I'm going to make the argument (and I do realize that I'm playing Devil's advocate here) that when PNM's feel like they got a fair shake, it's also good PR for the chapter and the GLO. That PNM may be in a position of influence one day...how do you want her to feel about your org?

I still feel very positively about most (all but one) of the chapters/GLO's who cut me. I went through under the old method. I remember some delightful, warm, meaningful conversations. Politeness and hospitality on the part of chapter members was universal. This is bad?

I'm just wondering if there is some sort of happy medium.

Well, one of the ways that releases by some chapters work it that they cause the PNM to realize that they have to look at the chapters that really want them. If there are no cuts until after 2nd, that pretty much wastes 2nd round in terms of having any idea of knowing where you stand.

And since at most campuses the number of parties that a PNM can go to reduces each round, you'd have PNMs cutting some of the chapters who want them to keep chapters that don't.

I understand why it seems like it be better PR, but I think it would be bad in terms of actual recruitment outcome.

ETA: and there is a happy medium really since I think the majority of PNMs do have full parties for second round, don't they?

I guess I think that if we want more PR-based open activities, there's a place to have them, but it's not in the middle of actual recruitment. We could all probably benefit from more Meet the Greeks type stuff before formal recruitment and we'd benefit even more if there were all Greek campus wide service projects or drives that were about actual service rather than hype or publicity, which I realize is ironic in a suggestion about PR.

But I don't think you can give people warm fuzzies (no disrespect to Alpha Xi Delta intended;)) at the same time we need to be sending realistic messages about where people match.

We've been doing the new release figures at my school since 2006. I do know that it has helped everyone reach quota and even some struggling chapters make quota additions. We have a relatively small recruitment with six sororities and usually less than 100 girls accepting bids. we've found it works well for everyone. There aren't any cuts until after the second event but they're a lot more, honest, would be the best word, and it helps when girls are coming into skit night. Also, since are events take place in one building girls can see if another sorority has a large party or a small party and that can effect perceptions. Now, everyones parties are equal and most girls end up happy.

I think that sounds like the sort of balance I'm talking about, KDMafia. A girl who goes to at least two events at each house, and is able to talk to at least 3 or 4 members, will have no reason to feel mistreated. It also gives even the competitive chapters a better chance at evaluating the girls.

For schools that do grade cuts after the first round, make that transparent as well. A girl can say, "Okay, I got cut from XYZ because I didn't have a 3.0," or whatever.

That's okay for campuses like mine where there are only 3 chapters (4 when I was a collegiate,) but for big systems with upwards of 8 chapters, you already spend two days having open house parties. Having every girl come back for the second party would extend the process even further. I doubt very seriously that anyone on the sorority side would want to add additional days to an already arduous process in order that a few girls who would not get a bid from them regardless of the rules get to feel like the system is "fair." No matter when you make the hard cuts, it is always hard for the PNMs. Stringing them on does not make them feel better. I think I'd prefer to think that I was cut because someone didn't get a chance to know me rather than because they got to know me and didn't like me!

we had 11 chapters at my campus and the only cuts that were made after open houses (the first round) were for grades (or a standards issue, but it was rare). For first parties, the rushees had to narrow their list to 9. Unfortunately, they usually ended up cutting the same couple of houses, so those groups numbers would drop off significantly. Unfortunately, it also led to many girls who would have been great members of those houses to get dropped completely after second parties.
Maybe if the rushees didn't make cuts after open houses it would have worked, but that would have made rush at least a day longer- we already had 2 days of open houses and 2 days of first parties. So the new method makes more sense, but I think educating everyone as to how it works it the key.

This is a recurring thought in this thread. I'm curious as to some suggestions for how this can be accomplished. It's easy to explain RFM to women who are already in a sorority, as they have (most likely) had some internal education on how their own membership selection processes work. So they understand terms like bid lists, invitations, releases, release figures, etc. And for the most part, you don't have to worry about hurting any feelings of active members when having these discussions.

