences in gender with regard to identity
development. The third vector, Moving through Autonomy towards independence
focuses on the development of self-sufficiency and interdependence. The fourth
vector, Developing mature interpersonal relationships (MIR) reflects the notion that
peer interaction provides for a learning environment and helps shape the student’s
personal identity. As stated previously, women’s identity development has been
linked more closely with the development of the mature relationships vector; males
have been linked to the autonomy towards independence vector during identity
formation. In addition, several researchers have suggested that women’s identity
development is more aligned with intimacy (Josselson , 1987; Marcia, 1980,
Schiedel & Marcia, 1985). In their study on the role of gender in adolescent identity
and intimacy decisions, Lacombe and Gay (1998) found that females tend to resolve
dilemmas by integrating factors dealing with identity and intimacy.
Greeley and Tinsley (1988) addressed gender differences in the development
of autonomy and intimacy during college. The study findings revealed that women
obtained significantly higher intimacy scores than men in college and that intimacy
development preceded autonomy development for most women. In fact, “intimacy

35
was the best predictor of autonomy, accounting for 17.1% of the variance” (Greeley
& Tinsley, 1988, p. 517).
Greeley and Tinsley’s (1988) study also revealed that for women, mastering
of tasks involving relationships may have a significant impact on their autonomy
development. Straub and Rogers (1986) found in their study of 241 female
undergraduate students at a private, Midwestern university, that for women,
developing mature interpersonal relationships may precede the development of
autonomy, as well. The development of autonomy may surface later in the
psychosocial development of women. A follow up study by Straub (1987) indicated
that for women, developing mature interpersonal relationships, may serve as a
prerequisite, if not an agent to facilitate, the development of autonomy.
Straub’s (1987) qualitative study included a subset of the 24 female
undergraduates from the 241 female undergraduate student participants of the Straub
and Rogers (1986) study. Using Critical Incident Interviews which were based on
Flanagan’s (1954) Critical Incident Techniques, participants were asked to describe
the critical incidents that they perceived to have significantly affected their
development of autonomy, as defined by Chickering. Straub found that many of the
events that the participant women associated with the development of autonomy
were more associated with Chickering’s vector of developing mature relationships
(Straub, 1987).
Straub (1987) came to two significant conclusions when integrating her study
with the previous study (Straub & Rogers, 1986). First, for a majority of women the

36
development of interpersonal relationships task may precede the autonomy task for
the majority of women, in contrast to men. Second, mastery of the relationship task
may facilitate a woman’s development of autonomy (Straub, 1987). A more recent
study by Taub (1995) on women’s development revealed that the processes of
developing freeing interpersonal relationships is connected to the development of
autonomy, as well.
In essence, Josselson and Gilligan posited that gender differences exist with
regard to identity formation. Several research findings have corroborated this
assertion. Findings revealed that in contrast to male concerns of self-definition,
separateness and autonomy, females view interpersonal relations, a sense of
connectedness and intimacy, as vital components in identity development. Research
also revealed that interpersonal relationships may foster the development of
autonomy in women (Greeley & Tinsley, 1988; Straub,1987; Taub 1995).
Women on College Campuses
This section will look at the experiences of women in higher education
environments. Specific attention will be placed on the concept of a “chilly climate”
for women at coeducational colleges and its impact on student development.
Research outcomes of students attending women’s colleges will also be reviewed
and compared to research on sorority organizations, one of few same sex
organizations within the college campus setting.
Chilly climate. Hall & Sandler (1982, 1984) have written extensively about
the concept of a chilly climate, which is the notion that women at coeducational

37
colleges are at a stark disadvantage when compared to men because the climate is
less conducive to women. Evidence of a chilly climate for women has been
documented in other research studies as well (Janz & Pyke, 2000; Pascarella, Whitt,
Edison, Nora, Hagedorn, Yeager & Terenzini, 1997; Whitt, Edison, Pascarella, Nora,
Terenzini, 1999). The effects of a chilly climate on women may include undermining
their self-confidence as well as negatively effecting career aspirations (Hall &
Sandler, 1982). In addition, Astin (1993) found that at coeducational colleges, female
students were underrepresented in leadership positions in campus organizations.
Hall & Sandler (1982) asserted that the coeducational college environment
proves restrictive for women. They posit that student affairs professionals do not take
into consideration the differing developmental pathways of male and female college
students and suggested that college was primarily created to meet the needs of men
and thus may not have fostered feelings of belongingness nor comfort for women.
Female students may feel frustrated when asked to conform to a university setting
that is partial to the development of autonomy. Consequently, the inherent design of
college environments may have led to a “chilly climate” that neglects or undermines
a women’s developmental need for connectedness and relationships while promoting
an environment that fosters autonomy, a vector more aligned with the development
of males.
Women’s colleges. In stark contrast to the chilly climate found in
coeducational colleges, research on single-sex colleges reveals significantly positive
outcomes for women. Astin (1977) studied over 200,000 students at 300 colleges,

38
and found that attending a single sex college was associated with several positive
outcomes for women. First, these women were likely to persist in college, attained
greater roles in student leadership and were more likely to attend graduate school
(Astin, 1977). They also had greater involvement in classroom and extracurricular
activities, higher self-confidence, and greater satisfaction with their college
experience (Astin, 1977, 1993; Smith, 1990; Ingalls, 1984). In relation to identity
development, Kinzie, Thomas, Palmer, Umbach and Kuh’s (2007) study comparing
the experiences of women students at coeducational and women’s colleges revealed
that students attending women’s colleges, reported “greater gains in understanding
themselves and others” (Kinzie et. al, 2007, p. 155).
Research on women’s college graduates is equally impressive. Although
students attending women’s colleges constitute less than 2% of female students
attending college, their alumnus comprise 20% of women members of Congress, and
33 percent of the women on the boards of Fortune 1000 companies
(www.womenscolleges.org). In addition, several studies of graduates of women’s
colleges revealed that they were twice as likely as coeducational women college
graduates to have been cited in Who’s Who of American Women (Rice and
Hemmings, 1988; Tidball, 1973). Wolf-Wendel (1998) examined the rankings of
women since the 1960’s in an updated study using data found in Who’s Who of
America, Who’s Who Among Black Americans and Who’s Who Among Hispanic
Americans. Women’s college graduates were overrepresented in all three of these
rankings, as well. This study confirmed previous findings that women’s colleges

39
graduated higher percentages of successful women, as denoted by the Who’s Who
rankings (Sharpe & Fuller, 1995).
Some researchers posit that the successes of women’s colleges stems from
their ability to provide successful role models or mentors for female students
(Langdon, 2001; Tidball, 1973, 1980; Riordan, 1994). Research reveals that
Women’s colleges typically employ twice as many women faculty members in
comparison to coeducational institutions (Sebrechts, 1999; Tidball & Kistiakowsky,
1976). Several studies by Tidball (1973, 1980, 1985) reveal a statistically significant
correlation between the percentages of women faculty at women’s colleges and high
achieving female students. In contrast, Nidiffer and Bashaw (2001) found that
women are underrepresented in faculty and administrative positions on coeducational
colleges. Astin (1992) posits that peer interactions outside the classroom were twice
as important as students’ interactions with faculty members.
Leadership at Women’s colleges
As aforementioned, Astin’s (1993) study found a positive relationship
between leadership development and women’s college attendance. Women in
leadership positions are also overrepresented at women’s colleges. About 16% of
college presidents at coeducational institutions are women, in stark contrast to the
almost 90% serving as college presidents at women’s colleges (Langdon, 2001).
Whitt (1994) found that at women’s colleges, student leaders, along with faculty
administrators and alumnae served as important role models for other students.

40
Students also had more opportunities to practice their leadership skills on campus, as
well.
Leadership and the Sorority
Kezar and Moriarty (2000) sights research in regards to women’s leadership
over the last decade, revealing that for women, leadership is viewed as a collective
rather than individual process. Women’s leadership styles are relational and an
emphasis is placed in empowering others to participate in activities that promote the
goals of the organization (Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Rosener, 1990). In contrast to
fraternity organizations, Kezar & Moriarty (2000) found that sorority membership
“was a predictor of the development of leadership related traits” (Kezar & Moriarty,
2000, p.67). This fits directly with the design of sorority organizations in that
leadership is a collective act that is promoted within the organization.
Similar to outcomes associated with women’s colleges, research findings
suggest that sorority member students have higher academic achievement, greater
involvement in extracurricular activities, as well as attain leadership skills (Pike &
Askew, 1990; Haye, et. al, 2002; Kezar & Moriarty, 2000). The following section
will review research concerning sorority organizations. In the next section, a brief
overview of the founding of sorority organizations, their purpose and standards and
opportunities for social capitol will be reviewed.
Sorority Organizations
Sororities have existed on American college campuses for over 150 years.
Sororities are defined as social organizations of women students at a college or

41
university. Similar to fraternities, sorority organizations are usually designated by
Greek letters. Each distinct sorority is known as a chapter on college campuses.
Sororities are also referred to as women’s fraternities. Kappa Alpha Theta was
recognized as the first Greek lettered women’s fraternity at DePauw University.
Similar to Greek systems at other universities, students at the private, West
coast University where this study was conducted, participated in a series of activities
known as rush. Rush is used as a mechanism to seek new members into the
organization. During rush, a series of meetings known as “open houses” are held
where current members briefly interview rushees so as to determine which ones
would serve as potential members of the perspective sorority. If accepted the rushees
receive an invitation known as a bid to join the sorority at the end of the rush
process. If the rushees accept the bids to join they are known as new pledges to the
sorority.
Founded in 1902, the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC) serves as an
umbrella organization for the 26 autonomous Greek letter international women’s
sororities. The NPC adopted a set of standards as the minimum expectation for the
college chapters affiliated with the NPC. The standards are used as guidelines to
enhance the development and learning of members. These standards include:
positively affecting intellectual development, instilling the values of their
organizations and their host institution, developing leadership skill and abilities,
developing positive relationships, developing citizenship through service and
outreach.

42
The Purpose of Sororities
In light of research on “chilly climate” and women’s colleges, it is important
to discuss for what purposes sororities were established. As women’s colleges were
established in the 19
th
century in response to women being excluded from higher
learning environments (Riordan, 1994), sororities may have been created within co-
educational settings to deal with the “chilly climate” within the university setting.
Handler (1995) states that the sorority may be recognized as a “collective response
to, and an adaptive strategy for dealing with, a male culture”(p. 252). She further
explained that sorority membership is used in order “to navigate college campuses”
(p. 252). Bette Locke Hamilton, one of the founding members of Kappa Alpha Theta
in 1870, was one of the first women admitted to Indiana Asbury College, now known
as DePauw University. Hamilton once stated that establishing Kappa Alpha Theta
“help[ed] the girls win out in their fight to stay in college on a man’s campus. We
had to make a bigger place for women in a man’s world, and the [women’s]
Fraternity was one means to the bigger end” (www.kappaalphathet a.org). The word
sorority referring to an all female greek organizations had not yet been coined. Thus,
sororities may be viewed as social networks that assist in securing opportunities for
social capital on coeducational college campuses. The following section will review
research on social capital and sorority member women.
Social Capital and the Sorority member student
Putnam (1995), a well known researcher of community and civic
participation, describes social capital as the “features of social organizations such as

43
networks, norms, and social trusts that facilitate coordination and cooperation for
mutual benefit” (pp. 65-66). Research reveals gender differences regarding how
social capital is accessed. Campbell and Rosenfeld (1985) found that men had larger
social networks then women. Salaff and Greve’s (2004) study on women’s social
networks revealed that women, in contrast to their male counterparts, were more
likely to be detached from social networks in general. Moore (1990) found gender
differences in opportunities to develop social ties, and that males faired better than
their female counterparts. Because social capital available to women is diminished
within co-educational colleges as well (Riordan, 1994) sororities may serve in
providing opportunities for social capital within the university setting.
Kuh (1985) and Strange (1986) posit that Greek systems on college campuses
serve as powerful socializing agents. A 1997 research study by two of the largest
fraternity and sorority umbrella organizations, the National Interfraternity
Conference (NIC) and the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC) revealed that
members and alumnae of Greek organizations excelled in the organizational aspects
of social capital. In regards to sorority membership, Scheele (2003), a Greek
alumnus, contends that increasing numbers of college women choose to participate
in rush as they perceive sororities to aid in the attainment of personal and academic
goals. Indeed, the university where this study was conducted recently reported their
highest participation in sorority rush since 1985 (Daily Trojan, September 11, 2007).
Sorority affiliation may provide avenues for women to gain social capital
during college and beyond. A study focusing on sorority members and gender

44
strategy illustrates the use of the sorority as a resource for attaining social capital in
order to achieve personal goals. In an article titled “The Fraternal Sisterhood:
Sororities as Gender Strategy,” Lisa Handler (1995) suggested that women join
sororities as a form of gender strategy, as well as to facilitate identity development
during college:
First, by joining a sorority, women engage, individually and collectively, in
constructing themselves as women. Notions of womanhood are very much
shaped and bound by the sorority’s needs and purpose and the sorority’s
relationships to Greek life and campus culture. Second, sororities are a
strategy for dealing with the complexities of gender(ed) relations-both among
women and between women and men (p. 237).

Handler’s statement involve issues of identity development and gender
strategies as reasoning for female college students to participate in rush and
ultimately to pledge a sorority. Other researchers have found a correlation between
relationships and the development of identity (Kroger & Green, 1996, Pearson &
Bruess, 2001;). Thus, further developing the theme of “relationships”, the next
section will review the impact of friendships and romantic relationships as they
pertain to identity development.
Friendships. In regards to the identity development of adolescent women
and friendship, Josselson (1996) states that “friendship has [the] most impact on
identity when women are in the process of defining or revising themselves” (p. 232).
Citing research outcomes from her 20 year longitudinal studies, she posits that
friendships in college may facilitate the process of identity formation in women by
serving as springboards in revising and forming one’s identity. As identity formation

45
is central to adolescent development, friendships may play an important role in
college women’s student development. These findings also lend support to women’s
identity development research revealing that need to develop interpersonal
relationships before developing autonomy.
Romantic Relationships. Collins (2003) posited that romantic relationships
may play a more significant role in adolescent identity development than previously
considered. Brown (1999) stated that “romance first emerges in adolescence as an
identity issue, not a relational issue……,” and that “….adolescence must first prove
to their peer group that they are (among other things) viable candidates for a
romantic relationship” (p.302). Two hundred forty one male and female college
student participants in a study on interpersonal relationships named romantic
partners (47%) specifically, as their closest relationship, while friendships (36%),
family relationships (14%) and other relationships (3%) were nominated less
frequently (Bercsheid, Snyder & Omoto, 1989). Study findings by Gilmartin (2005),
and Holland & Eisenhart (1990) revealed that heterosexual romantic relationships
were of primary importance to the college women study participants, as well.
In regards to Greek member students, research reveals that sorority women
date and interact primarily with fraternity men (Copenhaver & Grauerholz, 1991;
Larson & Leslie, 1968). Whitbeck and Hoyt (1991) in their study on campus
prestige and dating behaviors, found that sorority women reported more frequent
dating than their non-Greek counterparts. Erwin and Love (1989) found that students
who dated often scored higher in autonomy than those who dated less frequently.

46
This study provides further support to research linking intimacy as an important
factor in autonomy development.
Sorority Affiliation and Identity Development
Forming a sense of identity is viewed as a key developmental task in
adolescence (Erikson, 1968). In light of conceptual and empirical research examined
in this review, sororities have the potential to create the optimal developmental
environment for identity formation. Sorority affiliation may provide for many of the
factors associated with fostering women’s identity development.
Astin’s (1985 a) theory of involvement provides a conceptual model that
exemplifies the potential of sororities as organizations that promotes involvement,
and thus may positively contribute to student development. As empirical research
reveals, Greek students have a positive, statistically significant association with
involvement on college campuses (Baier & Whipple, 1990; Hayek et al., 2002, Pike
& Askew, 1990). These finding may have an impact on identity development, as
well. Hood, Riahinejad, and White’s (1986) study revealed that involvement in
campus activities is positively related to identity development. Therefore, it is a
reasonable expectation that Greek affiliation, having higher levels of involvement,
may positively affect the identity development of student members.
Regarding women’s identity development, another study, focusing on the
relationship of identity achievement of college women and campus participation,
Weston and Stein (1977) found that women with strong involvement in campus
organizations were closer to constructing their individual identity. Interestingly,

47
factors such as academic class year, the type of institution attended and housing was
not associated with a women’s identity development. Thus, the student involvement
and promotion of leadership skills and opportunities found in sororities, may foster
the identity development of its female members.
As to other areas of personal and academic development, Sorority member
students, as a subculture of coeducational colleges, displayed greater involvement in
leadership and extracurricular activities and higher academic achievement and
cognitive outcomes than other student populations (Kilgannon & Erwin, 1992;
Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Hayek et. al, 2002; Pike & Askew, 1990; Pascarella,
Flowers & Whitt, 2001). Lounsbury, Huffstetter, Leong and Gibson (2005) revealed
that a sense of identity had a positive, statistically significant relation to
undergraduate academic achievement. Buczynski (1991) also found a correlation
between intellectual development during college and identity development. The
sorority environment may provide for the encouragement of women peers to achieve
academically, as noted by Pascarella (1984) and Ware, Steckler and Laserman
(1985). Thus, variables within the sorority environment, such as the encouragement
of women peers may possibly foster identity development, as well.
Sorority member students report higher levels of confidence, as well
(Kilgannon & Erwin, 1992). Kalsner (1992) states that “self-esteem involves an
emotional appraisal of the self and is reflected in an individual’s self-
confidence”(p.7). Prager’s (1982) study on the identity development and self-esteem
in young women revealed a positive correlation between attaining identity

48
achievement and the enhancement of women’s self-esteem. (p.180). Since sorority
member students have been found to have higher self-confidence, a component of
self-esteem, then their identity development may be heightened.
Sorority members may have more opportunities to exhibit competence in
areas deemed important through leadership roles within the sorority house and the
community. The sorority member environment may also help to enhance competence
by creating a situational context where the individual is valued by sisters and peers
that are considered significant others and therefore may aid in the development of
self-esteem. The sorority environment may provide for opportunities to exhibit
competence through leadership roles within a sorority. In addition, the sorority may
provide for feelings of being valued by significant others through a psychological
sense of community. Thus, identity development, being positively correlated with
self-esteem may also be heightened.
Within conceptual research, a premium has been placed on the development
of autonomy in adolescence on identity development. Empirical research reveals that
for women the development of autonomy may be contingent upon the ability to
establish intimacy and maintain meaningful relationships (Greeley & Tinsley, 1988;
Taub,1995; Straub & Rogers, 1986; Straub, 1987). Strange (1994) posits that in
American culture, achieving autonomy denotes developmental advancement within
adolescence. Newman and Newman (2001) also speculated that the process of
individuation is overemphasized in early and late adolescents. They posited that
group identity may serve as a “…..precursor to and explanatory variable in the

