Example Of Micro-Culture Identity On Campus

On and around the campus of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign I argue that there are two senses of belonging. The first way students “belong” or fit into the campus is through the school itself. The second means through which students feel included within the campus is in their respective micro-cultures or subgroups. The mix of these two cultures come together to make up student body’s identification.

I argue one of the two ways students identify themselves on campus is through a unified sense as an Illini. Students generally enter campus with little to no knowledge of what being an Illini means, but leave campus with vast explicit and tacit cultural knowledge. If someone on the quad was to yell “I-L-L” we know the proper response is to yell back “I-N-I.” This is an example of explicit knowledge students on campus learn throughout their four years. At football or basketball games we cheer for our team. It is these types of moments where we-students or even staff for that

matter-forget about our micro-cultures. It is these types of moments when we all blend together into a sea of orange and share a unified sense of identity.

The aforementioned identity is not always tangible, but it certainly is understood across the student body and alumni. I recently experienced this situation firsthand. Over the weekend I volunteered with iHelp [sic]. While going door-to-door to collect canned food donations, I introduced myself as a student from the university working with iHelp. At one particular house the gentleman opened the door and invited me inside to watch the football game and explained he was an alumnus. In that moment we experienced a shared understanding and despite being complete strangers he and I both felt comfortable with each other. This shows the power of a shared identity.

In summary, I believe that one of the two ways students identify on this campus is as an Illini. According to Spradley and McCurdy tacit culture is “cultural knowledge people lack words for” (Spradley and McCurdy p.3). The example of the gentleman welcoming me into his house was an example of this because we shared an understanding, but did not have to verbally describe it. The reading explains explicit culture as “cultural knowledge that people can talk about” (Spradley and McCurdy p.3). During welcome week the tradition of yelling “I-L-L” and “I-N-I” was told to us by current students. This tradition serves as an example of explicit culture. The above examples outline how the student body and alumni share a common identity as Illini through cultural knowledge.

The second way I argue that students identify themselves on campus is through their micro-cultures. These can include race, religion, RSO’s and Greek life among other things. What constitutes micro-cultures “are systems of cultural knowledge characteristics of subgroups within larger societies. Members […] possess a special cultural knowledge that is unique to the group” (Spradley and McCurdy 4). It’s that shared knowledge and exclusivity which is why members will identify through their micro-cultures.

On campus the most notable example of micro-culture identity is Greek life.

Approximately 23% of students participate in Greek life (Office of Dean of Students). In the text fraternity life is described as a well known micro-culture, “For example, a college fraternity has a micro-culture within the the context of the university and a nation. Its members have special daily routines, jokes, and meanings for events. It is this shared knowledge that makes up their micro-culture…” (Spradley and McCurdy p.4). I can attest to the micro-culture experience of being a member of Greek life. There are special pieces of history we honor, inside jokes and brotherhood that create a strong micro-culture. I identify as much as an individual as I do a member of the fraternity. Within the Greek system there are various racially and religiously based chapters. Those houses represent a sub-group within a micro-culture; which offers proof that race or religion can be considered important cultures on

campus.

To summarize, I argue that the second way students at this university identify themselves is through the micro-cultures they participate. In the Spradley and McCurdy the difficulty of separating one’s self from a micro-culture is discussed; “Women who have left prostitution can describe the process of their exit from prostitution. As ex-prostitutes they struggle with the stigma of their past, the challenges of developing a new identity…” (Spradley and McCurdy p.30). Obviously, the sub-group of prostitution and fraternity or sorority membership are extremely different, but what they share in common is the control over member’s lives it take. There is essentially no ability to differentiate one’s self from those micro-cultures once they’re joined.

To answer the initial question of whether members of this campus identify more through a shared identity or micro-cultures one must consider both sides of the argument I presented. Truly, the answer lies somewhere in between. Depending on the day or situation the answer can vary. If I was asked where I went to college, I would reply that I am an economics major at the University of Illinois. That in itself represents my feeling as an Illini and the sub-group of economics majors I am a member of. Identity is a complex idea and to try and be just one person all the time doesn’t work. Even anthropologists have to try and wear different hats so to speak when conducting research. So, to summarize, students across this campus share a common identity, but certainly also identify through their various micro-cultures.