Phi Sigma Sigma discontinues legacy policy.
 

Long time no post... but I’ve been lurking lately.

We just got an email stating that Phi Sig will be discontinuing the legacy policy.

I’m wondering if every NPC org will continue to follow the ones that have already announced.

I wouldn't be surprised. However, it seems to me that eliminating recommendation letters would have a bigger impact than targeting legacies.

I'm hoping sorority recs will be changed to "rec from a person who knows you personally and doesn't have to be a sorority member".

Preach! I've been calling for this for a decade at least. It's insane to me that 18-year-old women going through recruitment at some of these schools with 15+ chapters (for example) have to expend all their energy to get just as many recs, if not more (if aiming for two per sorority).

And what do the recs really say if they come from someone the PNM doesn't personally know and ultimately just amount to a formality?

I would be all for that, in addition to allowing alumnae the opportunity to write recs.

The only thing with allowing non-members to write recs: a member is likely to be cautious about writing a rec for someone who's capable of screwing up her sorority. A non-member is not going to be affected if said girl ends up pledging a group and doing horrendous things once in.

She could say truthfully, "Oh, Patty PNM has great grades and activities!" and rave about that. Maybe she knows that the girl is an advanced drama queen or vicious gossip or flaming racist as well (or maybe she doesn't), but you know what? She won't care if the girl pledges and tears up the chapter or even loses their charter for them. I recall a chapter in Florida that almost lost their charter because 2 (only 2!) members took some NMs out and hazed them.

Good point.

Practically every NPHC organization requires some sort of external letter of recommendation.

Most people aren't writing letters of recommendation for people they know are terrible people.

See, that's the thing. As a teacher of manymany years, I have known many other teachers who were totally clueless about some of the meanest bullies in school. These kids would act like Eddie Haskell around teachers (or certain teachers) and do horrible things to their "enemies". Once I caught 2 Eddies upending a cooler of KoolAid over the head of another girl in the hall--caught them redhanded!-- and the AP kept saying she went to church with them and they neeevvver would have done such a thing.

So many teachers get fooled because students know that later on, they'll need various recommendations.

Agree with you about the "Eddie Haskells" as they can appear as early as elementary school.



When my mother was asked to write recommendations for our high school by the local Panhellenic Alumnae, she came to her three kids to ask for real scoop on these PNMs. ;) Honestly I believe my brother was the best source our of the three of us and she was able to write a rec with confidence. (I believe she only wrote one "non-rec.")

Wanted to respond in another recently closed thread, but will try here. NPC groups who recently changed their legacy policies better hope enough of their specially chosen new members make-up, in number and in active involvement, for those alumnae and non-chosen legacies who will no longer/never be working diligently and earnestly for their orgs. It's great to evolve, but some members will be skeptical of the speed and reasons for the change and whether the outcome will be fully positive.

ETA: Closed thread mentioned above has reopened [AOII Eliminates Legacy Policy]

I know that Phi Sig does not ever require rec letters, even if it is tradition at the school. (We don’t have many chapters in the south, where I feel most schools that want recs are located - I’m a northern girl, I didn’t know this was a thing until GC!)

I could see rec letters being a letter from any sorority alum. I obviously never get to write any, but I know so many former students that I would love to write to a chapter and say, “This is a great woman! You want her!” But alas, I can’t.

If this was to happen, it would also need to be letters that the PNM doesn't ever see. Just like the letters of recommendation that are sent when you apply for college. You request them from the teachers, and unless the teacher shares the letter on it's own, the student has no way of knowing what it says.

Maybe you request letters and they are sent through panhellenic at the university and every chapter gets the same letters or something. That way if your letter is a "danger will robinson" and more of a no-rec, then it doesn't come back on you.

As a recruitment advisor, the no-rec recs always seem more helpful.

:D

OK, so I went to Phi Sigma Sigma's website to hopefully understand WHY eliminating this legacy policy is so prudent for NPC organizations. And again, the explanation is that

"continuing to offer any preferential treatment perpetuates and upholds a system of privilege within our membership and does not meet our responsibility to promote inclusivity."

I'm sorry, but sorority and fraternity membership is exclusive, whether we like it or not, and changing a legacy policy isn't going to change that. Being in a greek organization requires several things that signal "exclusivity", one being you have to PAY to be a member. That item, in and of itself, is a HUGE reason limiting women who may be fabulous from joining. Are our national organizations now going to offer scholarship assistance for dues to these fabulous women who can't afford to pay dues?