49
formation of individual identity” (p. 516). Sororities may serve as agents for “group
identity” and thus serve to facilitate the formation of individual identity.
Sorority membership can be regarded as a mutually supportive relationship
where both the organization and the individual benefits. The individual is
strengthened through the sorority environment as an opportunity structure for
involvement and through the building of relationships. The developmental
opportunities and social capital provided to members also facilitates the identity
development of its members. The organization is strengthened through the
contributions of its members by “instilling the values of their organizations and their
host institution,” as revealed by the NPC standards.
In regards to the seven vectors of development, Chickering and Reisser
(1993) suggest that “when students are encouraged to form friendships and to
participate in communities that become meaningful subcultures, and when diversity
of backgrounds and attitudes as well as significant interchanges and shared interests
exist, development along all seven vectors is fostered” (p. 316). Sororities, as
meaningful subcultures, provide students with opportunities for such significant
interchanges, as well as the ability to form and foster friendships with the common
interest of the organization at heart. Gilligan and Josselson reiterate the importance
of a women’s need for relationships and intimacy. Pascarella and Terenzini (1991)
posit that prior levels of development may reasonably affect later levels of
development. In the case of women’s identity development, research suggests that
for women, the development of mature relationships may serve as a prerequisite to

50
another important factor in identity formation, the development of autonomy (Straub,
1987; Greeley & Tinsley, 1988; Taub, 1995).
Hall and Sandler (1982) have argued that the adverse effects of a chilly
climate on coeducational colleges include less participation in class, diminished
career aspirations, as well as undermining self-confidence. Studies on students at
women’s colleges, however, revealed the opposite outcomes. Women’s college
students reported greater involvement in both classroom and extracurricular
activities, higher self-confidence, as well as higher occupational aspirations (Astin,
1977; Ingalls, 1984).
Within co-educational environments, sororities may function as microcosms
of women’s colleges, serving the developmental needs of its female members.
Sororities serve as one of the few organizations on co-educational campuses that
consist of all female members and may serve as a refuge from the chilly climate
many women experienced at coeducational colleges. In addition, the sorority
environment may provide for opportunities for important exchanges with same and
opposite sex students, as Handler (1995) suggests. Thus, the social capital inherent
within the sorority organization may be of substantial benefit to its members.
Literature Review Summary
This literature review informed this study by providing a basis as to why
sorority member students are an obvious purposeful sampling group in regards to
women’s identity development. Sorority member students, as a subculture of
coeducational colleges have been found to have more self-confidence, as well as

51
displayed greater involvement in leadership and extracurricular activities, not to
mention higher academic achievement and cognitive outcomes than other student
populations (Kilgannon & Erwin, 1992; Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Hayek et. al,
2002; Pike & Askew, 1990; Pascarella, Flowers & Whitt, 2001). There is a strong
association between these positive outcomes and identity development in women as
referenced in the last section. Few researchers have looked at sororities, even though
they house many of the factors that conceptual and empirical research suggests
facilitates women’s identity development.
Strange (1986) posits that Greek organizations have the potential to create “a
perfect developmental environment” (p. 37). From the standpoint of theory and
empirical research, sorority membership may provide members with the factors
deemed necessary to advance identity development. Sororities may provide
opportunities for student involvement promoted by Astin, the building of
relationships contended by Josselson and Gilligan, provide arenas for crisis and
commitment emphasized by Josselson and Erikson as well as provide for an
environment that fosters Chickering’s seven vectors of development. Empirical
research reveals that sorority member students are privy to opportunities for the
development of meaningful relationships, leadership skills, social capitol, and a
psychological sense of community. In addition, sorority member students maintain
higher academic achievement, self-confidence and cognitive outcomes than other
college student populations.

52
If the aforementioned theoretical perspectives are seen as valid and the
outcomes of empirical studies involving sororities are taken into account, then
sorority member students would serve as the obvious purposeful sampling subgroup
to research in regards to optimal environments for female college student identity
development. However, little research has been done on the identity development
processes of these students and a need for empirical research in regards to the
sorority sub-culture is long overdue. The sources of impact on the identity
development of sorority member students specifically, will provide insight into a
little researched subculture that previous research has found holds significant
advantages for the identity development of women college students.
To properly understand the sources of impact of these students, it is important
to assess the students’ perspective of what events or situations in college have been
especially important to her development. Therefore, this study aimed to discover
sorority members’ perceptions of the sources of impact on their identity
development.

53
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the methods of data collection and analysis for this
study. Qualitative research methods were used to explore sorority members’
perceptions of experiences that influenced their identity development. A more
detailed description of participants, measures and procedures is included in this
chapter.
Participants
Participants were 70 sorority member women enrolled in a large, private west
coast university. Fifty-three percent (n=37) had senior class standing, and forty-
seven percent (n=33) were juniors. Sixty three (90%) of the participants were of
White/European ethnic backgrounds, 3 (4%) of the participants identified as
Hispanic/Latina and 4 (6%) of the participants were of mixed ethnicity (6%). The
ages ranged from 19-22 (M=20.77, SD= .80).
Participants were members of one of eight sorority chapters, all of which
were affiliated with the National Panhellenic Conference. Sixty four percent (n=45)
had been members of a sorority for 3 or more years; while 36% (n=25) had been
members for less than three years. Thirty nine percent (n=27) lived in the sorority
house in which they were members, whereas 61% (n=43) did not.
Raters
Raters were three female doctoral students (one of whom is the author) of
White/European descent. All were doctoral students in Education at a private, west

54
coast university and were engaged in dissertation research involving the identity
development of college students. Each member of the rating team had completed
two inquiry courses in the doctoral program and had participated in mock rating
sessions that utilized data gathered when piloting the critical incident forms.
Measures
Critical Incident Technique
A variant of Flanagan’s (1954) critical incident technique (CIT) was used to
explore sorority member perceptions of what had influenced their identity
development. The qualitative design of the critical incidents also provided for rich,
thick descriptions to convey findings, as well as provided for multiple perspectives in
regards to sorority student identity development.
According to Flanagan (1954) the CIT provides “a record of specific
behaviors from those in the best position to make the necessary observations and
evaluations” (Flanagan, 1954). In this study, that is the sorority members themselves.
Sorority members were asked to “describe themselves and their social world” as it
relates to their identity development (Patton, 2002, p.250).
For the purposes of this study, the critical incident forms were referred to as
the College Years Experience Questionnaire (CYEQ). The CYEQ was refined
through a pilot study conducted by 11 doctoral students. In the final version (see
Appendix D) participants were asked to describe at least one, but possibly two
experiences or incidents that had affected their sense of self, with the more specific
requests to:

55
Please describe that incident or experience in a few sentences. Be sure to
indicate (a) what that incident or experience was (b) if another person or
persons were involved in this incident or experience. If so, describe them and
their relationship to you (c) what do you think was important about this
incident or experience, and why (d) what you believe the long-term effect has
been on your sense of who you are. In addition, participants were asked to
rate on a seven point scale (1=Very Negative, 7= Very Positive) (a) the
degree to which the experience was positive, as well as (b) the eventual effect
the experience had on their sense of self. A final questionnaire asked
participants if they would like to participate in a future study (Appendix E).

A demographic questionnaire (Appendix C) accompanied each CYEQ and
asked participants their age, gender, ethnicity and university attended. Participants
were also asked if they had membership in a sorority, the name of their sorority; the
length of their membership, and whether they currently lived in a sorority house.
Procedures
A purposeful sampling strategy was used to select participants for the first
phase of the study. There were four basic criteria that participants in this study met:
1. Affiliation: participants were members of a sorority affiliated with the
National Panhellenic Conference (NPC).
2. Year of Academic Standing: participants were in their junior or senior
year of college.
3. University: participants were enrolled at the large private, west coast
university.
4. Age: participants were 18 years of age or older.
Participants were recruited from eight sororities with National Panhellenic
Conference (NPC) affiliation, at one large, private west coast university. The NPC

56
and its advisors assisted in identifying the specific sororities and the university Greek
student advisor helped obtain contact information for the Presidents of those
sororities. The principal investigator presented at Monday evening sorority meetings,
corresponded with sorority chapter presidents via telephone and e-mail, as well as
provided recruitment handouts to students on campus (Appendix A). Information
describing the study and an online link to the survey was provided to participants by
hand and email.
The CYEQ was adapted to enable respondents to access it online and was
then posted on an online survey service. The chapter presidents forwarded an
electronic copy of an email generated for the study to their prospective members.
The email described the study and included a link to the on-line survey.
One-hundred fourteen responses were collected in this study through the use
of the CYEQ Questionnaire; 100 fit the study criteria. Once the targeted 100
completed College Years Experience Questionnaires (CYEQ) were accumulated, the
raters received the participant responses electronically. Each of the three raters
reviewed the responses to the CYEQ individually. Two of the three raters grouped
them by perceived similarity into themes, using as many themes as seemed
necessary. The raters looked specifically at the source of the impact the participant
described when developing themes.
The raters then corresponded electronically with a third rater to review and
discuss the themes for the purposes of consistency. Once they reached a consensus,
the 100 CYEQ responses were coded into fourteen themes. The mean ratings of

57
incidents within each theme were calculated by the principal investigator in regards
to their positivity, as well as their eventual impact on sense of self. The full text of
the incidents, listed according to the theme to which it was assigned is displayed in
Appendix F. There were two incidents that the raters of this study determined did not
relate to any of the 14 themes and are listed under unclassified in Appendix E.

58
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
This chapter presents the results of the study. Each section begins with the
research question that was used to guide the study. The results consist of qualitative
data analysis. Participant data, descriptions of the 14 themes developed from
participants’ critical incidents and excerpts from the CYEQ responses describing
each category will be used to address the first research question. Participant ratings
regarding the experience’s positivity and eventual impact on their sense of self will
address the second and third question.
Research Question One
The first research question was: What experiences in college do sorority
member students report as having been particularly important to the development of
their sense of self?
Table 1 lists the categories with the abbreviated names used in the analyses.
The four categories that had the most incidents were those that dealt with sorority
membership, sorority network, leadership within the sorority, as well as leadership
within a campus related organization, accounting for 30 of the incidents. The
majority of the 100 incidents were reported by participants to have occurred in their
Junior (32%, n=32) and Freshman year (31% n=31). Twenty-three (23%) of the
incidents occurred in the sophomore year and 10 (10%) in the senior year of college.
Four (4%) participants reported incidents occurring at several years within their
college career.

59
The second and third research questions dealt with the impact the incident
had on them in regards to: a) the degree to which they viewed the incident as
positive; and b) the eventual impact the incident had on their sense of self in terms of
scores on a 7 point scale (1= very negative, 7= very positive). Once the incidents
were grouped into themes, the mean scores of the positivity and eventual effect on
sense of self were calculated. Table 1 includes the fourteen themes, abbreviations,
frequency of incident responses in each theme, as well as the mean and standard
deviations of the participant ratings.

60
Table 1. Themes with Abbreviations, # of Incidents, and Mean Positivity Ratings

Themes Abbreviations
# of
Incidents Positivity
Positivity on
Sense of Self
M SD M SD
1. Participating in rush and/or
joining a sorority
Sorority
Membership
10 5.6 2.22 5.6 1.96
2. Being elected or serving in a
sorority leadership position
Sorority
Leadership
10 5.7 2 6 1.25
3. Dealing with Crisis Crisis 10 2 1.63 4.6 1.58
4. Receiving the support of sisters
within the sorority network
Sorority
Network
9 6.56 0.88 6.11 1.05
5. Being elected or serving in a
leadership position in a campus
related organization
Campus
Leadership
8 6.63 0.74 6.88 0.35
6. Learning about myself as a
result of a romantic relationship
Romantic
Relationships
8 4.36 1.92 6 1.31
7. Making an important,
independent decision for myself
Decision 8 5.13 1.81 6.63 0.52
8. Making a commitment to
community service and outreach
Community 6 6.83 0.41 6.5 0.84
9. Sorority Affiliated Judgment or
Rejection
Rejection 6 3.17 1.72 4.33 1.51
10. Having an experience
of failure
Failure 5 2.8 0.84 4.4 1.95
11. Making the transition from
home to college
Transition 5 4.2 1.79 6 0.71
12. Studying Abroad Study Abroad 5 7 0 6.6 0.89
13. Receiving personal or career
guidance from others
Guidance 4 7 0 6.5 1
14. Engaging in a selfless act of
compassion
Compassion 4 4.75 1.71 6 0.82

61
Theme Descriptions and Incident Excerpts
This study aimed to capture the sorority student’s perspective on the sources
of impact on their identity development during college. Selected responses from the
CYEQ are used to accurately depict the varied experiences relating to themes found
in each of the 14 categories. The category titles are an abridged representation of the
major themes contained within each group.
1. Participating in rush and/or joining a sorority. (Sorority Membership).
This category comprised 10% of the total incident responses, and dealt with
participants engaging in sorority rush activities and accepting a bid to join a
particular sorority. Participants reported that the process of rushing a sorority as well
as learning about the sorority system had a profound effect on their sense of self.
These sorority experiences included: engaging in sorority rush activities, accepting a
bid to join a particular sorority, learning about the sorority system, searching for the
sorority that best fits ones values, establishing new relationships through friendships
and connections, negative experiences within the sorority, feeling a part of a
community and attachment to the university, as well as feeling accepted and wanted
by peers.
One example from this category of responses was:
I think that being chosen to become a member of my sorority influence[d] my
sense of who I am. While I did not fit specifically into the stereotypes of my
sorority sisters, knowing that I was accepted and wanted by these smart,
talented, and gorgeous girls made me feel that maybe I too fit into this
category Receiving your bid from a particular house completely dictates the
path that college will lead you on – from who your life-long friends will be,
to what major you may choose, and what potential spouses you may meet.

62
Another participant described her sorority acceptance:
….one of the most significant events over my college career was being
accepted into my sorority…… because joining a sorority really dictated the
type of lifestyle I would begin while in college.

In regards to rushing a sorority, one participant wrote:
Going through rush my Freshman year really made me reflect on who I was
as a person and what my priorities were. I could either go for the popular
party girls or for the house in which I knew I would find true lasting
friendships. In the end I chose the later and have learned so much from my
sorority sisters.

Not all incidents in this category were positive, however. A 20 year old junior
gave this description of her experience:
….rush has been such a negative experience that I have completely blocked
out any and all positive associations with my sorority- I am not friends with
any of the girls at all. Long term, I feel like I have to explain my terrible rush
experience every time I say I am in a sorority so that way people realize that I
am not the typical sorority girl.

2. Being elected or serving in a sorority leadership position. (Sorority
Leadership). Ten incidents fit into this category which reflects participants feeling
validated by their perspective sorority sisters and others through leadership
opportunities within their perspective chapters. Examples from student experiences
included: Receiving a nomination from sorority sisters for a leadership position
within the chapter, serving the sorority network for the benefit of all members,
acquiring leadership skills, creating new relationships with members through
leadership activities, receiving validation from pledges, active members, friends and
parents of sorority members for service.

63
Two 21 year old participants described their sorority leadership experience in
regards to their identity development:
I feel like I’ve found an identity by taking major leadership positions in the
house. I developed authority, integrity and a personal code of ethics.

One incident that helped shape my sense of who I am was getting elected the
president of my pledge class. The entire pledge class voted on who would be
the most reliable person, liaison between pledges and actives, and most
responsible leader. Getting elected by these girls meant a lot to me because
they are amazing girls and their respect and admiration is really special…

A senior participant spoke to the skills she had gained as a result of her leadership
experience in her sorority:
...I learned to be a leader, work with a diverse group of individuals,
communicate while trying execute a large scale event. I wanted to be an
event planner, so it was my first experience planning a large scale event, I
gained confidence that I could do so, and very well.

3. Dealing with Crisis (Crisis) This category was indicative of incidents
participants reported as related to dealing with crisis and comprised 10 of the
incident reports. These struggles included dealing with deaths in the family, eating
disorders, sexual assault, as well as managing multiple social and academic
demands.
A 22 year old senior described the effects of dealing with an eating disorder
on her sense of self:
The incident is realizing and overcoming eating disorders and understanding
the reasons I did it. I took strength from my friends around me...most of my
friends have been going through their own. They encouraged me to go
through therapy and overcome my disorder. This changed me in so many
ways in that I now love myself and believe in myself.

This 21 year old senior described experiencing a death in the family:

64
My brother died from a drug overdose during the first semester of my
sophomore year. It was the worst thing I have ever experienced. Dealing with
his death was extremely difficult, but I believe it has made me a stronger
person in the end. I discovered who my real friends are and gained a stronger
sense of myself. I appreciate life more….

4. Receiving the support of sisters with in the sorority network. (Sorority
Network) This category was associated with 9 of the 100 reported incidents.
Participants reported experiencing the support of fellow sorority members,
welcoming new members and making them feel a part of the sorority, cultivating
friendships and connections, providing opportunities for the building of relationships
at a new member retreat, helping a sister in need during difficult times, and
supporting sisters in other academic or social endeavors (i.e., the marching band).
A 22 year old senior reported the experience of moving into her sorority
house freshman year:
When I moved into the house second semester of my freshman year and the
older girls who lived in the house were so nice to my roommate and I and
they made sure we felt welcome and included us in their activities. I didn’t
know the older girls well and it made me feel like these girls were really
happy to have me be part of the house and I felt comfortable in the house.

Another participant revealed the support of a sister after ending a romantic
relationship:
I had just had a fight with and broken up with my first boyfriend of college. I
was extremely upset and down the street at his house. I called one of my best
friends in the sorority and even though she was in pajamas and had her
glasses on she came and got me immediately from his frat house. I think the
incident was important to me because it showed me that this is part of what
sisterhood in a sorority is about, dropping everything if you have a sister in
need.

65
A 22 year old senior described the support of her sorority sisters in her
extracurricular endeavors:
I’m in the marching band as well as a sorority. My sisters got together and
made a giant banner for me and brought it to the game. I saw it from the field
during half time and it was awesome. b) The girls who made the sign were all
older members of the house. c) This was important because it showed how
much my sisters’ support me. d) It encouraged me to continue my
participation in multiple activities knowing that I would have the support of
really great friends.

5. Being elected or serving in a leadership position in a campus related
organization.(Campus Leadership) Eight responses fit this category which included
receiving a nomination for a position, receiving a majority of the votes to be elected
by fellow members, producing the school news, serving in a leadership position in a
service club, and running for a leadership position within university student
government.
A 20 year old junior described her leadership experience within the
University Student Government:
I joined USG, undergraduate student government, during the end of my
sophomore year. It has given me leadership experience and has allowed me to
meet new people outside of my usual group of friends. It has also allowed me
to meet people outside of my chosen field, business. The experience has
given me more confidence in my leadership abilities.

A 20 year old junior participant explained the effects of campaigning for a leadership
position on her sense of self:
Just in these past few weeks I ran for Student Body Vice President. It wasn’t
one particular incident but the experience of running that really impacted my
life. There were many people that were involved with this consisting of my
running mate, our volunteers, the other tickets, and the student body. I

66
learned a lot about myself while running, and even though I lost, I became a
stronger person because I ran.

One senior described her emotional experience as a leader:
I produced the school news last semester. Each week was very terrifying
because I was in charge of making all decisions and getting the show on the
air, but it was my best experience at [this university]. I worked with people
in my major (broadcast journalism) and learned how to work together with
them. It gave me more confidence in the field and helped me with problem
solving.

6. Learning about myself as a result of a romantic relationship. (Romantic
Relationships). Eight of the 100 incidents were involved in this category. They
sighted experiencing a serious relationship for the first time, navigating through
difficult relationships and dealing with betrayal as incidents having an impact on
their sense of self. Other incidents included ending a relationship, as well as gaining
insight from the negative relationship experiences of friends.
A 20 year old junior describes the effects of her first romantic relationship on
her sense of self:
…met my boyfriend of two years my freshman year. I had never had a
serious boyfriend in high school and not only was college a new experience,
but so was my relationship. I now understand how loving I can be towards
someone else.

