Florida State University Libraries

Honors Theses The Division of Undergraduate Studies

2013

Fraternity Involvement and Academic

Success: The Role of Cultural, Human and
Social Capital
Kelly Green

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact lib-ir@fsu.edu
 THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

FRATERNITY INVOLVEMENT AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS: THE ROLE OF

CULTURAL, HUMAN AND SOCIAL CAPITAL

By

KELLY GREEN

A Thesis submitted to the

Department of Sociology
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with
Honors in the major

Degree Awarded:
Summer, 2013
The members ofthe Defense Committee approve the thesis of Kelly Green defended on April
191'\ 2013

Dr. Annette Schwabe

Thesis Director

Outside Committee Member

Dr. Irene Padavic

Committee Member
Fraternity Involvement and Academic Success:
The Role of Cultural, Human and Social Capital
Honors Thesis Kelly Green
 Page |1

Dedication

This research is dedicated to several individuals. First is my Professor Dr.

Annette Schwabe who helped me gain an interest in sociology. She also spent

numerous hours helping me work on this thesis which has served to better me as an

individual and scholar. The next person that I would like to dedicate this thesis to is my

close friend and fraternal brother, Joshua Barrocas. His tireless approach toward

bettering Greek Life has served as an inspiration for me since we met my freshman

year. The last person I want to dedicate this research to is my father. He has always

told me to hold myself to high standards and has expected great things from me.

Without his guidance and motivation, I would have never even attempted this thesis.
 Page |2

Table of Contents:

Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………………………..…

Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………… .…2-3

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………….3-5

Literature Review……………………………………………………………………………………5-12

Academic Success ……..…………………………………………………………………..5-6

Academic Success and Fraternity Membership……..………………………7-10

Capital and Academic Success……….…………………………………………...10-11

Hypotheses………………………………………………………………………………….12-13

Methods…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 14-19

Sample.................................................... .................................................. 14-16

Measures……………………………………………………………………………………... 6-17

Mediating Variables……………………………………………………………………17-18

Analysis Plan……………………………………………………………………………….……19

Results…………………………………………………………………………… ………..…………….20-31

Data……………………………………………………………………………………………20-24

Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….... 4-31

Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-33

References……………………………………………………………………………………………... -36

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………… ………………….. 7-39

 Page |3

Introduction

This research was originally inspired during my involvement in the Emerging

Leaders course, a class that took prospective leaders from several Greek organizations

at Florida State University to educate them in the areas of academics, leadership, risk

management and social networking. I was enrolled in this course during the spring

semester of 2011. During the course of the semester, I learned a great deal about the

structure of a variety of Greek organizations and had a chance to meet leaders and

general members of various Greek chapters as well as staff from the Office of Greek

Life.

During this time period, Eric Barron became the new president of Florida State

and subsequently sent out a team of surveyors to provide him with information

regarding the academics, lifestyle and influence of Greek life at FSU. This process did

not go over well when it came time to survey the Interfraternity Council (IFC) fraternities

since these institutions are both reserved and exclusive. President Barron ended up

abandoning the process because several fraternities on the IFC did not allow the FSU

administration to collect data. Though it appeared that attempts to measure the effects

of Greek life on students would be difficult, I wondered whether my connections with the

Office of Greek Life as well as my membership in a fraternity would allow me access the

data and explore the relationships between Greek life and academic outcomes. One of

the key topics that President Barron, the Office of Greek Life and Greek leaders

(including me) all around the university had been discussing at the time was academics.

Recent declines in fraternity GPAs had led to more oversight by advisors and the
 Page |4

Interfraternity Council. Still, very little research existed relating to this matter and thus,

the main theme of my thesis was born.

I decided that I wanted to conduct research that was similar to what President

Barron’s commission had attempted to conduct. I wanted to quantitatively measure the

effect of fraternity membership on academic success in an effort to uncover how much

of an impact (if any) fraternity involvement had on students. After asking around, I

found out that prior to the process initiated by President Barron, the Office of Greek Life

released a grade report that illustrated that there are no significant differences between

Greek and non-Greek GPAs at FSU. I then decided to explore other measures of

college success to uncover if there were any other real differences between male

undergraduates in Greek organizations and those not within Greek organizations.

Using a sociological perspective, I wanted to investigate whether there were

differences in academic success by fraternity members and non-members. If so, I was

interested in identifying the factors that might explain the differences. I was familiar with

Bourdieu’s concept of different forms of capital and felt as if it might play a role in

differences between the academic success of those in Greek organizations and those

who were not. Therefore, I decided that I would look at whether or not three types of

capital -- cultural, human and social -- would help explain any relationships that might

exist between membership and academic success.

Therefore, my research questions are as follow:

1) Are there any differences in academic success between fraternity and non-

fraternity members?
 Page |5

2) If there are differences, to what extent do cultural, human and social capital

explain any existing relationships between academic success and membership?

Literature Review

Definitions of Academic Success

Before examining the impact of fraternity involvement on academic success, it is

important to understand what academic success is and why it is being used as a

dependent variable. While Grade Point Average (GPA) is the most common measure

of academic success, much research shows that academic success may be defined

more comprehensively by considering an array of benefits and experiences that

students define as positive outcomes of college. Lenning and Johnson (1972)

attempted to analyze other aspects of academic success in college beyond GPA to

include social definitions of college success. They identified competency,

understanding of norms as well as socialization abilities as key factors in college

success. This illustrated that college success is relative and, as a result, hinted that

perhaps self-rated measures of success may be an accurate tool in gauging overall

academic success. Sparkman et al. (2012) highlighted the concept of emotional

intelligence in their measures of academic achievement. This term was used to

describe how individuals perceive themselves in the academic sphere. Thus, academic

success seems to encompass a broad range of achievements beyond GPA (Lenning

and Johnson 1972).

