I started this thread way back when and I thought I would update. Hope I'm posting this correctly. My daughter accepted a bid to an unhoused sorority tonight. It was a hard decision because the housed situation is so ingrained at IU that the unhoused are considered less desirable and these are 19 year olds we are talking about. The best part about this for me was....SHE ASKED ME FOR ADVICE! Jesus God I thought I was gonna pass out!

So happy for your daughter! Smart decision.

I preferred to live out of house then in house. I loved my chapter sisters, but I didn't love living with all of them, all of the time.

CONGRATULATIONS to you, Justhere, and your daughter! It is fabulous to see such a mature outlook. Big, happy, Panhellenic hugs!

My daughter did receive a bid tonight, from an un-housed chapter. Her Rho Gamma advised her to go to the chapter and give it a shot, which she did. She felt lucky to get any bid at all. Many girls on her floor didn't make it to pref. round at all, or didn't get any chapters that appealed to them and dropped out.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the recruitment system is set up to be a mutual selection process. If one party or the other does not feel comfortable (at the very least) with moving forward, it would be in the best interest of the PNM and the chapter to end the relationship. This not only ensures that another girl could move into a spot better suited to her, but also a chapter which gains a committed new member.

The message I was trying to get across was that she just didn't make a connection with the three chapters during pref. round. She continued to visit these chapters with the hope of finding that connection, but it just didn't happen. The fact that they are un-housed was a consideration for her; the idea of possibly living in an apartment frightened her a bit.

NO ONE said that the un-housed chapters are "less" than other chapters. They simply didn't feel comfortable to her. There were other chapters with houses that also didn't feel comfortable, but those did not end up on her list.

As far as wanting my daughter to be a part of Greek life and also bashing the system, that's totally true. The problems are not the fault of the girls in the chapter houses. Every sorority member my daughter came into contact with during recruitment was nice to her, and she actually enjoyed the process and meeting all the girls. I just don't understand why IU/PHA allows the system to continue the way it is. Why are so many qualified young women turned away from an experience that would benefit not only the girls, but the university?

Tell her to give it some time. Recruitment is an emotional whirlwind. Please encourage her to spend a few weeks engaging in her new member process. Day to day sorority life is much different than recruitment and it can take time for that connection to develop.

She is bound to the bid for 1 year. If she finds out in a few weeks that she is uncomfortable and unhappy, she can always drop before initiation, if it comes to that, or she may find that she loves it!

That last question has been discussed in the multitudinous IU threads on here.

Mutual selection exists up to a point, but at many schools, the balance is tipped towards either sororities or rushees, usually the sororities. It's not just IU.

I graduated a year or two before the first unhoused sorority came to IU, so it hasn't been too long since I was there, but I have not been able to see these unhoused chapters for myself. However, I am so grateful and happy that there are 3(!) more wonderful organizations that college women have the opportunity to participate in.

As an active, I was always thrilled with our new pledge classes but it was all too common to find out that spectacular girls (who had maximized their options) went bidless. All my sisters that were RGs have stories of consoling wonderful girls who were open-minded and yet came up short. This is how it is with our crazy, antiquated system that does not use RFM and refuses to change. I would talk with friends in other chapters and we all seemed to agree: yes- an unhoused new chapter might possibly be "less desirable" but we really felt it would benefit the Panhellenic community overall. The demand was there and we knew there would be women who could look beyond the house aspect. And having these organizations would not make IU Recruitment suddenly super easy. It would still be very competitive but just maybe, this would make a few more deserving people able to contribute to IU Greek Life.

So I am just happy that these chapters have actually come to fruition and while they might struggle with their identity on a campus that hyper-focuses on having a house, I really think they have a true shot of being very successful and strong. IU is a school where getting to a bid to any chapter is beyond lucky (this is said across many campuses but I truly think it is IU that has lottery-esque odds) and these unhoused chapters are no exception.

I should add, that I also think another way to open up more spaces is to have more chapters require live-out policies. My chapter had a senior-year live out policy and when I was there more chapters began to open this up as an option for their seniors and it did help get a few larger pledge classes. But really, only at IU, one could think that anything less than 2 years in a house is not a "real" sorority experience.