A 19 year old junior participant described what she learned about herself as a result
of her romantic relationships:
…I realized that I didn’t need my boyfriend to go out and have a good time
and to get attention. I figured out that I was actually an attractive person and
that if I was confident other people would accept me and be eager to start up
friendships…I had become incredibly dependent on him…the realization that
I could move on without him and that I could stand alone as a person was
great progress for me.

67
Another participant discussed her reaction to a friend’s negative experience in a
relationship:
This incident really opened my eyes to how girls allow their sense of self to
be shaped by boys….While giving her advice, it made me realize that one
cannot allow a boy to dictate their conceptions of their own confidence,
worth, and legitimacy. I have used this incident to ground many of my own
decisions regarding boys and allow me to see the consequences of becoming
too attached to a toxic boy.

7. Making an important, independent decision for myself. (Decision) This
theme involved making a difficult ethical or personal decision irrespective of others
input (peer or family). These decisions included declaring a major, transferring to
another university or quitting an athletic team. Eight participants described
experiences in relation to this theme.
In regards to a difficult decision within the sorority, a 21 year old senior
explained:
I had to backup/support a difficult decision (due to the nature of my position
in the sorority). The decision involved a few of my friends. I learned to stand
up for what’s ethical and hope everyone else accepted it. I’ve become a
stronger leader as a result.

Another senior participant explained:
Experience was choosing to study for the LSAT this past summer while
renting a room in a fraternity and while most of my friends were relaxed and
hardly doing anything b. Best friends, boyfriend, housemate c. Even though
it was hard to stay in every night and study while my close friends were
relaxing, going to movies, bars, and everything else, I made the right decision
by giving almost all of that up for a solid 3-4 months. I sacrificed, worked
hard, and it paid off—I was just accepted to Harvard Law School. D.
Solidified that making sacrifices and smart choices, though difficult ones, is
worth it.

68
8. Making a commitment to community service and outreach. (Community)
Six student incidents were coded into this category. Participants described events
that included joining a mentoring program, a service organization and participating
in Alternative Spring break as important events in their development of identity.
One 21year old junior stated that:
Joining a mentoring program to help mentor young middle-school aged girls
in matters such as body issue, sex, drugs, alcohol, pregnancy, etc. other
people involved included the 30 or so other college mentors. This has been
the most valuable and rewarding experience I have had in college….

A junior participant described her experience with the Joint Educational Project:
My freshman year I participated in JEP (Joint Educational Project) which
allowed me to work with a first grade class for a semester. To supplement my
class, I worked with two other students to teach the first graders about
exercise, nutrition, and general health information. It was important to learn
that working in a group takes a lot of planning and effort, and also that giving
is a rewarding experience.

9. Sorority Affiliated Judgment or Rejection. (Rejection) Six incidents fit into
this category. This theme was defined by experiences of participants feeling judged,
dismissed or criticized by fellow sorority and fraternity members, while others
described experiences of dealing with various stereotypes in regards to sorority
membership by those outside of the Greek system.
A 20 year old junior described being stereotyped because of her sorority
affiliation her Freshman year:
Within my first few weeks at school, a group of boys out one night asked me
and my friends which house we belonged to. When we responded “Pi Phi”
they all high-fived us and told us that we were to be congratulated for making
it into the “hot” sorority. While immediately gratifying, after thinking back
on the incident I realized that I did not want to solely think of myself as a

69
member of the “hot” sorority, and that there was so much more to me and
each of the girls within my house. This experience opened my eyes to the
stereotypes that occur within the Greek community and made me in the long
run value myself as a person with more to offer than my appearance.

A 21 year old junior described an incident involving being judged by others within
the Greek community;
The first time I discovered a rumor that had been going around about me in
one fraternity for several months without me knowing about it. The other
person involved was just an acquaintance in that fraternity. It was important
because it was the first time something negative had been said about me for
no reason and widely publicized. It is important in the long-term because it
makes me re-evaluate who I spend time with and who I trust.

A 21 year old junior describes caring for a friend:
My best friend felt very sick after consuming too much alcohol. We were
with a group of people who didn’t’ really take notice to her discomfort. So, I
stepped away from the group and helped her out.

A senior participant described her compassion for a friend with this
statement:
The day before school started my sophomore year of college my best girl
friend and roommate who is not in my sorority revealed to me that she
has an eating disorder. I am the only friend that she has told and as I
comforted her I felt really close to her. This incident has given me my
sense of self as one who takes pride in her friendships and strives to
nurture others.

10. Having an experience of failure.(Failure) These five participant
experiences involved a personal failure in the form of not being hired for a job
opportunity after extensive interviews, performing poorly in a class, not being
accepted into a study abroad program, not receiving a bid from a sorority and not
getting into graduate school.

70
The following 21 year old senior described the experience of not getting into
medical school:
I didn’t get into one of my first choices of medical school relatively early in
the application process. I felt completely defeated. But my friends and family
rallied around me and convinced me to keep my head up and stay positive. I
learned that I can be tough and persevere even in hurtful or crushing
situations.

A 21 year old senior explained:
I was excited about a job opportunity and made it to the final round
interview. I didn’t have a connection to the company, that is, I didn’t “know”
anyone who worked there or who could make a call. I didn’t get an offer to
work there after graduation. I was upset because I was so excited about it
and I had invested a lot of time with them (6 hours for the last interview).

11. Making the transition from home to college. (Transition) Five incidents
comprised this theme and involved several aspects related to the new college
environment affecting participants’ sense of self. Examples of incidents included
meeting and interacting with new people, living in a sorority house, and balancing
work with school.
A 20 year old junior described:
…coming to school as a spring admit and meeting people, I also enjoyed just
being in LA and discovering things on my own away from home.

While 22 year old senior participant wrote:
Living in the dorms with a person I didn’t know (sharing a room, sharing
space, living with someone besides my immediate family).

12. Studying Abroad. Experiences involving Study Abroad opportunities
accounted for five of the one hundred incidents. Participants related their experiences
as facilitating their personal autonomy and independence. These experiences

71
included Studying Abroad in Prague, Australia, Spain and London. One senior
participant stated that she experienced:
…a new environment with new people and learning to adapt to a new culture,
city, country, family, friends and school.

…This experience was extremely important because I was in a completely
new environment with new people and learned how to adapt to a new city,
country, family and friends.

Another senior stated:
Studying abroad was an extremely influential experience. It changed my
sense of independence (I am now more comfortable doing things on my
own), my understanding of myself and my culture in a broader, global
context, and allowed me to get to know people that I would not otherwise
have met. Living in Spain was the best semester of my life, and it will always
have an effect on me.

13. Receiving personal or career guidance from others. (Guidance) The four
incidents that fit this theme involved participants receiving encouragement, advice or
constructive criticism from professors, student advisors, speakers or peers.
In regards to her peers, one 21 year old participant explained:
Receiving criticism from honest roommates about the way I act in certain
situations was important and really helped me think about the kind of person
I wanted to be perceived as. I now pay more attention to the things that come
out of my mouth.

A 20 year old junior described a classroom experience:
I took a sound design class as part of the core for my film production major.
My student advisor and professor really encouraged me and said that I had a
lot of talent. I had been doubting whether there was a place for me in film,
and I realized that sound design was my niche. My student advisor chose me
to be a sound designer of the film she is going to direct.”

72
14. Engaging in a selfless act of compassion: (Compassion) Four of the
participants described helping a friend in need. These needs included helping a friend
deal with an eating disorder, helping a friend to the hospital after being hurt, helping
a friend that had consumed too much alcohol as incidents pertaining to this category.
All descriptions involved giving priority to the friend.
A 21 year old senior describes an incident occurring her junior year:
A friend and roommate of mine got bit on the leg by a dog and needed a ride
to the emergency room. I was studying for the MCAT a week later and felt
that I really needed the time to myself to study. But I knew how important
that it was that she got to the hospital to get it cleaned up and I wanted her to
have someone there with her who she knew loved her and supported her.

In summary, the excerpts of each of these experiences represented the source
of the impact on the student’s identity development, as well as the importance of the
experience to their development. The participants were also asked to rate the
positivity as well as the eventual impact on their sense of self. The results of their
ratings is addressed in the next section.
Research Question Two
The second question that guided this study was: How positively did
participants perceive these experiences?
Positivity of Incidents
The themes with the highest mean positivity ratings were Study Abroad (7.0)
and Guidance (7.0). All participant incidents pertaining to these themes ranked the
experience as very positive. Other themes ranking high in positivity included:
Community (6.13) Campus Leadership (6.63) Sorority Network (6.56) Sorority

73
Leadership (5.7) and Sorority Membership (5.6). The themes of Decision (5.13,).
Compassion (4.75) Romantic Relationships (4.36) Transition (4.2) and Rejection
(3.17) received moderately high ratings. The lowest positivity rating were found in
regards to Crisis (2) and Failure (2.8).
Eventual Effect On Sense of Self
The third question that guided this study was: What was the perceived
positivity of the experiences on participants’ sense of self?
The highest rated theme in regards to positively impacting sense of self
involved Campus Leadership (6.88). The following themes were also rated highly:
Decision (6.3) Study Abroad (6.6) Guidance (6.5) Community (6.5) Sorority
Network (6.11) Sorority Leadership (6.0) Romantic Relationships (6.0) Transition
(6.0) Compassion (6.0) and Sorority Membership (5.6). Crisis (4.6) Failure (4.3) and
Rejection (4.4) received relatively high scores. The mean rankings of themes in
regards to eventual impact on sense of self did not fall below 4.33. Thus, most
incidents were perceived as positively impacting partiticipants’ identity
development.

74
Table 2. Comparison of Mean Positivity Ratings

75
Positivity vs. Eventual Impact on Self
When comparing the mean scores of the positivity and eventual effect on
sense of self, the data indicates that participants ranked the experiences to have a
substantial effect on their sense of self. Nine of the fourteen themes were rated
higher in regards to the positivity impact on sense of self than the immediate
perceived positivity of the experience. Those themes that were rated low in positivity
(Crisis, 2 Failure, 2.8: Rejection 3.17) , receive more positive ratings in regards to
their eventual effect on sense of self (Crisis, 4.6,; Failure, 4.40, Rejection, 4.33).
Four themed experiences that were rated very positive in the short run (Study
Abroad, 7; Guidance, 7Community, 6.83; Sorority Network (6.56) were slightly less
positive in regards their impact on participants sense of self. (Studying Abroad, 6.6;
Guidance, 6.5;; Community Service, 6.50; Sorority Network, 6.11).The mean
ratings of positivity and eventual impact on sense of self for incidents involving
sorority membership were the same (5.6).

76
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
This was one of few studies to have identified the sources of impact on the
identity development of sorority member students. The participant descriptions of
incidents and ratings provided rich data in regards to the identity development of
sorority member women. This chapter discusses the findings of the study.
First, the findings of this study are discussed in relation to sorority affiliation.
The second section describes the findings in regards to four key factors discussed in
the literature review: student involvement, relationships, crisis and autonomy. Next,
the findings are compared to empirical research on the negative impacts of Greek
affiliation and the conceptual research of Josselson and Chickering and Reisser.
Finally, the limitations of the study, directions for future research, implications for
practice and conclusion are addressed in this chapter.
Sorority Affiliation and Identity Development
Heida (1990) concluded that in regards to Greek organizations the “successes
are harder to detect than the failures” (p.3). In contrast, this study speaks to the many
successes of sorority organizations in providing educationally effective opportunities
to advance the identity development of its members. The results suggest that many
women thrive as a result of their sorority membership. Opportunities for
interpersonal relationships, leadership development and a psychological sense of
community are prevalent in the sorority setting. In addition, the interpersonal

77
relationships established within the sorority community help to facilitate the
development of autonomy.
This study confirmed that sorority-related experiences played a substantial
role in students’ perceptions of their identity development. Four of the 14 themes and
35% of the reported experiences pertained directly to sorority affiliation. These
themes were: sorority membership, sorority leadership, sorority network, and
sorority affiliated judgment or rejection. The incidents in the first three of these
categories were highly rated, both in the immediate and in terms eventual impact on
sense of self. Unsurprisingly, incidents in the fourth category which pertained to
rejection were rated less positively (M=3.17). The mean rating of the eventual
impact on sense of self for this theme were slightly higher (M=4.33).
These results seemed generally to confirm the suggestion by Kuh and Lyons
(1990) that sororities, and fraternities, may serve as safe places to examine one’s
identity. Many participants described experiences that dealt with factors associated
with female identity development. The prevalence of these factors within the sorority
environment is noteworthy. In an analysis of her sorority experience, Scheele (2003)
provides an eloquent synopsis of these factors:
In favoring autonomy over community, I was too quick to dismiss the ways
our sisterhood empowered us, both as individuals and as a collective, how it
gave us the opportunity to influence each other’s lives positively, and how it
anchored us within a close-knit community as we spread our figurative
wings. Sorority women are famous for their networking prowess; they create
opportunities for members to obtain leadership positions on campus and in
the ‘real world.’ More integral and lasting, however, is the confidence that an
older member can inspire in a younger one simply by suggesting a potential

78
outlet for her particular talents. I, certainly, thrived on this sort of recognition
(p.120).

The leadership opportunities, psychological sense of community, social
capital and mentorship implied by Scheele (2003) were prevalent in many of the
participant responses. Student affairs professionals need to assist women students in
becoming involved on campus, as sororities do.
The data from this study suggests that sororities may provide members with
opportunities to explore multiple dimensions of identity. That is group, leader and
social identities are encouraged within the sorority organization. A group identity is
fostered through a psychological sense of community, built through relationship and
connectedness, buffering the affiliated women student from a chilly climate. The
sorority network provides a strong support system that fosters their endeavors and
provides avenues to gain social capitol. The sorority allows them the ability to
master leadership skills with mentoring in a safe environment.
The sorority structure and standards are other factors that encourage the
identity development of its members. Four of the five National Panhellenic
Conference (NPC) standards of sorority membership were evident in student
responses and were linked with factors found to promote the identity development of
women. These standards include: instilling the values of their organizations and their
host institution, developing leadership skills and abilities, developing positive
relationships, developing citizenship through service and outreach. Few incidents
spoke to the first standard: positively affecting intellectual development, although

79
research reveals that sorority member students have higher academic achievement
and cognitive outcomes than other college student populations (Pascarella et. al,
2001; Pike & Askew, 1990).
College Experiences Sorority Member Students Perceive to Have Influenced Their
Identity
Whereas the results provided general support for the experience of being in a
sorority, they also were congruent with existing literature on psychosocial
development theory and research. Specifically, it is possible to organize these 14
obtained themes into the following key factors in student development that emerged
in my literature review. Powerful examples of Student Involvement, Relationships,
Crisis and Autonomy were found in participant incident reports. Table 3 lists these
over-arching categories and the themes they are associated with.
This section will begin with a brief representation of the themes as they relate
to these over-arching categories. Next, the 14 themes that emerged will be discussed
as they relate to student development research and theory.
Student Involvement
Student Involvement, as an overarching theme comes as no surprise. In
keeping with Astin’s (1985) theory of involvement and research on Greek affiliation,
the findings of this study overwhelmingly support the role of involvement in sorority
members’ development of identity. Thirty-four incidents and 4 of the 14 themes
concerned an experience related to involvement. These themes were named:
participating in rush and/or joining a sorority; being elected or serving in a sorority

80
leadership position; being elected or serving in a leadership position in a campus
related organization and making a commitment to community service and outreach.
Significantly, 19% of incidents of student involvement were sorority related. Forty
incidents mentioned sororities in some capacity, whereas 4 mentioned their fraternity
counterparts.

Table 3. Study Themes by Key Factor

Student Involvement
Participating in rush/ and or joining a sorority
Being elected or serving in a sorority leadership
Being elected or serving in a leadership position in a campus related
organization
Making a commitment to community service and outreach
Relationships
Receiving the support of sisters within the sorority network
Learning about myself as a result of a romantic relationship
Receiving personal or career guidance from others
Engaging in a selfless act of compassion
Crisis
Dealing with crisis
Sorority affiliated judgment or rejection
Having an experience of failure
Autonomy
Making an important, independent decision for myself
Making the transition from home to college
Studying Abroad

81
Participating in rush/ and or joining a sorority accounted for 10% of the total
responses and students described joining their sorority as having an “extreme impact
on the person I have become.” Another participant stated that “…..being chosen to
become a member of my sorority influenced my sense of who I am”. Most
discussed the positive impact of friendships within the sorority, while two of the
incidents were negative. One participant stated that “…..rush has been such a
negative experience that I have completely blocked out any and all positive
associations with my sorority – I am not friends with any of the girls at all.”
Although this student spoke to the negative impact sorority rush and membership
had on her sense of self, rating its degree of positivity very low (1 out of a possible
7) she rated the long-term impact of membership as very positive (7 out of a possible
7). Nevertheless, she stated that the sorority experience “did solidify my experience
of myself as a strong, independent woman who does not have to conform in order to
have fun and live an enjoyable life (as both my parents had portrayed) which is a
VERY big positive.” It seems that the sorority experience, albeit negative,
reinforced her self-understanding and helped her develop a sense of autonomy.
Several participants spoke of how sorority acceptance was a major milestone
in their college experience. Other participants found their sorority membership to
have a potential impact on their life in college and beyond. In fact, some used the
precise language found in the women’s identity development theories of Josselson
and Gilligan to describe their sorority acceptance. References were made to the
“connections,” “belonging,” and “relationships” that were developed as a result of

82
the sorority experience. One sorority member, who touched on both relationships
and belonging wrote:
Receiving your bid from a particular house completely dictates the path that
college will lead you on - from who your life-long friends will be, to what
major you may cho(o)se, and what potential spouses you may meet. In the
long run, your feeling of belonging within the house you are placed and
whether or not you look highly upon them (which I most definitely do), will
define a college woman and has most definitely defined me.

