Prohibiting 1st Semester Freshmen From Pledging
 

Saturday night I was at anniversary party for an old employer of mine. I was talking to her son and two of her grandsons. The son said that he was taking his younger son back to college -- a small private liberal arts college -- early tomorrow so the young man could attend a series of fraternity open houses on campus.

I said wasn't it awfully late in the semester for rush parties. The young man explained that they weren't really rush events. He said that his college forbade first semester freshmen from pledging Greek letter organizations. He said formal rush will be held once the second semester starts.

He added the open houses were informal. He said that after nearly finishing his first semester at college, he knows which two fraternities he will be concentrating his attempts to receive a bid for membership. He said he already eliminated the rest of the other fraternities (one attracted athletes, another party animals, yet another Young Republican types). He said that he knew a number of members in the two fraternities that he is interested in, meeting the members in his classes.

His older brother chimed in that forbidding first semester freshmen from pledging might not be such a bad idea. He said he pledged as a first semester sophomore at a large public university. The older brother said that the first semester of college can be traumatic. He said he had a year to assess the various fraternities on campus, learn their reputations and was able to figure out which Greek letter organization would be the best fit for him. He added that a number of men who had pledged as freshmen "burned out" as members, going inactive before graduation. He said too often these men made poor choices in choosing their fraternity memberships, accelerated because there were numerous fraternities and too little time for make a proper assessment as a college freshman.

A former co-worker overheard this conversation. She belonged to a sorority at a large southern university known for its fraternity/sorority system. She agreed that many members "burned out" as actives, but she doubted the postponing rush would work on a campus in which almost 1,000 women participate in rush.

Two questions. The first part ... do many colleges forbid first semester freshmen from pledging. I know a few private colleges do, but I am not sure about public schools.

Secondly, I would like the GC participants weigh in the topic -- pledging as a first semester freshman as opposed to waiting for the second semester or later.

Any input would be appreciated. I want to thank you all in advance

Personally, I'm of the opinion that there's nothing to be gained by having students wait - as far as the GLO's are concerned...and I'm not even sure that freshmen are really gaining a whole lot either.

Why?

1) I don't have any data for this but I'm willing to bet that for all the kids who have no idea about Greek Life when they get to campus and then choose to rush, there are at least equal numbers who feel that "school is too much" and they "don't have the time" to devote to being a pledge.

2) A good pledge program should provide help in the transition to college. I ended up with better study habits due to being in my fraternity as a first semester frosh. I'm not naive enough to believe that's the case everywhere, but if the fraternities were smart, they'd be heading that direction and selling that view point. Having older members around should cut down the learning curve for a great many typical students - whether it's how to register for classes to where a certain building is, mentoring is huge.

3) Reputations become a much bigger part of the game. Froshes now have 4-5 months to hear about how XYZ is all the jocks, and ABC is the nerds. While some may actually get a better sense of how each house is, I again feel that at least an equal number, if not more, let the rumors impact their decision. This hurts everyone involved, as it's never a positive to see a kid end up in a house that's not really right for him.

4) For all the concern about 'dirty rushing' that crops up in certain places, this system doesn't seem like a good idea for avoiding that.

5) The NIC in the past has often argued the Constitutional issue of a Public University (ie state-funded) infringing on freedom of assembly. It's an interesting question and one of those things that might actually have some teeth.

6) 1st semester freshman year is a unique time where you can meet so many people, because everyone is new...I can't imagine how many fewer people I would have met had I not been in my chapter.

He has a point, but the first semester of college for anyone could be beneficial because you get to meet a whole of people.

I completely agree with prohibiting first semester freshmen from pledging. Here's why:

1. Joining other campus orgs (yearbook staff, football team etc) is not a lifetime commitment. Greek life should be. Will it really kill you to wait a semester if you're going to be a brother/sister your whole life?

2. Shortened pledge programs have been mandated by many universities and national GLOs. Often times people are initiated before they have their first semester's grades (and subsequently flunk out or leave the school) or know whether that college is truly the right fit for them. I know a lot of the propaganda says "going Greek your first semester helps you fit in at a big campus", but the fact is, going Greek won't prevent you from being in classes taught by TAs instead of real professors, or hating that the whole school culture revolves around football. You can't "hide" in your GLO. It's part of the campus, and you can't know what the campus is truly like until you actually live there and go to class there.