College success has also been gauged based on the future success of the

individual. Nelson (1975) analyzed a variety of different factors and their implications on
 Page |6

future salary. This research suggested that GPA was not predictive of future salary with

the exception of the extremes of GPA (a 4.0 as opposed to a 1.0). However, there is a

lack of existing research that examines the actual effect of GPA on future salary.

Bowen (1975) instead decided to survey graduating college students regarding their

outlook toward the future job market and found that there was a positive relationship?.

More recently, Godofsky et al. (2013) expanded upon the idea of using college students’

perceptions of their future by assessing the effects of these perceptions on the current

recession and success in the work place. For these reasons, outlook toward the future

will be another key measure of academic success.

Pascarella (1995) looked at the overall college experience when trying to gauge

the success of students in college. This research focused on the importance of social

experiences and competencies in academic institutions in shaping a college student’s

feeling of overall success. Jorgensen and Fichten (2011) furthered this idea by using

college experience as one of their measures of success in college when comparing

disabled and non-disabled students. They found a relationship between their other

measures of academic success and self-rated college experiences in all students.

Thus, academic success seems to be a fairly broad concept that would best be

measured using multiple indicators that tap various aspects of academic success.
 Page |7

Academic Success and Fraternity Membership

Very little research exists that analyzes fraternity membership and any form of

academic success. The research that does exist focuses on fraternity infrastructure and

the effects of fraternity membership on character development and social skills.

It is important to examine whether there are characteristics of students that

involve selection into fraternities – self-selection or the process of admittance after rush.

Lynch and Sedlacek (1970) conducted research at the University of Maryland in an

attempt to understand what types of students join fraternities. They surveyed numerous

students and found that fraternity members typically identified themselves as leaders in

high school and also had higher academic potential. Fraternities recruited individuals

who were successful in high school and who fostered and continued to foster a

competitive spirit inside and outside of the classroom (Herbert 2006). Based on this

study, it would appear that fraternity students will have higher levels of academic

success due to the fact that they recruit members who were already successful in high

school. This selection effect may also mean that preexisting forms of cultural capital

like parental educational attainment and household income may explain any relationship

between membership and academic success.

The research seems to show that fraternities, as institutions, also foster other

types of important skills and provide resources necessary for academic success.

Fraternity members in general feel as if there is continual pressure on them to improve

themselves (Herbert 2006). Fraternities have activities that provide for increased social

networking through involvement in philanthropies. They also have extracurricular

activities that can be seen as a possible means for resource accumulation that would be
 Page |8

helpful in the classroom and beyond (Lynch and Sedlacek 1970). This is not only

indicative of the fact that members of fraternities may have a better college experience,

but may feel as if they have accumulated the resources and knowledge to be successful

in the future. For this reason, members of fraternities should rate both their outlook

toward the future as well as their college experience higher. This relationship may be

explained by forms of social capital like organizational involvement and peer network

size.

Another study done at the University of Kentucky found that a possible resource

available for fraternity students is stimulants (DeSantis et al. 2010). Eighty six percent

of fraternity members studied had used stimulants by the time that they were seniors

compared to a little over thirty five percent of general students. Disregarding the health

concerns, it is important to keep in mind that the fraternity members have access to a

resource that can allow them to forgo sleep and study in a shorter period of time before

tests. Other research on study habits also shows that students who “cram” at the last

minute actually do better in their classes (Nonis and Hudson 2010). Therefore, the

human capital measure of total study hours should help explain any relationships

between membership and academic success.

Nonis and Hudson (2010) studied the effects of study hours on college

performance and found that students who studied more often tended to be more

successful in terms of class performance and overall GPA. However, a mitigating factor

for this relationship was time management skills as well as the habits that students had.

Crede et al. (2010) addressed class attendance in their quantitative study of class

attendance and found that it had an ever greater effect on class academics and overall
 Page |9

academics than study hours. Class attendance was also found to have a relationship

with meticulousness and motivation (Crede et al. 2010). Since previous research has

shown that fraternity individuals are more motivated and competitive, I believe that they

will have higher levels of class attendance.

Other previous research on fraternity involvement has conducted qualitative

analyses of individual fraternity students through interviews (Byer 1998, Hebert 2006,

Nelson 1975). This research has looked into fraternity membership and identified links

to increased leadership skills, social networking skills, competitiveness and goal setting.

Byer (1998) conducted in depth interviews with four different fraternity members and

reached the conclusion that fraternity members have a great deal of pressure to be

successful in athletics, philanthropies, and social avenues as well as school. For this

reason, any differences in academic success might also be explained through the social

capital measure of pressure to be successful in school. Thus, it seems important to

assess the role of capital in academic success.

How might the selection factors of fraternity members and the goals fraternities

have for their members shape academic success? Research on fraternity involvement

and college success has typically addressed the effect of fraternity membership on

Grade Point Average or GPA (Maholic 2010). The Fall 2010 Grade Report done

through the Office of Greek Life at Florida State University reported both the average

IFC fraternity members’ GPA as well as the men’s campus average GPA. This report

illustrated no significant differences in Grade Point Average between these two groups

with the “All Fraternity” GPA being 2.979 and the “All Men’s” average being 2.971.

When looking at the semester GPAs, fraternity members were a little lower with a GPA
 P a g e | 10

of 2.856 compared to the men’s average of 2.909. Grove and Wasserman (2004)

looked at both fraternity and sorority GPAs compared to non-fraternity and sorority

GPAs at a large, undisclosed private school in the northeast. They found that members

of fraternities and sororities finished college with a GPA that was roughly two tenths of a

grade point lower than non-fraternity members. However, in order to understand

whether or not fraternity involvement has a broader effect on academic success within

college – especially given that fraternities attempt to inculcate several different skills and

competencies -- it is important to look beyond GPA when assessing the role of fraternity

membership on academic success.

Academic Success and Capital

Noble and Davies (2009) attempted to look at the effect of cultural capital on

varying levels of participation within the college environment. They highlighted parental

occupational status as well as parental income as key proxies for cultural capital.