Let's move on to the recruitment process, which in some places means that a PNM has to buy an entire week's worth of new clothes to "look the part" of a sorority member on their campus. If she can't afford that, is she going to be given a "clothing allowance"? My pledge sister and best friend's daughter is going to be going through recruitment at Alabama in the fall, and let's just say she spent QUITE A BIT of money to get her what she needs to "be competitive". On top of that, you charge a woman at least $250 to GO THROUGH recruitment, with no guarantee that she gets a bid. Should we refund the registration fees if she isn't successful? In-house fees at Alabama average $7,200 PER SEMESTER and out-of-house fees are nearly $3,600 PER SEMESTER. How is THAT not limiting the women who can join a sorority?

I do believe that economics is the first thing that would need to change for sorority membership to stop limiting women from joining. No amount of legacy policy changes are going to change the fact that the cost of joining a sorority or fraternity is the number 1 limiting factor against inclusivity.

Here's a thought. Let's stop the madness with all the fees and nickel and diming that national organizations love to do. Hell, let's get rid of the ridiculous mansions that chapters live in, which cost millions of dollars to build and maintain. Let's have the national organizations find ways to lower their costs, and pass that savings on to the chapters, who can then lower their dues to allow for inclusivity. That makes a WHOLE LOT more sense than removing a legacy policy.

OK, rant over...sorry if I've offended anyone.

Or we could get rid of national organizations altogether, as local groups are way cheaper.

:)

Like I said on someone’s Facebook the other day, when you support or are an ally in a way that is comfortable and doable for you, instead of in a way that truly helps the group in question, you’re doing it wrong.

NPC sororities: housing since 1872; tough nut to eliminate unless the new Covid19 economy continues to shrink the $$$ pool living in-house (and we all know BIG financial changes are coming here).

Not all NPC housings are owned by an NPC group. Among the existing options, a chapter may rent their land but own their house on said land, or pay rent to a college for dorm floor usage.

There are already NPC groups offering collegiate scholarship assistance for dues to members in need; some groups are more circumspect about them than others. Not everyone in a chapter need know who receives help.

My point is that eliminating the economic barriers to membership, which is quite frankly what makes membership exclusive, makes a whole lot more of an impact than eliminating a policy that doesn't guarantee anyone a spot. If our organizations are going to tout change, make it meaningful. That's what I'm saying.

I know that the change in legacy policy was explained to us as this - a legacy obviously has a parent that has been to college. This puts them at an advantage in life.

Taking more legacies means you’re not leaving a lot of spots for women who are first generation college students. I was kind-of one of them (well, my grandparents went to college... but my parents? No.) I do feel that all women should have the chance to go Greek, not just ones who’s parents went to college.

However, would I be sad if my daughter got cut from Phi Sig? Yes. (Granted now they’re 22 and 23 and the likelihood of them actually being a Phi Sig is next to none....)

I was also a first generation college student. And at my university, legacies were few and far between, so it wasn't an issue. I wonder how many chapters said, "hey, we need to get rid of the legacy policy, because we want to take all of these women over here, but we can't because there are so many legacies." I can't imagine outside of the large Southern universities and Indiana that this is the case. Maybe I'm being naive.

To me, this is a feeble attempt to look relevant in terms of what is going on in the world today. And I'm not saying it just about Phi Sigma Sigma, because DPhiE is talking about it too. I just don't think it does enough to make relevant change.

See, that's what I'm saying. I think that these groups are just trying to look relevant and cool, while their HQs are possibly congratulating each other on cutting down the number of screaming mom calls they get every year. I haven't heard of a sorority being forced to take legacies for years. I also have not heard of a sorority who admitted to dropping a fantastic PNM in order to keep a subpar legacy. It just doesn't happen!

Yes!

I think you've hit on something. WHY on this planet of the gods would someone want to buy new clothes just to get others to look at them? The idea this is required simply boggles my mind, and further reinforces my belief that many policies/procedures/"how it's done" come from a couple of dozen big campuses. The rest of the greek world knows better.

Of course, you seem to be equating money with inclusion, and I can't fight that.

To the bolded: I get what you're saying. The correlation/argument is buying a new suit for the job interview of your life. Feel good, feel confident. Not saying it's the right thing to do, but that's why people do it.

I feel the same way. It's a knee-jerk reaction to staying relevant to the causes that potential members care about. It feels disingenuous to me, like a token gesture to show they're in tune to what's going on in the world. Maybe I'm just an old cynic :cool:

Right! Look at most campus's recruitment booklets or websites or social interactions about recruitment, there's a HUGE focus on what should I wear. Of course PNMs are going to focus on having the right look based off of what the CPC is putting out there.