The participant revealed that choosing to become a member of a sorority as part of
an out-of -class experience in college had an impact on how she defined herself and
that it had provided a sense of belonging, as well as an arena for establishing
relationships with peers.
This woman also validated Josselson’s (1996) claims of the importance of
friendships in relation to identity development. In fact, 50% of participant responses
in this theme mentioned incidents with friends in their responses. Handler’s (1995)
claims of sorority membership as gender strategy in dealing with both men and
women are validated by this participant, as well, indicating that sorority membership
may play a role in establishing friendships, as well as heterosexual romantic
relationships by influencing the “potential spouses you may meet.” Research by
Gilmartin (2005), Holland and Eisenhart (1990), and, Berscheid, Snyder and Onoto
(1989) also revealed that heterosexual romantic relationships were important factors
in adolescent women’s identity development.
Kuh (1982) posited that the quality of involvement is enhanced by sorority
members involvement within the chapter, as well as within the broader college

83
community. Thus, a more active component of student involvement entails
leadership. Leadership development is correlated with involvement, as well (Astin,
1993). Hunt and Rentz (1994) identified a significant correlation between sorority
involvement of junior standing women and positive impacts on psychosocial
development in their study. That trend was not clear in this study for 32% of the
incidents took place during the junior year.
Research by Astin (1993) revealed that female students are underrepresented
in leadership position at coeducational colleges. The findings of this study, however,
revealed otherwise. It is notable that two of the four themes associated with student
involvement concerned leadership roles, accounting for 18% of all reported
incidents. Being Elected or Serving In A Sorority Leadership Position and Being
Elected or Serving In a Leadership Position In A Campus Related Organization, are
two themes that participants associated with identity development. Sorority
membership may provide women college students with opportunities for leadership,
and possibly serve to facilitate the “development of leadership” as Kezar and
Moriarty’s (2000) findings suggest. Previous research links leadership roles with
adolescent women’s identity development (Weston & Stein, 1977). Thus, the
involvement and leadership opportunities present within the sorority environment
may aid in the identity development of sorority affiliated college women.
Abrahamson (1987) found that sorority women participated in leadership activities
within the sorority at a higher percentage, when compared to other leadership roles

84
on campus. Although these data do not permit such comparisons, it is clear that
sorority leadership was important to these women.
One participant wrote “I feel like I’ve found an identity by taking major
leadership position in the house.” Leadership skills they reported having obtained as
a result of their positions within the house included learning to communicate and
“work with a diverse group of individuals,” supporting Bialek and Lloyd’s (1998)
findings. Other aspects of self affected as a result of their sorority leadership
experience included developing “authority, integrity and a personal code of ethics.”
As to being elected or serving in a leadership position in a campus related
organization, three of the eight participants noted that this leadership experience
helped them build confidence, similar to research findings by Bialek and Lloyd
(1998).
Dugan (2006) found a statistically significant relationship between
community service and leadership development. Interestingly, the final category
linked to student involvement was: Making a commitment to community service and
outreach. Community service is an integral part of the sorority organization. One of
the NPC Standards reads: developing citizenship through service and outreach.
Although only 6 of the 100 incidents pertained to making a commitment to
community service and outreach, the findings support the NPC standards and
research on community service as a component of sorority life. Thus, sorority
membership facilitates leadership development through involvement in community
service.

85
Mentorship in identity development was an issue in 12% of participants’
responses. Serving as mentors for others or being the product of mentoring was a
part of the participant experience. One participant noted that her leadership position
with in the sorority helped her define herself “as a leader and role model for other
people.” Students mentioned mentoring others and participating in volunteer
opportunities in Ecuador and Uruguay Other examples of mentorship were found in
incidents involving Learning about myself as a result of a romantic relationships and
Receiving the support of sisters within the sorority network. These themes will be
reviewed in the next category, relationships.
Relationships
Josselson and Gilligan stress the importance of relationships and connections
in women’s identity formation. Relationship building seems to be an important part
of sorority life, as well. Indeed, one of the NPC standards includes “developing
positive relationships” within the sorority chapter.
Themes involving relationships as sources of impact on identity development
accounted for 25% of the responses. This supports findings by Pearson and Bruess,
(2001) and Kroger and Green, (1996) that students mentioned relationships as a
factor in their identity development more frequently than any other category.
Although many incidents did not fit specifically within the overarching theme of
relationships, participants did at some point, reference this theme. Significantly, 57
of the 100 participants mentioned friendships or romantic relationships with peers as
a factor in their identity development. The following themes associated with

86
relationships as a key factor are: Sorority network, Learning about Myself As A
Result of A Romantic Relationship, Receiving Personal or Career Guidance from
Others, and Engaging In A Selfless Act Of Compassion.
Engaging In A Selfless Act of Compassion was placed within the overarching
theme of relationships as most incidents related to placing the needs of peers before
the needs of the participant. Four of the 100 incidents were coded in this theme. In
one incident, a student came to the aid of a beached seal. Although her peers
mocked her compassion for the animal, the participant felt that the incident was
important “because it proved that I can stick to my guns in the face of people I so
desperately want to appreciate me. This self-knowledge has strengthened my sense
of self.” Other participants shared experiences of helping a friend in need as a self-
affirming experience.
One theme in relation to receiving mentorship involved study participants
receiving personal or career guidance from others. The four women who reported
incidents in this category described faculty and peers having offered guidance and
encouragement. One participant described her experience in a sound design class:
My student advisor and professor really encouraged me and said that I had a
lot of talent. I had been doubting whether there was a place for me in film,
and I realized that sound design was my niche. My student advisor chose me
to be a sound designer of the film she is going to direct.

Receiving the support of sisters within the sorority network is another theme
that involved relationships and was represented by 9 incidents. Several aspects of
social capital that have been found to permeate women’s colleges, were also found

87
within the sorority subculture in this study. The findings of this study suggest that at
this coeducational institution, the sorority network serves as the social capital
component in women’s higher education. Similar to Putnam’s (1995) description of
social capital, Metzger and Wright (2007) describe social capital as “the advantages
created by a person’s location in a structure of relationships” and explain that
“….some people gain more success in a particular setting through connections to
other people” (Metzger & Wright, 2007, p.5).
Receiving mentorship was evident in the incidents in this category, as well.
Twelve participants mentioned the significant help of mentors within the sorority
aiding them with a particular skill or achievement. The incidents describe a form of
mentorship inherent within the sorority network. Leadership opportunities and a
psychological sense of community, specifically, were referenced in many of the
incidents. Examples of support and encouragement, as well as opportunities for
leadership are evident in participant experiences. One student described how she was
asked to apply for a leadership position in a campus related student organization: an
email request “was sent by a current board members who I had met in my sorority.”
The participant also revealed that this experience was “empowering”, and raised her
“self-esteem.”
Two other participants referenced senior members of their sorority chapter
supporting their endeavors. One participant stated that the senior members made her
feel “welcome” and “comfortable” within the sorority. Another participant stated that
the support of her sorority sisters made her “feel apart of the school right away”

88
providing for a psychological sense of community (Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1995;
Johnson, 1972; Robson, 1966; Scott, 1965). In regards to identity development, and
her sorority sisters one participant revealed that “they have shaped me and I them
into the people we are today.”
Although sorority member students at coeducational institutions may not
have as many female role models as their counterparts in women’s colleges, they do
benefit from connections with sorority chapter sisters that serve as role models
within the organization. In regards to working closely with a sorority chapter
President, one participant wrote “I learned a lot from her about how to deal with
certain situations, how to time manage, and how to work with divers groups of
people.” Thus, mentorship within the sorority organization was apparent.
Another participant described the support of her sister after ending a romantic
relationship. She states that the incident was important to the participant “because it
showed me that this is part of what sisterhood in a sorority is about, dropping
everything if you have a sister in need.” The following theme Learning About Myself
As A Result Of A Romantic Relationship further depicts the importance of these types
of incidents to students perceived identity development.
The importance of romantic relationships in adolescent development was in
accordance with previous conceptual and empirical research as well (Brown, 1999;
Gilmartin, 2005; Holland & Eisenhart, 1990). Bernsheid, Snyder and Onoto (1989)
found that undergraduate participants named romantic relationships as the closest
interpersonal relationship they had experienced, accounting for 47% of responses.

89
This study also found romantic relationships to have an affect on the identity
development of study participants. Eight incidents were of that type. Most incidents
involved participants dealing with conflict or dishonesty.
One participant stated that she learned about herself as a result of a friend’s
negative romantic experience. The participant states that “this incident really opened
my eyes to how girls allow their sense of self to be shaped by boys….” She later
reveals that “while giving her advice, it made me realize that one cannot allow a boy
to dictate their conceptions of their own confidence, worth, and legitimacy.” Scheele
(2003) also posits that she witnessed many of her sorority sisters “defining
themselves in terms of their boyfriends or other members of the sorority.” (Scheele,
2003, p.120).
Another participant described how she learned to become autonomous as a
result of her romantic relationships. She writes “I realized that I didn’t need my
boyfriend to go out and have a good time and get attention…..I had become
incredibly dependent on him…..I feel like the realization that I could move on
without him and that I could stand alone as a person was great progress for me.”
Many other examples of experiences involving autonomy are found in the next
category.
Autonomy
The development of autonomy is considered central in the formation of
identity (Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Erikson, 1968). The role of relationships as
facilitating agents in developing autonomy has been well documented (Greeley &

90
Tinsley, 1988; Straub & Rogers, 1986; Straub, 1987; Taub, 1995). Komives and
Schuh (1988) posit that “those who have worked extensively with young women
would agree that young women often define their identity through relationships and
need to address the nature of their relationships with others before they successfully
have a sense of their own identity. Then they can move from dependence to
differentiating and appreciating independence” (p. 26). The findings of this study
corroborate Komives and Schuh’s (1988) assertions as well as previous empirical
research on women’s identity development.
Baier and Whipple (1990) found Greek member students to be more
dependent on peers and family than were not affiliated students. This study did not
provide data that corroborate those findings, but 18% of participants described
experiences that promoted gaining independence; 3 of the 14 themes involved
experiences linked to gaining a sense of autonomy. These categories were: Making
an important/independent decision for myself, Making the transition from home to
college, and Studying abroad.
Newman and Newman (2001) posit that group identity provides for a sense
of connection and belonging and is of great importance to adolescent development,
serving a “more basic, primitive need than individual identity” (Newman &
Newman, 2001, p. 520). One participant addressed this notion directly by stating that
joining her sorority had “an extreme impact on her identity development. She also
states that “although it had an impact on the way I perceived myself (since I
represent not only myself, but also part of an organization) I think over the years I

91
have attained more of a distance and independence even within the organization”.
The student’s perceptions of experiences is important for two reasons. First, it
reaffirms Newman and Newman’s view that group identity is important to the
development of self, as this participant viewed her identity as represented
individually, as well as a part of the organization. Second it reinforces findings that
relationships and connections may facilitate the development of autonomy for
women, as Josselson (1996) and Gilligan (1982) suggest.
Another participant described how a friend’s shock of her affiliation with a
sorority helped her come to several realizations in relation to her autonomy: “I am
my own person and no activity I do or partake in shapes who I am or defines what I
am.”
Eight incidents dealt with Making an important/independent decision for
myself, irrespective of others input. In regards to supporting a difficult decision
involving several peers one participant wrote “I learned to stand up for what’s ethical
and hope everyone else accepted it. I’ve become a stronger leader as a result.” Three
participants felt that declaring their major was an important, independent decision,
while one participant discussed her decision to transfer to this private westcoast
university, despite her “parents wishes.”
Five participants discussed Making the transition from home to college. In
regards to identity development, one participant wrote
I have become more comfortable in foreign situations, I know myself, and I
know what I feel is right and I am able to handle things as I have become
more mature.

92
Other participants noted the development of “time management skills” while
having the experience of living with a roommate; and “discovering things on my
own away from home” also was relevant to their experience.
An unanticipated factor in participant responses involved descriptions of
Studying Abroad as having been an influential experience. One participant
commented studying abroad had changed her “sense of independence (I am now
more comfortable doing things on my own).” Other participants also referenced
“being more independent” and the issue of autonomy was evident in one participants
statement that she could “survive and thrive in a foreign country on my own.” All
five participants in the Study Abroad category discussed their independence within
the Study Abroad experience as affecting their sense of self and gaining a
perspective on their ability to cope autonomously. One participant wrote that
Studying Abroad was a “very influential experience in shaping my character and
helping me find myself”. Three other participants stated that they gained an
understanding of self as a result of their experience. Three of the five participants
discussed the study abroad experience in terms of its impact on their lives. One
stated it “was the most incredible experience of my life, while others stated that it
was “the best semester of my life” and the “most memorable experience of my life.”
The positive evaluations were reflected as well in the quantitative scores they
provided for current and eventual impact on sense of self.
Although these incidents represented only 5 of the 100 incidents, study
abroad received the highest possible rating in terms of positivity, by all five

93
participants (M=7.0). The eventual impact of the incident on their sense of self also
received high ratings(M= 6.6). Several participants addressed their identity
development, specifically, as part of the Study Abroad experience.
Crises
Crises may serve as a key factor in identity development (Erikson, 1968;
Josselson, 1996). Significantly, then 21 percent of participants reported incidents
involved a crisis. These incidents were coded into themes that included: Dealing with
crisis, Sorority affiliated judgment of rejection, and Having an experience of failure.
Ten of the 100 participants described incidents involved dealing with crisis. Two of
the incidents involved dealing with deaths in the family. One participant explained
that as a result of her sibling’s death she “gained a stronger sense of [her]self.”
Another participant described acknowledging and treating her eating disorder
and stated that her friends had been supportive, but added that “…..most of my
friends have been going through their own…..” This statement is quite telling as
empirical research reveals higher prevalence of eating disorders within the sorority
(Kurtzman, Yager, Landsverk, Wiesmeier & Bodurka, 1989; Schulken, Pinciaro,
Sawyer, Jensen & Hoban, 1997). One other participant described helping a friend
deal with her eating disorder as affecting her sense of self.
Crises is evident as well in the theme, Sorority Affiliated Judgment or
Rejection. Four of the six incidents dealt with being judged or rejected by members
of the Greek community. In regards to being judged by Greek member students, a
participant described an experience where potential sorority members were ridiculed

94
for their appearance, but welcomed when accepted to the sorority. This participant
revealed that in regards to her sorority sisters behaviors “it made me wonder whether
girls who had rushed me really liked me at all, or if I was just a number to them.”
Another sorority participant described being ignored by a “big sister” in the house.
In regards to the sorority environment, she states: “I felt like I was back in middle
school and I wanted to quit the sorority right there for making me question myself
and my social skills”
Two incidents dealt with people outside of the Greek community judging
participants for being affiliated with a sorority. After being congratulated for
membership in a “hot” sorority by a group of boys, a participant noted her realization
that she did not want to be viewed exclusively as a member of a sorority, and that
“there was so much more to me and each of the girls within the house.” This
participant also stated that there are “stereotypes that occur within the Greek
community” while another participant stated that her experience helped her realize
that “sorority life does NOT always reflect reality.”
Another participant described the way that independent students treated
sorority member students within the art school. This incident spoke to the stereotypes
that permeate college campuses in relation to Greek organizations. The participant
wrote:
….to be quite honest, I do not feel sorority girls are very well liked or taken
seriously. For whatever reason there is a general consensus that people
involved in Greek life aren’t creative or dedicated…I have no idea where this
idea is derived from, but it has been a difficult stereotype to break. I would
say this is a negative thing. On the first day of every class I have to face

95
judgment, and then spend the rest of the semester redeeming myself. I really
resent that people make such assumptions and it has been a difficult thing for
me to deal with.”

The final section having to do with Crisis is having an experience of failure.
Some of the five incidents dealt with a personal sense of failure and involved not
being accepted into graduate school, a study abroad program, as well as a sorority.
Findings on the Negative Impacts of Greek Affiliation
Incidents of hazing and alcohol abuse are well-documented in research on
Greek member students. The findings of this study suggest that issues occur, but that
for the most part they did not precipitate a critical incident. Experiences related to
alcohol use and abuse were reported in 6 of the 100 incidents; as one participants
noted that in regards to “…Greeks in college…drinking seems to be the norm.”
Incidents involving substance abuse were mentioned in two incidents. No specific
mention of hazing practices were made although, the incidents pertaining to the
theme being judged or rejected by others was for the most part inflicted by other
Greek member students or independents that judged participants sorority affiliation.
One participant referenced an ex-boyfriend pressuring her to be intimate and
that her refusal led to this important realization: “It was the first time I really felt like
I made a choice for myself and catered to my needs” The participant also reveals the
importance of this incident: “…I believe every college girl can relate to a story like
this one—I think this happens much more often than one would think” Another
incident found in the category of crisis, involved a participant revealing that she had
been sexual assaulted by an acquaintance. Previous research confirms an association

96
of sexual coercion and assault on sorority member students (O’Shaughnessey, &
Palmer, 1990; Tyler, Hoyt & Whitbeck (1998). It is important to note, however, that
neither of these incidents of gender violence involved fraternity member students,
contrary to research findings (Copenhaver & Grauerholz (1991).
Josselson’s Four status model of women’s identity development:
It is difficult to determine at exactly what stage of Josselson’s women’s
identity development model the participant women of this study are associated with.
However, it can be determined that these women have made a commitment to an
identity involving sorority membership as part of their social identity and thus may
be considered in the Foreclosure-Status-Purveyors of Heritage status. No
determination can be made in regards to participant women actively searching for
their identities, as defined by the Daughters of Crisis or Moratorium Status. Few to
no participants can be categorized within the Lost Sometimes Found Women, since
most participants had dealt with some sort of crisis and commitment as evidenced by
their experiences. Several participants described incidents exhibiting separate
identities of the Identity Achievers or Pavers of the Way by breaking away from the
psychological ties to their childhood. Participants described making decisions that
went against their parents wishes or decisions that went contrary to their peers.
Chickering’s Seven Vectors of Development
Chickering (1969) advocated interaction of students with other students of
diverse backgrounds as a means of developing tolerance and understanding.
Although a homogenous participant sample, would suggest a lack of meaningful

97
interactions, this study revealed that students participated in Study Abroad Programs
(5%) as well as oversees volunteer opportunities (2%) in which such encounters with
students of diverse background could take place.” Four of the five incidents referred
to “experiencing a new culture.” One participant stated that she “was in a completely
new environment with new people and learned how to adapt to a new city, country,
family and friends.”
Examples of Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) developmental vectors were
also found in student responses. Several participants referenced the Achieving
Competence vector through the strengthening of interpersonal relationships evident
in their experience. One participants sorority leadership experience proved that she
could “…take on a major project, work in groups, lead 150 people and have a
successful outcome. This taught me real life skills and how to work in a team
environment.” As to the completion of a difficult course with the guidance of a
professor and boyfriend, a participant reported that the class “…instilled an immense
sense of accomplishment in me and I’m extremely proud of my grade. It’s become
one of the factors in my decision to attend law school in the future.”
Managing Emotions, the second of Chickering’s vectors was also evident.
Regarding a boyfriend’s dishonesty one participant described her reaction at the
time: “I was fuming mad but I kept my cool in front of everyone and had an
assertive conversation with him the next day when he meekishly realized he had
done something wrong.” The participant demonstrated her ability to control her
impulses in order to cope with the situation.

98
Another participant overwhelmed with academic and sorority responsibilities,
states that “…when you are in a situation like that you have to ignore negative things
that others say and just do whatever you have to get done.” This is a good example
of a student developing coping strategies to deal with disruptive emotions.
Another participant stated that her rejection from graduate school resulted in
her feeling “completely defeated.” This experience, however, taught her to
“persevere” and that “…this character trait will help me to be strong and less
emotional during difficult times in the future.”
Many participant experiences related to the Moving through Aautonomy
Ttowards Iindependence Vector. Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) state that this
vector involves balancing one’s need to belong with one’s need to be independent.
Regarding the decision to join a sorority, one participant stated that the incident had
an impact on the way she perceived herself as an individual, as well as a member of
an organization: “I think over the years I have attained more of a distance and
independence even within the organization.” Another participant experience spoke
to the development of self-sufficiency after ending a romantic relationship the
participant states: “I feel like the realization that I could move on without him and
that I could stand alone as a person was great progress for me.”
After dealing with a crisis, another participant expressed her realization in
regards to her own independence: This experience “…showed me how codependent I
am and in a way made me want to be able to rely on myself more….”

