I just realized that I've been on GreekChat for almost 4 years. During that time, I have never once seen a sorority woman tell a fraternity how they should conduct Recruitment.

Just thought I'd mention that little fact...

Perhaps you haven't noticed the sorority women who react when open rush and fewer rules are suggested as a way to attract more fraternity pledges.

I've noticed a lot of MYOB posts, but obviously not skewed the way you're seeing it.

The number of cuts a chapter has to make during formal rush doesn't have anything to do with being at total (or not). All those going through formal recruitment would have the same shot at the houses they want.

I do agree that lowering total prevents COB. However, COB wears a chapter out, particularly if all chapters on a campus are forced to do it because they can't reach total (or close) in formal rush. Inter/National HDQs are going to press their chapters to get to total even if total is 75 and they have 72. The benefits to not having to COB as a campus for a whole semester would outweigh the benefits of being able to seek out those who are not "natural joiners" IMO.

I advised at a campus where total was met by 2 of 11 chapters. The other chapters not at total were worlds away-- and the ones who were at total weren't necessarily in the top tier by themselves.

Lowering total, as mentioned, has nothing to do with lowering quota at formal recruitment. The less COB a chapter has to endure, the better. Many quality members can come in during COR, but having to COR every quarter is exhausting, lessens morale and programming opportunities, among other things. It drains a chapter.

National and IHQ's need to keep chapters at total in order for them to remain competitive locally and to maintain their bills financially. I know there's a continuing debate over total and that finances aren't everything-- which is great-- but if total is 100, I have 20 members and those 20 members hve to pay more in dues to cover the chapter house, parlor fees, NPC and national dues, local events, and local dues... well, I'd be more inclined to want to have to pay less each year per person if I had more sisters in my chapter.

And the chapter that isn't at toal gathers an unfavorable reputation oftentimes, whether that is fair or not-- it still carries over to rumors at recruitment that hurt that chapter's efforts for years to come.

Just thought that I'd give a little update on this situations. The collegiate members votes this past week on whether or not to lower total. The decision did not have to be unanimous. As a result, it passed but not all 13 chapters were in favor of it. It will be taking effect starting with the spring semester.

Bluefish

Thanks for the update. I am glad to hear that this was passed and will help the chapters there tremendously

Congrats, I sometimes wish they would do this at UCLA! Throughout my years there I can't remember a time when more than two or three houses were at total/over total out of the eleven. Total is at 115, and if they just moved it down to 100, it would at least put over half of the houses at total. So many houses range from high 90s to 110, but it seems so hard to get to 115, since deactivation is so high at UCLA.

It literally makes every house spring rush!

There's been alot of discussion lately about raising total here at Bama. It's been set at 125 for as long as I've been advising, 11 years, and who knows how much longer than that. The Admin is making serious efforts to "grow" the student population and subsequently our Recruitment numbers have also been growing. At least for Panhellenic, IFC has benefitted as well but not nearly as much.

Because of this I've been learning alot about the process of changing Chapter Total and Panhellenic policies. It used to be in the Green book that Total should only be changed in increments of +/- 5. Somehow it became this set in stone number for alot of campuses regardless of the strenghths/struggles of each Greek system.

Sometime in the last few years policies and more importantly mindsets began to change in Panhellenic. The +/- 5 limitation wase removed and campuses are now encouraged to review Chapter Total much more frequently. Adjustments can and should be made based on the current status of each campus.

There are now 3 different options to choose from when determining Total rather than arbitrary number changes that so often were used.

- Size of the largest chapter
- Average chapter size
- Median chapter size

Each campus Panhellenic should look at the number of chapters that would be affected positively and negatively with each number. The ultimate goal should be to strengthen the smaller chapters while not overly hindering the larger ones. Sometimes that's tough to do especially on a campus where there is a significant size difference between the largest and smallest.

Total Lowered at Utah

Since Zillini mentioned the option of using average chapter size, I thought this would be interesting:

Panhellenic at the U. of Utah has just lowered total from 80 to 63 (which is average chapter size). The vote was 5-1. None of the chapters were at 80, although at least one was at 79.

The article in the Nov. 17 '05 Daily Utah Chronicle has quotes from the Greek adviser and from the presidents of two of the sororities.

http://www.dailyutahchronicle.com/me...hchronicle.com