Is there a UA saying that RFM must be used? If not, why can't collegians choose how they want their system to work? Don't get me wrong, I think their system is dated and ill-advised.

Well, they do use RFM. They just have a different way of setting quota. They use RFM for everthing else. It's sort of like starting with the end number and working backwards instead of starting with everyone and working down.

The reasons behind bed quota are very old and really don't apply today. Some of it has to do with housing them. But that's no longer valid. The main problems today are 1) getting past tradition - and this is the hardest one and 2) getting a formula for slowly increasing the new member class sizes so that the actives are not overwhelmed. Consider a house hold 100 members. So right now, in November, the house is full. Suppose they will graduate 35 members. And the house can handle the 100 for chapter meeting, dinner, etc. So jump forward to a NM class the size of one at Alabama (since their pool of PNMs is close in size) and try to cram 120 more people in - today - when they've never had that many before. They don't have procedures to pick who lives in. They ALL live in. They don't have schedules for meals. How can a chapter of 100 or so handle a NM class of 120? Once they are initiated, there is a power shift in the chapter....and the old members don't like that. All sorts of issues that have to be handled on a gradual trend, not over night. I'm not saying they shouldn't do it - they should. It's just they can't change overnight.

I'm always astonished by the logistics of it, and while I don't know how you manage it, I'm glad for this kind of NPC spirit that finds homes for as many women as possible.

And I don't understand why you don't understand! If you need 1 RC for every 10 PNMs when only 200 women go thru, you still need one for every 10 (or whatever) when you have 2000. If you need one tent at each location when you have 5 locations, you still need one tent (maybe bigger) at each location when you have 20. It just takes more people and more resources but those are available because the system is already that large. It's not a mystery. They get 100,000 people plus in Bryant-Denney Stadium at Alabama for a football game rather easily. Getting 2300 women to 16 houses seems fairly simple compared to that.

Hmmm...I was thinking more along the lines of how you get huge groups of PNM's in and out of the house in the allotted time for each round, how many alums have to hide in the kitchen refilling punch bowls, and things like that.

But I guess this relates to what you said upthread about IU...because it was a gradual increase, you adapted as it grew; it's not like PNM's doubled overnight.

Oh for heaven's sake! How many people are backstage at a banquet plating the food, etc??? And they have like 18-20 parties in one round. That's only 100 or so women going thru a house built for 300. Not all the women are on the floor at one time. Not all that difficult. Stop thinking what you are used to. It's not the same.

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I suspect there are other strong reasons for the opposition. Your comments suggest that change needs to come very very gradually. Not a toggle switch type of change. I wonder that this system isn't an intentional anachronism in many ways.

Exactly.

And I think they are. A FEW chapters seem to be taking a FEW members beyond what can live in. Don't expect pledge classes of 100 at IU as the norm, but I think you'll see a handful of quota additions at most chapters (that is utterly unscientific thinking on my part - just conjecture). Some are going to keep a death-grip on the old style and that's their prerogative, but I think many of the chapters will start to see the value in allowing some or all of the seniors to live out. With the importance on MONEY right now as all of us grow nationwide, I think headquarters is going to start being more firm about allowing all available cash flow. Because yes this is about friends, sisterhood, leadership, parties. But it's also big business and there are some big-ass houses that need to be built around the country. And you need to make hay while the sun shines.

Just checked some numbers, for anyone curious. Between 2009 and 2014, average individual quota increased by 5, from 42.5 to 47.7. Average chapter size has increased from 150 to 170. Total number of women receiving bids has increased from 789 to 1002, with big gains coming with new chapters.

Not what I would call a statistically significant change in the % of women who are ultimately matched. Over 6 years, an average of 59% of women who sign up for recruitment receive bids, and an average of 85% of women who attend preference receive bids. Some years better, some worse. No trend up or down.

Interesting stats. As a point of clarification: did the average individual quota rise simply because the 3 new chapters took larger classes compared to the other groups? Does that number include the colony class which would have been significantly larger? In other words, take those three groups fully out of the mix, and how do the quota numbers look over that same time period?

I actually just took the "individual quota" number that each chapter submitted, and divided it by the number of chapters who participated in formal recruitment. So it doesn't account for any quota additions, or colonizations that happened outside of formal recruitment.

In 2009, the smallest reported "individual quota" was 29 and the largest was 55. In 2014, smallest was 37 and the largest was 74.

Not particularly scientific!! The newest chapter isn't included yet, because this will be their first year in FR.

Looking at just the 19 sororities that were there in 2009, from 2009 to 2014 based on total numbers immediately after formal recruitment:
1 stayed exactly the same
3 are smaller in 2014 than 2009
5 have 1-5 members more in 2014 than 2009
4 have 6-20 members more in 2014 than 2009
6 have 21+ members more in 2014 than 2009

Average chapter size for the older 19 chapters went from 149.6 in 2009 to 167.9 in 2014.

A woman in my church is a member of an IU sorority and she indicated that the discussions and opening up towards moving away from Bed Quota are starting although in very small ways. Mostly it looks like chapters are allowing seniors to live out, thus opening up more room but that still is not going to allow for maximum placement in any way. My guess is that, short of continuing expansions to help pick up the slack this is going to be a slow process.

I know the numbers at Indiana and the bed quota is not a favorable situation. But, with a deferred recruitment, many women are released due to grades. I think that information should be included when mentioning that only 59% of women who signed up for recruitment receive a bid to join a chapter. The women that sign up for recruitment are responsible for making the grade requirements, the releases that happen due to grades are to be expected.

Just out of curiosity, are the grade requirements more stringent at Indiana than at other universities?