99
Most participant experiences referenced developing mature interpersonal
relationships as having an impact on their identity. Chickering and Reisser (1993)
contend that peer interactions provide for a learning environment and help shape the
student’s personal identity. While serving as the President of her sorority chapter,
one participant noted that another member “questioned [her] ability to lead.” The
participant then stated that the experience “…really affected my confidence…made
me question myself. But it taught me how to handle situations diplomatically, how to
work under pressure of peer-evaluation etc.” Relating the experience of helping a
friend with an eating disorder, one participant stated that “I am the only friend that
she has told and as I comforted her I felt really close to her. This incident has given
me my sense of self as one who takes pride in her friendships and strives to nurture
others.” Another participant stated that the sorority friendships she has built “…will
last throughout my life and still continue to mold me into a well-rounded individual.”
Most participants did not speak to establishing identity directly, however
many incidents dealt with factors related to participants finding their sense of self as
a result of an experience. In regards to being judged as a result of her sorority
affiliation, one participant stated that she “discovered that I had never molded or
changed my attitudes to become a typical “sorority” girl. It made me realize that I am
my own person and no activity I do or partake in shapes who I am or defines what I
am.” In reference to a difficult experience, one participant stated: “I learned that I
have to be confident in the decisions I make and trust myself and my instincts.”

100
Developing purpose, the fifth of Chickering & Reisser’s vectors, was also
found in participant responses. One participant stated that being elected to a
leadership position within her sorority house made her “realize[d] how much I enjoy
helping the house and helping my best friends.” Another participant described how
mentoring 8
th
grade girls through a student service organization helped her develop a
sense of purpose in relation to her identity. The participant stated “I can see myself
dedicating my time (now and beyond college) to equal education for inner-city /poor
youth.” After participating in campus community service organization, another stated
that she “will always look to do community service.”
Last but not least, the developing integrity vector involves the developing and
internalizing personal values and beliefs. Several participants described experiences
where personal values and beliefs were solidified. One such participant stated that as
a result of a major leadership role she “developed authority, integrity, and a personal
code of ethics.” Another participant in a sorority leadership position described
having to make a difficult decision involving other sisters in the house. She states
that she “leaned to stand up for what’s ethical and hope everyone else accepted it.
I’ve become a stronger leader as a result.”
Limitations of the Study
Several limitations of this study warrant note. One concerns the selection of
participants. Only those sorority members affiliated with the National Panhellenic
Conference (NPC) were recruited. However, NPC membership nationally remains
predominantly Caucasian and represents 26 historically Caucasian sororities. It is

101
therefore, no surprise that 90% of participants in this study were of European
descent. Because the obtained results may have been different if the sample
participants were of diverse ethnic backgrounds, it would be important to use a
broader recruitment strategy that have greater ethnic diversity.
A second limitation was that all participants were recruited from a single
university. This may have implications for external validity to other college
campuses. That is, this particular campus might recruit a different type of sorority
member or have sorority conventions that were significantly unique to affect the
result. Therefore, future studies should examine the impact of sororities with
members of diverse backgrounds that include participants from private and public
universities with Greek organizations on campus.
Directions for Future Research
Some researchers believe that Greek organizations are antithetical to the
mission statements of universities (Baier & Whipple, 1990; Wechsler, Kuh &
Davenport, 1996, Maisel, 1990). Others contend that the criticism of Greek
organizations is unsubstantiated. Pike & Askew (1990) state that “to the degree that
student involvement in learning is a desirable goal, universities may do well to
promote Greek membership” (p.18). Although there are negative aspects to Greek
organizations, and these problems have been extensively researched, the lack of
research on responsive interventions ultimately perpetuates their existence. Sound
empirical research is needed to successfully address factors such as alcohol abuse
and eating disorders, in hopes of implementing appropriate solutions. Potential

102
solutions to this challenge include seeking funding opportunities for research, as well
as publications that solicit research on Greek organizations. Published research
would help to disseminate information in regards to fraternities and sororities and
provide knowledge to students, parents, student affairs professionals, as well as
media outlets.
Sorority organizations have shared a history with American higher education
for over 150 years. We must understand how sorority affiliation has affected the
development of women college students of yesterday and today. Further research is
necessary to examine the programs and objectives of sorority organizations in order
to better understand their contributions to higher education. As the data from this
study suggests, sororities may address the developmental needs of women to a
greater extent than the programs implemented by student affairs professionals. Thus,
studying the sorority environment may serve in identifying effective organizational
practices that promote the identity development of women college students. Those
practices that promote student involvement, leadership and social capital within the
sorority setting can and should be expanded to include all women students in higher
education.
Implications for Practice
Knefelkamp (1982) asserts that theory serves as “a common language” within
the “community of scholars” on college campuses (p. 6). If theory serves as the
foundation for student affairs practices as McEwen (2003) suggests, then relevant
theories that inform practice are invaluable. Traditional theories, however, lack

103
applicability to differing populations, especially women. The use of theoretical
models that are inapplicable to differing populations may prove detrimental to
informing practice and policy within the university setting. Josselson’s notions of
connections and competence as well as Gilligan’s emphasis on the importance of
relationships in women’s identity development are validated in this study, as well as
in previous research. These theoretical frameworks on women’s identity
development are of no value if practitioners do not utilize them as frameworks to
guide policy and research.
Strange (1994) presented a framework of 14 propositions offering them as
“an agenda for scholars and practitioners in the field” (p.399). One proposition, deals
directly with women’s identity development and its implications for practice. She
asserted that “students differ in how they construct and interpret their experiences,
and such differences offer important guides for structuring the education process” (p.
402). Student affairs professionals are vital in supporting tasks and creating
opportunities that aid in the development of students’ complex identities. In light of
research on women’s identity development, further investigation is necessary to
determine if higher education practitioners take the developmental differences
associated with gender into account when creating and implementing policy in
regards to students. If student affairs professionals are to best serve the needs of the
differing populations on college campuses, then a better understanding of gender
specific development is necessary.

104
It is likely that the design of educationally purposeful environments of the
past have not taken the role of gender into consideration. For example, autonomy
may have less salience for women than it has for men. Yet the very notion of “going
away to college” in and of itself is embedded in the notion of developing autonomy.
Women college students may feel alienated as Hall and Sandler (1982) suggest. The
design of college environments may have led to a “chilly climate” that neglects or
undermines a woman’s developmental needs of connectedness and relationships
while promoting an environment that fosters autonomy, a vector more aligned with
the development of males.
If women need to master such relationship tasks in order to facilitate
autonomy, then a paradigm shift in campus practice and policy are necessary.
Professional development should be available to student affairs professionals so they
are aware of gender specific development and do not use a “one size fits all”
approach in meeting the needs of diverse students. In addition, developing and
fostering student programs that allow for peer interactions will facilitate the identity
development of women on the contemporary college campus. Academic
programming and student affairs professionals should attempt to facilitate this task
by creating opportunities to build relationships and connectedness. In light of these
gender specific development needs, programs such as freshman orientation, may
require reevaluation and modification.
Greek organizations are seen as visible and controversial college sub-cultures
on college campuses (Heida, 1990; Maisel; 1990). As evidenced by data in this

105
study, many Greek students feel that they have been scrutinized. Because of the
negative publicity they have received, most fraternity and sorority members are
reticent to share their experiences as Greek members. Yet, the resulting knowledge
gaps serve as “organizational barriers” that hinder progress for this college sub-
culture (Clark & Estes, 2002, p.45).
To address these knowledge gaps, communication might be encouraged
between Greek organizations, student affairs professionals, parents, faculty, staff and
students. For example, forums would be scheduled to discuss many of the pertinent
issues in regards to Greek organization. Many of the perceptions, fact or fraudulent
would be addressed in these forums. These forums would help to create and provide
interventions to effectively address problems, such as alcohol abuse and eating
disorders, within the Greek community, as well as foster research. Thus, the forums
would be used to “…provide knowledge, skills, and motivational support for
everyone” (Clark & Estes, 2002, p.118).
Researchers need to isolate the normative features of the college environment
that seem to encourage successful academic and developmental outcomes for
students. The benefits of Greek organizations have been neglected in student affairs
research and practice. Thus, the programs that sororities implement to foster identity
development of women, are not being extended to other groups and contexts.
Greek organizations that have been found to provide the optimal environment
for members should be identified and benchmarked. A report by the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Commission on productivity states that “a characteristic of

106
all best practice US firms…is an emphasis on benchmarking: comparing the
performance of their products and work processes with those of world leaders in
order to achieve improvement and measure progress” (Boxwell, 1994, p.37). In order
to ensure best practices as outcomes for Greek organizations and other student
populations in higher education, benchmarking would be utilized. Best practices
would be implemented and goals would be established to emulate the benchmarked
Greek organization.
Conclusion
This study sought to fill an important void in what is known about sorority
member student identity development. Both the participant descriptions of incidents
and ratings provided rich data in regards to the perceived sources of impact on the
identity development of sorority member women. First, the importance of student
involvement on the development of women’s identity was validated. The prevalence
of leadership related experiences and skills described in the incidents was
noteworthy, as well. Second, the significance of establishing relationships as a factor
as well as a facilitator of autonomy in women’s identity development was also
represented in the data. Third, the role of the sorority as an opportunity structure for
several forms of social capitol was apparent. Last, but not least, the importance of
experiences involving crisis and commitment were perceived to significantly impact
sorority women’s identity development.
Chickering (1969) has stated that “a student’s most important teacher is
another student” (p. 253). Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) also state that “the

107
influence of peers may be as great or greater than that of faculty” (p. 313). Student
affairs professionals must recognize the impact that peer groups may have on college
students developmental process. The finding suggest that sororities are effective in
providing their members with developmentally significant opportunities,
relationships and skills. As many of the factors discussed in this study involved the
sorority environment to some degree, the recommendations from this study would be
to look at factors within the sorority environment, specifically, that foster the identity
development of women. A study focusing on the effects of the sorority environment
may bring developmentally effective practices to light

108
REFERENCES
Abrahamawicz, D. (1988). College involvement, perception, and satisfaction. A
study of membership in student organizations. Journal of College Student
Development, 29, 233-238.

Abrahamson, J.P. (1987). The Influence of Student Involvement by Sorority
Membership. Bloomington, Ind: Center for the Study of the College
Fraternity.

Adams-Curtis, L.E. & Forbes, G.B. (2004). College women’s experiences of sexual
coercion: A review of cultural perpetrator, victim, and situational variables.
Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 5, 91-122.

Archer, S.L. (1985). Career and/or family: The identity process for adolescent girls.
Youth and Society, 16, 289-313.

Astin, A. W. (1977). Four Critical Years: Effects of College on Beliefs, Attitudes,
and Knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student Involvement: A Developmental Theory for Higher
Education. Journal of College Student Development, 25(4): 297-308.

Astin, A. W. (1985a). Involvement: The Cornerstone of Excellence. Change, 17(4):
35-39.

Astin, A.W. (1985b). Achieving educational excellence. A critical assessment of
priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A.W. (1992). What really matters in general education: Provocative findings
from a national study of student outcomes. Perspectives, 22, 23-46.

Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited (1st
Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A.W. (1999) Student Involvement: A developmental theory for higher
education. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 518-519.

Baer, J.S. & Carney, M.M. (1993). Biases in the perceptions of the consequences of
alcohol use among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 54(1), 54-
60.

109
Baier, J.L. & Whipple, E.G. (1990). Greek Values and attitudes. A comparison with
independents. NASPA Journal, 28, 43-53.
Baird, L.L. (1969). The effects of college residence groups on students’ self-
concepts, goals, and achievement. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 47,
1015-1021.

Baumeister, R.F. & Sommer, K.L. (1997). What do men want? Gender Differences
and Two Spheres of Belongingness: Comments on Cross and Madsen.
Psychological Bulletin. 122(1) 38-44.

Berscheid, E., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. (1989). The Relationship Closeness
Inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 792-807.

Bialek, S.C., & Lloyd, A.G., (1998). Post Graduation Impact of Student Leadership.
American College Personnel Association, p. 1-6.

Boeringer, S.B., Shehan, C.L., & Akens, R.L. (1991). Social contexts and social
learning in sexual coercion and aggression: Assessing the contribution of
fraternity membership. Family Relations, 40, 58-64.

Boxwell, R.J. (1994) Benchmarking for Competitive Advantage. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Brown, B.B. (1999). You’re going out with who? Peer group influences on
adolescent romantic relationships. In W. Furman, B.B. Brown, & C. Feiring.
(Eds.), The development of romantic relationships in adolescence (p. 291-
329). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Buczynski, P. L. (1991). Longitudinal relations among intellectual development and
identity during the first two years of college: A structural equation modeling
analysis. Research in Higher Education, 32, 571-583.

Campbell, K. and R.A. Rosenfeld. 1985. “Job Search and Job Mortality: Sex and
Race Differences.” Research in the Sociology of Work. 3: 147-174.

Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd Edition). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Chickering, A.W. (1969). Education and Identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

110
Clancy, S.M., & Dollinger, S.J. (1993). Identity, self and personality. Identity Status
and the Five-Factor Model of personality. Journal of Research in
Adolescence, 3, 227-245.

Clark, R.E. & Estes, F. (2002). Turning Research into Results: A guide to selecting
the right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.

Clark,J., & Zehr, D. (1993). Other women can: Discrepant performance predictions
for self and same-sex other. Journal of College Student Development, 34, 31-
35.

Collins, W.A. (2003). More Than Myth: The Developmental Significance of
Romantic Relationships During Adolescence. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 13(1), 1-24.

Copenhaver, S., & Grauerholz, E. (1991). Sexual victimization among sorority
women: Exploring the link between sexual violence and institutional
practices. Sex Roles, 24, 31-41.

Cramer, P. (2000). Development of identity: Gender makes a difference. Journal of
Research in Personality, 34, 42-72.

Cross, S. E., & Madsen, L. (1997). Models of the self: self-construals & gender.
Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5-37.

Dollar, R.J. (1966) Student characteristics and choice of housing. Journal of College
Student Personnel, 7(3), 147-150.

Douvan, E., & Adelson, J. (1966). The Adolescent Experience. New York: Wiley.

Dugan, J.P. (2006). Involvement and Leadership: A Perspective Analysis of Socially
Responsible Leadership. Journal of College Student Development, 47 (3),
335-343

Ellsworth, C. W. (2006) Definitions of Hazing: Differences Among Selected Student
Organizations. Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity
Advisors 2(1).

Erikson, E.H. (1963). Childhood and society (2
nd
ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York: Norton.

111
Erwin, T., & Love, W. (1989). Selected environmental factors in student
development. NASPA Journal, 26, 256-264.

Evans, N., Forney, D., & Guido-DeBrito, F. (1998). Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Flanagan, J.C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51,
327-358.

Garrett-Gooding, J., & Senter, R., Jr. (1987). Attitudes and acts of sexual aggression
on a university campus. Sociological Inquiry, 57, 348-371.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s
Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gilmartin, S.K. (2005). The Centrality and Cost of Heterosexual Romantic Love
Among First-Year College Women. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(6),
609-633.

Glovetti, G,. Stem, J.T, Marasco, F., Haworth-Hoeppner, S. (1988). Student
residence arrangements and alcohol use and abuse: A research note. The
Journal of College and University Housing, 18(1) 18-33.

Goodwin, L. (1989). Explaining alcohol consumption and related experiences among
fraternity and sorority members. Journal of College Student Development,
30, 448-458.

Greeley A. T., & Tinsley H. E. A. (1988). Autonomy and intimacy development in
college students: Sex differences and predictors. Journal of College Student
Development, 29, 512-520.

Hall, R. M., & Sandler, B. R. (1982). The classroom climate: A chilly climate for
women? Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges.

Hall, R. M., & Sandler, B. R. (1984). Out of the classroom: A chilly campus climate
for women? Report of the Project on the Status and Education of Women.
Washington, DC:Association of American Colleges.

Handler, L. (1995). In the Fraternal Sisterhood: Sororities and Gender Strategy.
Gender and Society, 9, 236-255.

Hayek, J.C., Carini, R.M., O’Day, P.T. & Kuh, G.D. (2002). Triumph or tragedy:
Comparing student engagement levels of members of greek-letter

112
organizations and other students. Journal of College Student Development,
vol. 43(5), 2002, 643-663.

Heida, D. E. (1990). Greek affairs in higher education: Dilemmas in philosophy and
practice. NASPA Journal, 28(1), 3-7.

Holland, D., & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Educated in Romance: Women, achievement,
and college culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hood, A.B. (1984). Student development: Does participation affect growth?
Bulletin of the Association of College Unions-International, 54, 16-19.

Hood, A.B., Riahinejad, M.A. & White, D.B. (1986). Changes in Ego Identity
During the College Years. Journal of College Student Development, 27, 107-
113.

Hunt, S. & Rentz, A. L. (1994). Greek-letter social group members’ involvement and
psychological development. Journal of College Student Development, 35(4),
289-297.

Ingalls, Z. (1984). Women’s colleges show renewed vigor after long, painful self-
examination. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1, 18-19.

Janz, T. A. & Pyke, S. W. (2000). A Scale to assess student perceptions of academic
climates. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 30 (1), pp. 89-122.

Johnson, C.S. (1972). Fraternities in our colleges. New York: National
Interfraternity Foundation.

Johnston, LD, O’Malley PM, Bachman JG. (1994) National Survey Results on Drug
Use From the Monitoring the Future Study,1975–1995; Vol II,College
Students and Young Adults. US Department of Health and Human Services;
NIH Publication Number 98-4140; 1997.

Josselson, R. (1987). Finding herself: Pathways to identity development in women.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Josselson, R. (1996). Revising herself: The story of women’s identity from college to
midlife. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kalsner, L (1992). The Influence of Developmental and Emotional Factors on
Success In College. Higher Education Extension Service, 3(2), 3-13.

113
Kaludis, G. & Zatkin, G. (1966). Anatomy of a pledge class. Journal of College
Student Personnel, 7(5), 282-284.

Kappa Alpha Theta, “Theta through the Decades---1870’s, “
http;//www.kappaalphatheta.org/ What is theta/theta through the
decades/1870 (6 June 2002)

Kezar, A., and Moriarty, D. (2000). Expanding Our Understanding of Student
Leadership Development: A Study Explaining Gender and Ethnic Identity.
Journal of College Student Development, 41(1): 55-69.

Kilgannon, S., & Erwin, T. (1992). A longitudinal study about the identity and
moral development of Greek students. Journal of College Student
Development, 33, 253-259.

Kinzie, J.L., Thomas, A.D., Palmer, M.M., Umbach, P.D., & Kuh, G.D. (2007).
Women students at coeducational and women’s colleges: How do their
experiences compare? Journal of College Student Development, 48, 145-165.

Knefelkamp, L.L. (1982). Faculty and student development in the 80’s: Renewing
the community of scholars. In H.F. Owens, C.H. Witten, & W.R. Bailey
(Eds.), College student personnel administration: An anthology. Springfield,
IL: Thomas.

Komives, S., & Schuh, J. H., (1988). Student Development Applications To Greek
Letter Organizations. Bloomington, IN: Center for the Study of the College
Fraternity

Koss, M. P., & Gaines, J. A. (1993). The prediction of sexual aggression by alcohol
use, athletic participation, and fraternity affiliation. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 8, 94-108.

Kroger, J and Green, K.E. (1996). Events associated with identity status change.
Journal of Adolescence, 19, pp.477-490.

Kuh, G. D., & Arnold, J. C. (1993). Liquid bonding: A cultural analysis of the role of
alcohol in fraternity pledgeship. Journal of College Student Development, 34,
327-334.

