Do the chapters ever take matters into their own hands? "Suzie, we voted unanimously not to invite you back, and you are here because Panhellenic requires it. Due to the rules, we can't keep you out, but we want you to know that all of us agreed that you are not right for this house."

I would never darken their door again if I heard something like that! On the other hand, I wonder if the PNMs who are dropped by all three groups tend to be the ones who are so socially tone-deaf that this kind of warning wouldn't faze them.
________

I would have to disagree that women dropped by all groups are all socially tone deaf. There are probably some of them out there....but, I think it is unfair to lump those of us that were dropped by all orgs into an umbrella judgement.

If you read my post, you will see that I did everything I could to present the best side of myself to orgs and show my dedication to greek life.

But, about the "We voted...." I know that in the orgs I'm in now, we are NOT allowed to share anything that takes place in voting. Even if Sally Rushee sees me on campus and bursts into tears asking me what happened, I am obligated by the vows I took in each org to keep that confidential. Even if I personally thought she would be a great fit, it doesn't matter because it is a decision made by the entire group. I would just have to advise Sally Rushee to come out next semester and try again. (ending with a smile, of course)

It's quite all right. :D :D :D

We're all here to learn and exchange info.

Continuing the guaranteed placement discussion:

I think mutual selection is probably best: however, it had occurred to me, particularly when I was reading about say Sig Ep's new(ish) membership program, if maybe groups shouldn't approach the process believing that the strengths of their organization could turn anyone into a good member?

I wouldn't want the whole new member class to be randomly matched or anything like that, but really if you got 5 to 10% new members that picked you instead of your picking them (which let's face it: we can describe traditional matching as mutual selection, but the groups hold most of the cards. The PNM may not even get to cut a group if she's not invited back to the max. parties. Sure she can decline her bid in the end, but is that really mutual selection in anything other than a technical sense?)

If you got to choose 90% of your nm class, and got a few strays, couldn't your org. handle it?

(I'll confess that I'm thinking more girls who might be cut for superficial reasons rather than girls who are released because they were morals or risk management problems.)

This is the same in all Panhellenic sororities that I know of. Membership selection is very private and not to be discussed with anyone who is not an initiated member.

Sidenote: I heart Epsilon Nu (the Sigma chapter at UNCG). My favorite Leadership Consultant is from that chapter and she tells me some fun stories about those girls.

I actually disagree with both of those ideas. First, a PNM can always cut a chapter. There is no rule that you have to rank all the chapters you visit or that you have to visit all the houses you're invited to. If a PNM is upset with receiving a bid from a chapter, she should not have ranked the chapter on her bid card.

Second, I've seen chapters at my alma mater take "strays" for the purpose of meeting quota or being at total. I don't think it's good for a chapter to be forced to take members they don't want...whether it's by the policies at the school or advisors/national HQ. I don't think it's good for the chapter OR the new member who will probably subconsciously know she wasn't at the top of the bid list. On the flip side I don't think a PNM should be forced to accept a bid to a chapter she doesn't want either.....I think mutual selection is the only way both the chapters and PNMs are happy (hopefully!).

Actually, some campuses DO make pnms go back to maximum number of parties or all the ones they were invited to if they didn't get invited to the maximum AND the only time that they don't have to actually list them all is on the final bid card. Even then the whole system is stacked towards encouraging them to rank all the chapters : if the campus does quota additions, you aren't eligible unless you maximized your options.

I think the rules must vary a lot from campus to campus.

I'm also used to a campus where the average new member class is in the 50s, so that probably influences my thoughts a lot.

At former campus, I believe a group really would be better off consistently making quota, even with some girls who weren't their absolute top picks, than they would be consistently being perceived as being a struggling chapter.

There are some schools, mine is one, where you have to visit every org that extends you an invitation. If you are not there and no one knows why, you are automatically dropped from recruitment.

At every campus I've ever assisted with, PNMs have to attend the maximum number of parties for that round. So, if there are 6 parties that round and they get invited back to exactly 6 houses, they cannot cut a chapter.

There may be some campuses where PNMs can always cut a chapter during formal recruitment, but I'm pretty sure the majority require you to maximize your options.

(sorry for the thread hijack, AlwaysSAI :o)

I was always under the impression that you have to rank the amount of houses you visited, but you could always rank a house you didn't visit. i.e. Suzy visits ABC, DEF, GHI and JKL but really didn't like GHI. She could rank ABC, DEF, JKL and MNO (a house who dropped her in a previous round). I'm not saying she would be 'maximizing all her options' to be eligible for quota additions, but if maximizing her options means she's ranking a house she really dislikes, wouldn't it be better to not rank that house? I guess I just hate to think that people feel they have no control during recruitment. But clearly at some schools they don't.

At my school we didn't even rank chapters. We got our list of invites, and if we had to, we cut the ones we didn't want to go back to. Of the ones we were going back to, we didn't rank them. The only ranking was done after preference, when we were filling out our bid sheets.

To me that seems like the best procedure. I don't know why more schools don't do this.

OtterXO, your comment confuses me a little: if you still have to go back to the maximum number of parties, why is this better than ranking them first?

To me, it still seems like most of the control is with the group.

AlwaysSAI, whenever you want to tell us the next part of your story, I'm so ready to read it.