Breaking down economic barriers to membership certainly makes our organizations less exclusive. How many stories on here have a PNM saying an active member asked what her dad did for a living? I think that's insane, but it happens all the time!

An "interview suit" is not an entire new wardrobe, though.

But I'm betting outside the biggest, say, 20-30 greek schools in the nation, this doesn't happen.

Where are the advisors who are creating these? For literally decades we (sororities) have been claiming to concentrate on a woman's character, but we've been playing these kinds of games, making liars of ourselves.

Ding ding ding!

We always seem to be contradicting ourselves... we don't care about looks, but we do. We're inclusive, but we're exclusive. It doesn't matter where you come from, but it does. It doesn't matter how much money you have, but you need a lot.

We do all of these wonderful things to empower women, but the world outside Greek life generally doesn't see it or believe it. Should we be surprised by this?

WINNER!!!

Okay...

Legacy--It's tough for alumnae to lose the status that is *sometimes and not uniformly* afforded to their legacies. Legacy status has been decreasing over the years anyway. It also can be devastating to the alumna when their legacy gets cut.

Appearance- Yes, many chapters are too focused on looks. However, if PNMs could ask one question going into recruitment, my guess would be over 90% would ask, "what do I wear?"

A new business suit for an interview is a good analogy, but this is a SERIES of interviews requiring different classes of attire, from very casual to formal/cocktail. AND "interview" clothing for women can also bring a variety of results. For men, "Dockers, collar and khakis, business suit, suit and tie, etc." are much more definitive.

MANY girls opt to get new clothing for each event, but many of them have most of the requirements already in their closet. Just as they could do their own nails or put their belongings in a large ziplock or market bag, many OPT for manicures and Kate Spade/Tori Burch bags and sandals.

Dues- It would be wonderful to make dues more affordable for all and yes, having to pay dues does create exclusivity. But that is a larger barrier/step and one that would take more time.

Recommendations- I have mixed emotions. First choice would always be someone that knows the PNM personally. Not always possible, which brings us to the way many are done now. This is because "they are required". Yes, some sororities require them prior to granting a bid, but the larger issue of needing a rec for each house on SEC campuses, etc., has created an environment of meaningless recs that actives do not even read. It checks a block.

If we want to truly encourage inclusion, recs either need to be done away with OR accepted from non-alumnae, if necessary. In many cases a good letter of recommendation from a teacher would mean much more than the ones that are submitted today. But that would mean a return to actually READING the recommendations and that makes me cringe for the recruitment committees at large greek schools. Having to read, absorb, and prioritize them would be an enormous undertaking. Perhaps NPC alumnae groups should venture into less exclusive high schools to recruit and meet girls and set them up with recs.

These are all tough issues, but I am hearing a lot of what sounds like a blanket resistance to change. And if you want to maintain exclusivity in terms of QUALITY, some barriers need to go because race is NOT an accurate predictor of quality -- as some current NPC members are showing us daily.

Is there any intimidation or resistance felt by students from less exclusive highschools when they are asked to meet with women from NPC Alumnae Groups? How often does this type of potential PNM end up an initiated NPC member?

OK, so do you think PNMs are so focused on what to wear because chapters are too focused on looks or vice versa? Do you honestly believe that a woman at say Georgia could roll into recruitment with a large ziplock or market bag and not be immediately eliminated from consideration? I personally witnessed a woman get laughed at and ridiculed because she had a fake Kate Spade bag in the early 2000s, and the "fake label" was becoming unstuck due to the extreme heat of the Georgia weather.

As an Alpha Phi, you've likely experienced some backlash with the Alpha Phi membership selection "scandal." What's Alpha Phi's stance on all this?

The whole point of this is that meaningful change is about more than eliminating a legacy policy. And if NPC groups are going to hang their hat on inclusion by eliminating legacy policies, then all of our groups need changes in leadership quickly.

I personally have a little resistance to change, but I understand that change is necessary to evolve. Legacy policy elimination is change for PR/image sake, and it's baffling why it's being celebrated. Again, my opinion alone. Not the opinion of my chapter or my organization that I know of.

I just had a conversation with some Panhellenic sisters about the changes and how they're being celebrated. We wondered if everyone would have been so positive if it were Alpha Phi leading the charge. Would the perspective be different? Would we look at them as only changing their Legacy Policy so they could avoid being forced to bring legacies who don't meet their "standards" into the first invitational round instead of inviting only women who meet those "standards." We came to the conclusion that there would be a lot more pitchforks and torches if that were the case.

If NPC is truly interested in making meaningful change (and not just seeming relevant due to the optics of the moment) there should be some research done. How many minority women register for formal recruitment? How many first gen students register? How many from these groups receive bids? Maybe they have that data and it is just not universally accessible. I have never been privy.

Campuses that have upperclass quotas have established those to give these otherwise overlooked pnms an equal opportunity of receiving a bid.

If the data shows an interest by POC and first gen students (who have presumably been overlooked in favor of legacies) then the elimination of these policies may be warranted. Perhaps then we need to establish a separate quota for these overlooked pnms?

I suspect the data may show that lack of diversity has much less to do with legacy policies and rec letters. It likely has much more to do with the financial burden. And, if the numbers point there, as many others have said, what are our organizations willing to give up to make membership more affordable?

Do we restructure recruitment to 4 rounds in the Panhel provided tshirt? Do we let our housing decor become dated? Do we eliminate in person training for our members to cut travel costs? Eliminate national office staff and traveling consultants? Do we redirect money raised for our philanthropies to more needs based scholarships for pnms?

I have no doubt the groups dropping their legacy policies are well- intentioned. I just don't think it is going to bring about the change that most hope it will.

If NPC has captured the statistics on diversity now, I would love to see a comparative study in 10 years. Without far more than a change to legacy policy, I suspect this data will remain unchanged.

I'm sorry, no. A separate quota for every chapter on a campus to follow during rush, for "a particular type of POC/first gen overlooked PMN", isn't necessary.

But I'd like to know whether Bama ever truly used or still uses a separate POC quota [in relation to past 15-20 years of Bama sorority recruitment issues].

What comes next, a separate quota for PNMs with cranberryblue hair?

And finally, not every campus considers upperclassmen as 'overlooked' in their purpose for calling it UC quota.

Ohhh no, we do not want to go back to quotas for various groups. That turned into a swamp back in the day. And I can see where it would lead to, like girls lying about being first generation college students so they could slide into that quota group.

I like where you're going in terms of looking at the data to truly see if we can suss out the trends, identify potential obstacles to membership, and identify possible solutions.

I agree with the others that separate quotas are not the answer; but, that one suggestion doesn't dismiss your whole post. You brought up a lot of valid ideas and considerations.

One issue I do see is.....human factors. If we were to all "agree" that financial means was a problem and we all "agree" to cut down on costs, I firmly believe that there will still be chapters which won't truly hold themselves to that. They will still post photos of members on trips to Greece, members on yachts, and members with expensive handbags to the chapter Insta and whatnot. They will still find some way to spend $$$ during recruitment. It's human nature to want to be better than everyone else. No one wants to be the financially sensible chapter that gets left behind because we all know they will be left in the dust by the big spending chapters doing big, flashy things. It seems that some chapters these days are selling an image more than sisterhood :( Those professional-grade recruitment videos cost money and the money has to come from somewhere. Once one chapter ups their game and raises the bar on their videos, house, formal dances, etc, then there goes the neighborhood!

So, as you were suggesting, how do we make sorority membership more financially accessible? Food for thought.....

Here's what I would not want to see. Have any of you ever been the parent of a child who had several field trips and you were thinking they were pretty pricey? And then you found out that some parents were required to pay a lot so that other kids could go on the trip?

Sounds very sweet but some of us who were paying are very middle class, with several children, and paying for other kids to go is not in the budget. I know of several parents who just refused to let their kids go on field trips if they were the trips where some people were paying for the whole class. Nobody knows what anyone's financial status is!

What I'm saying is that I would hate it if some people had to pay elevated dues so that others could join. If you want Greek life that much, you can always work to pay your dues. (I had 3 jobs at one time.)

I see elitism in the idea that diversity stems from not being able to afford a sorority That implies women of color, first-generation college students, and immigrants who don't know sororities are all economically disadvantaged.

Consider the small-town (probably northern) freshman. It's entirely possible she doesn't consider greek life at all. Or all she sees is the movie stereotypes where all the fashion plates laugh at the real women How do we get these women interested in joining?

How do we get the first-generation American interested in joining?

How do we get women of color interested? I know in my school in the dark ages, black women who rushed/pledged were treated horribly by the black groups, some of whom were D9 but most of whom were not; I don't know if that dynamic still plays.

I believe the legacy policies, the rec requirements, and our utter failure to reach out to those who are not like us - before they come to school - are serious failings. Sure, MS, AL, TX alumnae groups reach out - to those who already know about sororities - by "we'll hold a seminar and if you're interested you'll come", not by approaching those who don't. What happens in other areas? How do we reach out to others? And if we don't, how can we say we're really interested in them?