Kuh, G. D., & Lyons, J. W. (1990). Fraternities and sororities: Lessons from the
College Experience Study. NASPA Journal, 28, 20-29.

114
Kuh, G.D. & Bursky, M.(1980). Knowledge dissemination by publication in student
affairs: Who publishes what where? Journal of College Student Personnel,
21, 387-93.

Kuh, G.D. (1982). Enhancing the quality of Greek life. Bloomington, IN: Center for
the Study of the College Fraternity.

Kuh, G.D. (1985). What is extraordinary about ordinary student affairs
organizations. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators
Journal, 23(2), 31-43.

Kuh, G.D. (1999). How are we doing? Tracking the quality of the undergraduate
experience, 1960s to the present. The Review of Higher Education, 22, 99-
119.

Kuh, G.D., Pascarella, E.T., & Wechsler, H. (1996). The questionable value of
fraternities. Chronicle of Higher Education, 42(32), A68.

Kurtzman FD, Yager J, Landsverk J, Wiesmeier E, Bodurka DC (1989). Eating
disorders among adolescent female student population at UCLA. J Am Diet
Assoc., 45–53.

Lackie, L. & de Man, A.F. (1997). Correlates of Sexual Aggression Among Male
University Students. Sex Roles. 37, 451-457.

Lacombe, A.C. & Gay, J., (1998). The Role of Gender In Adolescent Identity and
Intimacy Decisions. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 27(6) 795-802.

Langdon, E. A. (2001). Women's colleges then and now: Access then, equity now.
Peabody Journal of Education, 76(1), 5-30.

Larson, R. F., & Leslie, G. R. (1968). Prestige influences in serious dating
relationships of university students. Social Forces, 47, 195-202.

Lee, R.M., & Robbins, S.B. (1998). The relationship between social connectedness
and anxiety, self-esteem, and social identity. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 45, 338-345.

Lee, R.M., & Robbins, S.B. (2000). Understanding Social Connectedness in College
Women and Men. Journal of Counseling and Development. 78, 484-491.

115
Lounsbury, J., Huffstetler, B., Leong, F., & Gibson, L. (2005). Sense of identity and
collegiate academic achievement. Journal of College Student Development,
46(5), 501-514.

Lounsbury, J.W., & DeNeui, D. (1995). Psychological sense of community on
campus. College Student Journal, 29, 270-277.
Lytle, L.J. Bakken, L., & Romig, C. (1997). Adolescent Female Identity
Development. Sex Roles, 37, 175-185.

Maisel, J. M. (1990). Social fraternities and sororities are not conducive to the
educational Process. NASPA Journal, 28(1), 8-12.

Marcia, J.E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551-558.

Marcia, J.E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.) Handbook of
Adolescent Psychology (pp.159-187). New York: Wiley.

McCabe, D. L., & Bowers, W. J. (1996). The relation between student cheating and
college fraternity or sorority membership. NASPA Journal, 33, 280-291.

McCarthy, M., Pretty, G., & Catano, V. (1990). Psychological sense of community
and burnout. Journal of College Student Development, 31, 211-216.

McEwen, M.K. (2003). The Nature and Uses of Theory. Student Services: A
Handbook for the Profession: Jossey-Bass Publishers, Inc.

McKee, C. W. (1987). Understanding the diversity of the Greek world. In R. B.
Winston Jr., W. R. Nettles III, & J. H. Opper Jr. (Eds.), Fraternities and
sororities on the contemporary college campus (Vol. 40, pp. 21-35). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Metzger, J. & Wright, J. (2007). Gender Presentation and Membership Bias in Greek
Organizations, 2, 1-5.

Molasso, W.R. (2005). A decade of research on the Fraternity/Sorority movement.
Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, 1, 1-
12.

Moore, G. 1990. “Structural Determinants of Men’s and Women’s Personal
Networks.” American Sociological Review. 55: 726-735.

116
National Interfraternity Conference (NIC) and National Panhellenic Conference
(NPC) & Center for Advanced Social Research at the University of Missouri-
Columbia (1997). Report on Research Results. Indianapolis, IN.

National Interfraternity Conference (NIC) and National Panhellenic Conference
(NPC) & Center for Advanced Social Research at the University of Missouri-
Columbia (2002). Report on Research Results. Indianapolis, IN.

Newman, B.M. & Newman, P.R. (2001). Group Identity and alienation: Giving the
we its due. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30, 515-539.

Nidiffer, J. & Bashaw, C.T. (2001) Women administrators in higher education.
Albany, NY:State University of New York Press.

Nuwer, H. (1999). Wrongs of Passage. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

O’Shaughnessey, M.E. & Palmer, C.J. (1990). Sexually stressful events survey:
Summary Report. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Office of the
Dean of Students.

Pascarella, E.T. (1984). College environmental influences on student educational
aspirations. Journal of Higher Education, 55, 751-771.

Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings
and insights from 20 years of research. San Francisco: Josey-Bass

Pacarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (2005). How college affects students: Findings
and insights from 20 years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Parker, D. & Gade, E.M. (1981). Fraternity and Sorority Perceptions of their
Residence Environments. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22, 358-362.

Pascarella, E., Edison, M., Whitt, E. J., Nora, A., Hagedorn, L. S., & Terenzini, P.
(1996). Cognitive effects of greek affiliation during the first year of college.
NASPA Journal, 33, 242-259.

Pascarella, E.T., Flowers, L., & Whitt, E.J. (2001). Cognitive effects of Greek
affiliation: additional evidence. NASPA Journal, 38 (3), 280-301.

Pascarella, E.T., Whitt, E. J., Edison, M.I., Nora, A., Hagedorn, L.S., Yeager, P.M.,
& Terenzini, P.T. (1997). Women’s perceptions of a “chilly climate” and
their cognitive outcomes during the first year of college. Journal of College
Student Development, 38, 109-124.

117

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3
rd
ed).
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Pearson, F. C. & Bruess, B. (2001). Student perceptions of factors which influence
their identity and moral development. College Student Affairs Journal, 20,
22-36.

Pike, G, & Askew, J. (1990). The impact of fraternity or sorority membership on
academic involvement and learning outcomes. NASPA Journal, 28, 13-19.

Pike, G. R. (2000). The influence of fraternity or sorority membership on students’
college experiences and cognitive development. Research in Higher
Education, 41(1), 117-139.

Pike, G. R. (2003). Membership in a Fraternity or Sorority, Student Engagement, and
Educational Outcomes at AAU Public Research Universities. Journal of
College Student Development, 44(3):369-382.

Prager, K.J. (1982). Identity Development and Self-Esteem In Young Women. The
Journal of Genetic Psychology, 141, 177-182.

Presley, C., Meilman, P., & Lyerla, R. (1993). Alcohol and drugs on American
college campuses: Uses, consequences, and perception of the campus
environment (Vol. 1). Carbondale, IL: Core Institute.

Putnam, R.D., (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of
Democracy, 6, 65-78.

Rice, J.K. & Hemmings, A. (1988). Women’s colleges & Women Achievers: An
Update. Signs, 13(3), 546-559.

Riordan, C. (1994). The value of attending a women’s college. Education,
occupation, ad income benefits. Journal of Higher Education, 65, 486-510.

Risman, B. J. (1982). College women and sororities: The social construction and
reaffirmation of gender roles: Urban Life, 11(2), 231-253.

Robson, J. (1966). The colleges fraternity and its modern role. Menasha,
Wisconsin: Goerge Banta.

Rosener, J.B. (1990). Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review. November-
December: 119-125.

118

Salaff, J.W. and A. Greve. 2004. Can Women’s Social Networks Migrate?”
Women’s Studies International Forum. 27: 149-162.

Sarason, S.B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a
community psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Scheele, K. (2003). Sex (Roles) and the Sorority. A Story of Feminist
Transformations. In Tetrault, M.A. & Teske, R.L. (2003). Partial Truths and
the Politics of Community, p.112-123.

Schiedel, D.G. & Marcia, J.E. (1985). Ego Identity, intimacy, sex role orientation
and gender. Developmental Psychology, 21, 149-160.

Scott, W.A. (1965). Values and organizations: A study of fraternities and sororities.
Chicago: Rand McNally.

Schulken, E. D., Pinciaro, P. J., Sawyer, R. G., Jensen, J. G., & Hoban, M. T. (1997).
Sorority women’s body size perceptions and their weight related attitudes and
behaviors. Journal of American College Health, 46,69–74.

Sebrechts, J. (1999). The women’s college difference. In S.M. Davis, M. Crawford,
& J. Sebrechts (Eds.), Coming into her own: Educational success in girls
and women (pp.37-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sharpe, N.R. & Fuller, C. H. (1995). Baccalaureate Origins of Women Physical
Science Doctorates: Relationship to Institutional Gender and Science
Discipline. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 2,
1-15.

Smith, D.G. (1990). Women’s Colleges and Coed Colleges: Is There A Difference
for Women? Journal of Higher Education. 61(2), 181-197.

Smith, D.G., Morrison, D.E., Wolf, L.E. (1994). College as a gendered experience:
An empirical analysis using multiple lenses. Journal of Higher Education,
65, 696-725.

Sottile, J.M. (1994). College student development: A new outlook. (Department of
Educational Psychology, West Virginia University). (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service Document No. 376772.

Stericker , A. B., & Johnson, J.E. (1977). Sex-role identification and self-esteem in
college students: Do men and women differ? Sex Roles, 3(1), 19-26.

119

Storch, E. A. & Storch, J. B. (2002). Fraternities, sororities, and academic
dishonesty. College Student Journal, 36, 247-252.

Strange, C. (1986). Greek affiliation and goals of the academy: A commentary.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 27, 519-523.

Strange, C., (1994). Student Development: The Evolution and Status of an Essential
Idea. Journal of College Student Development, 35, 399-411.

Straub, C.A. & Rodgers, R.F. (1986). An exploration of Chickering’s theory and
women’s development. Journal of College Student Personnel, 27, 216-224

Straub. C.A. (1987). Women’s Development of Autonomy and Chickering’s Theory.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 28(3) 198-205.

Tampke, D. (1990). Alcohol behavior, risk perception, and fraternity and sorority
membership. NASPA Journal, 28, 71-77.

Taub, D. (1995). Relationship of selected factors to traditional-age undergraduate
women’s development of autonomy. Journal of College Student
Development, 36, 141-151.

Tidball, M. E. (1980). Women’s Colleges and Women Achievers Revisited. Signs:
Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 5(3): 504-517.

Tidball, M. E., and Kistiakowsky, V. (1976). Baccalaureate Origins of American
Scientists and Scholars. Science, 193: 646-653.

Tidball, M.E (1973). Perspectives on Academic Women and Affirmative Action.
Educational Record, 54, 130-145.

Tidball, M.E. (1985). Baccalaureate origins of entrants into American medical
schools. Journal of Higher Education, 56, 385-402

Tripp, R. (1997) Greek organizations and student development: A review of the
research. College Student Affairs Journal, 16(2), 31-39.

Tyler, K.A. Hoyt, D.R. & Whitbeck, L.B. (1998). Coercive Sexual Strategies.
Violence and Victims, 13, 47-60.

Ware, N.C., Steckler, N.A., & Laserman, J. (1985). Undergraduate Women: Who
Chooses a Science Major?” Journal of Higher Education, 56, 73-84.

120

Wechsler H, Davenport A, Dowdall G, Moeykens B, Castillo S. (1994) Health and
behavioral consequences of binge drinking in college: A national survey of
students at 140 campuses. JAMA.1994;272(21):1672–1677.

Wechsler H, Kuh G, & Davenport A. (1996). Fraternities, sororities and binge
drinking: Results from a national study of American colleges. NASPA
Journal. 33, 260–279.

Wechsler, H., Dowdall, G.W., Dowdall, G.W. Davenport, A., & Castillo, S. (1995).
Correlates of college student binge drinking. American Journal of Public
Health, 85, 921-926.

Weston, L.C. & Stein, S.L. (1977). The Relationship of the Identity Achievement of
College Women and Campus Participation. Journal of College Student
Personnel. 18(1), 21-24.

Whipple, E.G.(1998). New Challenges for Greek Letter Organizations:
Transforming Fraternities and Sororities into Learning Organizations. San
Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.

Whitbeck, L.B. & Hoyt, D.R. (1991). Campus prestige and dating behaviors. College
Student Journal, 25, 457-469.

Whitt, E. J. (1994). “I Can Be Anything!”: Student Leadership in Three Women’s
Colleges. Journal of College Student Development, 35: 198-207.

Whitt, E., Edison, M., Pascarella, E., Nora, A., & Terenzini, P. (1999) Women’s
perception of a “chilly climate” and cognitive outcomes in college:
Additional evidence. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 163-177.

Whitt, E. J., Edison, M., Pascarella, E. T., Terenzini, P. T., and Nora, A. (2001).
Influences on Students’ Openness to Diversity and Challenge in the Second
and Third Years of College. Journal of Higher Education, 72(2): 172-204.

Wolf-Wendel, L. (1998). Models of excellence: The baccalaureate origins of
successful European-American women, African-American women, and
Latinas. Journal of Higher Education, 69, 141-186.

Zirkel, S. (1992). Developing independence in a life transition. Investing the self in
the concerns of the day. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62,
506-521.

121
APPENDIX A

122
APPENDIX B: RESEARCH PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET

123

124

125
APPENDIX C: COLLEGE YEARS EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION BANK

126
APPENDIX D: COLLEGE YEARS EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

127
APPENDIX E
INCIDENTS ARRANGED BY OVER-ARCHING THEME
1. Participating in rush and/or joining a sorority.
1. Going through sorority rush—other girls were involved—I was friends with some,
but not with most since it was freshman year. It was important because much of the
time, sorority choice basically dictates who close groups of friends will be. It tested
my skills of making a good first impression and communicating well with people. If
I had joined a different sorority, I’m sure my life would be different—not in a hugely
significant way, but just regarding who my close friends are and how I spend my
spare time.

2. Rush - my best friend from high school and I came to school together and rushed
together - it was very important to us to not only be in the best sorority but to be in it
together. We both got in to DG - and it had a huge effect on our happiness in college.
We were both so happy that we both got into the sorority that we wanted - and that
we got into it together. It made both of us happy, proud, and confident throughout
college - being a DG was definitely something to be proud of!

3. Rushing my sorority had a huge impact on who I was and who i wanted to
become. There i made some great friends and ultimatly met my friend

4. I would say one of the most significant events over my college career was being
accepted into my sorority. Other girls in the house found out about their acceptance
at the same time so it was significant to all of us. These people have grown to
become some of the best friends I have at USC, and most likely for life. I think the
incident was important because joining a sorority really dictated the type of lifestyle
I would begin while in college. There are certain requirements you have to fulfill to
be an active member and you make a lot of new relationships and connections
through being in a house. I believe the long-term effect joining a sorority had on me
is mainly the relationships I’ve made, the people skills I have developed, and the
lasting connections i have created

5. Joining my sorority freshman year had an extreme impact on the person I have
become. The association that I have with Theta molded me into a certain “type” of
person, one that I consider very positive since I have been told countless times over
the years that everyone in my sorority is a genuinely sweet, well-rounded girl.
Although it had an impact on the way I perceived myself (since I represent not only
myself, but also part of an organization), I think over the years I have attained more
of a distance and independence even within the organization.

128
6. Freshman Rush, after I had read the book “Pledged.” I hated rush so much - it was
so superficial, full of perfectly manicured girls wired with too much caffeine. I cried
almost every night. My whole family is very invested in Greek life - I felt like I had
to rush. My mom flew down to coach me through the rest of rush when she felt that I
didn’t want to continue. This incident was key when I realize how uninvolved I am
with my sorority. I feel like a hypocrite for even being in a sorority - people
comment on how my shaved head and the sorority girl image do not mesh at all
fairly often. I enjoy the events only when I bring a boy friend to the events with me.
In that sense, rush has been such a negative experience that I have completely
blocked out any and all positive associations with my sorority - I am not friends with
any of the girls at all. Long term, I feel like I have to explain my terrible rush
experience every time I say I am in a sorority so that way people realize that I am not
the typical sorority girl. However, it did solidify my experience of myself as a strong,
independent woman who does not have to conform in order to have fun and live an
enjoyable life (as both my parents had portrayed), which is a VERY big positive.

7. Going through rush my Freshman year really made me reflect on who I was as a
person and what my priorities were. I could either go for the popular party girls or
for the house in which I knew I would find true lasting friendships. In the end I chose
the later and have learned so much from my sorority sisters.

8. a. joining a sorority b. my sorority sisters c. made a lot more friends, became apart
of a community. I felt an attachment to something at [this university] d. good long
term effect, positive, and made me stronger.

9. I think that being chosen to become a member of my sorority influenced my sense
of who I am. While I did not fit specifically into the stereotypes of my sorority
sisters, knowing that I was accepted and wanted by these smart, talented, and
gorgeous girls made me feel that maybe I too fit into this category. Receiving your
bid from a particular house completely dictates the path that college will lead you on
- from who your life-long friends will be, to what major you may chose, and what
potential spouses you may meet. In the long run, your feeling of belonging within the
house you are placed and whether or not you look highly upon them (which I most
definitely do), will define a college woman and has most definitely defined me.

10. Well since this has to do with sororities how about I choose that. (a) My
experience with KKG (b) The rest of the house, some were friends (c) It shaped the
type of people and activities I was to be around for the next four years (d) I think the
long term affect has been adverse. It might have happened even if I was not in a
sorority, maybe it was just USC, but I feel like the people I met and the friends I had
were very subpar to what I look for in friends and boys in general. I am pretty laid
back so I kind of let things progress without doing anything about it. So I ended up
being around people that I have no respect for and feel they were some of the worst

129
friends I have had. I feel like I abandoned a lot of the core beliefs I used to have and
have made bad habits as far as the way I treat my friends and family.

2. Being elected or serving in a sorority leadership position
1. One incident that helped shape my sense of who i am was getting elected the
president of my pledge class. The entire pledge class voted on who would be the
most reliable person, liaison between pledges and actives, and most responsible
leader. Getting elected by these girls meant a lot to me because they are amazing
girls and their respect and admiration is really special. It was important because it
gave me a chance to be a leader in the house and i established myself quickly as
someone who would want to continue to be a leader in alpha gamma gamma. I
believe the long term effects is that this experience helped hone my leadership skills
and teach me a lot of things about what it takes to be a leader.

2. My experience as the VP of Administration at Pi Beta Phi, while living in the
sorority house for the 2005 calendar year, was a great experience. I enjoyed working
with the other members of the Executive Board- particularly the President. We
became very close and I learned a lot from her about how to deal with certain
situations, how to time manage, and how to work with a diverse group of people. I
learned a lot about myself as a person- what my priorities are, my personal opinions
on issues, how I like to organize my time and my life, and just what is important to
me. It also made me reevaluate the kind of people I want to surround myself with,
since it made me realize that being around motivated goal-oriented people had a
positive effect on me, and this made me want to motivate and inspire all the other
girls in my house as well as in other realms of my life.

