Panhellenic Expansion at Clemson Voted Down
 

....

Re: Panhellenic Expansion at Clemson Voted Down
 

I think that is IT in a nutshell right there! Looking at who's already there I am guessing the top contenders would be Pi Phi or Phi Mu. I know that right now Phi Mu is recolonizing at Miami-Ohio, which is a BIG job.

Maybe people are gun-shy after AGD didn't do well and pulled out - they don't want to put all this energy into welcoming and acclimating a new sorority only to have it not work out.

Just a few questions... The span between your smallest and largest sororities is great. Are you saying that the larger sororities support expansion because they believe they are too big and expansion will lower total thus allowing them to have fewer members? How much would quota be lowered by bringing one new sorority to campus? When Alpha Gam came to your campus, why did they only take 50 girls to start? What was chapter total then? If interest in a new group is low, what will make expansion different now? Also, how reasonable is it to expect a group with 65 members will be able to COB up to 130 in a semester?

Thanks for your info, Browneyedgirl. It sounds like you have a lot of good statistics and that expansion has been well thought out by your existing groups. It is rare to find a campus where the big sororities want to be smaller! While it doesn't sound like you would have any significant change in quota, I suppose it is a start. I didn't see it if you said how the smaller groups feel about expansion. It would probably not be a positive thing for the smallest of your sororities and I can see a new group pushing them on out (which would defeat your purpose). I think someone suggested that you take some time to get those small groups up to chapter total before bringing a new group in. Realistically, it will be tough for them to COB to total (I figure if they could do that then they would have already). However, if you want the whole system to succeed (and it sounds like you do) that is the logical first step.
Good Luck!

Re: Looks like we're voting again...
 

Pi Phi actually had 2 chapter in South Carolina at one time--SC Alpha at USC and SC Beta at Clemson. I think the SC Alpha chapter went out a decent while ago, but their alumna seem to be really strong--a good record of giving, plus the current Pi Phi Grand President is an SC Alpha. Obviously being a (North) Carolina girl and a Pi Phi, I would love to have a South Carolina chapter again... But it's all good. :) oh, and I PM'ed you.

I just wanted to say this is a really great, constructive conversation where actual sororities are being named and the campus is being named. I think some very good, productive ideas are bring expressed here. This is a tough issue.

I am getting the impression that the sororities do not COB in the off semester?

Even if they are not at Total? If hats true, why would that be?

And if thats not true, why would you think that the weaker chapters would suddenly jump to chapter average?

Yes, I agree. I would be interested in hearing who is big and who is small and why that is. Would brining in another group help the weaker one? If it means lowering quota, I guess I'm missing how that will help the smaller one grow. Maybe I'm just confused?

You have a good point. I am not saying they shouldn't bring a new group on. You should bring a new group on once a year. assuming you have a fricking clue lol.

But. One more group will only lower quote by maybe five.

500 girls going through nRush for 10 sororities makes quota 50. Add an 11th sorority and you have quota at 45.

Right?

Also, groups that are much smaller than average generally suck ass.

Bear with me for a moment.

In order for a smaller group to truly justify itself in terms of being competitive, it would mean that they got just as many qualified applicants as the largest groups on campus. Every one of which would be willing to accept their bids.

And then they would deliberately only take in the best 10-25 [percent of that group.

If thats not true, then all the arguments they have about smaller being cozier are just them talking out their asses and trying to justify their lack of competitveness with the other groups.

This would be assuming that every house is searching for the same type of girl, or at least that there's an equal number of each of the different types of girls that each house wants. The problem is that different houses want different types of girls. At a campus where the majority of sororities and the majority of rushees are the "stereotypical" kind, the rich, pretty party girls, the few sororities who don't want that type of girl will be hard pressed to find rushees that fit their house (at least during formal rush). But at many campuses, the girls who would fit into the "non-stereotypical houses" don't ever think of rushing because the image they see is solely that of the stereotypical chapters. That's why the smaller sororities tend to suffer.

I don't know if this is another one of the NPC/IFC differences, a difference between men and women, or just something I've completely made up, but I've noticed that fraternities seem to be a lot more concerned with "getting the best and the brightest" to join their fraternity, while women are more interested in finding women who fit the profile of their house. I know this is true for my sorority, at least -- we could have a PNM who has a 4.0, was class president, head cheerleader, etc. etc. -- but if she doesn't fit in with the girls in the house, we wouldn't bid her.

There are a lot of reasons why a smaller group might be smaller: their girls aren't as pretty/popular as the bigger houses, they have messy internal problems, they might not have enough resources to compete with the other houses, they might not have as much sisterhood as the other chapters, they might have a very small pool of their sorority's "type" to draw from (the smallest sorority on my campus is one that is composed of primarily East coast Jewish girls, and in the middle of Wisconsin there's not a huge market for that), etc. But I can think of very few reasons why anybody should say that a smaller sorority isn't as worthy of being a sorority just because it's smaller. There is room in the Greek system for all types and sizes.

Again, it all ties into the IFC/NPC differences and the way fraternities treat their organizations more like businesses whereas the sororities tend to look more at the women involved.

Or maybe I just completely mis-read your post . . . it's late.

back to the topic at hand
 

I noticed in USA Today that Clemson is ranked the #1 school for most people playing intramural sports. I was wondering if the sororities play intramurals too??

James -

8 of the 10 are at total from formal rush in fall and so they can't COB.

Two need to get up to total - one is lower and one is practically there. The one who is practically there might not feel it worth the expense or hassle to do COB rush. It's very very different than up here where COB is pretty much a way of life at a lot of schools.

We also had a chapter there. I cannot remember when it closed, but the local alumnae would be ECSTATIC to have the chapter back.

When is Panhellenic voting again?

9 when quota was 48? Well, I don't have a solution but I think maybe this needs higher ups to fix. With that kind of disparity there are obviously bigger issues at hand. I hope all works out amicably for everyone involved.

I just want to say that I am sorry your Panhellenic system is in such a state right now.

I do believe there is an answer in order to help the system. Hopefully by working together the groups can come up with a solution!

Don't you already allow this? The point of COB is that it is, well, continuous. If a chapter is under total they should be allowed to give an open bid at any time, unless there is a colony on campus (and sometimes even then). It's kinda like she is saying "well, you have a year to get your act together, if you don't tough toenails." It's all well to say you had a year of "opportunity" but as Marie said, it sounds liike there are other issues that can't be solved just by telling the smaller chapters to COB.

33girl--

While I see your point on the "tough toenails", I think it's ridiculous for a chapter with such issues that they would only get 9 women when quota is 48 and only has 40 women coming back when average chapter size is 148 to hold back the Greek System from expanding. I realize Panhellenic spirit and all that jazz, but at some point, if one chapter hindering the system from growing, and the chapter is not doing anything to improve, then you gotta give them a limit on time. This worked out very well at another school I know of, and the group that was very low ended up working their asses off, along with alumnae support, in getting their shit together and are now 3rd largest of 10.

Most certainly, if you bring another sorority to campus under your present circumstances, you will force the smallest of your groups to close. Obviously if that smallest group could get to chapter total by COB they would have already done that. Granted, that in itself is a problem and perhaps it is not unreasonable to say "you have a year to get things straightened out and then we are going ahead with expansion".
I don't see how one new sorority on campus is going to do much to help your larger groups downsize, which seems to be one of the goals. If that truly is what you want, why would the larger groups be opposed to some sort of "cap" on chapter total? I believe you are correct, that all groups have the RIGHT to take quota regardless of how many member they have, but you have said that the large groups feel they are too large and want another sorority on campus so that quota will not be as high (or did I misread this?)
Finally, all of your sororities need to remember that when one group falls, someone takes their place on the bottom. That is why it is so important to take care of each other and do everything that you can to ensure the success of your Panhellenic as a whole.

I think what she's saying (and correct me if I am wrong BrownEyedGirl) is that this would sort of be the official "one year to go" notice. That Panhel agrees that expansion is the right route but wants to give the smallest chapter every opportunity to get to total or even average chapter size.

As far as limiting quota additions, I think this idea may not be in the best interest of the potential new member. Quota additions are often viewed as a way for groups to get more new members when in fact they are a way for new members who maximized every option they had (attended all parties, put down all choices on her pref car, did not SIP (aka suicide) and still did not match to be placed.

shadokat - I understand what you are saying and agree, but apparently there are 3 other chapters that aren't for expansion either, not just the smallest chapter. My point is it's somewhat disingenous to say "do what you are already doing and what's in the Green Book" and act like it's a new tack to take, which is what it sounded like from browneyedgirl's recap.

Honestly, I think if the smallest group's nationals just stepped up and assured them they weren't going to get closed, this would pass 10-0 and no one would give a shit.

If I remember a previous post correctly...
 

...the smallest chapter at Clemson is DG and their nationals DID step in to help them...last year or last semester I believe -- which is what is being done with the DG chapter at USC (the one in South Carolina!) I am not sure what else can really be done...I would guess that the other three that also voted against expansion may have done so -- at least partly - out of fear -- raised in a previous post - that if the smallest chapter is de-activated then they might be the next one to occupy the celllar....

I hate it when things like this happen :mad: :(

Unfortunately when a group gets so small that it can not survive financially, recruitment to ceiling is almost impossible. Whether the campus expands or not, this group needs a very large group of friends to join together to change the dynamics. The very small groups who are struggling terribly will not benefit from any new rules.

GPhiBLtCol -

there's a BIG difference between the national stepping in to help, and having them assure you that your head is not going to be on the chopping block 6 months forthwith. I have no idea what was said or not at Clemson so I won't speculate.

browneyedgirl - do you have houses there or dorm suites or what?

I believe they have dorm floors or suites.

My own personal belief is that expansion may have been voted down out of a lack of understanding by the collegiates of how to make the situation work moving forward. They may look at the smallest group and their friends who are in it and not want to hurtn them, without understanding how to help them either. I've faced several situations with different campuses where collegiates vote one way or another based on a lack of education or information.

>>>I think if the smallest group's nationals just stepped up and assured them they weren't going to get closed<<<

How can anyone assure them of that? It sounds like they are on the downslide as it is. Bringing another sorority to campus may very well seal their fate. If they are only getting 9 when quota is 40 plus, time is just not on their side. Should this hold back expansion on campus if it is needed? I don't know the answer to that.

My comment about assuring them they wouldn't close them was partially based on housing. It is one thing if you have a huge house to fill and maintain utilities in and quite another to have a hall. (i.e. I would think you could "step back" more easily from a hall if need be, rather than having to close the chapter simply because you can't fill and maintain the house.)

Maybe the collegians are making the wrong choice...maybe they are absolutely right. But the point is it is THEIR choice and time will tell. You have to have opportunities to get involved in big issues to learn. Giving college women the chance to make those choices is a big part of what Greek life is all about.

Are all chapters not getting quota during formal rush or just the smallest one? Many years, including this one, we have a couple chapters not get quota (out of 6). My campus has also always seemed to be cyclical with chapters of fewer members years ago now among the largest and vice versa - is that happening here?

As an alum of a chapter who is 'smaller' I do take offense to the comments that those groups are somehow not good enough to be greek. Sure there may be problems but the largest groups have always had as many or more problems, just in different areas. And I agree that asking that group to double in that amount of time will be a tough task - I've done it, believe me I know :)

Luckily there is equity in housing with this situation so that isn't the issue - I would suggest if other sororities really want to help the situation to step forward and offer help directly to the chapter. Whether with joint workshops or helping them advertise their COR events, even the smallest bit of help will make their task a bit easier. They most certainly feel the pressure of their situation and would likely welcome the support from their greek sisters.

Good Luck and try not to let it divide Panhellenic

Dori

>>>As an alum of a chapter who is 'smaller' I do take offense to the comments that those groups are somehow not good enough to be greek<<<

I don't think that anyone meant to convey the idea that the smallest house on the campus isn't "good enough to be greek". The fact is, though, that they are about 1/3 the size of the largest chapter. I think everyone agrees (probably even their own members) that, realistically, if the deal they have is that they must COB to chapter average within one year, it will be extremely hard. The struggle that some of the other chapters that are against expansion seem to be having is that they realize that a new chapter on campus may prove too much for the smallest chapter and they will fold. Please correct me if I am wrong, Browneyedgirl.

I was referring to the comments by James in earlier posts.

Luckily the rest of the responses have been geared toward helping the situation and finding a workable solution. :)

How odd. Nowhere in my post do I discuss the worthiness of small chapters to be Greek.

I would have to further disgree with you and say my post was very much geared towards helping the situation and finding a workable solution.

What I am doing is challenging the small chapter paradigm and badically saying that the excuses that small chapters use are self deceptions that define their problem incorectly and therefore do not allow a solution.

Once a chapter says "small is good and cozy" they lose their competitive edge and lose any reason to try harder.

So the first step is to admit they have a problem lol, and then take steps to solve it.

Browneyedgirl!

A few of us have posed the same question to you and you keep ignoring us.

What is your current COB policy? Are you allowed to Cob in the non-formal rush semester?

Actually 33girl, I believe that the way Panhell works, each Panhell member has an official NPC delegate advisor and that they basically they believe that they have to vote the way that advisor tells them.

Any Panhell people want to correct me or elaborate?

Also note that Browneyed girl keeps saying that the Advisors areng up with suggestions, and that one of the advisors was KKG's National President as well as a NPC board member. Thats not an undergrad lol.

So there is no choice or real leadership experience for the collegians here at all.

James - I refer to your comments that all small chapters "suck ass"

Not only is this a vast generalization of something which you obviously know nothing about but it also completely discounts any good qualities that these chapters may possess. A large chapter with problems is no more 'kidding themselves' than a small chapter is by trying to justify their small numbers. Most small chapters are not small by choice but this does not signify that their chapter is inherently better or worse than a larger chapter on campus.

I do not envy the chapter at Clemson their position because it sounds like they have a lot of work ahead of them. I know how hard their task will be and how much effort it will take to integrate that number of new members into their group. It is hard but it is possible. But remember, while they may be 1/3 the size of the largest chapter, they still have 65 members so they can't 'suck ass' too bad or they would be far smaller than they are. Incidentally, that number is the current chapter total at my collegiate school and above total for many others.

All I am saying is that there can be a productive discussion of the issues without resorting to belittling the chapter involved and the many other chapters nationwide in similar situations.

James - it depends on the school. I don't think our advisor ever attended a Panhel meeting and she certainly didn't tell us how to vote (she wasn't a sister, so she couldn't). Obviously at large schools like Clemson the advisors are going to be more informed. Some sororities do give the advisor an insane amount of power - some she's just a figurehead. But as browneyedgirl said, when you are in that meeting, you (the collegian) are the one who votes.

Now as far as Greek advisors and administrators manipulating decisions with threats, that's another story. :p

I wouldn't be too upset with him . . . I've found that fraternity men have little concept of what it's like to be a huge chapter, and therefore don't understand the "less sisterhood in large chapters" complaints very well. On our chapter, for example, out of about 25 fraternities, only 2 of them have over 100 members, and maybe three more are over 80. Out of 11 sororities, about 7 of them are over 100, all but one (or maybe all?) over 80. So for the fraternities, anything over 60 is considered pretty big, whereas for the sororities it takes almost twice that.

Most campuses are similar.

So the likelihood of most men ever belonging to a chapter of over 100 is fairly small, at least when compared to a women's chance of belonging to a sorority of over 100.

Personally, my chapter isn't even at campus total (120) and I feel like we're way too big already . . . I wish sororities on our campus could be capped at 60. Unfortunately that's not really plausible.

James--

Chapter advisors on campuses that I have had to deal with during expansion do help the chapter make the decision on how to vote. International/national organizations also talk about it at their council meetings. You're right, it's not just a chapter that has the vote, but other people are involved. And obviously that's because the organization has to look out for their best interests, while also being positive panhellenically.

I do agree with you that some small chapters get to a point where the fight has left them. They've struggled for a long period of time, and they decide to resign themselves to the size that they are, and work hard at recruitment, but don't let it dictate their entire chapter. Sometimes that's good, other times it doesn't work. But in defense of smaller chapters, and someone else mentioned it, often times don't have the motivation/lack of sisterhood/lack of participation factor that large chapters can struggle with. This does NOT imply all large chapters...I'm speaking generally of course.

The sad truth is that while we are all gung ho sorority women for our own groups and believe in our principles and sisterhood and what not, sororities and fraternities are businesses, and to keep themselves viable, they sometimes have to make tough decisions.

First let me say that I am NO EXPERT on rush or NPC rules.

Let's take this proposal another way, in a way that doesn't involve a cap on sorority size. Why don't the really large chapters with members who are concerned about their gigantic size just extend fewer bids than quota allows? Why couldn't this be voluntary?

I understand that a chapter has the RIGHT to take quota, but if these women are complaining that their groups are too large, why would they WANT to take quota? Isn't the large size a problem that they could solve on their own just by not taking so darn many new members? Isn't this an easy way to solve the size problem?

It just doesn't seem right to keep taking tons of new members and then complain about how many members a group has. If you want fewer members, extend bids to fewer people.

Isn't that simple, or are people too caught up in the game of bragging about getting quota?

In the formal rush process, you do not have complete control over how many women recieve bids to your chapter. If you extend fewer bids than quota, and they are not all accepted, you shoot yourself in the foot. On the other hand, if you extend more bids than quota, you can't retract them just because too many girls accept.

For example...

At my school, quota is usually around 50. Approximately 150 women attend pref parties at each chapter, in an ideal situation (50women*3parties=150). My chapter can choose to put all 150 women on its bid list. So, if the first 50 we want do not all accept, it goes to 51, 52, etc. If we cut our list to 45 because we didn't want to take quota, and some of those did not accept, we would end up with fewer than 45.

So, as long as your school uses some kind of computer matching, it is in your chapter's best interest to put as many women as possible on the bid list.