Winkle-Wagner (2010) stated that an additional measure of cultural capital within the

educational sphere should include mannerisms that relate to status and the academic

environment. For this reason, professionalism in dress will be included as a measure of

cultural capital.

While I did not find significant research on the effects of human capital on

academic outcomes for fraternity members, Smith et al. (2012) highlighted time

management skills as a key measure of human capital in relation to education (within

 P a g e | 11

college) as well as workplace learning. Human capital typically is used to measure hard

skills that relate to tangible success. Davenport (1990), Craig (1990) and Crede et al.

(2010) all identified a positive relationship between class attendance and academic

success. Nonis and Hudson (2006) as well as Soltz (1992) also indicated that study

habits were integral in measuring academic success.

When measuring social capital within college freshman, Stephenson (2010)

quantified social capital as involvement in networks within their institutions as well as

involvement in community programs. Farmer-Hinton and Raquel (2008) as well as

Perna and Titus (2005) highlighted the effects of both parental and peer pressure as

being key social capital influences on success within school. They also measured the

size and nature of students’ peer networks and found that they had a positive

relationship with success in school. Shecter (2009) furthered this idea by measuring

social capital though student extroversion (which was recorded through the total number

of friends respondents had) and found that this measure also had a positive relationship

with school success.

 P a g e | 12

Hypothesis Diagram

Hypotheses

Therefore, based on the research I reviewed, my first hypothesis is that fraternity

members will report greater overall academic success than non-fraternity members. In

particular, I expect that fraternity members will report a more positive college
 P a g e | 13

experience, greater self-rated success and a more positive outlook toward the future

than non-fraternity members. However, the report issued by the Office of Greek Life at

Florida State University (FSU) did not observe any major differences between the GPA

of IFC fraternity men and the men’s campus average nor did Grove and Wasserman

(2004). Thus I predict that I will not find differences in GPA between fraternity members

and non-fraternity members. However, given that the Office of Greek Life at obtained

data on the GPAs of members of IFC fraternities across all classes (not just seniors) my

data on GPA and membership might yield different findings than the prior report from

FSU. Based on this report and the preexisting research on fraternities and academics, I

believe that I will find no differences in GPA between fraternities and non-fraternities.

I also wish to test whether there are differences in GPA and other academic

outcomes in my sample and to try to explain why there might or might not be

differences. My second hypothesis is that members of fraternities will have greater

levels of all or most forms of capital, which will explain the difference in academic

outcomes. If there is a difference in academic outcomes by membership, differences in

capital will explain part or all of the differences. In particular, I believe that all three

forms of capital will explain the relationships between membership and academic

success.
 P a g e | 14

Methods

Sample

The sample consists of 30 senior men who were members of fraternities

recognized by the InterFraternity Council (IFC) at Florida State University and 30 senior

men who were not affiliated with a fraternity. The IFC fraternity seniors were selected

from a population of senior men who are active members of IFC fraternities. The non-

fraternity seniors were drawn from a population of senior men who are currently enrolled

in Florida State University.

Recruitment methods for the IFC fraternity seniors included snowball sampling

through fraternity liaisons who were contacted at the weekly IFC meetings. In the first

phase of recruitment of fraternity members, I described the general purpose of the

research and qualifications for participation to during the weekly IFC meetings. At the

end of each meeting, I passed around a sign-up sheet was passed around to the

representatives (liaisons) of each fraternity and told them that I would contact them

within the next week to ask if they could provide a list of four to six interested seniors to

participate in the research. From these contacts, I received 37 names and phone

numbers of possible survey participants from a total of 15 fraternities on the

Interfraternity council. I contacted all 37 of the students and attempted to schedule

survey dates and times. Of the men I contacted, 20 (54%) responded and completed

the survey.

I recruited male non-fraternity seniors using convenience and snowball sampling.

I contacted the instructors of large classes in multiple fields (biology, accounting,

business management, sociology, criminal justice, etc.) via e-mail and asked if they
 P a g e | 15

would allow me to spend 10 minutes at the beginning of their classes to recruit potential

survey participants from among the male senior students in these classes. Of the 10 of

instructors that I contacted, four allowed me to recruit from their courses, for a total of

five classes. In each class, I described the purpose of the research and qualifications

for participation. I then distributed information sheets on which interested students

provided contact information. Though not all enrolled students were in attendance on

the day that I recruited, 39 senior men provided me with contact information and

expressed interest in participating in the survey. Through snowball sampling, I

recruited five additional students by asking the seniors recruited through the classroom

visits to list any other possible participants in the survey. The seniors were then

contacted and, as with the fraternity seniors, survey dates and times were scheduled for

those willing to participate. Of the students who provided contact information, 20 (59%)

completed interviews.

In the subsequent summer and fall term, I attempted to contact the remaining 17

fraternity students who had previously either not responded to my attempts at

contacting them or had scheduling conflicts. I was able to get ten more of the students

to complete the survey leading to a total of 30 fraternity seniors (81%) completing

interviews. I did the same for the non-fraternity seniors and was also able to get ten

more students to complete the survey adding up to a total of 30 non-fraternity students

(77%) completing the survey. Overall, I had 30 seniors who were members of IFC

fraternities and 30 seniors who were not Greek affiliated complete the survey adding up

to a total of 60 respondents.
 P a g e | 16

At first, the high rate of participation from the individuals that I contacted was

surprising. However, the high level of participation was probably due to the fact that the

data was collected over an extended time and because most of the targeted participants

volunteered to be contacted for the study. Also, since I am a member of an IFC

fraternity, the respondents that I contacted who were in fraternities most likely had a

high level of trust in me to conduct the survey fairly.