3. As VP Fraternity Development in my house, I am in charge of Inspirations Week
(initiation week), which basically required me to put on programming and
ceremonies sleeplessly for a week for our large pledge class. At the end of the week,
everything had gone to plan and I was delighted as pledges, active members, my
friends, and parents of sorority members personally complimented me on the success
of the week. This made me feel that my accomplishments and contributions did not
go unnoticed and it also allowed me to see the success of the Puritan work ethic! It
has empowered me to give myself wholly to things that I want to succeed at. I have
realized that if I only give a partial effort, I get a marginal result. Although very
exhausting, this experience allowed me to place more faith in the good of my peers.

4. Heading Recruitment for my sorority B. my co-chair who is also one of my best
friends C. I learned to be a leader, work with a diverse group of individuals,
communicate while trying to execute a large scale event D. I want to be an event

130
planner, so it was my first experience planning a large scale event, I gained
confidence that I could do so, and very well.

5. I feel like I’ve found an identity by taking major leadership positions in the house.
I developed authority, integrity, and a personal code of ethics.

6. My experience happened just this year when I was appointed President of Tri
Delta. Everyone in my house was involved, including my advisors. They are all my
friends. This experience is important to me because it has helped to define me as a
leader and role model for other people. This will definitely have a long term effect
on me. I realize the huge responsibility that I hold and the challenges I will face. It
has also taught me to delegate.

7. I was the assistant recruitment chair my sophomore year. I spent months planning
it with the recruitment chair and president. After 4 long days of recruitment that
night we received the list of the girls who were going to join our house. I was so
proud after all the work I had done we had the best pledge class on the row. The
entire house was ecstatic to see the new girls and great them. Everyone worked
together to get the pledge class there. This experience proved that I could take on a
major project, work in groups, lead 150 people, and have a successful outcome. This
taught me real life skills and how to work in a team environment.

8. I was elected as the Director of Member Development for my sorority. This
position involves a lot of responsibility in the house and acts as the support system
for all members of the house. I feel that being elected to this position has made me
realize how much I enjoy helping the house and helping my best friends

9. I was president of my sorority, and I had a terrible past-president. She made my
life extremely difficult, to the point of me being miserable in my role. Although this
was a tough experience for me, I overcame it, and learned that I have to be confident
in the decisions I make and trust myself and my instincts. I also learned that the
sorority was what I did for fun, and that I shouldn’t let it make me miserable. My
second semester as the president was much better

10. A) after being elected President of my sorority, someone challenged my having
the position. B. another member of my sorority, we are friendly with each other but
there has always been a sense of competition between us. Since, the incident, we
have drifted apart. C) for the first time I learned how to work with someone who I
knew did not think highly of me, and questioned my ability to lead d) it really
affected my confidence….made me question myself. But it taught me how to handle
situations diplomatically, how to work under pressure of peer-evaluation etc

131
3. Dealing with Crisis.
1. A) I was on a band trip to Italy. I got lost from my boyfriend who had my
passport, hotel key and money. I was an absolute wreck and bawling hysterically.
An Italian guy saw me crying and gave me a tissue and tried to help by offering his
cell phone. Some girls on the tour told me the general place I could find my
boyfriend so I took off running and eventually found him. B) A perfect stranger was
so kind it was amazing. When I finally found my boyfriend I didn’t say anything, he
just hugged me and understood. It was ridiculously dramatic. We’d been together
for about a year and a half at that point. C) seeing how much I needed my boyfriend
terrified me. I was absolutely lost without him. At the same time, the kindness of the
Italian boy blew me away. It reminded me tat sometimes when you get lost someone
will actually come find you. It made me want to offer that kind of reassurance to
someone too. D) It showed me how codependent I am and in a way made me want to
be able to rely on myself more (definitely never let anyone hold my passport, key
and money again=). It also reminded me of how karma really works. I’ve always
make a point to help people even if I don’t know the, that just affirmed that going a
little bit out of your way for someone can make a world of difference when they
really need it.

2. The incident is realizing and overcoming eating disorders and understanding the
reasons I did it. I took strength from my friends around me...most of my friends have
been going through their own...they encouraged me to go through therapy and
overcome my disorder. This changed me in so many ways in that I now love myself
and believe in myself.

3. Both of my grandparents dying in the same month. It was a very difficult time for
me and I could not go to other people for help. I was devastated since it was the first
time anyone close to me had died. I never overcame this incident, but when I met
my boyfriend, he helped tackle my fear to be sad.

4. One of our invite parties was shut down because the venue was being
surveillanced for undergrad drinking and fake IDs, and unfortunately both were
happening at our event. Our entire house was there, each with a date, including some
of my very best friends. I was there with my boyfriend as my date, which I am
thankful for since he was able to remain calm during all of the chaos. This incident
was important because it was a wake up call that we live in a “bubble” as Greeks in
college, since drinking seems to be the norm, and fake IDs don’t seem to be a big
deal……but in reality these can get you into a lot of trouble. This incident was a
reminder that we all need to remain responsible for our actions and think about what
we are doing before acting on it. In the long-term, it just made me realize that I do
love college and the “bubble” I’m living in, but when I graduate things will be very

132
different. It also made me realize that I don’t mind breaking some rules as long as
things don’t get out of control or dangerous.

5. My brother died from a drug overdose during the first semester of my sophomore
year. It was the worst thing I have ever experienced. Dealing with his death was
extremely difficult, but I believe it has made me a stronger person in the end. I
discovered who my real friends are and gained a stronger sense of myself. I
appreciate life more and don’t take deal with unnecessary bullshit.

6. My dad’s business failure. My family was involved as well as much of the wealth
in Houston. It taught me a lot about ethics and the problems with our judicial system.
I am pretty much a cynic. Long term I have little faith in people, and expect the
worst.

7. I was sexually assaulted by an acquaintance while studying abroad in Spain. This
changed my perspective on safety and trust and made my relationships much more
difficult. It’s also made me much more aware of myself and much more interested in
women’s issues.

8. I had unprotected drunk sex with my ex-boyfriend and then got the morning after
pill the next day. I unknowingly got pregnant; however, it was an ectopic [entopic]
pregnancy and in the middle of the night my one of my fallopian tubes burst and i
almost internally bled to death had i been rushed into surgery a half hour later. I
know so many people that pop those pills like candy, despite the growing statistics.
Drinking, sex, and life are not light matters, and we are all becoming adults now and
need to start taking things seriously.

9.I got really sick the week before finals. I had three papers due three days in a row.
So, with my pounding head, fever, and runny nose, (and between sobbing calls to my
mother) I pulled three all-nighters and got my stuff done. This helped me see that
I’m even more determined and stubborn than I ever imagined.

10.I was told to organize something for my sorority at the last minute when I had
about 4 or 5 papers and projects to do and just came down with the flu. This
experience was important because it made me realize that you can get through
anything if you just do it, no matter how miserable you are. And when you are in a
situation like that, you have to ignore negative things that others say and just do
whatever you have to to get it done.

133
4. Receiving the unconditional support of sisters with in the sorority network.
1.I had just had a fight with and broken up with my first boyfriend of college. I was
extremely upset and down the street at his house. I called one of my best friends in
the sorority and even though she was in pajamas and had her glasses on she came
and got me immediately from his frat house. I think the incident was important to me
because it showed me that this is part of what sisterhood in a sorority is about,
dropping everything if you have a sister in need. Also, as a freshman at the time it
made me feel like i really had developed some new, meaningful friendships post-
high school. I think the long term effect has just been to try to always help others as
she helped me in what seemed like a crisis at the time, but looking back on it wasn’t
that significant in and of itself.

2.a) I’m in the marching band as well as a sorority. My sisters got together and made
a giant banner for me and brought it to the game. I saw it from the field during half
time and it was awesome. b) The girls who made the sign were all older members of
the house. c) This was important because it showed how much my sisters’ support
me. d) It encouraged me to continue my participation in multiple activities knowing
that I would have the support of really great friends.

3. When I hang out with friends, anytime really. The best friends I have made are in
Tridelt and I have really discovered who I am through those friends.

4. Before I transferred to USC I went to a college in NYC that did not have greek
life. While attending school in NY I made amazing friends and really became who I
am today. I am strong in my beliefs and I stick to them. I value good friends and
loyalty. When I transferred to USC and rushed my first year, I was looking for those
same type of friends I had made my Freshman year of college. I found those girls in
Theta and I didn’t have to change who I was. I am not a party girl, I don’t like to go
out on Tuesdays and Thursdays and I don’t feel the need to go to frat parties.
Thankfully I found a bunch of girls that love you no mater and support the choices
you make.

5. When I moved into the house second semester of my freshman year and the older
girls who lived in the house were so nice to my roommate and I and they made sure
we felt welcome and included us in their activities. I didn’t know the older girls well
and it made me feel like these girls were really happy to have me be part of the house
and I felt comfortable in the house. I think this made me pay attention to how I treat
people and make sure that I always think about how I make people feel.

6. When getting ready for a night out recently, my roommates and I began to be very
sentimental. The three of us were in front of the bathroom mirror thinking how much
we have to cherish this last semester together. I have always been very independent,

134
but being with these girls and realizing how much I will miss them, I think I have
become a more trusting and appreciative of others. This is going to affect me as I
start my career and need to develop a new group of friends. Realizing the importance
of loved ones makes me a happier person every day.

7. coming to USC as a second semester freshman and making friends easily with a
specific group of girls who have stayed my best friends ever since b. the girls i live
with now and have since i came to USC...my best friends c. it was important because
it made me feel apart of the school right away, and not like a new student d. they
have shaped me, and I them into the people we are today.

8. At the new member retreat we all said something that we did a ropes course that
was supposed to build team cohesion. it did much more for me. it tested my limits
and my abilities and made me realize that i could be pushed to my breaking point
and still take one more step. it made me believe in myself and my abilities as an
individual and made me trust and rely on my friends more.

9.Completing an application for the university where I was to describe my
experience thus far and what has influenced me, etc. b. n/a c. this incident was
important because it really got me thinking about the time I’ve spent here & ways in
which my sorority has developed & influenced my opinions and abilities. d. my
experiences within my sorority will have a lifelong effect on my sense of self. I have
learned so much about people as a whole & how to deal with several unconventional
situations. Also, I know the friendships built here will last throughout my life and sill
continue to mold me into a well-rounded individual.

5. Being elected or serving in a leadership position in a campus related
organization.
1. I had been nominated to be the new president of a club I am a member of (b) I
guess the majority of people who voted for the new Executive Board of the club
trusted me enough to vote for me to be the new president. (c) It made me feel really
good about myself and made me appreciate my fellow group members even more
because I realize that’s how much they trusted me to do a good job as president. (d)
Hopefully the long-term effect would kick in over the summer if I succeed in taking
my group to a theatrical exhibit in Prague called the Prague Quadrennial which
happens every 4 years.

2. I joined USG, undergraduate student government, during the end of my
sophomore year. It has given me leadership experience and has allowed me to meet
new people outside of my usual group of friends. It has also allowed me to meet

135
people outside of my chosen field, business. The experience has given me more
confidence in my leadership abilities.

3. I produced the school news last semester. Each week was very terrifying because
I was in charge of making all decisions and getting the show on the air, but it was my
best experience at USC. I worked with people in my major (broadcast journalism)
and learned how to work together with them. It gave me more confidence in the
field and helped me with problem solving.

4. (a) I received an email asking me to apply for a leadership position in a student
organization at USC called Best Buddies. (b) It was sent by a current board member
who I had met in my sorority. (c) It was empowering and exciting for me. (d) It
raised my self-esteem and made me become a more active leader in my school.

5. I became actively involved on a fashion club with my friend and it since has
landed me an internship within fashion and lead me towards getting a degree that
will allow me to continue in the fashion field. if i would not have been dragged to the
first meeting i still would not know what i want to do with my life or found a passion
that ignites everytime i go to work.

6. Just in these past few weeks I ran for Student Body Vice President. It wasn’t one
particular incident but the experience of running that really impacted my life. There
were many people that were involved with this consisting of my running mate, our
volunteers, the other tickets, and the student body. I learned a lot about myself while
running, and even though I lost, I became a stronger person because I ran.

7. Directing Take Back the Night. This gave me confidence to know that I could
really accomplish whatever I set my mind to.

8. Getting involved in activities and becoming a leader in them. i realized i wanted to
be involved in things and it has made me a motivated person.

6. Learning about myself as a result of a romantic relationship
1. dating a guy for a year freshman year that was comfortable but i didnt love him --*
being less likely to fall into another relationship like that in the future.

2. When I realized that I didn’t need my boyfriend to go out and have a good time
and to get attention. I figured out that I was actually an attractive person and that if I
was confident other people would accept me and be eager to start up friendships. At
the time my boyfriend and I had been dating for 2 years (since high school) and I had
become incredibly dependent on him, especially after we lived together after

136
freshman year. I feel like the realization that I could move on without him and that I
could stand alone as a person was great progress for me.

3. I also met my boyfriend of two years my freshman year. I had never had a serious
boyfriend in high school and not only was college a new experience, but so was my
relationship. I now understand how loving I can be towards someone else.

4. In November of my sophomore year I found out that my boyfriend of 3 ½ years
was not only cheating on me with a 16 year old, but when I found out, he left me to
be with her. I was completely depressed my entire sophomore year and found
comfort in partying really hard and eating a lot and spending as much time with my
craziest friends as possible. I was actually proud of my behavior and wanted my ex
to see that this was what I was doing so I would post crazy pictures on myspace to
piss him off. Then one day I read that his girlfriend and her best friend were openly
making fun of me and called me a whale. It was really important looking back that I
saw myself through their eyes and saw how sad what I was doing to myself really
was. I was really embarrassed, and not only took the pictures down but stopped
drinking and partying so hard and lost a lot of weight so no one could talk about me
like that again. I think it made me realize I didn’t want to be who I was being and
that I just needed to calm down and deal with what happened to me instead of
running away from it, which is very positive in the long run.

5. This summer, I was dating a guy and one night he was acting odd so I knew
something was strange, but it turns out his ex-girlfriend had invited herself to come
over and he hadn’t refused her so she came. He wasn’t honest with me and didn’t tell
me this fact until she arrived to the building that we both lived in. It was very
uncomfortable for me and for all of our mutual friends who thought that it was an
odd thing to do since we were all present when she came over. I was fuming mad but
I kept my cool in front of everyone and had an assertive conversation with him the
next day when he meekishly realized he had done something wrong. I re-evaluated
our relationship and realized that I didn’t want to tolerate dishonestly in a
relationship and let it fizzle out.

6. One of my good friends had a horrible fight with her boyfriend, which ended with
her on crutches after he accidentally (and drunkenly) dragged her behind his car for
half a block. Even despite the horror of this incident alone, she continued to beg her
boyfriend for forgiveness (although he clearly was in the wrong). This incident really
opened my eyes to how girls allow their sense of self to be shaped by boys – this girl
is one of my good friends and she has so much going for her – smart, beautiful,
accomplished, sweet, motivated, a great friend, the list goes on – but the way the boy
ignored her after essentially leaving her for the dead made her feel unconfident and
undeserving. It broke my heart to see this great girl feeling down on herself because
of the foul of (for lack of better terms) this loser. While giving her advice, it made

137
me realize that one cannot allow a boy to dictate their conceptions of their own
confidence, worth, and legitimacy. I have used this incident to ground many of my
own decisions regarding boys and allow me to see the consequences of becoming too
attached to a toxic boy.

7. Throughout my first couple semesters at USC, I was in the throes of cutting ties
with my ex-boyfriend (of 2 years). Coming home for Christmas during my
sophomore year, I didn’t think I was going to see him because I hadn’t talked to him
in months. Nevertheless, he called and I went to go visit with him as a friend. The
visit started fine until he began pressuring me to be intimate with him again. I stood
my ground and refused to stoop to that level once again. It was the first time I really
felt like I made a choice for myself and catered to my needs. I believe that ever since
then, I have been much more confident and much more assertive to get the things I
need to keep my self-confidence and self-esteem. I think this is important because I
believe every college girl can relate to a story like this one—I think this happens
much more often than one would think.

8. I broke up with my long-time boyfriend and went on a date with a grad student
who was a former TA in a class I was taking (not my TA). The TA ended up kind of
dumping me and that made me wonder if I had done something wrong. I realized that
my ex-boyfriend was not the only guy out there, and also that I needed to stop
focusing on guys and get more girl friends

7. Making an important, independent decision for myself.
1. I had to backup/support a difficult decision (due to the nature of my position in the
sorority). The decision involved a few of my friends. I learned to stand up for what’s
ethical and hope everyone else accepted it. I’ve become a stronger leader as a result.

2.Experience was choosing to study for the LSAT this past summer while renting a
room in a fraternity and while most of my friends were relaxed and hardly doing
anything b. Best friends, boyfriend, housemate c. Even though it was hard to stay in
every night and study while my close friends were relaxing, going to movies, bars,
and everything else, I made the right decision by giving almost all of that up for a
solid 3-4 months. I sacrificed, worked hard, and it paid off—I was just accepted to
Harvard Law School. D. Solidified that making sacrifices and smart choices, though
difficult ones, is worth it.

3. The choosing of my major. Changing from undeclared to a BFA in Theatre (focus
in Stage Management) (b) The professor I had at the time for my Freshman Seminar
course was the one to push me to declare a major by having us discuss what it is that
we are passionate about. She gave me every possible number I could ever need in

138
order to make my application process to the School of Theatre easy and thorough (c)
I think that declaring my major, especially such a specific one such as Stage
Management helped me realize how passionate I am about the theatre and how much
I could be my fun, crazy self around other fun, crazy people who are all as passionate
as I am. (d) It made me realize that I need to take everything at a time, as much as
theatre gigs occur one at a time. It’s one of the less stable career choices I could have
made but the amount of passion I have for it makes it so it doesn’t matter. I would
never want to be stuck at a job that I don’t enjoy, enough people do that already and I
wouldn’t want to be one of them.

4. When I was a freshman in college, I attended the george washington university. I
decided that because of the relationship that I had with my water polo team, I wanted
to transfer. I went there on scholarship to play water polo, and my team was not what
I expected. I decided to transfer, despite my parents wishes, and I applied to USC
where I was accepted. I am so happy I made the decision to attend USC as this was
the school that I wanted to attend from the beginning.

5. i entered college as a student-athlete (water polo player) and was a member of the
team for one year. overall, i enjoyed my experience as a player for one year, mainly
because i liked my teammates. the most important thing about my experience was
that i ultimately ended up quitting after one year and because i was not involved in
any other activities, i decided to join a sorority as a result. the long term effect has
been the result of now having a much more social life in college as the result of
joining a sorority versus being much more athletically inclined and not as social
(except for with other teammates).

6. Okay well I would suppose another incident would be when I decided I finally
wanted to declare my major and found a major that I felt connected to. I applied to
USC undeclared and had absolutely no idea what I wanted to pursue. I had always
been an artist and painter in high school but it never had occurred to me to major in
the subject. Then at the end of my sophomore year I had an inspiring conversation
that made me realize that art is my true passion and I wanted to study it and create it
at USC. Long term effect of what that did to me would be that it entered me into the
art school, where to be quite honest, I do not feel sorority girls are very well liked or
taken seriously. For whatever reason there is a general consensus that people
involved in the greek life aren’t creative or dedicated……I have no idea where this
idea is derived from, but it has been a difficult stereotype to break. I would say this is
a negative thing. On the first day of every class I have to face judgement, and then
spend the rest of the semester redeeming myself. I really resent that people make
such assumptions and it has been a difficult thing for me to deal with.