And once you're initiated - you're stuck (females anyway). Unless you transfer to another school with your sorority you can never join another one, and even if there is a chapter of your sorority there, they might be completely the opposite of the chapter you joined and you want nothing to do w/ them or vice versa.

3. Rushees know the stereotypes going in. I take this as a PLUS. Formal rush can be really phony and superficial, so if that's the only time you've had any contact w/ these people, it can be hard to make a decision - especially if you don't know anyone else on campus. Plus a lot of times, chapters are rushing in a way that isn't really "them" (especially if they're getting national help). We had deferred and never had anyone say after joining "I'm so disappointed, I thought you guys were the sorority that had all the homecoming queens" or something like that. I'd rather have a girl who's heard all the stereotypes, positive AND negative, and goes where she wants, not necessarily to where she would have thought was great her first week on campus.

4. "Dirty rushing" happens at every campus, no matter WHEN rush is. Some of the pre-freshman year schools supposedly have their whole class picked out from recs and resumes before the school year even starts. If that isn't "dirty" I don't know what is.

5. Less chance of burnout. If all you've ever known is your GLO, after 4 years I can't see how it WOULDN'T be on your nerves. If burnout isn't a problem, why are so many national groups implementing special programs to keep the seniors involved?

The NPHC groups do not allow first semester freshmen to pledge - and they seem to have much less of a problem instilling the fact that membership is a lifetime commitment. I'm not saying there aren't NPHC members that leave their GLO behind the minute they graduate, but for the most part, you hear from the 40 year olds "I am an AKA" not "I was an AKA."

And to the OP's question, it's not just private schools that do this.

Correct, it's referred to as deferred recruitment and it's more common than the OP thinks.

I don't think that first semester freshmen and first semester transfer students should not be allowed to formally pursue organizations.

I know some who did because there were no university or chapter restrictions against it. These people often don't know much about college life, that particular campus, and Greekdom enough to pursue an organization.

I agree with a lot of 33girl's points.

I thought I'd throw this out there, though, as we're all weighing pros and cons: One drawback of later pledging is that you lose the benefit of having those long-term seniors who are very comfortable with the organization and with leadership within it. Those seniors that have been with the org since they came to college are often some of the chapter's best assets because (at least in smaller chapters) they have held a couple of lesser-important offices before taking on the big ones (Prez, Recruitment, Standards, etc.)

I had to read this a few times before I understood what you were saying.

I think it can go both ways, though - you can have seniors who have "tunnel vision" to the point that all they've ever known is XYZ and XYZ is wonderful and never ever needs to change.

If there are no chapter or university-established restrictions, people can pledge an NPHC org as a first semester freshman. They have to have the necessary credit hours and GPA for the Fall line. Some of us had that as first and second semester freshmen but thank God we had to wait.

Pursuing membership as a first semester freshman doesn't happen too often but 2nd semester freshmen initiates are common, particularly for certain organizations with different credit hour requirements.

I am against any school administration limiting the right of association. Do these universities allow 1st semester freshmen to join the ski club? the Baptist Student Union?

Do you find your sorority to be comparable to "sign-up type" organizations like the ski club and BSU?

That may be an issue.

In this discussion I do!

I'll edit for clarity...

Do you mean if they tested out of courses and got the credits, took college courses while still in high school and got the credits, things like that?

That same thing can happen w/ NPC deferred rush too.

:)

Some universities restrict the type and number of organizations freshmen join, period. They want freshmen to focus on getting acclimated and academics.

Beyond that, I don't want freshmen pursuing NPHC organizations as freshmen just because they can also go to the organizational fair and sign up for a bunch of clubs.

Come to us when you can understand and respect why NPHC organizations aren't like the ski club or the InterFaith Coalition. And are qualified to pursue membership.

Yes. Also, many universities offer summer courses to incoming freshman so they are able to have a college GPA and at least 12 credits before the Fall. I was in such a program.

My point is that the NPHC as a whole does not forbid first semester freshmen.

Is it? Chalk it up to regional differences, but almost every greek i know who came in on the UG level were sophomore/junior level. Im sure hypothetically it happens, but is it "common?"

touche. i too am against first-semester froshies pursuing membership, and that's both NPHC and NPC. i know it's the norm for the latter, but i really do think that freshmen need some time to get acclimated to college life, as it is a HUGE milestone and life-changing event. and while i'm sure most of us would like new members to associate that milestone with XYZ, i think that coming-of-age stage should happen independent of a GLO affiliation.

case and point, one of my LS's (ok, im letting go of all PC here) came in as a freshman - had very little knowledge/exposure to greek life and well, she was 18 vs. 20-21 like the rest of us. believe it or not, a lot of maturation can happen in those short 2 years. and in the present-day, you can definitely see the difference in her connection to our chapter and to the organization than the rest of us. love her to pieces, but should she have waited? i think so. no, i know so. even a semester longer couldve made a difference.

then again, i see why NPCers would be/are totally for first-semester initiation, because (what i gather from GC), formal initiations are done once an (academic) year, and there tends to not be a chance for a second-semester freshman to join.

Yes.

Most undergraduate NPHCers came in as sophomores or juniors. This is because of the GPA and credit hour requirement restrictions for NPHC organizations, as a whole.

For organizations (or chapters) with lower credit hour requirements, they often get 2nd semester freshmen.

NPC has historically always been in favor of early 1st semester freshmen rush/recruitment.

I totally respect the fact that NPHC has a different opinion and it certainly works for them.

NPC groups can expect to see drastic decreases in numbers if a complete change was made to deferred recruitment.

Deja vu.... Anybody else feel it??

In numbers of women signing bids/pledging, maybe. But what's the point in crowing about statistics like "our chapter has made quota for the past 90 years" if you can't retain more than half of those women throughout their collegiate career or as active alumnae?

I'd rather have 30 women pledge who will truly make a lifetime commitment, than have 70 women pledge and have half of them be gone by their senior year.

I'm obviously not saying that ALL women do that - but when I read things on here like "at my school, you're made fun of if you're a senior and still active" it usually is from the chapters that have first semester rush with huge pledge classes.

Are there initiatives to get some consensus across NPC sororities regarding the "lifetime commitment" aspect? Or would that always vary by the sorority or even chapter?

It seems that many of you always acknowledged it as a lifetime commitment whereas many did not and even scoffed at the idea.

Well, I think the alums on GC are as a rule the ones more likely to say "I am an ASA" not "I WAS an ASA."

I'm sure every NPC group would like to have the amount of alumnae participation and devotion that the NPHC groups have, but I think it would take more than just impressing upon the collegians that membership is for life...we need to offer programs that are relevant and real INCENTIVES to stay active as an alumna. Or it might mean a complete overhaul of the way we recruit members. I don't know, if I knew the answer I guess I'd have a palmino pony and a million dollars. :)

oh yeah. big time.

the million dollars is doable, but where are we getting a palmino pony? lol

Thats stupid, another example of a university interfering in greek life. Traditionally pledges are supposed to be freshman in their first semester, this causes them to bond more with their pledge class IMO.

I agree that having more time to spend with your pledge class is important and that being a first semester pledge will help with that but it's a big transition that many freshmen need time to adjust. I wish my girls had been required to wait at least a quarter before pledging. It would really help with retention as well.

I guess if you have a problem with numbers than it would definitely help to have a shorter pledge semester. My chapter usually starts with 50 and ends with 30-35 and it keeps our numbers perfectly in check so this would make us change our bid process a lot.

Well, I don't think we have a problem with numbers. This was our first year with recruitment and so far, none of our girls have depledged (as far as I know and I'm the pledge mom). But, I think that many of the freshman have had issues with juggling school, commitments and sorority life. It would help with them being more comfortable in staying, realizing how much of a commitment they can handle and school life in general. Even having recruitment deferred by a quarter would help because they would have a better grasp of college.

All of this I think is good for my school. We're not like SEC schools or state schools, and I know they're systems are infinitely different from ours.

I posted this in another thread regarding fraternity rush, but it applies here as well.

Having year round recruitment (Summer, Fall and Spring/Winter) has always been an effective and successful way to recruit. Summer Rush gets you the local pledges and the men already known to the chapter. Fall Rush picked up out-of-state guys, guys from summer rush who needed more time to make an informed decision, guys who - for what ever reason - did not attend summer rush events, and returning students now interested in fraternities. Spring Rush (winter rush) picks up the guys who want a semester of school under their belt, guys who could not devote time to rush (pledge) during the summer or the fall (for example - athletes, band), guys who didn't really have a clue about Greek life on campus before they arrived, and friends and class mates of current members.

Bottom line is that a year round recruitment system supports not only incoming freshmen, but also upperclassmen with rushing. No "one time to receive a bid or else" factor. Year round recruitment allows the rushee to pledge when - and how - he feels most comfortable doing so. It can even the playing field by allowing chapters to use their strengths when - and how - they rush. For example, a chapter might not have a house on campus, but can compete during summer rush. Or a chapter doesn't do well during formal rush on campus but does well one-on-one either during the more relaxed summer rush or recruiting one-on-one during the school year (and then pledging during the spring). Or a chapter may do it's best recruiting during the more formal structure of fall rush.

Restricting how and when fraternities rush is... restrictive. And not good for the fraternity system as a whole. Which is why the NIC (IFC) advocates no restriction and year round recruitment.

I would add that the NIC/IFC year round recruitment model could apply to NPC recruitment as well. That is if the NPC would allow it and the chapters weren't lazy.

Short version would be to allow chapters to hold open houses during the summer so that potential new freshmen members could learn a little about each chapter. No dirty rushing cause this would be done similar to those schools that have rush in the Spring and hold open houses during the fall - like Centre, Indiana and Vanderbilt. Come fall, those freshmen PNMs who want to rush could do so then. It could be the more formal and structured recruitment if that is what the campus wants. Then come Spring/Winter, there would be a more informal recruitment - similar to COB/COR. But to keep in the *spirit* of NPCism, you could still have PNMs sign up and have a quota set. And Panhellenic could still require a year long wait for the next recruitment if someone accepted their bid but did not initiate. This would keep a freshman from changing her mind and then trying to rush the following semester. It would still be from the time of acceptance of the bid thus no change in NPC rules. If a school wanted to have their formal structured recruitment in the Spring/Winter, then they would just reverse the previous and do so. Thus if the freshman PNM feels she is ready to join in the fall, she could attempt to do so. Since it is a mutual selection, she would know that she may not receive a bid depending on each chapter's and or organization's policy regarding class standing etc.

And this works well for the freshman PNM since she would be able to rush when she is ready and comfortable doing so. And the "one time to receive a bid or else" factor should be greatly decreased.

As for NPHC or any other organization (NPC and NIC/IFC included) that might require a PNM to have a certain number of college credits prior to receiving a bid, that wouldn't change. The individual organization's rules should always trump the councils and/or the campus.

We're not lazy...we're smart!
 

Lazy? Excuse me?

The formal rush model is the most efficient way to add new members.

1. Promote the event
2. Have large #s of interested individuals line up outside your door in alphabetical order with nametags
3. Actives give 100%, for membership selection is the main focus for a set amount of time
4. Welcome a quality pledge class
5. Conduct a thorough new membership education with the entire group

And yes, I know there are some campuses where this doesn't work and NPC groups must recruit all year, but I do believe the formal rush model is the most efficient.

But not necessarily the most efficient way to retain those members throughout college and assure that they stay active and participating as alumnae.

A lot of the reason NPC chapters rebel against year round or even twice a year recruitment is the misconception that any member recruitment MUST equal skits, matching outfits, and elaborately planned parties. I agree that once a year for those activities is enough. It isn't, however, the only way to rush and recruit members. If NPC groups truly would learn to RECRUIT and foster that philosophy instead of just changing the terminology, maybe we wouldn't have droves of women dropping out of their chapters in their junior/senior year or earlier.

I respectfully disagree with you and can think of 300,000 examples why.

But some chapters have no issue with retaining members.

I knew that would get a response. ;)

The topic of this thread is Prohibiting 1st Semester Freshmen From Pledging. I personally do not agree with forcing a freshman to wait. I also feel that the "one shot at a bid" model - which is often perpetuated by a single formal/structured rush - is often true depending on the campus. Regardless if recruitment is deferred. Indiana and Ole Miss come to mind here. As such, my suggestion is that recruitment should be year round.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the formal rush model isn't the most efficient way to add new members overall. However, my suggestion is that instead of waiting a full year to have the next rush, the Campus Panhellenic Council could have a less formal/structured rush the other semester. Not COB/COR to bring a chapter up to quota or total, but a secondary panhellenic-wide rush (for lack of a better phrase). Women would still sign up for recruitment and a quota could be set.

I have heard excuses from some NPC members saying it would be "too much work" to rush twice a year. And it would if the CPC was to duplicate the formal/structured type of recruitment. However, the concept I envision is that the *secondary recruitment* should not be hectic or time consuming for either the chapters and the PNMs. As I understand it, the NPC has provided four different recruitment models that each campus should select from as best fits the specific campus. Why not have a more formal type of recruitment one semester and a less formal the other semester? This would allow more quality women to join sooner. And it would be especially beneficial to those campuses where most, if not all, of the chapters make - or are near - quota (i.e. Kansas State, Indiana, Nebraska, Ole Miss) each year.

Those are the 300,000 that it DID work for, but it doesn't take into account those who could have been had with another system.

Recruitment should be year round, because that would give anyone the chance to go through rush if they so desire.

When I said "retain" I meant that those alumnae were actually active in an alumnae chapter and/or as national volunteers, not just names on a membership list. I'm going to go edit my post to reflect that.

Indeed, and at my school the issue wasn't with retaining members, but students. The school was fairly demanding and $$$$$. A lot of people transfered to state universities or dropped out due to scholarships/loans not coming through.

That said, this is WHY there are multiple forms of recruitment and COB/CR.

My school, a small one, has two "panhellenic-wide" recruitments: deferred formal in the spring & informal in the fall. They are completely identical to each other except in areas where formal requires a little more. Formal has PX's be unaffiliated for the week, bid matching and a silence period, whereas informal does not. Otherwise, it's the same schedule of events, same amount of decorations, same time and commitment for recruitment chairs, quota is set, etc. It works pretty well.

My alma mater does recruitment twice a year, which is both good and bad. We have formal in the spring and informal in the fall. A PNM must have 12 credits to join, but those 12 can be AP credits, so some first semester freshmen have the opportunity to join. It's good in that it gives a PNM 3-4 solid good chances to join, plus MAYBE first semester junior year. Students transfer, an emergency can happen during FR that would cause you to drop out (sickness, death in family), or God forbid, a PNM is simply not interested in Greek Life until they meet our brothers and sisters!

The downside is that there are a lot of PNMs who suicide during FR, resulting in a lower quota, which is the reason every chapter does informal in the fall. The PNMs know that every chapter will be participating in the fall, so there is no incentive to rank all 3 chapters if they only want one. If they rank all three and get matched to #2 or #3, they're stuck for a year. If they suicide and don't match, they only wait a semester. It's a chicken-egg scenario.

It would be nice to not have to have to spend the money (another argument for no-frills) recruiting new members when the money could be spent enjoying the new members, like with a sisterhood retreat.

Also, with every chapter recruiting during informal, it can hurt the smaller chapters. At most schools, only the chapters under total recruit during informal, allowing the smaller chapters a chance to "catch up" without having to compete with the most popular chapters. To add insult to injury, PNMs only go to the chapters they wish to visit, so if a PNM only visits the three most popular chapters (because she has her heart set on them), the smaller chapters do not get a chance to recruit her. However, an upside is that all chapters participating in informal removes the stigma of smaller chapters "having" to recruit during informal.

Despite the disadvantages, it works out because most chapters are at or pretty darn close to total after informal, and 11 of 14 chapters made quota last year (the three that missed it were within 5 and some CRed). We get the numbers that our Campus Panhellenic sets for us, yet we just do it in two halves.