I conducted the surveys through face-to-face verbal questioning in the

respondents’ apartments, in classrooms or in local public areas including but not limited

to coffee shops and libraries. Before beginning the survey respondents were given an

informed consent sheet that included a recap of the purpose of the research as well as

relevant contact information. Each interview took between 30 and 45 minutes. I used a

computer program called Machform by Appnitro to administer a survey to a sample of

selected seniors (by credit hour) at Florida State University (Machform 2007-2008). All

respondent responses have been kept locked in a secure data file and are confidential.

Measures

Dependent Variables. I measured my primary study outcome, academic success,

using four variables: Grade Point Average, College Experience, School Success and

Outlook toward the Future (see Appendix A for specific survey questions). As a basis

for respondent’s current academic standing, the respondent was asked their major, their

approximate GPA (rounding to the nearest hundredth if possible) and how many credit

hours they had including their current semester’s course load in order to ensure they

that were a senior. I used a discrete count of this variable in the analysis.
 P a g e | 17

In an effort to measure the respondent’s College Experience, respondents were

asked to rate how pleased they were with their college experience on a scale of one to

ten. Respondents were then asked to rate how successful they had been in school on a

scale of one to ten. For the last measure of academic success, I asked respondents to

describe their outlook toward the future on a scale from 1 to 10. For all of these self-

rated variables, I used a continuous measure of this variable in the analysis.

Independent Variable. My independent variable, Membership, has two

categories: IFC fraternity membership, which I coded as 1 and non-fraternity

membership, which I coded as a 2.

Mediating Variables

Human Capital. I measured human capital using the following three variables:

Time Management Skills, Total Classes Missed and Total Study Hours. For the

variable Time Management Skills, the respondents were asked to rate their time

management skills on a scale from 1 to 10. For the second aspect of human capital,

students were asked how many classes a week they typically did not attend during each

year of their undergraduate studies. These averages were then added up for a grand

total of hours they studied over the four years. For the third aspect, respondents were

asked how many hours on average they spent studying per week during each year of

their undergraduate studies which were also then added up for a total number of study

hours.

Cultural Capital. I used four measures to gauge cultural capital including:

Mother's Educational Attainment, Father’s Educational Attainment, Household Income

and Professional Attire. For Mother’s and Father’s Educational Attainment, I first asked
 P a g e | 18

the respondents with whom they lived with during high school; the options included

“primarily with their mother, primarily with their father, their parents, a mother and

stepfather, a father and stepmother and other.” The respondents were then asked to

give each parent/guardian’s highest level of education as “less than high school, high

school/GED, some college, associate’s degree, bachelor’s degree or master’s degree or

higher.” For Household Income, respondents were also asked to provide which

household income quintile they fell into as approximated through the most updated

quintiles provided from the US Census Bureau. The quintiles were “$0-$19,999,

$20,000-$39,999, $40,000-$59,999, $60,000-$89,999, and $90,000 or more.” For

Professional Attire, I asked respondents how many times a week they dressed in either

business or business casual attire.

Social Capital. I tapped social capital using three variables including

Organizational Involvement, Time Spent with Friends and Pressure to be Successful in

School. For the variable Organizational Involvement, I asked the respondents to

provide a list of school-based organizations in which they were involved like “clubs,

sports or honor societies” throughout their college experience. I also asked respondents

to provide a list of non-school based organizations like “fraternities, religious groups and

volunteer programs.” I then added these two lists to make the category of

Organizational Involvement. I used a total continuous count of this variable in the

analyses. For the second measure, I asked respondents to quantify how many people

they considered “general friends” in college. For the last measure of social capital, the

respondents were asked to rate on a scale from 1 to 10 how much pressure they felt

(from any source) to be successful in school.

 P a g e | 19

Analysis Plan

I used the statistical software SPSS to conduct simple correlation analyses to

assess the main effects of Membership on all four measures of academic success, in

turn. Though I report these on one correlation table, below, I did run the analyses

separately for each of the four relationships using simple correlations. Thus, I derived

four correlation coefficients for each independent analysis of the four relationships:

membership and GPA, membership and Self-Rated Success, membership and College

Experience, and membership and Outlook toward the Future. Then, for any significant

analyses between the independent variable and the dependent variables, I conducted

partial correlations to see if any of the measures of capital might explain the

relationship. Each of these partial correlation models only included three variables:

membership, an outcome variable (e.g., GPA) and the potential mediating variable. In

order to assess mediation, I also confirmed that the mediator was significantly related to

both the independent and dependent measure in question.

Because of the large number of individual variables and almost countless

possible relationships, I will only identify and discuss main relationships as well as any

relationships involving control or explaining variables that are relevant to the previously

mentioned main relationships. Most relationships will still be shown in the next section

with their relevant information highlighted for easy access.

 P a g e | 20

Results

Data

Table 1: Frequency Table for Academic Success Measures

Variable Frequency % Mean SD
DV 1 Grade Point Average 3.07 .41
0-2.79 13 21.7
2.8-3.0 17 28.3
3.01-3.34 14 23.3
3.35 or higher 16 26.7
DV 2 College Experience 8.43 1.57
0-7 13 21.7
8 16 26.7
9 13 21.7
10 18 30
DV 3 Self-rated School Success 7.45 1.23
0-6 10 16.7
7 23 38.3
8 17 28.3
9-10 10 16.7
DV 4 Outlook Toward the Future 5.97 1.29
0-5 16 26.7
6 16 26.7
7 28 46.7

Table 2: Frequency Table for Independent Variable

Variable Frequency % Mean SD
IV 1 Membership 1.5 0.5
Fraternity 30 50
Non-Fraternity 30 50
 P a g e | 21

Table 3: Frequency Table for Cultural Capital Measures

Variable Frequency % Mean SD
CV 1 Mother's Educational Attainment 3.88 1.63
Less Than High School 2 3.3
High School 13 21.7
Some College 11 18.3
Associates 3 5
Bachelors 20 33.3
Masters 10 16.7
Greater than Masters 0 0
CV 2 Father's Educational Attainment 4.03 2.01
Less Than High School 1 1.7
High School 4 6.7
Some College 7 11.7
Associates 5 8.3
Bachelors 25 41.7
Masters 3 5
Greater than Masters 7 11.7
CV 3 Household Income 4.5 1.03
$0-$19,999 1 1.7
$20,000-$39,999 4 6.7
$40,000-$59,999 6 10
$60,000-$89,999 2 3.3
$90,000 or more 47 78.3
CV 4 Professional Attire 2.02 1.76
0 times a week 13 21.7
1 times a week 14 23.3
2 times a week 16 26.7
3 times a week or more 17 28.3
 P a g e | 22

Table 4: Frequency Table for Human Capital Measures

Variable Frequency % Mean SD
CV 5 Time Management Skills 7.32 1.77
1-6 13 21.7
7 15 25
8 18 30
9-10 14 23.7
CV 6 Total Study Hours 9.35 6.63
0-4 hours 15 25
5-8 hours 15 25
9-13 hours 15 25
14 or more hours 15 25
CV 7 Total Classes Missed 5.28 4.57
0-1 classes 13 21.7
2-4 classes 17 28.3
5-8 classes 16 26.7
9 or more classes 14 23.3

Table 5: Frequency Table for Social Capital Measures

Variable Frequency % Mean SD
CV 8 Organizational Involvement 2.2
0-1 20 33.3
2 24 40
3-5 13 21.7
6 or more 3 5
CV 9 Time Spent With Friends 33.5
0-15 hours 16 26.7
16-25 hours 15 25
26-40 hours 15 25
41-140 hours 14 23.3
CV 10 Pressure to be Successful 8.37
1-7 16 26.7
8 9 15
9 13 21.7
10 22 36.7
 P a g e | 23

Table 6: Correlation Matrix for Academic Success Measures (Simple Correlations)

Membership Grade Point College Self Rated Outlook
(F=1; NF=2) Average Experience Success Toward the
Future
Membership 1
Grade Point
Average .354** 1
College
Experience -.193 0.226 1
Self-Rated
Success .233 .617** .241 1
Outlook
Toward the
Future .026 .335** .352** .481** 1
* Indicates correlation is signficant at .05 level, ** Indicates correlation is signficant at .01 level

Table 7: Partial Correlations with Control Variables

Control Variable Membership

& GPA
Mother Educational Attainment 0.344**
Cultural
Capital

Father Educational Attainment .327*

Household Income .334*
Professional Attire .345**
Time Management Skills .372**
Human
Capital

Total Study Hours .363**

Total Classes Missed .276*
Organizational Involvement .384**
Capital
Social

Time Spent With Friends .363**

Pressure to be Successful in
School .361**
* Indicates correlation is significant at the .05 level
** Indicates correlation is significant at the .01 level
 P a g e | 24

Post-hoc Data

Table 8: Post-hoc Simple Correlations

Membership Classes Missed Grade Point Average

Membership 1

Classes Missed -.283* 1

Grade Point Average .354** -.385** 1

* Indicates correlation is significant at the .05 level, ** Indicates correlation is significant at the .01 level

Data Analysis

Frequencies

Table 1 provides frequency information for the dependent variables that measure

Academic Success.

The first measure of Academic Success, Grade Point Average or GPA, was split

into four roughly even categories. Only around twenty percent of the respondents had

below a 2.79 GPA (21.7%, n=13) and around a quarter of the respondents reported that

their GPA was a 3.35 or higher (26.7%, n=16). A majority of the respondents had a

GPA between these two categories. The mean was 3.07 (SD= .41).

The next variable, College Experience, has been redistributed into four main

categories due to the widespread responses. A majority of the respondents rated their

college experience either as an eight (26.7%, n=16), a nine (21.7%, n=13) or a ten

(30%, n=18). Only around twenty percent of the respondents rated their college
 P a g e | 25

experience as a seven or less (21.7%, n=13). The mean of 8.43 further illustrates the

fact that most of the respondents rated their college experience highly (SD= 1.57).

The variable Self-rated School Success was also split into four categories in

order to create a more even distribution. A large plurality of the respondents stated that

they rated their success in school as a seven (38.3%, n=7). Less than twenty percent of

the respondents rated themselves as less than a six (16.7%, n=10) or a nine or higher

(16.7%, n=10). The mean was 7.45 (SD= 1.23). This shows that, as opposed to the

other self-rated variables, the majority of respondents only rated themselves as around

seven out of ten which is a comparatively low rating.

Outlook toward the Future had a very uneven distribution and was redistributed

into only three categories. Around a quarter of the respondents rated their outlook as a

five or lower (26.7%, n=16) with another quarter of the respondents rating their outlook

as a six (26.7%, n=16). Almost a majority of the respondents (46.7%, n=28) rated their

outlook towards the future as a seven. No respondents rated their outlook higher than a

seven and the mean was 5.97 (SD= 1.29). This is the lowest average of all of the self-

rated variables and shows that a large number of the respondents did not have a highly

positive outlook towards the future.

The independent variable Membership (Table 2) is coded into the two response

categories: Fraternity and Non-Fraternity. The distribution between these two

categories is exactly even – there are 30 respondents in both the Fraternity and Non-

Fraternity categories.

The next variables that are analyzed in the frequency table (Table 3) are the

control variables that are measures of Cultural Capital. These variables are Mother’s
 P a g e | 26

Educational Attainment, Father’s Educational Attainment, Household Income and

Professional Attire.

The variable Mother’s Educational Attainment showed that a third of the

respondents answered that their mother had a Bachelor’s degree (33.3%, n=20). Only a

few of the respondents stated that their mother had less than a high school education

(3.3%, n=1) or an Associate’s degree (5%, n=3) with a fairly even distribution between

High School (21.7%, n=13), Some College (18.3%, n=11), and Master’s degree (16.7%,

n= 10). No respondents reported that their mother had greater than a Master’s degree.