139
7. One day in one of my classes, we were asked what our plans were after
graduation. Everybody seemed to have a good grasp as to what field they wanted to
enter or job they wanted to pursue. When it was my turn, I felt that I had no
information to offer. My major has no distinct career future and I really didn’t care
what I did as long as I was happy. I said I would really just like to travel the world,
laugh, and make friends. I think this is important because I don’t think I will ever be
unhappy with my future because I don’t believe I won’t settle for what is “normal”
or “safe”. I may not be as financially successful, but in the long-run I won’t have any
regrets.

8. a. Incident occurred freshman year right before Winter Break. After spending a
few months with the people in my dorm, and after speaking with friends from home,
discovered that I had kind of lost my sense of self—I was acting in ways I never had
in high school (drinking, shacking, etc.) and realized that my ‘friends’ had no idea
who I really was. Came to terms with the fact that the people I had been hanging out
with for the past four months, who were all really funny, probably weren’t going to
be my friends in the long term b. More of a self-realization and a build up of
incidences that had been occurring all semester. c. Important because I am so much
better for it today. I had lost my sense of self to fit in with this group of people
because I wanted to have friends and not be lonely; I figured out that there would be
people at USC who were much more like me. Found my group of friends (sorority
sisters) who are much more motivated, smart (common sense wise), and loving. d.
Long term, it gave me the sense of self confidence that I knew who I was.

8. Making a commitment to community service and outreach.
1. Joining a mentoring program to help mentor young middle-school aged girls in
matters such as body issue, sex, drugs, alcohol, pregnancy, etc. other people involved
included the 30 or so other college mentors. This has been the most valuable and
rewarding experience I have had in college—giving back to others, which is so often
overlooked during college, being able to have a significant impact on young girls’
lives, and to see that impact. This has really boosted how I feel as a person.

2. Taking part in Alternative Spring Break - Uruguay. I went with 2 other girls I
somewhat knew and a group of other USC students. I got to see a whole new culture
and do community service while meeting new people, partying, and learning about
myself. I was exposed to a true sense of 3
rd
world, giving me perspective on my own
opportuntities

3. a) being a mentor for 8
th
grade girls through the student organization, WYSE
(Women & Youth Supporting Each Other) b) all other mentors were female

140
undergraduates coming from various backgrounds c) opened my mind to
development and education of inner-city students d) I can see myself dedicating my
time (now and beyond college) to equal education for inner-city/poor youth.

4. The experience was joining Helenes. b) Yes, the executive board of this group was
very excited and interested in me joining c) I have had great experiences in the
community and made life long friends d) I have life long friends and I will always
look to do community service.

5. My freshman year I participated in JEP (joint educational project) which allowed
me to work with a first grade class for a semester. To supplement my class, I worked
with two other students to teach the first graders about exercise, nutrition, and
general health information. It was important to learn that working in a group takes
alot of planning and effort, and also that giving is a rewarding experience. In the
long-run, I believe that participating in JEP gave me a sense of the bigger life picture
and of the community that I live in. Being able to inspire those children and make
them smile, even if just for a moment, will always stay with me.

6. Going to Ecuador this past summer to volunteer. I went by myself and was there
for three weeks. I tutored poor children and worked in a daycare.

9. Sorority Affiliated Judgment or Rejection.
1. There was one evening at the house - when a group of us girls were watching The
OC or some show in the TV room - that immediately stands out in my mind. A
commercial for Wal-Mart came on during the break, and one of my sisters (one who
I’ve actually hung out with frequently at social events) made a snide comment about
how horribly ghetto Wal-Mart stores are and how she thinks people who shop there
must be low class. This hurt my feelings tremendously, as I come from a humble
background and have watched my parents shop at the Wal-Mart chain out of
necessity. I guess this experience made me realize that many women in my house
have absolutely no conception of what it’s like to live on a meager budget, and that
they are typically ignorant (if not insensitive) to the effects that their words about
finances can have on others. Of course, I didn’t say anything about this incident to
the women there... though I did tell my best friend in the house, who’s family
background is very similar to mine. She completely understood why I was hurt and
related similar experiences with our sisters to me. This made me feel much better,
and made me realize that ultimately, sorority life does NOT always reflect reality.

2. There was one incident at the beginning of Spring semester last year that was
particularly disturbing to me. We were getting ready to start a process called COB,
where women may join the house informally (outside of stringent fall recruitment)

141
and a group of us girls on the committee starting looking up USC Spring-admitted
freshmen on Facebook. I was completely shocked at some of the comments some of
the older girls made about the girls whose profiles we looked at. In particular, we
looked at a set of twins (fraternal) who were new to our university. Two girls (who
are no longer members of our sorority) wouldn’t shut up about how one of them was
soooo much prettier than the other and how they didn’t want the “ugly” one (read:
not ugly at all) to join the house. Then, when we didn’t get the pretty one but the
“ugly” one, I watched them be totally sweet and fake to her, the way I was treated
when I joined the house that Fall. It made me wonder whether the girls who had
rushed me really liked me at all, or if I was just a number to them.

3. A couple dinners into my time joining the sorority, not too long after we had been
initiated and i had been assigned a big sister I went to dinner and I sat down next to
her realized no one was talking to me and everyone seemed to be engrossed in their
own gossipy conversations. I felt like i was back in middle school and I wanted to
quit the sorority right there for making me question myself and my social skills. My
big sister in the sorority, the person who was supposed to steward me through things,
was ignoring me and pretending i wasnt there. I didn’t know her very well but the
idea that she had no desire to learn anything about me really hurt.

4. I think it would have to be one night when I was at a party and I mentioned
something about my sorority to one of my guy friends that I had known for over a
year. He told me he had no idea that I was even in a sorority. Ironically enough I had
lived in the house the year before when he met me and I was even an officer within
the house and was very involved and active member. This still stands out to me
today because I discovered that I had never molded or changed my attitudes to
become a typical “sorority” girl. It made me realize that I am my own person and no
activity I do or partake in shapes who I am or defines what I am.

5. Within my first few weeks at school, a group of boys out one night asked me and
my friends which house we belonged to. When we responded “Pi Phi” they all high-
fived us and told us that we were to be congratulated for making it into the “hot”
sorority. While immediately gratifying, after thinking back on the incident I realized
that I did not want to solely think of myself as a member of the “hot” sorority, and
that there was so much more to me and each of the girls within my house. This
experience opened my eyes to the stereotypes that occur within the Greek
community and made me in the long run value myself as a person with more to offer
than my appearance.

6. The first time I discovered a rumor that had been going around about me in one
fraternity for several months without me knowing about it. The other person
involved was just an acquaintance in that fraternity. It was important because it was
the first time something negative had been said about me for no reason and widely

142
publicized. It is important in the long-term because it makes me re-evaluate who I
spend time with and who I trust.

10. Having an experience of failure.
1 I was excited about a job opportunity and made it to the final round interview. I
didn’t have a connection to the company, that is, I didn’t “know” anyone who
worked there or who could make a call. I didn’t get an offer to work there after
graduation. I was upset because I was so excited about it and I had invested a lot of
time with them (6 hours for the last interview). However, the situation made me
wonder if I wanted the job because I was genuinely interested in it or if I liked the
thought of how much it paid.

2. One semester, I decided to take a beginning guitar class because I wanted to learn
how to play, but I didn’t make the time to practice which reflected in my poor
performance in class. If I practiced more, I could have performed better, but instead
I embarrassed myself. After this experience, I learned that I should invest more time
into activities to save face in front of my peers. Every activity should have a priority
at some point.

3. a. i was not accepted into the study abroad program i was applying for. b. many of
my friends and roommates were involved in this experience for they comforted me
and helped me through the rejection. c. this event was important because it helped
me deal with a tough situation and now i know how to get through rejection. d. this
incident helped me understand that there are many things in life people get rejected
from and to be prepared for rejections in the future. this situation has helped me
realize not to take everything so personally.

4. My freshman year I rushed the sororities and was rejected from the ones that I
thought I wanted to be in. I was devastated because the majority of my suitemates
got into the ones they wanted and I was the only one who had dropped out of the
process. As a result, freshman year was very hard for me. I had always been popular
and had tons of friends in high school and now I was in a situation where I felt
rejected for the first time and I had to step out of my bubble and go make an effort to
meet people. This incident defined me in that it taught me that there are
disappointments in life, but that you can overcome them. I made friends with the
people in my dorm, and I met my best friend Ashley who was also not in a sorority.
Basically through this situation I learned that I didn’t need the sorority to make
friends. I ended up joining one the next year, but when I rushed that time I was more
confident in who I was and I was joining to get involved, not to define my status

143
5. I didn’t get into one of my first choices of medical school relatively early in the
application process. I felt completely defeated. But my friends and family rallied
around me and convinced me to keep my head up and stay positive. I learned that I
can be tough and persevere even in hurtful or crushing situations. I believe that this
character trait will help me to be more strong and less emotional during difficult
times in the future.

11. Making the transition from home to college
1. (a) meeting a variety of different people (b) more of an everyday thing - in going
out, meeting new people in classes, living in the sorority house, etc (c) saw
individuals do drugs/talk about it...doing different things that I had never been
exposed to before entering college (d) I have become more comfortable in foreign
situations, I know myself and I know what I feel is right and I am able to handle
things as I have become more mature.

2. I wouldn’t call it one particular experience, but rather a more general every-day
experience—as an accounting major, I often have to balance work and my life and
sleep which can be very difficult at times. As a result I have learned how to distress
and help others do the same. In the long run, I believe my hard work and time
management skills will help me be successful.

3. a) coming to school as a spring admit and meeting people, I also enjoyed just
being in LA and discovering things on my own away from home. (b)They were other
spring admits who were in the same situation as me. They are still some of my best
friends. (c)It was difficult to be away from home and on my own for the first time
when everyone else had already done it for a semester. These friends helped me
because they were in the same situations as me. (d)Well I feel that I am more
independent because I had to figure things out once everyone else new what their
routine was.

4. Living in the dorms with a person I didn’t know (sharing a room, sharing space,
living with someone besides my immediate family)

5. The experience of living with the roommate assigned to me freshman year has
definitely impacted myself as a person as well as my college experience. I came to
school rather sheltered and trusting and was put into a living situation with a girl
who, while she might have been well-meaning, was also a compulsive liar and
someone who enjoyed manipulating people to get her way and make herself feel
better about herself. While I was not the only person who failed to see how
destructive her behavior was, I was the one in closest proximity to her and ended up
investing too much of myself in the friendship. Long story short our friendship ended

144
earlier this year and while I feel that the time I spent trying to help and support her
was a waste of my time in many ways, and she did manage to hurt herself and many
people around her many times, I also learned a lot about myself. I am much less of a
push-over, and while I cannot change my nature I am at least more wary of giving all
of my trust to people until I know them better

12. Studying Abroad
1. I studied abroad in Prague my junior year. It was the most incredible experience
of my life. The culture shock and language barrier was difficult at first, but I learned
that I can survive and thrive in a foreign country on my own. I traveled all over
Europe and met some incredible people. I wouldn’t change my experience abroad
for anything. I learned that I can relax and enjoy life without stress, and that in doing
so, my world won’t fall apart.

2. I went abroad to Australia for a semester all on my own. I would think that it was
a very influential experience in shaping my character and helping me find myself. I
think in the long run, I will look at the world through the eyes of not only my own
culture, but recognize the differences in people and their backgrounds because of the
time that I spent learning about other cultures.

3. Studying abroad was an extremely influential experience. It changed my sense of
independence (I am now more comfortable doing things on my own), my
understanding of myself and my culture in a broader, global context, and allowed me
to get to know people that I would not otherwise have met. Living in Spain was the
best semester of my life, and it will always have an effect on me.

4. My experience was studying abroad in Sevilla, Spain. I lived with a Spanish
family and went to a Spanish university. I experienced this with other American
students from other colleges that I traveled, went to school, and spent free time with
and a Spanish family that I lived and ate with. I did not know anyone before my
experience. This experience was extremely important because I was in a completely
new environment with new people and learned how to adapt to a new city, country,
family and friends. This was the most memorable experience of my life as it opened
my eyes to new cultures, both Spanish and from different regions of the US (my
other program participants). This will effect me in the long-term because it has given
me a broader perspective on what is “normal” in regards to culture and values.

5. Studying abroad in London--- I learned more about myself (experiencing a new
culture, living with amazing people, traveling all around Europe, being more
independent)

145
13. Receiving personal or career guidance from others.
1. I took a sound design class as part of the core for my film production major. My
student advisor and professor really encouraged me and said that I had a lot of talent.
I had been doubting whether there was a place for me in film, and I realized that
sound design was my niche. My student advisor chose me to be a sound designer of
the film she is going to direct.

2. It was the beginning of the school year as I was listening to a speaker talk about
jobs and what it means to be a trojan. This was my first year at a university and
living on my own, but this speaker really made me think about my life and what i
wanted to do with it. I had never felt so motivated by a speaker and I realized it was
because he was asking questions rather than preaching at us. That day I went out and
got an internship in a job that I wanted whether or not my parents really liked it.
Since then I have been working at the same job and love everything about it! I feel
that without that speaker, I may still be in my dorm not knowing what i want out of
life.

3. Recieving criticism from honest roomates about the way I act in certain situations
was important and really helped me think about the kind of person I wanted to be
percieved as. I now pay more attention to the things that come out of my mouth.

4. Of all of the Writing 340 classes, I chose one of the hardest subjects offered, with
probably the hardest professor: Legal Writing with James Brecher. Before this class,
I studied often and my grades were above average. Still, never before did I spend so
much time and effort on a single course. My work ethic was stronger than it had ever
been during my semesters at USC and in the end, I exceeded the goals I had set for
myself. I didn’t expect to get higher than a B or a B+, despite my hard work. It
turned out that I got an A-, which thrilled me. I put a lot of myself into the papers
that I wrote for that class and it paid off. I was the primary person responsible for my
grade, since I was the one putting the time and effort into the class. However, my
boyfriend, who was also in the class, was a huge source of encouragement for me.
My professor was also an asset for me, as he took a lot of time to walk me through
the legal issues I was assigned to analyze and write about. Overall, this class instilled
an immense sense of accomplishment in me and I’m extremely proud of my grade.
It’s become one of the factors in my decision to attend law school in the future.

14. Engaging in a selfless act of compassion.
1. I was on the beach in santa barbara with some friends from ucsb - mostly good
looking frat boys and surfers that i’d been flirting with all day. we happened upon a
beached seal that was still alive. the boys continued walking and thought i was crazy

146
when i wouldn’t leave until animal control got there. they were hot and cool and i
didn’t want them to think i was lame, but i couldn’t leave this poor stuck animal.
even my girls that i was there with were making fun of me and thought i was crazy.
this incident was important to me because it proved that i can stick to my guns in the
face of people i so desperately want to appreciate me. this self-knowledge has
strengthened my sense of self.

2. A friend and roommate of mine got bit on the leg by a dog and needed a ride to the
emergency room. I was studying for the MCAT a week later and felt that I really
needed the time to myself to study. But I knew how important that it was that she got
to the hospital to get it cleaned up and I wanted her to have someone there with her
who she knew loved her and supported her. I remember thinking “if I’m not
compassionate enough to take a friend to the hospital when she’s hurt, I don’t
deserve to do well on the MCAT or get into medical school.” At that point, I was
really aware of the fact that I often put others before myself and I still feel that way
about myself a year later.

3. My best friend felt very sick after consuming too much alcohol. We were with a
group of people who didn’t’ really take notice to her discomfort. So, I stepped away
from the group and helped her out.

4. The day before school started my sophomore year of college my best girl friend
and roommate who is not in my sorority revealed to me that she has an eating
disorder. I am the only friend that she has told and as I comforted her I felt really
close to her. This incident has given me my sense of self as one who takes pride in
her friendships and strives to nurture others

Unclassified
1. I made the dance team here at my university c. it was a goal that I had worked an
incredibly long time to achieve, and having all the hard work pay off was a great
moment. d. it taught me that hard work does make a difference, and through it you
can accomplish any goal.

2. When I was dancing with Dance Company in this dance that was my favorite and I
knew I looked good and had the dance down and when I stepped onstage and first
kicked I heard the crowd go crazy. It felt SO good to me because I’ve always
struggled with my self image and yet I felt SO good about myself and felt like all
eyes were on me and I was so pleased and proud. It was important for me to realize
that this is who I am and that I am able to accomplish my dreams. It has really helped
me continue to be ambitious in my weight loss and has boosted my confidence
tremendously.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative study examined the college related sources of impact that sorority member students perceived affected their identity development. A variant of Flanagan's (1954) Critical Incident Technique was used to ask sorority members (n=70) to describe one or two critical incidents that they believed had affected their sense of self, and then to rate the immediate positivity of the incident, as well its eventual effect on their sense of self. Three doctoral students reviewed the 100 obtained incident reports, from which they developed 14 themes: Participating in rush an/or joining a sorority

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

From their perspective: discovering the sources of impact on older women undergraduates' identity development and mapping those experiences

PDF

Concept mapping of the sources of perceived impact on community college students' identity development: a students' perspective

PDF

Concept mapping and describing the sources of impact on Black gay college student identity development at 4-year institutions

PDF

Undergraduate single mothers' perception of the impacts of college on their cognitive and psychosocial development

PDF

The sources of impact in college on gay male student identity: the current student perspective

PDF

Discovering the sources of impact of college on LGBTQ students' identity development and mapping those experiences

PDF

Describing and mapping the sources of college impact on the identity development of African American college students attending a predominantly white institution

PDF

First-generation Armenian American community college students' perception of events affecting their identity development

PDF

STEM identity development: examining the experiences of transfer students

PDF

More than one barrier to break: mapping the impact of college on identity in Latina undergraduates

PDF

Examining the relationship between students’ pre-college experiences and outcomes in diversity courses

PDF

Historically Latino/a-based fraternities/sororities: understanding Latino/a student experiences in a historically White-dominated system

PDF

Educators, experiences, and environment: exploring Doctor of Physical Therapy student perceived influences on professional identity formation

PDF

The sources of impact on first-generation Latino college students' identity development: from the students' perspective

PDF

Student perceptions and experiences: deconstructing race in fraternity/sorority life

PDF

Creating community online: the effects of online social networking communities on college students' experiences

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions of student behavior and relationship quality: an exploration of racial congruence and self-identity development

PDF

The influence of a Latina-based sorority on the academic experiences of Latina college students

PDF

Latina-oriented sororities: Identifying attitudes toward the new member education process

PDF

Beyond persistence and graduation rates: examining the career exploration processes of first-generation college students

Asset Metadata

Creator Sarkissian, Vergene (author)

Core Title Student perspectives on identity development: describing the experiences sorority members perceive influenced their identity

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 10/02/2009

Defense Date 05/13/2008

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Autonomy,Crisis,identity development,leadership,mentorship,OAI-PMH Harvest,Relationships,social capital,sorority membership,sorority network,student inolvement,study abroad,women's identity development

Language English

Contributor Digitized by the University of Southern California (provenance)

Advisor Goodyear, Rodney K. (committee chair), Espalin, Charles A. (committee member), Malloy, Courtney (committee member)

Creator Email sarkv@hotmail.com,vergenes@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1619

Unique identifier UC157250

Identifier etd-Sarkissian-2435 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-118732 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1619 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Sarkissian-2435.pdf

Dmrecord 118732

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Sarkissian, Vergene

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu