I wonder if my university has a separate quota for juniors and seniors. Somehow I doubt it. With the amount of girls I was told went through rush this year, it didn't really sound like anyone was really hurting for members. Would be comforting to know they do - I'm rushing in the fall, and will be a senior. (I'll be a senior for a LONG time.)

My school never had a problem with this. I went to a small school where many girls didn't want to join a sorority after they had gotten to their junior year, but many will join though COBs and such. We haven't ever had a problem with sororites not wanting the older women. It's usually the other way around if that happens.

UT-Austin had a system where quota was 50 up to 5 more Jr.s /Sr.s I had a good friend that pledged ADPI as a Jr. , don't know if this is still done but it seems fair to me.

Why is this? Did they feel that there was a stigma attached to pledging second-chance rushees? (Seems like a win-win situation to me; houses for the young women, and more experienced, dues-paying members for the houses.)

Ivy

We never had a problem pledging upperclass students. They usually turn out to be the most dedicated and active members and their maturity adds greatly to the chapter. Last year we initiated a grad student but she decided to do it as an alum since she was only going to be there one semester. And, we pledge married women as well.

If it truly is a problem on certain campuses, the Panhellenic can vote to allow a certain number of quota-free juniors and seniors. At my school they even allowed a certain number of "free" locals----women that the college is in their hometown.

Separating juniors and seniors into a separate group does just that---separates everyone. I think that it would become known as the group you could get into if you couldn't ever make it into one of the others---I wouoldn't want that stigma!