Pledging period issue
 

Ok,
I know that there have been some general threads on this but here's a question I want to throw out there and get some feedback on:

Our International Fraternity recently changed its constitution and bylaws at the last Karnea (our term for our general convention every 2 years) to limit the pledging period of all chapters to 8 weeks.

The reasoning behind this was to increase the initiation rate of men that pledge Delt (I guess the rate of our International Fraternity was lower than our competitors, we have a rate of 75% I believe) and to narrow the scope of the program as to tighten the reign on any hazing potential (I guess someone felt that the longer the pledge period the more likely it was that negative activities would spring up) But hazing is not even an issue at my chapter. We have a fantastic pledge program and strongly oppose any negative activities. Our belief is that you can't build up good members by breaking them down first. It's just a non-issue for us. Anyway, both reasons are good in their intentions; however, my chapter and my concern was that initiating after 8 wks was too soon, that a young man may not be ready to assume the responsibilities of membership. Basically this is great for smaller chapters who are working to increase their over all membership very quickly. Or for immplimenting more strict guidance for chapters who need to remove some bad traditions that are associated with hazing. But it may hinder larger chapters with successful and established pledge programs, such as mine, in a few different areas. The vote was close as I recall but the change was approved by a simple majority of chapters and the 8wk program regulation was enforced and implemented at all Delt chapters for the 1st time this semester. Here is where we are running into some problems with the change:

1-Academics-Our school runs on 2 full semesters (about 14 wks each)...not quarters. We are not able to determine a candidates academic standing (GPA) any earlier than after the end of the semester. Initiating after 8 wks completely null and voids any academic requirement for initiation. Even the best high school students may struggle in college and in my opinion 8wks is not enough time to determine someone's academic standing or needs. Even with a grade report from professors there is still plenty of time (post initiation) for them to "mess up" and bomb out the semester. Even with the great academic programming my chapter has there are some young men who will struggle and need time to find methods that work for them. Initiation should be a reward for those who have demonstrated their ability to be good members, and an additional motivator (besides their own personal success) for them to work with the academic/pledge programming and develop good academic habits and skills.
Initiating them before determining their scholastic performance may result in a signficant drop in the chapter's GPA. So we may have a great initiation rate but we will initiate men who will then reflect poorly on our academic standards. They will immediately have to go on probation and it just doesn't make sense. Most fraternity members will likely agree that it's easier to develop and work programming with pledges who are working towards initiation then members who have initiated. Quality over quantity is what I say. Plus, a dropping GPA will in turn hurt recruitment efforts which will lower pledging rates, which will lower total membership rates, but hey initiate 1 out of 1 pledges in a house of 3 actives and you get a 100% rate! (gimmie a break).

2-Involvement/Leadership-How can someone be a leader or hold a position if they do not quite understand how the process or the system works. It takes time and observation to really get a grasp of all the elements it takes to run a successful chapter. 8wks is not enough for some men to see how things operate and gain an appreciation and understanding. The amount of history and organization that goes into running a large fraternity and a large chapter cannot be covered and understood in one meeting. It takes a hands on approach that comes from participating in pledge and active activities that span the course of a semester.

My chapter tried to work with this program by saying that at 7 wks a grade report will be issued and reviewed by the Pledge Education committee and the Academic Committee. Those pledges whom have demonstrated superior scholastics by having a certified estimate of a 3.0 GPA from a grade report from each professor at that time and have thus far been exemplary in the general pledge program and understanding of the fraternity operations by the Pledge Education Committee and general chapter opinion (i.e. hasn't been brought up for depledging) are rewarded by being initiated at 8 wks. Kind of an ‘honor initation’. They then go into a Neophyte education program where their academics will continue to be monitored by the academic committee although they are not required to attend study hours any more. They also will work with the executive and administrative committees to continue to learn about chapter operations on the active side of things (how chapter works etc.), work with the Ritual committee to understand that aspect of our fraternity that is new to them, and also continue to participate in activities with their pledge class to keep cohesiveness and unity among them even though they are now active brothers and some of their class is not quite there yet. It's like an arm of membership education that bridges pledgship and active membership for those who have already demonstrated what is needed to be a good member.

I have also noticed an amazing thing in that the men who did initate early have taken on a leadeship role among their pledge class brothers who did not meet the requirements at that time. They are really helping the guys who didn’t qualify with the areas they need to improve in so that they can soon call them Delt brothers as well. They are armed with a better understanding of the Fraternty that comes from what they learned at their initation to help the others see why what they are working on is important. It’s actually a really positive thing that some of them arrived earlier than the other b/c they have come back and are trying to push the rest of their class towards success.

Those who need to continue to work on their academics and/or need to continue to progress a little further in other areas of membership education (i.e. maybe they have violated a significant rule or bylaw like drinking in the shelter or have poor performance on tests about our principles, values, creed, or history) will continue their pledgeship through to the end of the semester where they will then again be eligible to initiate based on their academics (they must have an actual recorded 2.5 semester GPA or higher that time) . There is not a 3rd chance.

Well, this all matters because recently our traveling consultant has reported that this is not an acceptable way to run the program and we need to either initiate ALL of the men @ 8wks or depledge those who are not ready by then so that the "rate" is 100% (100% of those that are left).
This past week (the 8th week) 9 men out of 24 were eligible for this "honor initiation", many others were close but the committees felt that these 9 men were completely ready and the others just needed more time to work on grades (many were just shy of the 3.0 but have plenty of time left in the semester to work on it, and now the chapter can easily recognize who needs more academic assistance) and a few made a poor choice the weekend before the committee meetings to break a bylaw and drink in the house, thus demonstrating that they need time to develop more respect and understanding of the standards of conduct, their role in our activities both as a group and as individuals and how they effect the fraternity. We do not just want to give up on these men and just depledge them, they just need a little more time and attention so they can grow to be ready and I also believe the chapter needs more time to hone its skills in an 8 wk pledge program, keep in mind this is the 1st time we have attempted to do this in 8 wks.
Plus, to loose the other 15 men who are great and have good potential but just need a little more time to develop it would hurt a large chapter such as mine who needs 81 individuals just to put our house at live-in capacity. Average initiated pledge classes in out house are around 25 (mine was 34!). Taking a class of 9 just so we can have "100%" will kill us. Taking all 24, or even just a few less if some prove in the end that Delt is not the place for them, but taking the time to make sure those who will wear the Delt badge are good members and are properly prepared to be good Delts is worth the extra few weeks to us.
To me, those who go through initiation should have proven that they will be good members by taking a semester to learn how to and demonstrate it. We shouldn't be just initiating men for statistics and then thinking of quality as an afterthought...

Delta Tau Delta International Fraternity may have a slightly lower initiation rate than our competitors, but if that is a reflection of the fact that the standards to become a Delt are higher than other Fraternities, and it takes a little something extra to make it, then I say it’s a statistic that we can be proud of.

What do you think?

If your nationals says you have to initiate after 8 weeks, then you have to initiate after 8 weeks. Plain and simple. The only way you can supercede nationals ever is if your school mandates a longer pledge period which I really don't see any school ever doing. Most people don't hold positions the semester after initiation anyways unless there are dire circumstances, and if you're from a larger chapter, that shouldn't be a problem for you.

Re: Pledging period issue
 

This statement doesn't make sense.

Your initiation rate or percentage is the number of men who initiated divided by the number of men who accepted bids. You can't say "well we depledged them so it's 100%." If your TC told you this, I think he's got it wrong.

As to the rest of your post, I can't even imagine 25 person classes so I'll leave it to someone who can.

I'm sorry but I just don't think it's that simple to say, "they told you to do it so you have to". In the end this will hurt my chapter and others. I understand that in sororities that is often how things are done, but in fraternities there is a different process by which you can disagree with the 'higher ups'. I was just looking for some input on perhaps what other GLO's, in particular fraternities, who may have similar circumstances do.

PS I will also mention that I am an alumnus, serve on house corporation, and as an advisor to the chapter. As an undergrad I was an exec for 2 years and held 4 seperate administrative positions including rush and the pledge education committee. So I have put a lot of thought into the effects of this. I'm not just a member who maybe doesn't like change...I tried to see the positives in this when it was being decided and when my chapter was developing the changes in its program to meet the new requirement, I liked the program my chapter came up with to incorporate the change, it's proving to be effective. But the practice that they want us to do will not be.
The other issue is that no one from 'higher up' said anything to us while we were incorporating this into our chapter's operations. They only made it an issue AFTER we had already gone through 8 wks. The language in the change was too vauge and not anyone I know read it the way they did. Poor communication. The traveling cosultant even had to make a call to the Central office to clairify if we could or couldn't do it (he actually thought our way was a good way to interperet and run the program).

Re: Re: Pledging period issue
 

I agree...it doesn't make sense...but I think it's to pressure us into initiating EVERYONE b/c they know we'd rather get these guys in then let them go just b/c they are not quite ready yet.

I say it may take some men more than 8 wks to get it. Heck, I know it took me more than 8wks to adjust to college let alone begin to understand Delt. It's just too much in too short a time.

We had a similar issue come up this past august at the Beta Convention.

It was voted down. There is a very strong belief in self-government among chapters at our GF. I personally think that any amendment that makes you initiate men that you don't think is ready is only going to hurt you. Sometimes general fraternities live in another world though...

Sigma Chi Fraternity has begun a six to eight week pledge program. No less than six (if the chapter is small, it may not need a full eight weeks) to no more than eight. If the campus has an autumn or spring break that falls during the pledge period, that week would not count toward the time frame. The program was implemented this fall ('05). However, my understanding is that if a chapter needed more time to implement or had specific campus related issues, the chapter could petition IHQ to postpone it for a year.

The way I see this is that if pledges are taken at the start of the semester, (say the first of September for autumn term - early January for the spring term) then they would be initiated by/around the end of October/early March. This would allow the remainder of the semester for continuing education. And to devote time and energy to making sure the GPA requirement is met.

Overall, I think that having a uniform or standard pledge program is a good idea. Yet each campus, each chapter, and each pledge class is different. As such, some allowances should be built in that would allow a chapter to have some leeway as how to proceed with a particular pledge class.

This is why we have a "plactive" period. Our pledge program is 6 weeks. At the end of 6 weeks, one of two things can happen...initiation, or plactive status. Plactive is not meant to be another 6 weeks of pledging. These members are no longer pledges, but they are not actives. Plactive status is given if a quorum vote is reached saying that initiation at this time would not be in the best interest of the chapter. This may mean the girls need 2 days to finish a project or something in the system (not a result of the NM's) is not ready (IE, initiation is postponed a few days due to circumstances outside our control...sickness of a member (or NM), family death of a member/NM). Plactive status isn't a punishment, it's a period of adjustment/continued education/extension.

Sigma Pi's requirement is no less than three weeks and no more than eight, and it's been that way for about ten years. I know Sigma Alpha Epsilon has a very similiar rule. So this isn't uncommon.

Both SP and SAE have an exception for GPA requirements. Our school runs 11 week trimesters, so there's a period when a freshman has finished pledging but can't be initiated yet because he has no grades- sort of a limbo. We have to finish the pledge process in eight weeks, but we don't have to initiate until we know they got the minimum GPA. If that's your only concern, then I would request an exemption from your HQ.

The simple fact is, long pledgings lead to hazing. It's not guaranteed, but it is a strong link, and it's a good idea to limit the length of time a man is a pledge to something very definite. Besides, it shouldn't really take much more than eight weeks to train them in the basics. It's not as though someone is going to going to be elected president straight away off initiation. If you're electing NIBs to office, you have other problems.

I can completely understand your concerns with this. I am currently the President of my chapter, and we're having similar issues regarding our new member process. Phi Psi mandates a 6 week pledge process. My school is semester based, so we obviously can't know their grades once the pledge process is complete. To top that off, our Constitution doesn't allow for a "limbo" area between pledging and being active. You are either a pledge, or a Brother...no in-between.

One thing that has helped me to look past this is the whole idea of Fraternity Education. We have a "Fraternity Educator" vs. a Pledge Educator. I totally believe that Fraternity education should not stop with initiation. You should continue to learn about your fraternity for your entire time as an Undergrad and for the rest of your life. There are problems with initiating men who don't have the strongest of grades. Often times once they've been initiated, they have no structure to help them perform well. I'm not sure how your chapter is set up, but we continue to mandate study hours, tutoring, etc. for those Brothers that are not performing well academically.

You had mentioned that hazing wasn't an issue in your chapter. First of all, that's awesome! We are moving in that direction...and it's been a hell of a transition. One thing to think about though. All of the Brothers in your chapter right now may be on the same page when it comes to hazing, but it is vital to put safeguards into place to prevent it in the future. By having longer pledge programs, it truly opens the door to hazing. I had an entire semester of pledging, and I was hazed hard core. Something that I saw with the Brothers in my chapter when I was pledging, was that it seemed that after the pledge tests were done and the real "education" was over, they just got bored and instinctively turned to senseless hazing. That is something that we've completely turned around now, but we've put things into place to help prevent it when we're gone.

I understand the feeling sometimes that our Headquarters is kind of in this other dimension, and they don't really understand what is going on in their chapters. However, everything that they do is for the good of the Brotherhood. My challenge to you is that instead of looking at the negatives of this new program, look at how you can use it as a tool to better the chapter. If you still think that this is something that your chapter absolutely CANT use whatsoever. Then call your HQ, talk to your Executive Director, express your concerns and see what he has to say. I'm sure that they've thought about most of these things when they made this policy. Perhaps he will have some good advise, another way to see the situation.

Good luck! Change in a chapter is never easy...I know that first hand. Let me know if you've got any other questions!

Luke...

Re: Pledging period issue
 

You need to find a way to work with this new rule and to promote it-- but you can also write letters and give constructive feedback to your Grand Council about why this doesn't work for you.

What's wrong with pledging the 30 men, initiating those who meet the requirements and then holding the rest over pending a standards hearing to initiate the following week? Or holding them over to repeat pledging for another 8 week cycle?

The sororities have 4-8 week new member periods. ADPi is 4-6 weeks, with new members being allowed to hold offices. Those who break a policy or don't pass an international Initiation exam may be held over until they pass the exam/have a standards hearing to determine if they should remain in the organization.

Change is difficult, but the fraternity is a constantly changing animal-- if the policy doesn't really work for large and/or successful chapters, then it won't stick.

Go over the consultant's head and talk to a membership director.

update:

Well in speaking with the executive vp of our central office I was informed that what 'should' be done is all pledges who have been their eight weeks should either be initiated or depledged and that there is no longer an academic requirement to initiate but ONLY the academic requirement to retain thier membership.

But my issue and one that my chapter shares is that how can you have an academic requirement to RETAIN MEMBERSHIP but not to OBTAIN MEMBERSHIP? It's a logic problem here: as we see it initation is the doorway to membership, so to be elligible for initation you should be able to demonstrate elligibility for membership, right?. If you have an academic requirement for membership then you should have an academic requirement to initiate thus achieving that membership.

In addition I have looked at our International Constitution and Bylaws every which way where this change was made. I have not found one sentence that indicates that a chapter cannot have an academic standard/requirement for initation, or cannot offer to men who do not meet that standard after one eight week period, the opportunity to utilize the second eight weeks of that semester to meet it and then initate. In fact, in just a few sections up from that it says that "superior scholarship" is a requirement. So I feel that we are reflecting that clause by having an academic standard to initiate. Here's the section in question:

Article IV
Section 2. Qualifications For Initiation. In order to be eligible for initiation:
(a) The candidate shall have achieved in the semester immediately preceding the semester of initiation an average of not less than 2.25 on a 4.0 scale in the college or university at which the initiating chapter is located. The chapter’s Director of
Academic Affairs, upon recommendation by the Chapter Advisor and the Faculty Academic Advisor, has the power to waive such rule based on the curriculum and unique characteristics of said institution. In the absence of a Chapter Advisor and/or the Faculty Academic Advisor, the matter shall be referred to the Director of Academic Affairs of the Arch Chapter.

(b) In the event a candidate is otherwise eligible for initiation during the first semester in which he is enrolled in the college or university at which the initiating chapter is located, such that the requirements of Section 2(a) cannot be met, the chapter’s Director of Academic Affairs, upon approval by the Chapter Advisor and the Faculty Academic Advisor, may certify following investigation of the candidate’s academic background that he meets the scholastic standards for membership.

(c) The candidate shall have completed a period of pledgeship in which he has successfully demonstrated acquisition of a sound and thorough knowledge of the Mission and Values of Delta Tau Delta Fraternity and of the ideals and principles upon
which it and college fraternities were founded. The length of this pledge period shall not be longer than eight (8) academic weeks in duration and shall be in full compliance with any requirements for initiation of the institution in which he is enrolled... (the rest is about applying for an extension that allows full semester pledge periods, which we don't want to do...we still want to work with 8 wks but allow those who don't look like they are making the grades after the 1st eight to try the 2nd eight)

I asked the Exec VP to point to the sentence in the Constitution and Bylaws that we were violating by having and academic standard for initation and by offering the guys a second eight week chance to meet it and he couldn't.

Sorry I didn't re-read the thread before asking but... I'm assuming you're talking about initiating first semester freshmen? Although I'm sure your reply will express the dramatic difference between high school and college grades, you could always have a minimum high school GPA as a requirement for pledgeship. This is what sororities do. Just being honest, though... it doesn't always work out for us, but it's better than nothing.

Yes, I'm just talking about 1st semester freshmen. We do utilize academic indexing of rushees during recruitment. It's always an unspoken rule of thumb though go after the guys with good grades, good involvement, good personalities. We don't have a set in stone requirement for rush b/c some guys who may have not tried so hard in H.S. can come to college and do extremely well (case in point...me). But the Greek system also has a minimum HS GPA to even rush, so those safeguards are built into the system.

Your chapter may really benefit by getting away from "Rush" and start year round recruiting. This way you could set in stone a GPA out of high school, but for those quality guys that do not meet the minimum GPA out of high school you could make sure someone keeps in contact with them and and help them academically. if they are really interested in your organization assign them study hours. Your chapter could help those guys and have a potential member for the following semester. If you wanted to go a different route set a minimum GPA at say 3.0 out of high school, but if they were involved in 2 sports and 2 clubs the requirment could be lowered to a 2.5, etc.

I don't think the school would let them get away with that, nor do I think they should - it's discriminatory. True, your membership selection process should take into account whether someone's in extracurriculars but I don't think you should lower the minimum GPA for them. It kind of flies in the face of everything we say about Greek membership teaching time management. "I only have a 1.5, but it's OK because I'm in 10 clubs!" You shouldn't encourage people to do one thing less well just because they are doing other things.

Especially if you are looking at HS extracurriculars - some of them are just total BS things that meet maybe once a year and take no time but look good on a transcript.

Sorry, let me clarify. The requirement of a 3.0 would be your individual chapter's GPA requirement and would be well above the minimum GPA required by the school. Then if you felt there was a man that encompassed the values of the fraternity, but didn't have the chapter's minimum GPA and was still above the school's required GPA, you could except him.

For example, my chapter requires a 3.0 GPA from high school, while the university only requires a 2.3 or 2.4 GPA from high school. If a potential recruit encompassed our values and a proven leader, but was unable to obtain a 3.0 high school GPA we have a the ability to lower the requirement to a minimum 2.75 GPA. Then I have faith in our pledge program and the chapter to teach him time management and the importance of scholoarship.

In my opinion the greek system should be in the business of taking good men or women and making them great men and women. As the case would be for UNLDelt that didn't do so hot in high school, but has exceled in college.

Actually my chapter was starting to move towards year round recruitment before the eight week limit was instituted. We saw the eight week program as an advantage for our transition in that we could have two pledge periods a semester, thus letting us bring in more guys mid term when the 2nd eight week period can start and not have the issue of them jumping into the middle of a pledge class that his half way through their lessons and activities. So we wanted to work with the eight weeks but still retain a kind of "collegiate" GPA requirement to initiate rather than just cop out and apply for an extension of the pledge program. Besides, we have a feeling that the extension allowance will not last forever and eventually we would have to make the change so why not start working out the kinks now rather than later. Unfortunatly the task of changing our chapter's recruitment stratagy to year round in a fraternity recruitment system that has always been summer focused has been a very difficult task, especially when we are a large house that needs pledge classes of an average of 25 to keep going, and are part of a large greeksystem. We are making steps, but we will still get a huge majority of our recruits during summer and a few here or there during the school year. (this semester I think we have pledged 3 new men, but that's compaired to the 24 we pledged this summer. And that's more guys signed during the semester than any other chapter on campus, with the exception of the chapter that does not have a house, they almost act as a club though, no disrespect, but they operate differently than the other fraternities on our campus).

We put the emphasis on guaging the 'collegiate' academic standard due to the fact that just as a man can have a 2.75 out of HS but be an honor student in college...you can have an honor student out of HS who finds out that college isn't really for him when he pulls a 0.5 (happend to a young man who pledged my chapter a few years ago, we tried all we could and more with the academic program and helping him on a one on one level, he just had a difficult time with college as some young men and women do). So the fact that we would like to wait and see if they can successfully make the academic, and social adjustment to college during the pledge period (of course with all of our assistance they would want/need) before we bring them in is NOT a bad thing. We are just trying to maintain the higher standards that we claim as a fraternity.
My chapter's philosophy was that the pledge period is the time of adjustment. Where the chapter can see if the pledge can meet the expectations they would for him as a brother, and for the pledge to see if the chapter can meet his expectations he would have for them as a brotherhood. And yes, sometimes those decisions can be made and those expectations met on both sides after eight weeks, but not for everyone and not for every situation. But what's wrong with giving it more time on both sides to be more certain? I say nothing is wrong with that. Forcing things can lead to hast, which can lead to bad decisions that effect men who may not be ready for membership and in turn effect the fraternity. But taking time to be sure that each side can offer what the other expects before the lifelong commitment is made, well that can, and I believe will, lead to better brothers and a better fraternity.

for a year round recruitment, you don't necessarily have to do anything different or more than you are now. here are a couple of suggestions:

* start making a list of guys who are not affiliated and who could make a good member. maybe have each brother give at least 2 names and their contact info.

* during a regularly scheduled event (brotherhood, philanthropy, etc), invite a certain percentage of those guys on the list. don't make it a special recruitment thing. just invite them and say something like "hey man, my chapter is having this fun brotherhood event (describe), why don't you come with me?"

this gives the chapter a chance to meet them without being in a formal recruitment type setting and the guy gets to meet the brothers without feeling like he is being fed info to get him to join. after all/most of the guys get a chance to meet him and talk to him and they think he has potential, have someone close talk to him about the possibility of joining. doesn't have to be a bid offer. it could be an invitation to being the recruitment process during the next round.

if he's interested, you get him. if he's not, no big deal. this is a good way to get members who may have thought fraternity was not for him or is just a little unsure of it all. if he sees how your guys are during "normal" (aka non-rush) time, he may see the benefits and realize it's for him.

I might be missing something here but if the biggest issue are grades and...If you really want to do a class right at the beginning of fall semester ONLY take men who have a college GPA behind them, ie sophomores, jrs, transfers, etc.

Do rush events for the first 5 weeks or so of the fall semester. Bid first year's no earlier than the 6th week of school, that would put their initiation the in the first week of 2nd semester. If people are regional you can work with them either at meeting over winter break or via online forums to keep them involved and thinking about the fraternity (highly key in my opinion as we had poor retention over long breaks). They would initiate their first week back from winter break so you would have their grades. I don't know if this is in IFC rules or whatever, I don't know them, but it was how we worked with our no initiating first-semester first-years rule. If you feel like you need more 'class time' with them, make the last few weeks of rush invite only. Again I'm not familiar with IFC rules, but it would keep you with your national rules, get you the grade info etc.

While most of these suggestions are good, they may not be applicable with respect to how fraternity rush currently works at UNLDelt's college - The University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

My understanding is that most (all?) chapters that have houses recruit *incoming freshman* starting as far back as March (when the men are high school seniors) with open houses. (Usually during state playoffs, campus visits, etc.) Incoming (accepted to UNL) male freshman who are interested in the UNL Greek System may fill out a general application to the University declaring their interest in the UNL Greek System. This list is provided to each chapter.

Over the summer each chapter may then contact any of these (and other) *incoming freshman* and invite them to their specific rush events. (Open rush events are held as well.) Most bids are given out to and accepted by *incoming freshman* over the summer. The *incoming freshman* that accept, become pledges of the chapter. And instead of moving into a dorm, they move *directly* into the fraternity house from day one.

So there is a need by the chapters to get their pledge class *before* the school year starts. Otherwise, they are left with open spaces (beds/rooms) in their house and the cost goes up etc. And this is why retaining members is important as well. If they don't make their grades and drop out of the fraternity, then there is yet another bed open.

Frankly, for UNLDelt's chapter (all chapters at Nebraska) to be competitive, they will need to continue early/summer rush. At least until most (every?) chapter at UNL changes how they conduct rush.

Yes,
Thank you TSteven. While those ideas are great for some schools...it's just not applicable to the University of Nebraska's Greek System or my chapter.
My chapter does do some of the things Little E and gpb1874 mentioned (i.e.-maintain lists of guys friends and hold regular recruitment events through the year so as to pick up the interest of those guys and others) but, we cannot move to do our entire recruitment that way due to the fact the over 90% of those who rush are incoming freshmen that apply for SUMMER recruitment. Year round rec. is just not established on my campus. As I said before...we do get two or three guys mid-semester, on average.
The focus on freshmen is also the reason that we cannot afford to only recruit only guys with collegiate academic backgrounds already like sophs. or transfers. We average maybe 1-2 upperclassmen pledges each year...that's out of an average class size of 25 (my pledge class had 36 guys in it...only 4 of which were upperclassmen, the rest of us were freshmen).

I'm all for year round recruitment...actually I think having the mix of a solid summer recruitment program and still being open to and working on a year round strategy is great. Best of both worlds. But back to the major issue we had was...

Is there anything wrong with having an academic standard to initiate, and offering those who do not appear to meet that standard (or perhaps another initiation standard that our national office allows, such as a test on the history and ideals) after one eight week program another eight weeks (essentally the rest of the semester) to achieve? We recognize that it may take some men a little longer to become adjusted, but we don't want to cut them for that reason...nor do we want to lower the chapter's standards by taking them in before they are ready to assume and reflect the responsibilities of membership, which is essentially what the pledge period is intended to teach and allow them to demonstrate.

Just wanted to thank everyone for their input on this so far...good to have GC as a resource to bounce ideas and questions back and fourth!

My problem with the year round recruitment, 2 classes semester is that it makes chapters focus on numbers. The chapter goes from rush to pledging...to rush to pledging....to rush etc with no time to just enjoy being in a fraternity.

If it was possible at my school, I'd rather only have one rush a year. Numbers are never a bases on which to judge a good chapter, although many people seem to think it is. Additionally, just taking guys to fill numbers is going to screw you in the end. You will end up taking guys that otherwise shouldn't have gotten a bid and in the end that will bite you in the ass.

I agree that focusing on numbers alone is negative. But if your chapter finds great individuals, who would rather join sooner than wait a whole semester before the next chance...then only having eight weeks at the most before they can officialy pledge and begin their program is a positive thing. Sure with a summer recruitment focus it won't be utilized as much...but I see our greek system turning towards a more year round recruitmen focus, and if we have this eight week program up and running (**while maintaining the academic standards my chapter would like too**) as the transition moves along then we will just be better prepaired to accomodate the changes.

There are good benifits to a single main rush period a year. But as with everything there are also drawbacks. Fraternity Recruitment bugets at my school are very large (average 12-13 thousand a year) b/c each chapter is responsible for planning and holding their own events over the summer (there are a handful of organized event put on by Greek affairs) and the chapter must cover all travel expenses as it is summer time and you likely have to go To the rushees in their hometowns b/c they are not readily availible on campus as they are during the school year. So its a costly practice, but for larger schools and chapters it can work.

LXA used to have a Semester/Trimester Requirement.

They now suggest an 8 Week Association. I never agreed with that personally, but I am just an Alum.

The idea with 8 weeks was to get the Mid-Term Pass or not Grades. If for some reason a New Associate did not have Grades, he was carried over but for one Semester only.

My main Problem with The Short Periods, is how does a New PNA Learn about The Fraternity and The Local History and The Members depending on How Large a Chapter is?

If they do not have to learn anything, then We just become Clubs!:rolleyes:

I totally agree.

In a chapter of 70-80 members that takes 25-30 pledges...there is no way in hell a meaningful bond is built in 8 weeks. You will have a max of 8 weekly meetings, avg. 2 parties a week, with a few date parties thrown in....and that's about it. Then you are in and that's it.

8 weeks is total crap.

Can you apply to your HQ for permission to act outside those rules? If not, find out what the procedure is to change a rule like that. With my organization, the undergrad chapters still retain a final say on any new rules by way of a vote at our national convention.

There is a way to petition for an extension of the pledge period, but we felt that trying to incorporate it early would be better as we work towards more year round recruitment and also b/c we felt that the extensions would not be granted forever and eventually we would have to adapt, so why not just find a way sooner than later.
Delt has the same final say at our Karnea (our convention, which is our legislative body of the fraternity) so there was a final vote from every chapter. It was very close, but passed. It was strongly pushed by the smaller chapters, from smaller schools with smaller greek systems (small is not bad, just different than my particular chapter). Which I can see how it would help them bring in members and be benificial to them...but they wouldn't have the same issues as a large chapter such as mine (average 80 men) competing in larger greek systems (21 IFC and 7 NPHC fraternities). So the slight minority of larger chapters like mine are having troubles incorporating this while still trying to stay competitive on our campuses (again, they don't want us to hold an academic requirement for initation-we would be one of the ONLY chapters on campus to not have that standard)

I agree that there is never enough time to get to know your sisters/brothers. But 8 week is enough time for the new member to get close to at least a couple of the actives. Sisterhood and Brotherhood are a lifelong thing. There is never enough to build a bond with every single member in just a couple of week but there is always the time after to build a stronger bond.

My new member period was 5 weeks and I didn't have a bond with all my sisters but after I was initiated and started hanging around the house more I built a bond with all of them. The new member/pledging period is not the only time to build a bond.

I agree, but it's also more than just the bond that we are looking for in the pledge period. The specific issue for us is when our central office says that we can no longer have an academic requirement that men need to demonstrate BEFORE we initiate them. They expect us to hold the initiated men to an academic standard in order to retain their membership and privilages (as we do) but not the men seeking initiation?

Pledging
 

Pledging should not be looked at as a bad thing. I consider pledging as some of the greatest times in my life. Yes i got messed with and it was hard. I went through shit i wish upon no one. But I learned alot about myself and I became very close to my pledge brothers. The longer the process, the longer you have to see what the person is like. We have had kids come through and put a mask on then get initiated and just be worthless. A full semster of pledging and then Hell week should come after the semester break, be it xmas or summer break. That is how it should be. A real fraternity wouldnt limit itself to how long it can be.

Update on Issue
 

I would like to present an update on this issue since it first arose and I first posted on GC looking for some input.

Our National Organization has looked at the situation with our implementation of the 8 week pledge program and allowing hold over pledges and academic requirements for initiation being imposed at an early stage in the semester (8 weeks), a good deal of time before final grades are released.

Communication between my chapter and headquarters, as well as a few other chapters I'm sure, has proven successful and a solution has been reached. I'm proud to say that my chapter, Beta Tau's system of implementing the 8 week pledge program with allowance for holdovers for legitimate reasons and our method to retain our academic standards through grade reports was agreed on as an appropriate way to implement the changes and was actually recognized during training and leadership sessions at our Division Conference as being a great template for a great program.

It just goes to show that when everyone from top down, bottom up, alums and undergrads, are working towards a common cause and to improve the organization then real solutions can be reached. I'm proud of my chapter for thinking outside of the box in looking for solutions. And even though at first it looked as if their ingenuity would actually cost them accreditation...in the end, it turned out to be just the solution everyone was looking for.

Thanks for all of your input!

Good job. It sounds like you have a full chapter of leaders down there at Beta Tau.

This thread made me think of something..

I've heard... albeit probably rumors... that some organizations engage in "underground" pledging, where the school is unaware of any pledging activity.

has anyone else heard or seen this?

This subject was discussed on another thread, but I'll give you the brief version.
There are four situations that might be defined as "underground" pledging:
1. Having a GLO at a campus where membership in a GLO is grounds for expulsion. Amherst is a good example. Any pledging activities are conducted off campus

2.Having a GLO at a campus where GLO are not "recognized" but are tolerated. Brandeis and Yale are good examples of this situation.

3. Having an organization that is recognized, but due to school regulations (no frosh rush etc) or probation, that group should not have a pledge class or the pledge class includes ineligible people.

4. The group has lost school recognition but has retained (inter) national recognition

5. The organization has lost both school and GLO recognition, but continues to operate. This is actually fairly common. Often a guy thinks they've joined "Alpha Alpha Alpha" to find out five years later that AAA HQ never heard of them.

I Wish
 

Man just when you think your life is all in an uproar listen to this. You have 8 weeks to get what ever it is done for your pledges to cross over, at my alma mater was only have 2 weeks to pledge and to cross them over. LOL, Now thats crazy. So think about how much of an opportunity you have to other greeks out there. but i do understand that your upset i feel u but hey think about my 2weeks.LOL

please tell how to join grad chapter

to vnssmiddleton:

Even though your post will probably get deleted again,

read this http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/announcement.php?f=47

and this http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...ad.php?t=87637