Well my sorority chapter wouldn't have known what to do with one, generally speaking. If you've never seen one and don't know what it is, how could you know what the value of it is?

And why is it so wrong to THEORIZE that a rec could have a negative affect on a PNMs recruitment, or at least initially be looked at as something strange/off/weird? Regardless, I don't see how theorizing this = sticking your nose up at schools that rely heavily on recs.

But maybe I'm missing something?

Again, I point out that FERPA does not provide protection against a guidance counselor rendering a personal opinion about a student based on her knowledge of that student. It provides against the unconsented release of actual physical records. Therefore, the FERPA allegation fails. The high schools would violate FERPA if they provided official transcripts to sororities/alumnae without the student's express consent.

EDITED TO ADD: There is NO guidance counselor liability: According to the United States Supreme Court, FERPA does not allow for private individuals to sue a teacher, a school, or a district based on a perceived violation of FERPA. Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002). Even if a student believes that her FERPA privacy rights have been violated, she cannot sue a teacher, guidance counselor or school in court. The Court’s decision was based on the fact that FERPA prevents “a policy or practice” of disclosing educational records. FERPA does not speak to specific instances of disclosure and it only states that if an institution has such a policy and practice, then it can lose federal funding. Arguably, a single disclosure of educational records does not violate FERPA. It must be a “policy or practice” before a violation occurs. But it would not be wise to test this argument. The Supreme Court took FERPA’s language to mean that Congress did not create a private cause of action.

I have been, in general, responding to this question by the OP. I have personal knowledge and experience with the types of recruitment where recs are absolutely necessary and was trying to explain (rationalize?) why recs are such an integral part of these recruitments.

I am often frustrated when I feel others are implying that recs are such alien and offensive parts of rush that their chapter practically freaks out when they get one, and therefore, the chapters that use them are not really doing a good job of recruiting by relying on them for part of the recruitment process.

Maybe I was over-thinking some of the comments...my apologies if that was not the case.

I am not trying to offend you, and I feel certain you aren't trying to offend me. I think the difference may lie not only in how some schools value recs over others, but also in how one sorority values recommendations over another in membership selection. Every sorority has different criteria that they value over others. A recommendation doesn't guarantee someone a bid to a sorority, but it is something considered in the process and some organizations may place more weight on the rec than other sororities. I guess I am now understanding that for some sororities, a rec is just a rec, and for others, it carries varying degrees of weight in actual selection.

A PNM cannot stand on a rec alone, but it may help her secure a bid in concert with other factors where she is otherwise well-qualified. If there are 100 girls with similar grades and attributes, a rec will help them. If there are 100 girls with similar grades and attributes (including recs), then not having one will hurt them. However, if your particular organization places no value on recs (and given the above conversations they may be wise to do so!), it doesn't matter either way. But if your organization provides alumnae with a vehicle to recommend PNMs, the sorority members should be trained on how to process them, and how much weight, if any. should be given to them. This all treads into the territory of private membership selection though.

ETA: When I say "value," I mean actual valuation (e.g., predetermined weight) of a factor considered in the selection process, not that you don't value the opinions of your alumnae. For example, every chapter puts value (weight) into a minimum GPA.

Good thoughts, ADPiUCF

Maybe that is what is at play here. Some groups, as a whole, do not value alumnae recommendations. It is not the chapter, but the entire organization? This is something I really was not aware of and would make sense.

PNM were given a survey regarding the recruitment process. They were not happy with the timeline. One week between 3rd round and Pref. Apparently PNM's were regretting the way they ranked their choices. Frankly that sucks for everyone. How do you impose the silence rule during a week of classes? Ultimately, this fall it came down to the Religion of the SEC, Football. A home football game is to be held during the weekend that was to be Pref/ Bid Day. How do you maintain silence during tailgating, the game etc.? They decided to shorten the whole process to preserve the sacred Football game.

Terrible! Why not start recruitment earlier then? I understand university housing may not want to open earlier, but they might and other people can sign off campus leases earlier, stay in hotels, etc., if they want to join badly enough.

Remedies under educational law are not necessarily those one might expect in a civil court (monetary damages, for instance). A complaint filed with FPCO, and found to have merit, could result in some repercussions for the district (and therefore the employee).

Nonetheless, if I called the guidance counselor at my local high school, explained that I am an XYZ alum and would like some info on a list of female seniors there, I would fully expect her to hang up.

To her credit, since that would eliminate the need for any legal guidance, one way or another. We live in a litigious society.

The academic info necessary for membership perusal would appear on the transcript that was submitted officially to the school of application, and then unofficially with the rec packet -- both with the consent and knowledge of the PNM.

I wouldn't say it's the entire sorority that doesn't put much weight on recs, but certain chapters. Location/campus seems to heavily determine the importance (unless you're in a sorority which requires recs of all PNMs, regardless of the chapter). Generally speaking.

Another question: Do recs come into play during COB at schools where they weigh heavily during formal? I would guess that they wouldn't be required, but someone correct me if I'm wrong. And if a girl went through formal and was released (or she dropped out), would a rec be carried over to COB? *If this is venturing into membership selection, feel free to say so*

How about with colonizations? Are recs required? I know very little about even my own sorority's colonization process, so I'm curious as to what is done.

So you're saying that round 3 comes immediately before pref? No rounds in between? If so...

I don't think anyone was suggesting that the time between parties should be extended, but rather, that there should be more time given to parties. Or more rounds. The point is to try and give the active sisters more time to get to know the PNMs, and vice versa - not to drag things out just for the sake of dragging them out.

Your situation seems to be different from what has been proposed.

Very recently a GC poster posted that her NPC doesn't even have a rec form. So, I would say it is very possible that some nationals don't value recs - they utilize other methods in their MS.

At many competitive schools, recs are used in COB and in many colonizations recs are used and even "required" just as much as they are in formal recruitment.

ETA: And no, recs are not "carried over" because groups destroy them after recruitment. (Maybe all of them don't. Ours did, so no new member could accidentally stumble upon them.)

This.

No argument intended, but I think this is an interesting discussion of why we do what we have always done -- and if this really serves the purpose that we think.

One of those changes (previously mentioned) over the years has been the number of OOS PNMs. I'm just not convinced that a Bama pledge class that is about 78% OOS is/was dependent on "proper SEC recs," since OOS alums are far less likely to be familiar with such a local concept or culture.



I don't agree that this is public information -- but this information is easy to access and interpret on a PNM's transcript (both official and unofficial -- submitted with the PNM's consent and knowledge).

I have been told that this is necessary to maintain single sex status, according to federal requirements and/or guidelines.

If so, then anyone insisting that their sorority or chapter doesn't "do" recs or doesn't have to consider them may be a) not following the requirements of their group b)jeopardizing the group's single sex status.

Maybe I have this wrong?

I've seen plenty of "SEC quality" recs from non-SEC alumnae...not all, but a good many. Also seen a lot of "non-SEC quality" from SEC alums...it's not your conference, it's your training.

I think this is what I take issue with...I really don't believe that there is that much difference between a good candidate for Kappa and a good candidate for DPhiE and a good candidate for Phi Mu, and so on.

Now, obviously I am not privy to MS, so maybe that's not the case, and each group values something different, but my general sense is that the vast, vast majority of women who participate in FR meet the requirements of all NPC groups, save for the obvious grade risks and criminal pasts.