After Several Years: What Do You Think of the New Release Figures?

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by Splash

The chapter will only be able to take quote either way. This applies to every group of girls who goes to every round. I am speaking about qualified PNM's who get cut due to high release figures that having been given another chance could have won the sorority over. You say they'll be cut anyway. If they're qualified, giving them an extra chance to win the sorority over could only help their chances.

The purpose of RFM is not to help PNMs' chances at top chapters. The purpose of RFM is to maximize Panhellenic membership. Panhellenic membership is maximized when ALL chapters are making quota or coming close. If "top" chapters DON'T make those heavy cuts after round 1, PNMs choose to cut the "bottom" chapters, and then there is a huge disparity in the available PNM pool for "top" and "bottom" chapters. Additionally, there will be more women bidless because chapters can only take quota (plus maybe a few QAs). So, small chapters not making quota plus lots of unmatched women, all so PNMs can "have another chance" at a "top" chapter.

Originally Posted by Barbie's_Rush

I just don't think RFM does that much for struggling chapters, at least at campuses where someone would rather not be Greek at all than wear the letters ABC. I can't even dream of how demoralizing it would be to not have a large portion of your new members show up for bid day and to watch your new member class progressively dwindle through the weeks leading up to initiation.

Kind of. Every campus has "top", "middle", and "bottom" chapters. I think it's more a matter of how awful a "bottom" chapter is perceived to be. It's not like all "bottom tier" chapters (even at competitive schools) are experiencing poor retention/not making quota. They might be in danger if it were not for RFM. I guess my point is that RFM alone won't save a chapter that has reached the point of no return, but it can help a chapter from getting there in the first place.

[carnation]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

The purpose of RFM is not to help PNMs' chances at top chapters. The purpose of RFM is to maximize Panhellenic membership. Panhellenic membership is maximized when ALL chapters are making quota or coming close. If "top" chapters DON'T make those heavy cuts after round 1, PNMs choose to cut the "bottom" chapters, and then there is a huge disparity in the available PNM pool for "top" and "bottom" chapters. Additionally, there will be more women bidless because chapters can only take quota (plus maybe a few QAs). So, small chapters not making quota plus lots of unmatched women, all so PNMs can "have another chance" at a "top" chapter.

Kind of. Every campus has "top", "middle", and "bottom" chapters. I think it's more a matter of how awful a "bottom" chapter is perceived to be. It's not like all "bottom tier" chapters (even at competitive schools) are experiencing poor retention/not making quota. They might be in danger if it were not for RFM. I guess my point is that RFM alone won't save a chapter that has reached the point of no return, but it can help a chapter from getting there in the first place.

Both paragraphs: very, very true. I would love to see some kind of research that explores the number of women getting bids now vs. the numbers in past years. I would expect the numbers took a dip before someone came up with quota plus but by this time, they should have gone up again.

For sure, this part of the country isn't seeing all the chapters dying that we used to or even the number of very tiny "bottom" tier chapters on their way out. I think that RFM is finally doing its job.

I can still understand the frustration of women who are heavily cut right off because they were cut after only 1 brief party (sometimes just 20 minutes) in which hardly anyone got to know them. I don't know what the answer is for that.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by carnation

I can still understand the frustration of women who are heavily cut right off because they were cut after only 1 brief party (sometimes just 20 minutes) in which hardly anyone got to know them. I don't know what the answer is for that.

Deferred rush without ridiculous restrictions - where women interested in sororities and women already in sororities get to know each other as humans, rather than as pursuer and pursued. That is the answer for that.

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Deferred rush without ridiculous restrictions - where women interested in sororities and women already in sororities get to know each other as humans, rather than as pursuer and pursued. That is the answer for that.

And Virginia Tech is an example of a large-scale recruitment (12 chapters, quota about 50) where that works!

A-freakin-men. After reading the infraction stories threads, it's ridiculous some of the rules there are. It really becomes a tattle-fest. Glitter or napkins as gifts? Stepping over a sidewalk line? Really? These thing are TOTALLY going to make PNMs want to join one chapter over another. Panhellenics need to evaluate what is truly problematic.

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Deferred rush without ridiculous restrictions - where women interested in sororities and women already in sororities get to know each other as humans, rather than as pursuer and pursued. That is the answer for that.

In a perfect world, that would happen. (Cue rainbows and unicorns.)

But what you get is a full semester of high-pressure, under-handed dirty rushing, lots of focus on certain girls and none on others. Lots of time spent on "Coke dates," lots of time wasted on non-productive "rushing." Chapters are delayed in getting a portion of their budget, and NMs have less time to bond with the chapter.

There's a reason early recruitment has survived thus far - it's the quickest and most efficient way to place new members.

