19th edition of the Green Book
 

Here is the new 2014 edition of the Manual of Information!

Thank you!

I don't remember if we had an RFM thread stickied somewhere, so, I figured here would be appropriate for the question.

Is there a reason why total is adjusted within 72 hours of bid day? Wouldn't it make more sense to adjust total after graduation each semester to account for girls who graduated and girls who pledged but dropped?

Someone did not proof read :(. The description of the KD new member badge is mashed together with the description of the AZD badge.

DaffyKD

I think the reason for waiting 72 hours after bid day is to account for the fact that that incoming pledge classes maybe dramatically smaller or larger than the graduating class. If you reset total after graduation, your total would be an average or median of chapter size with only had 3 full pledge classes, which would put most chapters over total after recruitment (especially with the larger pledge classes we are seeing). The idea is to try to have the chapters participate in more recruiting year round and allow as many women as possible to opportunity to go greek.

The 72 hours may allow for the chapters to account for those immediate drops/no shows on bid day or right after if they have them (gives them until their first pledge ceremony, if they have one).

https://www.npcwomen.org/resources/p...%20Total-1.pdf

Interesting. That makes sense but it seems like it's an inflated version of total. I could be wrong, but to me, adjusting at the end of each semester seems like it would give a more accurate picture of total.

It's great to give more women the opportunity to join but at certain campuses, where non-primary recruitment still has a stigma, I feel like it ends up hurting chapters. Because total is falsely inflated it ends up forcing groups to recruit who don't really need to because the average chapter size is in reality, slightly lower than it was when total was determined. And then it can also make it seem like a campus is ready for expansion when they're actually not.

I'm not sure I'm explaining my thought process well, but I guess what I'm getting at is that total isn't accounting for retention.

Why bother having total or formal recruitment at all, if the goal is to have chapters recruiting year-round? Because total is adjusted too early, you're creating a false environment, basically forcing chapters to COB. Why not just do away with formal recruitment and move entirely to COB, or remove the total "ceiling" and allow groups to pledge as many as they want, within a +/- percentage of average chapter size?

Maybe total should be total range, instead of quota range.

It's not just falsely inflated - if TUV makes quota plus due to RFM and guaranteed bids for those who maximize their options, BUT half those women don't show up at bid day, that will get reflected in the averages too. That way TUV 's actual total is showing.

I don't understand. If you're saying they don't show up to bid day, that should be reflected when adjusting total because of the 72 hour thing, right?

I'm talking about later in the semester, like, girls who drop right before initiation

I understand what you're saying, and do agree that it creates a long cumbersome process of constantly COB-ing if you are a chapter that is right on the line. You are at total and then one person resigns or transfers or leaves the chapter in any way, then you are under. I've witnessed it at chapters and it can be slightly stressful for the people in charge of membership and recruitment, as well as those responsible for the new member programs.

Perhaps some of it is to change stigma of informal recruitment, so that there aren't only one or two chapters that are typically recruiting that way, but depending on the campus, that could take some time.

Some campuses can do a two tiered reset, specifically those doing deferred recruitment and even some that do the regular, traditional fall formal are talking resetting again after the fall semester to account for those numbers. Some campuses have elected to use a formula for their total reset to be average or median less x% to account for a little attrition or graduation, but that is on a campus by campus basis.

If the total readjustments create openings, you can quickly fill them on the sly and nobody is the wiser.

I was curious because it just seems like total is not totally accurate and I feel like while the goal is to take away the stigma of informal recruitment, I don't think it does.

When you have a campus that has always pretty much only done formal, and half or less of the groups do informal, and that half consists of the weaker recruiting chapters and maybe a middle or strong recruiting chapter, I don't see any amount of time changing that stigma.

I could be wrong but it just makes more sense to me to see a two-tiered reset or a total range like quota range.

I thought the goal was to force them to raise Total because they have been so hesitant to do so. There were campuses where Total was 55 but average chapter size was close to 70. Nobody would raise Total because they were afraid that one bad year would make them NOT get to Total.

As with anything, there are pros and cons. Pros- chapters who end up below average chapter size can pick up a few women quickly and include them with the rest of that class right away. Possible con- chapters could tell PNMs that they want them but won't be able to pick them up during formal but will have space as soon as Total is raised so they should drop out of recruitment and get a COR bid later.

I think AGDee hit the nail on the head. I was recruitment adviser during a period when it was high time to raise total, but the majority of sororities on campus resisted it, in large part because they hadn't done COB in years and would have been at risk to need to COB in the spring semester. When the new rules about resetting total 72 hours after bid day came about, we had a chapter that raised hell and fought it. Thank goodness it's now much more established as the rule.

You have a range of options on where to set total. So each campus should be able to find one -with the help of their area adviser - that suits their particular campus.

Total is set within 72 hours of the primary recruitment to allow for chapters to adjust their numbers for PNM no-shows and quick drops. It is also set early to assist in bringing about parity within the panhellenic system. This allows chapters who are eligible to COB to do so during the semester. Total should be set at median chapter size unless their bylaws state average or largest chapter size. Total should now be re-calculated each semester, again to assist in bringing about parity.

2016 - 21st Edition!
 

Here is the (2016) 21st Edition!

https://www.rit.edu/studentaffairs/g...compressed.pdf

Thank you.

Um, the description of the AOII badge is incorrect...

And that's not embarrassing at all considering an AOII will take over the chair in 2017.

It appears to be a copy-and-paste from the AEPhi badge description.

I swear on my honor as a Sigma Chi that I am not trying to stir up trouble or anything with what I'm about to say:

Do I understand that other sororities/women's fraternities are not allowed to see each other's presentations?

You are correct. Members of other NPC groups are not allowed to attend recruitment functions.

Are the presentations to the campus panhellenic considered a recruitment function?

Again, IFC guy just trying to understand.

I understood that to mean that women from the other groups presenting at a campus could not attend a presentation? For example, when Clemson had extension presentations this past spring, I could attend all of them as an ADPi but the Pi Phi and AOII women who had presented couldn't attend the AGD women's presentation.

No they are not. Members of PH are typically invited to attend extension presentations. Often they are open to any members who would like to attend as well as advisers for those groups. I've attended several over the years as an adviser. However, PNMs are not included.

It's unusual for the extension teams for other groups to still be on campus when another group presents. This is the first I've heard of that happening. We are always in and out when others are not there. But I would not expect to be in attendance at another team's presentation if I was a member of my group's official extension team.

No, it's more than that. Unless one is actively involved with a local chapter on a campus where extension is happening, a volunteer of an inter/national organization should not attend any other extension presentation.

An example - a volunteer of an inter/national organization who works on a college campus where extension presentations are happening should not attend those presentations unless it is for her own organization.

Oh, I'm not saying they were still on campus at that point-they weren't. Just using an example I knew of recently that I had attended. Sorry for any confusion there!

Way back in 1996/7 when AOII presented at Northeastern State (OK), our entire extension team watched the AGD presentation, and vice-versa. Oops. (Of course then the PH immediately voted and within an hour we knew who had been chosen, so maybe the whole thing was crazy.)

I guess I understand, but I don't like what it says about Panhellenic women.

I have attended the presentations on several groups on local campuses when I was an alum officer and a regional one for my group. I also attended presentations when we were one of the groups presenting. Never had a problem.

So, if a group colonizes in the fall, when total is recalculated in the spring, does that recalculation take into account the colonizing group? Even if the colony was considerably smaller than average chapter size (which would bring spring total down quite a bit)?

I feel that would be taken into account...or at least should be - and would probably be the advice of the RFM specialist and Area Adviser at the end of spring recruitment.

Thanks, just wondering.