The mean of 3.88 indicates that the respondents’ mothers had an average to high level

of education (SD= 1.63). None of the respondents reported that they had two mothers,

and there was no value for this response. For the variable Father’s Educational

Attainment, a large plurality stated that their father had a Bachelor’s degree (41.7%,

n=25). The only other levels of attainment that had a significant number of reports were

Some College (11.7%, n=7) and Greater than Masters (11.7%, n=7). Only a small

percentage of the respondents reported that their father had either Less than a High

School Education (1.7%, n=1) or a High School Education (6.7%, n=4) which indicates

that most of the respondents’ fathers had obtained a high level of education (Mean=

4.03, SD= 2.01). None of the respondents reported that they had two fathers, and there

was no value for this response.

The variable Household Income was divided into quintiles. The category $90,000

or more had a clear majority with almost 80 percent (78.3%, n=47) of the respondents

stating that they fell into this income bracket. None of the other categories had more

than ten percent of the respondents report themselves as that income bracket. This
 P a g e | 27

indicates that not just a majority, but almost all of the respondents fall into the highest

quintile of Household Incomes.

The last of the control variables is Professional Attire. Due to the uneven

distribution responses, the groupings were redistributed so that each category would be

fairly even. As a result, no one category has a majority of the respondents and very few

have more than a few percent over a plurality. However, the mean of 2.02 shows that

most of the students stated that they wore professional attire around two times a week

(SD= 1.76).

The next group of variables analyzed (Table 4) are the measures of Human

Capital. They include the variables Time Management Skills, Total Study Hours and

Total Classes Missed.

For the variable Time Management Skills, the groupings were also redistributed

due to the uneven distribution the responses. Only around twenty percent (21.7%,

n=13) rated their time management skills as a six or lower. Most of the respondents

rated their time management skills as either a seven (25%, n=15) or an eight (30%,

n=18) which is further indicated by the mean being 7.32. A high percentage also rated

themselves as a nine or a ten (23.7%, n=14). This distribution indicates that many of the

respondents highly rated their time management skills (Mean= 7.37, SD= 1.78).

The variable Total Study Hours also featured a wide distribution of responses,

which were redistributed into four roughly even categories. The mean of 9.35 indicates

that the average amount of study hours completed was around 9 hours (SD= 6.63). A

quarter of the respondents completed less than four study hours (25%, n=15) and a
 P a g e | 28

quarter of the respondents completed over 14 study hours (25%, n=15). This shows a

very broad distribution of the amount of study hours completed.

The last measure of Human Capital was the control variable Total Classes

Missed. This variable also had a wide distribution of responses and was redistributed

into four roughly even categories. The mean of 5.28 indicated that the average number

of classes missed was between five and six classes (SD= 4.57). The respondents

almost evenly reported that they missed 2-4 (28.3%, n=17), 5-8 (26.7%, n=16), and 9 or

more classes (23.3%, n=14), which also indicates that the majority of students missed a

large amount of their classes.

The next frequency table (Table 5) shows the control variables that measure

Social Capital. They are Organizational Involvement, Time Spent with Friends, and

Pressure to be Successful.

The first of these control variables, Organizational Involvement, was redistributed

into four categories in order to try and create more even categories. A large plurality of

the respondents were in either 0-1 organizations (33.3%, n=20) or 2 organizations

(40%, n=24) which indicates that the majority of the respondents were not involved in

more than a few organizations. This is further illustrated through the mean of 2.2 which

shows that the average number of organizations that the respondents reported was

around two (SD= 1.57).

The next variable is Time Spent with Friends; due to the large disparity between

the different times that the respondents provided; this variable was also distributed into

four categories which are all almost even in terms of percentages. The mean of 33.5

indicates that the average respondent stated that they spent between 33 and 34 hours
 P a g e | 29

with their friends a week and more than twenty percent of the respondents (23.3%,

n=14) stated that they spent upwards of 41 hours a week with their friends (SD= 22.5).

This indicates that the respondents spent a large amount of time a week with their

friends.

The last control variable is Pressure to be Successful and was also redistributed

due to a fairly uneven distribution of the responses. A significant plurality of the

respondents rated the amount of pressure that they felt was a ten (36.7%, n=22) with

another significant portion of the respondents (21.7%, n=13) rating their amount of

pressure as a nine. Only about a quarter of the respondents (26.7, n=16) rated their

pressure to be successful as a seven or lower. This, coupled with the mean of 8.37

indicates that the majority of the respondents rated the amount of pressure on them to

be successful as high (SD= 1.82).

Correlations

Variable Relationship (Type)

GPA Yes Negative
Outlook towards the future No
Success in school No
College experience No

In Table 6, it is shown that there is a statistically significant relationship between

membership in a fraternity and grade point average as illustrated by the r value of .354

(p<.01). This correlation is positive, which indicates that individuals who are not in a

fraternity appear to have higher grade point averages than those in fraternities. This is

the strongest and only statistically significant correlation found between membership

and any of the measures of academic success.

 P a g e | 30

The table (Table 6) also shows that there is not a statistically significant

correlation between membership and college experience with an (r= -.193, p=.139),

self-rated success (r=.233, p=.073), or outlook towards the future (r=.026, p=.843). This

indicates membership in a fraternity appears to not have an effect on any of these other

measures of academic success. Several of these measures of academic success did

appear to have statistically significant correlations with each other. Grade point average

did have a very strong, statistically significant correlation with self-rated success with an

r value of .617 (p<.01) as well as a fairly strong, statistically significant correlation with

outlook towards the future with an r value of .335 (p<.01). Outlook toward the future had

a fairly strong and statistically significant relationship with both college experience

(r=.352, p<.01) as well as self-rated success (r=.481, p<.01). The only measure of

academic success that did not have a statistically significant relationship with all of the

other measures was college experience (GPA: r=.226, p=.082; self-rated success:

r=.241, p=.064). These correlations across the various measures of academic success

appear to indicate a general relationship between all of the measures and could

possibly indicate that they are all related.