Is it perfect? No. RFM is working great now, helping the smaller chapters build. Eventually, somebody will come up with something a little better.

I like the UGA model - a sort of formalized second recruitment that takes place in January. This enables chapters to fill spots for girls who resigned, dropped out, transferred or graduated in December (an increasing number of women do that now), and enables girls who were dropped or quit or couldn't rush for some reason in August, or just transferred in, or changed their minds, to join.

[carnation]

You know what I remember about Coke dates back when Arkansas had deferred recruitment? (You had to be a sophomore back then to rush)

Coke dates weren't mentioned in the recruitment brochure, I suppose you had to be "in the know". Some girls had loads of Coke dates all summer. When the rushees came back to campus in the fall, dozens of them discovered for the first time that Coke dates existed because other girls would be excitedly talking about the ones they'd had. This had a huge negative effect on morale...."Why did I even bother to show up?"

Add to that that Arkansas had bed rush anyway and you can see how some women were picturing those beds as already having been filled before they even showed up on campus. They probably were.

AnchorAlum and others, I know y'all are just picturing with me how dirty the rush would get if the SEC crowd went to deferred recruitment. I know that Ole Miss has it but I have no doubt that the beds are already "filled", so to speak, before the first class starts in August.

I'm sure that deferred rush works for other campuses but I guess that's a whole other thread.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

In a perfect world, that would happen. (Cue rainbows and unicorns.)

But what you get is a full semester of high-pressure, under-handed dirty rushing, lots of focus on certain girls and none on others. Lots of time spent on "Coke dates," lots of time wasted on non-productive "rushing." Chapters are delayed in getting a portion of their budget, and NMs have less time to bond with the chapter.

From what everyone says, everyone wants the same "top" girls. If a chapter is stupid enough to spend all their $$ on the same women everyone else is spending it on, that's their own fault. Maybe if this sort of thing had more concrete consequences (i.e. getting to rush and realizing OH CRAP WE NEED $$) sororities would step out of this silly mindset.

Why would NMs have less time to bond with the chapter? Most groups have a 6-8 week mandated national pledgeship, whether it occurs in spring or fall.

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

There's a reason early recruitment has survived thus far - it's the quickest and most efficient way to place new members.

Talk about a revealing quote! There's no mention here of retention or member satisfaction - just that this is the easiest way to stick people in holes. Quick fixes rarely work. The NPC gives lip service to "lifetime membership" but if they really meant it, they wouldn't be trying to just pledge people as quickly as possible.

If sororities were able to retain all their members until graduation, there wouldn't be such craziness of getting the best freshmen, upperclassmen being disadvantaged, etc etc etc. You could fill the bathtub and keep it filled without having to continually plug the leaks.

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by 33girl

If a chapter is stupid enough to spend all their $$ on the same women everyone else is spending it on, that's their own fault. Maybe if this sort of thing had more concrete consequences (i.e. getting to rush and realizing OH CRAP WE NEED $$) sororities would step out of this silly mindset..

Big chapters have plenty of money to spend. They don't spend it all on recruitment. A good bit of the bill for dirty rushing is footed by individual members and alumnae. You'll never see it in the recruitment budget that's submitted to Panhellenic.

Originally Posted by 33girl

Why would NMs have less time to bond with the chapter? Most groups have a 6-8 week mandated national pledgeship, whether it occurs in spring or fall.

The 6-8 week new member period is just a basic. It takes longer to really get to know people in the chapter, and for the chapter to get to know NMs. That's what we tell NMs all the time, isn't it? With deferred, you've got a semester less to do it in.

Originally Posted by 33girl

Talk about a revealing quote! There's no mention here of retention or member satisfaction - just that this is the easiest way to stick people in holes. Quick fixes rarely work. The NPC gives lip service to "lifetime membership" but if they really meant it, they wouldn't be trying to just pledge people as quickly as possible.

If sororities were able to retain all their members until graduation, there wouldn't be such craziness of getting the best freshmen, upperclassmen being disadvantaged, etc etc etc. You could fill the bathtub and keep it filled without having to continually plug the leaks.

You are right...if we could all keep all our members all 4 years. That just doesn't happen. I daresay if you compare retention rates for early and non-deferred recruitments, there wouldn't be that much difference. Retention is indeed something that needs more attention (I lay that in part to the brief NM period).

I used to think deferred recruitment was a great idea and that my school (Alabama) should change to it. But then I saw it in action, in a couple of smaller schools with a just-as-competitive recruitments. It was a nightmare.

I would never say that EVERY school should have deferred recruitment. It clearly works for many schools. And it clearly doesn't work for many others. Isn't that why NPC offers several different methods of recruiting?

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I would never say that EVERY school should have deferred recruitment. It clearly works for many schools. And it clearly doesn't work for many others. Isn't that why NPC offers several different methods of recruiting?