How do you say to a big group of excited PNMs, "So the really strong, popular chapters will be cutting half of you after the first round. This is so you will get a chance to meet the average and weak chapters and they will get a chance to make Quota." They are already freaking out as it is and stressing over the cuts.

How do we deliver this education without furthering stereotypes and bringing more attention to things like tiers and strong vs. weak chapters?

Not at all picking on FR here - she's just the one I quoted. :) I am genuinely curious as to some ideas for what to tell PNMs about RFM. Does this education happen in a large group setting? Is it given by the recruitment counselors? What kinds of language should be used and what should be avoided?

I don't think you are picking on me at all! :)

In terms of education- I think it should be the recruitment counselors that explain it to the rushees. The large gatherings seem to be more of a pep rally type of thing. Plus it is harder to answer questions. And it doesn't have to be phrased- the strong ones will cut half of you. It should be explained that ALL chapters have to make manditory cuts. Just like the rushees make cuts, so do the groups. Sometimes just like a rushee has trouble deciding who to cut, so do the groups. But they have to be made.

I think sometimes the ranking of the chapters by the rushees before the sororities make cuts confuses the rushees as well. It makes the rushee think that since they ranked the group #1, they will be back there. Then they get cut. Why not just have the rushee chose from the groups that invited them back rather than doing a ranking before the invites to the next round have been extended?

^^^ Forever Roses, I think that you hit it on the head.

Panhel should probably not go into too much information about how the chapters make cuts just that they all will have to make cuts and will likely labor over these decisions for different reasons. I also like the idea of a PNM selecting max number of chapters to attend during round two, three, etc. based on their invites back. Having PNMs essentially rank post cuts seems to make more sense if you are trying to save hurt feelings. Having Panhel offer TMI about release figures will just serve to confuse the PNM and foster the sterotype of strong vs weak chapters on campus.

I don't think you CAN say that, because there may be times when groups are cutting lots of people for reasons that have nothing to do with release figures - grade requirements or the like.

The rushees just need to be told that 90% (or pick your figure) of them WILL be cut from at least one chapter, probably more, if that is the case. I think what gets to some girls is they think no one is getting cut but them.

And yes definitely, if the sororities are cutting harder because of RFM, the PNMs should see their choices before they rank. They should still have to go back to their max amount of parties though.

I think this would be a very good start. Letting the PNMs know, in a smaller setting (like Recruitment Counselor groups), that most of them will be released from at least one chapter.

Additionally, having a PNM choose from the chapters that invited them back helps to not give them unrealistic expectations. When you spend all evening, night, and morning thinking you have released a chapter, it can be quite a surprise to see that you will be returning to that chapter. Likewise, PNMs expect to return to chapters they ranked highly and it's unpleasant to realize that not only will you not be returning to that chapter you like, but also that you have only a few minutes to get composed before events begin.

The only problem I see with this is logistics. At my campus, at least, the PNMs are no longer confined to a particular area. When I went through, we lived on a dorm floor with our Recruitment Counselors. They woke us up as soon as our invites were ready (usually about 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning) and we chose which ones to accept. Also, you were not allowed to withdraw in the middle of the night, which gave PNMs a chance to sleep on it for a few hours. I thought this was helpful, because a PNM had time to recover and gain a little perspective. Often now, a PNM will see her invites less than an hour before events begin and make the snap decision to withdraw. We've had PNMs standing in line to withdraw change their minds and then it's too late, they have to withdraw because they've missed an event. It would be nearly impossible, given current time constraints, to get their list of invites to them and have them accept, regret, or regret with interest, then feed that into the computer and have events scheduled.

I have suggested changes such as these to college Panhellenics and they seem to think that the way it is "weeds out PNMs who would make less than desirable members."

On to the original question: As a recruitment advisor, I think the new release figures have been very good for the Greek system overall. I was absolutely terrified the first year we used them. I got our suggested numbers and realized that we were going to be required to release over one-third of the PNMs after open house. I thought there was no way it was going to work and nobody would make quota. After many obsessive conversations with the director of Greek life and a thorough explanation of Flex lists, I was still unsure. However, that first year all but one chapter made quota and a chapter that had historically struggled had the most quota additions. I’m now a believer. Since we’ve instituted the new release figures every chapter has either made quota or been no more than 4-6 away from quota. We’ve even had a few years where every chapter makes at least quota.

The only negative from my perspective is that our placement rate has gone down. A much higher percentage of PNMs withdraw than before new release figures. However, I believe that with some of the things discussed in this thread this could be minimized as well. As I said before, the college Panhellenics I have talked to indicate that this larger number of PNMs withdrawing should lead to higher retention within the chapters. They have tended to articulate that the PNMs who withdraw are the same ones that would likely resign from membership. I haven’t done any research on that, but it would be interesting to see what the statistics indicate.

This would extend the recruitment period, however maybe it should go back to the way it was when I rushed. We went to parties, then the day after we had something called "post office". We would go around a certain time and get the invite list- who invited us back. We would see the list, select which ones to go to, and then go on our way. If you were upset, then the Rho Chis were there to talk to you for as long as you needed. The parties were not until several hours later. You would meet at a certain time and get your schedule of parties, but you already knew who was on the list. So say first parties ended at 9pm on Sunday. From 10am-2pm on Monday you could go to post office. The second parties would then start at 6pm.

Yes, it worked this way at my school in the early 90s, on a campus with 10 houses and over 600 women going through Recruitment. We got our invites at 8am, and parties began early afternoon. If the computers of that day could make it work, then I have absolutely no doubt that logistically (referring back to LyreLyre's post) it could work today with even better technology.

(**for those who were upset and wanted to drop... they were encouraged to accept the invites they wanted/had, return to dorm and sleep on it a bit, and then they could drop out right before the parties. This usually allowed them time to get over the hurt and most plugged right along with the rest of the week)

I agree wholeheartedly that PNMs should be choosing from the groups that invited them and not the newer method of having them rank immediately after parties. I have spoken with quite a few PNMs who stated that they "would be doing all the choosing." It has been clear that they do not understand fully that there will be cuts on the sororites' parts too, and I agree that this leads to more women dropping.

I do not agree that all of those who drop would not be devoted members. Eighteen year olds make impulsive decisions, especially when emotions are running high. I know a few from my campus who really regretted their decision to drop and could have been outstanding members. They just allowed their emotions to get the better of them.

What you all are discussing here is the difference between Priority Ranking and Accept/Regret. The advantages of Priority FAR outweigh the advantages of Accept/Regret - and that's why we've seen the vast majority of college Panhellenics switch to it. Consider this: Campus has 12 chapters. PNMs go to all 12 first round and can go to 8 the second round. Super Susie PNM gets invited to all 12 chapters for second round. Average Annie gets invited to 6. With A/R, Annie is somewhat depressed because she was invited to HALF the number of chapters as Susie. With Priority, Susie's list has 8 chapters and Annie's has 6. So she doesn't feel as bad. Plus she could (theoretically) "save face" and say that she got invited to her top choices if she wants.

That's just one instance. Not to mention that you can't do flexing unless you use Priority, and the advantages of flexing alone are too great to give up.

I remember one university's Panhellenic handling the ranking very well. The recruitment counselors told the PNMs to rank the 8 chapters that they loved as #1, and then the chapters that they liked as 2, 3, 4, 5. So it wasn't ever "who do you want to go back to?" or "who do you like the least?" The vocabulary was always very positive.

And regarding the A/R method of having PNMs look at invites in the morning and go to parties in the evening.... WAY more PNMs drop out when it is done this way. When PNMs get their invitations 15-30 minutes prior to the parties, they are already dressed, they are already there. There's no time for tent talking and others trying to convince them to drop. Then they go to the parties and many times actually make a connection and wind up joining a sorority. Sure, some still drop, and that's fine. But at least they gave it a chance.

(I realize that we've wandered into A/R vs. Priority discussion, but this discussion does weigh in very heavily to RFM. :) )