Table 7 shows the correlation between membership and grade point average –

the one main relationship that was significant -- while controlling for the different forms

of capital. When the control variable Father’s Educational Attainment was entered, the

relationship between membership and academics success is still a fairly strong and has

a statistically significant correlation. However, the r value decreased from .354 to .327

and p is now significant at p<.05. For the variable household income, the r value has

also decreased from .354 to .334 with p<.05. Therefore, it is possible that the cultural

capital measures Father’s educational attainment and household income might be

 P a g e | 31

factors that select for both Membership and GPA. However, the post-hoc analyses

required to tease out these relationships are beyond the scope of the current study.

When the mediating variable Total Classes Missed is entered into the equation,

the correlation between membership and GPA is somewhat weaker as the r value

dropped from r=.354 to r=.276 (p<.05). This indicates that the human capital measure

of Total Classes Missed appears to partly mediate the correlation between Membership

and GPA.

Conclusions

The results of this research were somewhat surprising. Based on the data

collected and the analysis made, there was no statistically significant correlation

between fraternity membership and college experience, outlook towards the future or

perceived success in school. This information contradicts most of my previous

assumptions and even though previous research shows that fraternity membership had

a relationship with leadership, social networking skills, as well as competitive nature,

this does not translate into higher levels of overall academic success.

However, there was one statistically significant correlation. The data shows that

fraternity members have lower grade point averages than non-fraternity members.

While this seems to contradict the report issued by the Office of Greek Life, it is

important to understand that the report compared overall GPAs of fraternity men to the

men’s campus average, while my population for this thesis was seniors. This could

mean that while overall there is no discrepancy between the GPAs of all fraternity

members, there is between only students who are seniors. This discrepancy could be
 P a g e | 32

due to the timeline of membership with organizations which can often include varying

degrees of commitment in membership.

At least one measure of each form of capital did seem to have a controlling effect

on the relationship between fraternity membership and GPA. This was especially true

for the variable Total Classes Missed. Therefore, I decided to conduct a post-hoc

analysis in order to determine the extent to which Total Classes Missed was a true

mediating variable. I found that it does have an independent relationship with both

membership and GPA. This suggests that one of the main reasons that fraternity

seniors have a worse GPA is because they have had poorer class attendance.

Future research should focus on why fraternity students miss more class as well

as why and how this has an effect on GPA. Research should also be conducted that

further examines the effect of organizational involvement on GPA as well as the

differences in organizational involvement between fraternity and non-fraternity

members. Finally, future studies should look into whether or not there is a selection

effect based on pre-existing cultural capital since parental educational attainment and

household income were shown to affect the relationship between membership and

GPA. This research should serve to help create university and IFC policies towards

academic standards.

One of the strengths of this research was the fact it was able to include so many

seniors who were members of fraternities on the Interfraternity council. Another

strength was the fact that the survey was conducted by an undergraduate student who

is in a fraternity, which meant that the fraternity students surveyed were more likely to

be honest with their responses.

 P a g e | 33

The use of a comprehensive quantitative measure of Academic Success to

compare outcomes for students who were and were not members of fraternities was

novel.

This thesis was limited in terms of both time and resources. Due to time

constraints, only 60 respondents could be surveyed. Also, more questions were asked

during the surveying process that was not included in this research because of time

limitations. If given more time, I would have included pre-existing capital in my research

as well as many more measures of each form of capital. Also, since the study was

quantitative in nature, it is difficult to form conclusions regarding the acquisition of

capital and the nature of the relationships that were uncovered. In addition, the

measure of GPA was self-reported by the student as was parental income, possibly

influencing validity of these measures. Another measurement issue was that I probably

did not set income limits high enough in the response categories for my survey item,

which reduced variability and, therefore, probably limited validity of the parental income

measures.

The study only included simple and partial correlations as quantitative measures

and a more complex analytical plan might uncover subtle trajectories that vary by

membership status and that, in turn, affect academic success. The fact that only

seniors were included in the study means that there may have been a “survivor” effect

where individuals with lower degrees of membership have left the fraternity by their

senior year. Last, since only IFC fraternity men were included in this research, it is

difficult to form conclusions regarding the nature of other Greek organizations like

sororities and multicultural Greek organizations.

 P a g e | 34

References

Bowen, Gordon E. 1975. Employment Outlook for 1975 College Graduates in New
England. Regional Report Number 75-5.

Byer, L. John. 1998. “Fraternity Members Perceptions of how Involvement in a

Fraternity and Involvement in Student Government has Influenced their College
Experiences.”

Craig, Ford M. 1990. "A Study to Determine if there is a Relationship between Absences
and Grades at McCook College."1-33.

Crede, Marcus, Sylvia G. Roch and Urszula M. Kieszczynka. 2010. "Class Attendance
in College: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relationship of Class Attendance with
Grades and Student Characteristics." Review of Educational Research
80(2):272-295

Davenport, William S. 1990. "A Study of the Relationship between Attendance and
Grades of Three Business Law Classes at Broome Community College." 1-26.

DeSantis, Alan, Seth M. Noar and Elizabeth M. Webb. 2010. "Speeding through the Frat
House: A Qualitative Exploration of Nonmedical ADHD Stimulant use in
Fraternities." Journal of Drug Education 40:157-171.

Farmer-Hinton, Raquel. 2008. "Social Capital and College Planning: Students of Color
using School Networks for Support and Guidance." Education and Urban Society
41:127-157

Godofsky, Jessica, Cliff Zukin and Carl Van Horn. 2011. "Unfulfilled Expectations:
Recent College Graduates Struggle in a Troubled Economy. Work Trends.":
VOL:41-41.

