My research question is, "Why does Greek life have a negative reputation and how do we go about changing it?" I am interested in this research question for many reasons. For starters, I am a member of Delta Delta Delta here at the University of South Carolina and I am very involved and I know how bad of a reputation Greek life has to non-Greek members. I hate to see non-Greek life members make accusations and judge us Greek life members based off of the media and things they have heard about hazing and partying. Another reason this interests me is because I do not like being judged, especially when I did nothing to deserve it. People constantly judge me when they find out I am a member of a sorority and they do the same when they find out other people are members as well. For these same reasons, my research question affects me and my values. I do not agree with the negativity associated with Greek life, and is something I will not come to terms with. Greek life is an amazing thing and an even more amazing experience and does not deserve the negative reputation it holds. I most definitely have experience dealing with this negative reputation Greek life has and I feel I am qualified to write about this topic since I am a member of a Greek letter community and have experienced this judgment from non-Greek life members first hand.. 


The central claim of my first source is pertaining to how dangerous hazing is. There is a lot of evidence in this article about the dangers of hazing as well. This article includes statistics about the types of hazing that occurs in Greek letter communities, about who gets hazed, and about the effects hazing has on someone. The central claim for my second source is stating the general facts about hazing. This article includes ways that hazing can be justified, ways to fight hazing, facts, considerations to think about, questions to ask yourself if you are in a position where you might be getting hazed, and more. It provides a lot of solid facts that will be helpful for me to go back to when writing my final paper. My third source's claim is pertaining to just how dangerous and out of hand hazing can be. This article contains a story about a dangerous hazing situation and also a ton of facts. It talks a lot about how the realities of hazing are much different than the "humorous images people associate with the term." My first article's interests and values deal with how dangerous hazing is and can be. The article values statistics as strong evidence for how dangerous hazing really is. It includes interests about hazing in general and shows an interest in strong evidence. This source also shows interest in surveys taken among Greek letter community members so provide accurate evidence of the dangers of hazing. My second source values stopping hazing and getting the word out about how many negative effects it has. This article shows interest in stopping hazing, giving you facts about hazing to open your eyes to the dangers of it, showing you how people justify it, telling people what they can do to help prevent it, and more. My third source values answering questions people may have about hazing to inform people about the topic. In this article, the author shows interest in the different hazing methods and their effects on the person being hazed, which provides a lot of facts I will be able to use in my final paper. I find all three of my sources to be very credible. My first source is from a university website where the URL ends in "edu" and it is very current. It would be like having a page on our University of South Carolina webpage about hazing. This article also is not biased. The author is not promoting anything or taking a side against hazing, they are simply stating facts, giving statistics, and providing evidence of the dangers in hazing. My second source is also very credible. The URL ends in "org" and as well as my first article, it is very current. It has links all throughout the article to other websites proving more information about the topic and also gives the author's references at the bottom. I would say this article is somewhat bias because the author is trying to inform people about the dangers while also trying to convince people to take a stand in preventing and stopping hazing. My third source may be slightly less credible than my first two sources only because this article is from a website where the URL ends in "com", however, there is a link under the title of the website that ends in "org" which is the home website that my source comes from. The author's name is also on this article, whereas my other two sources it is not. Like my second source, this article is biased. The author is trying very hard to convince the reader of how dangerous hazing and the effects of hazing are on people. 

My research question is feasible and arguable because some people tend to believe that Greek life is bad but most people in Greek life understand that that reputation is all false and that Greek life is actually extremely great. I have found many disagreements between sources I have found. A bunch of my sources have different of viewpoints which helps me build my argument and my counterargument. I think I could revise my research question in the future by trying to make it a little less broad and narrow in on something tad more specific. 
