ROTFL! I think we should put this phrase in the recruitment booklets!

Titchou, I edited since I am just asking specifically about this business of grade requirements.

Would it not be to NPC's (or individual CPHs) advantage to state that there is a grade requirement/minimum GPA to enter recruitment? I don't see how it helps PR to encourage young women to enter recruitment when they have no chance whatsoever of making it past the first round.

My thinking is based on the fact that virtually every GLO was established on the foundation of scholarship being paramount. See Bound By A Mighty Vow for a great explanation of the early days of GLOs.

What am I missing here?

The problem is that NPC, and correctly so, pushes the agenda that every group sets their own grade requirements. Therefore, CPH should not effectively stop women from participating in recruitment because they may meet someone's requirement. Now, we know that they most likely won't make the cut but then there are those who are taken as exceptions. So by implementing a grade requirement to participate in recruitment, CPH is effectively overriding the individual groups' autonomy.

So how do you communicate that to a PNM? Frankly, you can't to all of them as some just will think they are the "exceptions." It's a tough tightrope to walk.

ah, thanks - got it. Uh huh. I see. My black and white/analytical thinking doesn't always work well for every situation...appreciate you taking the time to respond and clarify.

I know what you're saying. But there ARE women who have grades and activities who don't get past the doors of where they really want to be, and what
actually might be a great place for them. And often for them, "a" bid doesn't cut it - they want "the" bid. And they decide they'd rather not be Greek than be the "wrong" Greek. If that wasn't true, every chapter in every SEC school would be at total and take quota every time and chapters would not close at these schools because of low numbers. This end result is no less disheartening than women getting cut at IU because there isn't physical space for them in the house.

We CAN go around and around about it, but IMO, unless the students (and the monetarily involved alumnae) are the ones who lobby for the change, the only way to make it happen is to do it all at once. Pulling the Band-Aid off slowly just increases the numbers of women who remember "the old way." Also, starting what is essentially a new type of system would make it easier for new groups to enter the campus on equal footing.

Which all goes back to my basic point. If a group goes to IU as things are now, and doesn't have a long term plan in place for being an unhoused group that will be essentially apart from the rest of the sororities and a way to spin that positively...they're nuts.

I think you all are seeing the "bed quota" thing as more strict than it actually is. Chapters at this school are HUGE and they get to set their own quota which is typically, roughly a bed quota. Our house is housing 87 women this year. There are 129 members BEFORE recruitment and the chapter usually sets quota at right around 50. So, if we take our quota, we'll have 179 members. Obviously they are not all living in. Seniors live out and the new members don't live in. You're basically replacing your juniors.

It isn't like this is a school with 19 NPC groups and they keep the chapter sizes down to 50 or something.

It's pretty much impossible to know what quota would be in a traditional quota/Total system. It may not be much different because you will still have women dropping out when they are cut by their most desired chapter or getting cut from all groups.

Are the numbers comparable for other chapters?

33girl: You've hit the nail on the head and don't realize it. This is a MUTUAL selection process. Just because you want to be an ZZZ doesn't mean that you just simply get to be one. If that's too competitive and offends you, sorry. Each group can only take so many women. There has to be a way to whittle that down. And yes, some get their panties in a wad and quit. But that doesn't mean the system doesn't work. It's about wanting the Greek experience, not just wanting to be an AAA.

No, it doesn't offend me at all. You're totally misinterpreting me. My point is that there are disappointed rushees in EVERY Greek system - even the most noncompetitive. And there are great women who get overlooked or cut for dumb reasons or disinheartened and drop out in EVERY Greek system. The reason I chose the SEC as an example is because when I tell people they can go through a noncompetitive rush and be disappointed...when I tell people I saw it first hand...they often don't believe me.

IU isn't the devil because they want to stick with the system they have and cut many qualified women, any more than Arkansas is the devil because it's very hard for a new chapter to make it there and they have to cut many qualified women. Different strokes for different folks, but from where I sit those are both equally contradictory to NPC's "belief statement" of every woman being able to find her place in a sorority. If there's a situation at a campus that an NPC group (or NPC as a whole) finds contradictory to its mission, or potentially emotionally damaging to its members or potential members, they can pull their chapter(s) out any old time. If a school feels a Greek org's or system's policies are contradictory to its mission or potentially emotionally damaging to its students, they can say "do this or we derecognize you."

If the NPC as a whole and its groups as individuals really think IU's system is that awful, they need to grow a pair and either pull out or pass policies that prevent that sort of system. As carnation has mentioned, Arkansas changed from a bed quota system. I'm betting that the NPC groups and NPC in general lobbied for this change. In other words...they grew a pair.

You're right. You are on such a tear that I can't figure out what your stance is. The upperclassmen thing that has no bearing. "Potential" new member isn't plain enough for you. I give up.

I don't have exact comparative numbers but I believe most of the others are either similar or larger than our chapter.

The most recent number I can find is on the Spring 2009 grade report from the University which says that the average chapter size at that time was 143. It is my understanding that has increased a bit over the past 18 months so that would support that other chapters are of similar sizes.

WTF??? I just told you I agreed with you. Actually, I agreed with you twice. Should I kiss your feet too?

I also love when people take tangents and forget about reading the whole post. So since you decided to focus on a tangent (that I guess I should go back and take out in case it baffles someone else), I'll summarize the rest of the post for you.

Women get disappointed at every school, in every rush. IU's rush is not the sole producer of disappointed women who end up hating Greek life because they use a bed quota. A rush (competitive or noncompetitive) that follows the total/quota system will also occasionally produce disappointed women. Neither is perfect.

If you think IU's system is that terrible, I would lobby your national HQ to withdraw their chapter from there until it is changed. If you don't think it's that terrible, then I WASN'T TALKING TO YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Was that simple enough?

I think the weird part for me, as an outsider, is the idea that chapter sizes and NM classes would be different from chapter to chapter, but I don't have any numbers that show me how much. Like, are we talking about chapters all between 120 and 150, or are we talking a range from 80 - 200?

The former doesn't sound that weird, the latter does.

You said I was totally misinterpreting you. So I agreed that I had no idea what you are ranting about. WTF is right! Outta here on this one....

So we have to be back at iu in like 3 days is anyone else scared they are going to br that girl who gets 3 invites back for 14 party?