Re: the bolded. In my opinion the "problems" with Indiana bed rush (no quota/total system) are "the fault of the girls in the chapter houses." They have their reasons for maintaining this system; they have the power to change it. They choose not to. The University and the Panhellenic Association cannot dictate membership to each chapter. These are private membership organizations and they alone determine membership.

If nothing changes, nothing changes.

That's kind of like asking 15 year olds to rationally look at a proposal to raise the driving age to 17. They're too emotionally invested to see the positives even if there are negatives in the current system.

I know if I were in that situation, I'd be terribly afraid of increased chapters resulting in poor retention and more than that, of getting lost in the shuffle. I don't think it's only about wanting to stay "elite. " This is an age group loath to reveal its vulnerability and it's easier to say "we want to keep it elite" rather than "I'm really worried of our chapter getting too huge and no one noticing me."

And I'm sure the various sorority headquarters have had plenty of words about this. But it's got to be pretty hard to command change from on high when all of the chapters at IU are very successful and among the largest chapters in the fold. The risk of that phenomenal success may be worth the couple weeks of horrendous PR they get following bid day. Do I wish they'd ease up on the housing issues? Yes. But is there strong reason to maintain status quo? Also yes.

Not having had a chance to analyze the numbers, it did look to me like some chapters grew by 5 or so members, or about a 10% increase. That seems like a good step.

But they're not the largest of our chapters. They are not the largest by the choice of the chapter members, who cling to an archaic system like a life preserver. When the vast majority of sorority chapters throughout the country successfully use RFM AND have no problem filling their houses, and have happy members that can be held up as examples of the benefits of using RFM, IU can present no valid argument. Gradual change ain't gonna cut it.

Though there may be an increase in the numbers of new members per class, what is the initiated member retention rate? How many get fed up with living in the house and resign rather than live in yet again?

That's actually one of the reasons held forth for keeping the system as is - that retention rates are far better than similar schools.

Then again, I'm guessing that women who find the idea of living in for 2-3 years repugnant do not rush in the first place as they know that's what is expected. If the system does change, undoubtedly some of the people who love it now would have never taken part, and vice versa. Just as many people on here say that if they had gone to a different school they might not have been Greek.

[QUOTE=DubaiSis;2305413]And I'm sure the various sorority headquarters have had plenty of words about this. But it's got to be pretty hard to command change from on high when all of the chapters at IU are very successful and among the largest chapters in the fold. The risk of that phenomenal success may be worth the couple weeks of horrendous PR they get following bid day. Do I wish they'd ease up on the housing issues? Yes. But is there strong reason to maintain status quo? Also yes.

Gosh, I hope they are worried about more than PR. If they live up to their own stated values, they should be more concerned about how this system affects the self esteem of the young women involved. My daughter's chapter at IU is by far the most successful chapter in the country for her sorority. The national advisor stated to her that the national org is in favor of dumping bed quota. Somehow, though, it never get done. I suspect that most nationals approve of getting rid of this system as well. There are rumors that next year will be different; hopefully they are true.

Which schools would you consider similar? I'm not coming up with, off the top of my head, any other Big 10's with deferred rush. That seems like a confounding factor, though I've never looked at the numbers.

Northwestern
Ohio State

ETA: Maryland

I meant size wise/a similar stature in whatever state. I wasn't really factoring in the timing of rush.

Yeah, I just wonder if deferred is a confounding factor. I would hypothesize that deferred recruitments have better retention overall, but I don't know. Also, housing considerations, which we've talked about here before.

I understand your point; that the chapters at IU have no incentive to change, I just don't know that we can take it as far as to say, "they are doing well BECAUSE they don't use RFM." I think it's more like, "they are doing well EVEN THOUGH they don't use RFM."

Indiana DOES use RFM. They have used it for around 15 years now. It's quota/total that they don't use.

Right, sorry, that's what I meant.

Can we please use the correct terminology of "PNMs" instead of (uggggh) "recruits"? It's not the military or a cult.

The NPC Manual of Information (aka The Green Book). If you are a member of an NPC group, you can get it thru your national HQ. Also, your national org should have some sort of recruitment handbook/style guide/etcc. If you are not an NPC member, why are you posting this sort of thing?

What does no shows mean? At what point did they not show?

Did she d & f (delete & flounce) because I corrected her? I'm not usually pickypants about terms, but that particular usage is just nails on a chalkboard to me.