I wouldn't say that either. I'm just really glad my alma mater has it.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

Big chapters have plenty of money to spend. They don't spend it all on recruitment. A good bit of the bill for dirty rushing is footed by individual members and alumnae. You'll never see it in the recruitment budget that's submitted to Panhellenic.

So in other words, all these chapters have to do is ask the alums for money to do whatever and they get it? You were the one who brought up the "budget" but it seems that having a "budget" is a moot point.

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

The 6-8 week new member period is just a basic. It takes longer to really get to know people in the chapter, and for the chapter to get to know NMs. That's what we tell NMs all the time, isn't it? With deferred, you've got a semester less to do it in.

You've got a lifetime to get to know your sisters. Or, you should have a lifetime if you don't get burned out and self-terminate. Don't forget that hopefully some of the women have come into the chapter ALREADY being friends with some of the members. That's what I'm advocating. We heard constantly that women pledge more often because of friendship with one member than any other reason.

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I daresay if you compare retention rates for early and non-deferred recruitments, there wouldn't be that much difference.

I doubt that very much. There was a poster on here who said, in effect, that at her (pre-freshman rush) school, people routinely disaffiliated by their junior and definitely senior year, as Greek life was looked on as something you did as an underclassman. To the point that only 25% of her pledge class was left by the time she graduated. I also think it's important to look on WHY people disaffiliate. I just ran over my years as an active briefly in my head, and of the members we "lost," 3 left college completely (one returned later and reactivated) and 4 were terminated for behavior reasons. We didn't have women quitting because they "just weren't feeling it anymore." The other sororities on campus were similar.

I know with a large rush the thought of changing can be daunting, but it's that kind of thinking that perpetuates pre-rush choosing of pledge classes and under the table alum donations to get around budget rules.

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by carnation

Both paragraphs: very, very true. I would love to see some kind of research that explores the number of women getting bids now vs. the numbers in past years. I would expect the numbers took a dip before someone came up with quota plus but by this time, they should have gone up again.

For sure, this part of the country isn't seeing all the chapters dying that we used to or even the number of very tiny "bottom" tier chapters on their way out. I think that RFM is finally doing its job.

Whenever I read LeslieAnne's recruitment story at UMD in the mid 80s, I think, wow, if RFM were implemented, Maryland might still have Pi Beta Phi (closed 1990), Alpha Gamma Delta (closed 1992), Alpha Xi Delta (closed 1993), and Gamma Phi Beta (closed 2000). Instead, top tier chapters didn't make very many cuts after the first round, so of course, most PNMs cut the "bottom" chapters. I do have to wonder how Maryland had the same 18 chapters from 1962 to 1989, and without any membership-number-related closures since the first sororities came to campus in 1920 until 1990. That is especially impressive they made it through the 60s and 70s, times when Greek Life was not very popular! All that without RFM! Maybe as long as your chapter wasn't in debt and spiraling out of control with smaller and smaller numbers, your HQ didn't care?

[33girl]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

I do have to wonder how Maryland had the same 18 chapters from 1962 to 1989, and without any membership-number-related closures since the first sororities came to campus in 1920 until 1990. That is especially impressive they made it through the 60s and 70s, times when Greek Life was not very popular! All that without RFM! Maybe as long as your chapter wasn't in debt and spiraling out of control with smaller and smaller numbers, your HQ didn't care?

Yeah, pretty much. I don't think they cared if you had 5 members, as long as you were paid up. IMO the Internet has been part of what's changed all that. It's a lot harder now to hide that OMG XYZ's chapter at Goren U only has 16 people and the rest have 50, therefore XYZ must suck. When there was limited contact between universities, it didn't really matter. I mean, when I pledged I assumed that AST must have been one of the biggest sororities in the entire nation because it was one of the biggest chapters at my college.

Not only that, late 80s/early 90s is when insurance started going through the roof. Chapters who cost more to run than they brought in through membership fees were discarded. By this I don't mean that they were doing anything that was RM-bad, but that eliminating chapters probably cut the rate you had to pay on insurance.

[carnation]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

Whenever I read LeslieAnne's recruitment story at UMD in the mid 80s, I think, wow, if RFM were implemented, Maryland might still have Pi Beta Phi (closed 1990), Alpha Gamma Delta (closed 1992), Alpha Xi Delta (closed 1993), and Gamma Phi Beta (closed 2000). Instead, top tier chapters didn't make very many cuts after the first round, so of course, most PNMs cut the "bottom" chapters.

I so remember those days. I can think of many chapters that would probably still be at various SEC schools had we had RFM and I don't know if they'll ever return because when the schools have opened up for expansion, those chapters haven't bothered to reapply.