Grove, A. Wayne and Tim Wasserman. 2004. “The Life Cycle Pattern of Collegiate
GPA: Longitudinal Cohort Analysis and Grade Inflation.” The Journal of
Economic Education 35:162-174.
 P a g e | 35

Hebert, Thomas P. 2006. "Gifted University Males in a Greek Fraternity: Creating a

Culture of Achievement." Gifted Child Quarterly 50:26-41

Jorgensen, Shirley, Catherine Fichten and Alice Havel. 2011. College Satisfaction and
Academic Success. Final Report Presented to PAREA, Spring 2011.

Lenning, Oscar,T. and O. B. Johnson. 1972. "Exploring College Success: Where should
we Go from here?" Mar 25: 1-31.

Lynch, Robert C. and William E. Sedlacek. 1970. “Differences between Fraternity and
Non-Fraternity Members at the University of Maryland.” Research Report no. 12:
1-70.

Maholic, Suzy. 2010. "High- and Low-Achieving Fraternity Environments at a Selective

Institution: Their Influence on Members Binge Drinking and GPA." 71(12): 1-216.

Nelson, Alice,M. 1975. “Undergraduate Academic Achievement in College as an

Indication of Occupational Success.” Professional Series 75(5): 1-33.

Noble, John and Peter Davies. 2009. “Cultural Capital as an explanation of variation in
participation in higher education.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 30(5):
591-605

Nonis, Sarath,A. and Gail Hudson I. 2010. "Performance of College Students: Impact of
Study Time and Study Habits." Journal of Education for Business 85(4):229-238

Pascarella, Ernest T. 1995. “Influences on Students' Internal Locus of Attribution for

Academic Success in the First Year of College.” Research in Higher Education
37(6): 1-26.

Perna, Laura W. and Marvin A. Titus. 2005. "The Relationship between Parental
Involvement as Social Capital and College Enrollment: An Examination of
Racial/Ethnic Group Differences." Journal of Higher Education 76(5):485-485.

Shecter, Julie. 2009. "Classroom Social Capital: Development of a Measure of

Instrumental Social Support within Academic Settings." 1-24.
 P a g e | 36

Stephenson, E. V. 2010. Bridging the gap: The Role of Bridging social capital in the
development of civic engagement among first-year college students. , 322-322.

Winkle-Wagner, R. 2010. “Cultural capital: The promises and pitfalls in education

research.” ASHE Higher Education Report, 36(1): 1-144.

Zajacova, Anna, Scott M. Lynch and Thomas J. Espenshade. 2005. “Self-Efficacy,

Stress, and Academic Success in College.” Research in Higher Education

46: 677-706.
 P a g e | 37

Appendix

Appendix A

Survey Questions (included in thesis):

What is the highest level of education that your parent/guardian (F) has attained?

What is the highest level of education that your parent/guardian (M) has attained?

When you were in high school, what was your family's total household income?

At this point in time, on a scale of one to ten – with a “1” being poor and a “10” being

excellent, how would you rate your time management skills?

Thinking about only your time in college, in how many in-school organizations like clubs,

sports or honor societies have you been involved?

How many out of school organizations like social fraternities and volunteer programs

have you been involved in?

How many total friends would you say that you have?

How many times a week do you dress in a professional manner like business or

business casual attire?

How many hours have you taken including the classes you are currently enrolled in?

How many hours a week, on average, do you spend studying?

How many hours a week, on average, did you spend studying during your junior year?
 P a g e | 38

How many hours a week, on average, did you spend studying during your sophomore

year?

How many hours a week, on average, did you spend studying during your freshman

year?

How many classes a week do you typically not attend?

How many classes a week did you typically not attend your junior year?

How many classes a week did you typically not attend your sophomore year?

How many classes a week did you typically not attend your freshman year?

On a scale of one to ten– with a “1” being poor and a “10” being excellent, how much

pressure do you feel is on you for you to be successful in school?

On a scale of one to ten with one being not pleased at all and ten being very pleased,

how pleased do you feel about your college experience?

One a scale of one to ten, how would you rate your outlook towards the future?

What is your approximate GPA?

 P a g e | 39

Appendix B

Informed Consent Form:

Hi! I am Kelly Green an Honors in the Major student at Florida State University. I am currently conducting
research for my Honors Thesis. My faculty advisor is Dr. Annette Schwabe in the Sociology Department.

My research focuses on fraternity involvement and academic well-being. I will be interviewing several
seniors at FSU who are both involved and not involved in fraternities and will be using this information to better
understand the relationship between fraternity involvement and academic well-being.

The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between fraternity involvement and
academic well-being. The objective is to help understand whether membership in a fraternity affects academic
well-being and, if so, how the fraternity experience shapes this outcome.

I would like to ask your permission to interview you as a part of this process, but first let me give you a
little background before you decide whether to participate. Here is some information about myself, the survey
and Dr. Schwabe’s contact information in case you have questions about the survey.

Kelly Green: Dr. Annette Schwabe:

(305) 807-5644 526 Bellamy Building
krg09d@my.fsu.edu Department of Sociology
Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306
(850) 644- Dr. S hwa e’s offi e
OR (850) 644-6416 (main office)
aschwabe@fsu.edu

Any questions about your rights as a subject/ participant in this research study should be directed to the
Chair of the Human Subjects Committee, Institutional Review Board, through the Office of the Vice
President of Research at (850) 644-8633.
The survey should take approximately 30-45 minutes. Your participation is voluntary and you may stop
at any time.

You answers will be kept completely confidential to the fullest extent of the law. Your name will not
appear anywhere in the survey records. Also, all notes that I take during the survey will be destroyed once my
research project is completed at the end of the year.

Finally, in order to better facilitate the analysis of the responses you provide, your responses will be
recorded by using a special program on my computer that allows to me type in your responses each question;
if you are not comfortable with this or feel uncomfortable at any point in the survey, you reserve the right to stop
the survey immediately.

Please initial below if you consent to participate in my interview

(initials) (date)

I appreciate your COMPLETE honesty in answering the survey questions. Your honest and
detailed responses will help ensure the accuracy of my results.