I did a search for her and it seems she was a mom with a daughter going thru at IU last year...though I didn't read all her posts...

She also posted quota and matched numbers for every group in the other IU thread, but that post also seems to be gone. I thought it was interesting information, though if it was that readily available was surprised no one else hadn't already posted it.

According to her list there were only 5 groups that matched less than 50 members, and 2 of those were at 48 or 49. That definitely accounts for the increased number of bids and decrease in girls who went to Pref and wound up bidless. (saving editorial comment on that for another day...)

Good for IU and the chapters. We aren't going to get our wish of quota/total in the next few years, but incremental increasing of their definition of quota won't have all the problems that they think it will. These girls in the 50 member pledge classes will not know any different than having 50 girls in their pledge class. Interestingly there were a lot of chapters that had exactly that number, including some who historically take much less, so it does appear that Panhellenic put that suggestion out and many took it.

Next year if they go to 53-55 the sun will still come up and those girls will know no different either. Increasing by even 3-5 a year can go a long way when there are that many organizations on campus.

It may take 5 years, but how long have we been waiting? This is the most promising sign that I have seen.

Ok ok ok

You know, I'm really uncomfortable with the information that stbemtpynest posted, simply because I suspect she obtained the information from her daughter and it wasn't her information to share. And I don't know if Indiana does make that information public. The fact that she (stb) went and deleted posts suggests that my suspicion is correct.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong (specifically calling on AZ-Alpha Xi here) but that sort of information (at ARIZONA) is not shared publicly.

ETA: maybe I'm wrong, that's okay - I'm still uncomfortable.

I did read all her posts from when her daughter went through and accepted a bid from an unhoused chapter. I hope that the mother's blabbermouth won't harm the daughter, because that just isn't fair to the daughter IMO. The mother needs to step away from the keyboard when it comes to Indiana recruitment.

One more thing - my autocorrect keeps fighting me on "emtpy" and I can't even pronounce it.

AZTheta, I completely agree.

I'm guessing that if the different quotas of the different groups really were easily obtainable and for public consumption, they would be all over grreek rrank and that sorority parents thread during recruitment.

I'm not uncomfortable with you! It's the non-Greek parent coming here, stirring the pot, that was not right, IMO. If it is public info, like 33 said, it would be all over those other two sites.

You are correct, AZTheta, Arizona statistics are given out on a need to know basis.

I was at the meeting where the information that emptynest posted was discussed. Nothing she posted was incorrect, but I do not know if the information was for public consumption yet, or ever. I had some interaction with her last year, and my impression is that she shared the information not knowing she shouldn't. I truly do not think she meant any harm.

Panhellenic voted an approved a minimum quota for next year. All chapters must take at least 50, however they may take more. Now that almost every chapter has a live out policy, I would assume that many more chapters should be open to QAs than they have been in the past.

Is the 50 minimum a vote from Panhellenic or a dictate from the school administration? I would be more comfortable with the latter.

Complete lack of pc ahead: per irishpipes' thread, two of the smallest pledge classes were those in the two historically Jewish sororities. Is that because of the religious aspect or just because their physical plants are smaller?

Panhellenic vote.

I am curious to see how some chapters will react to the minimum, especially the chapters that have historically taken smaller new member classes

No problem, ladies! If the information on pledge classes & other stats was not for public dissemination, unlike universities in my experience, then I agree that it shouldn't be posted here. :) I am just used to those numbers being pretty commonly published.

Re: the bolded. You didn't come here and share it. You attended the meeting. She did not. I am not upset with thetalady for sharing what the parent (stb--nest) posted and then deleted. At thetalady's campus, those numbers are apparently public. At mine, they are not.

How can Panhellenic tell the chapters that they must take quota? Isn't that up to each chapter? Please help me understand that, because I'm pretty sure I understand something differently when it comes to quota.

Since each chapter sets their own quota at IU, I think they are saying it can't be below 50. ..if I am understanding the post correctly. Which I think is fine as it will force some upward and help ease them into full RFM whenever that comes about.

^^^yes this. The light bulb just switched on in my head. They have to set quota at 50 minimum, but as with any other school, they don't HAVE to take quota. however, as with any other school, they're going to have to explain to their nationals why they didn't. The only difference here is that quota can be set in advance instead of relying solely on the number of PNMs.