advice needed

[Low C Sharp]

Really? You know this how?

Well, the fact that it has apparently never happened is a factor. Have you ever heard of any alumna, from any group, anywhere, being removed from membership because of some publication they issued as a university employee (or anything of the kind)? I've never even heard rumor or gossip to that effect. In fact, I haven't heard of national GLOs expelling alum members in the last 30 years for anything short of stealing from HQ. Have you?

The director of Greek life at Alabama is a man, for whatever it's worth.

I really doubt the Greek advisor at someplace like Bama or Auburn is going to rock the Panhellenic boat in any way

That may be true, but that's enormously different from what you've been claiming (that they are bound by NPC rules and MUST follow them). If they or other Greek advisors are CHOOSING to follow NPC guidelines, then that's their choice as long as it's OK with their bosses. But they don't have to. If because of those rules, or for any other reason, Greek advisors deliberately leave PNMs in ignorance about what they need to do to prepare for rush, then their priorities are seriously out of whack, and they are letting their students down. This goes double for employees of public universities who, IMHO, have a state-funded obligation to try to build a Greek system that's as accessible as possible.
________
Blondibondar

[UGAalum94]

I love a hyper-technical back and forth as much as the next person, but as far as the can the campus do it if NPC forbids it debate, it's probably worth remembering that it's typically the campus panhellenic who produces and publishes the recruitment information.

So while I think the universities office of Greek Life and its employees are free to do what they want and think is in the best interested of the PNMs, the Panhellenic VP Recruitment probably isn't and any publications that are generated by the campus panhellenic probably scrupulously follow NPC rules and recommendations, I'm guessing.

Maybe that explains why you can sometimes find conflicting information about recs on the same website like UGA did last year. One source said, get recs; the other parroted the PNC party line

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

You don't need recs at OSU. Alot of the girls I know who rushed there didn't have any and they all got bids. If you would like to secure some, I'm sure they'd be good to have (she'd stand out from some of the other PNMs) ,but they're not needed.

I don't know about other groups, but ours (Delta Gamma) requires that each PNM invited to pref be sponsored. Generally speaking, the chapter will contact an alum to sponsor the girl. I'm not saying that EVERY chapter actually does this...but they're supposed to. And I'm not saying that a collegiate member grabs and signs it. But...when I hear of a girl from my hometown pledging my sorority without anybody contacting me or another initiated member here, I am not pleased. 99% of the time there is no problem...but....let's just say the system is in place to try to prevent future problems.

[UGAalum94]

We've got to be careful about drawing the distinction between getting a bid without a rec that you arranged for and getting a bid without a rec. Unless you were the membership chair, you'd probably have no way of actually knowing for sure that a PNM didn't end up with a rec.

I know that I've done at least four RIFs this year on girls who have no idea that I've sent one in. And they probably never will know. If they got bids, they'd be thinking they got one without one, but it wouldn't be accurate.

I'm not saying that all campuses use them or anything like that (although I'm really baffled about how groups that need them according to national policy get around it), but I'd be careful about telling people that they don't use them or need them. How would you know for sure what other groups want?

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

...I know that I've done at least four RIFs this year on girls who have no idea that I've sent one in. And they probably never will know. If they got bids, they'd be thinking they got one without one, but it wouldn't be accurate...

Exactly.

[Titchou]

The last year I was City Sponsorship Chairman for my sorority we had over 250 women from my home town go thru recruitment at various schools where we have chapters. I dare say that not a one of them knew I signed her sponsor form.

[Zillini]

The best advice I can offer to anyone who is associated with a University with a highly competitive Recruitment where upperclassmen are "penalized" is to present the proposal of a separate upperclassmen Quota. Take it to your Greek Advisor and/or to your Panhellenic. It benefits everyone involved, obviously the upperclassmen but also the Chapters.

The way it works at Bama is Panhellenic reports only the freshman Quota numbers to our Inat'ls. Upperclassmen new members are viewed as Quota Additions. So even if a Chapter doesn't make the freshmen Quota, they may still achieve Quota from a Inat'l statistical point of view with the upperclassmen. (Personal opinion, this might change if the UC Quota became large enough. However this year it was still only 7.) Another benefit is having been a college student, we know they are capable of making their grades. Last but certainly not least, we have gained some wonderful members over the years who were sophomores or juniors. Prior to this change these fabulous members would have had a slim chance of joining any sorority.

Remember Bama hasn't always had this in place. The idea and model came from Samford University (in Birmingham, AL) who had it for several years prior. The idea was brought up by several Chapter Advisors to the Asst Dean of Students (Greek Advisor). He investigated and agreed it had real merit. It opened up the Recruitment process and removed the stigma attached to upperclassmen.

Point being, new ideas and changes can be made on any campus but someone has to pursue it.

[aujm]

Greek Chat Posters,
As the Panhellenic Advisor at Auburn University, I have some comments to add to the postings here. This very long post is my first time to post here, I wanted to make sure the correct information about us is included in this discussion.

• Auburnmom, the descriptions of bid matching that have been communicated to you here are not correct. Each sorority submits to us one ranked list of every woman who attended their preference parties, however many that is. This year, quota was 58, so I will use it as an example, but if a sorority had 150 women at their preference parties, their ranked list is 150 names long. First, a comparison is made to see who in Sorority A’s first 58 listed that sorority as their first choice. Anyone who did is matched to that sorority. Anyone in that first 58 on Sorority A’s list who did not rank them first is put on hold so that we can see whether they can be placed in their first choice(s). As people ranked high on the Sorority A’s preference list are matched to other sororities, we move down the Sorority A’s preference list to find matches. In other words, if someone Sorority A ranks #10 has been matched to her first choice, we move to #59 on the Sorority A’s list. If someone Sorority A ranks #10 has a different first choice, her bid to Sorority A is not given to someone else until the potential member has been matched to her first choice. The same rules apply in matching potential members to their third choices. This process has been successful for us in that 82% of our new members this year received were placed in their first preference. The bid lists are submitted by the chapters and can not be manipulated by our office and or be altered by the choices a potential member makes. In bid matching, for someone to not receive a bid, she must be lower on the sorority’s ranked list than the sorority needs to go to meet quota for each sorority she lists. If someone is not matched to her first or second choice does not list her third choice, there wasn’t a third choice to try to put her in, which results in her release. For her to have listed her third option would only have made her available to join the third chapter, which she was not interested in.
• The recruitment invitations this year were exactly the same as years past, but the way that we collected the information changed. In the past, potential members had to accept as many invitations as they had room for. So, if potential member received 5 invitations for a six party round, she must accept them all, even if some were sororities she did not want to visit. This year, we used a ranking system with the potential members so that they could tell us the invitations they would most like to accept. Then, we matched invitations from the sororities with the lists and scheduled each potential member to visit as many sororities as we could, prioritizing her acceptances by the rankings she had provided. However, if a potential member did not receive all of those invitations, the system would move down her ranked list to find which sororities did invite her back in an effort to fill her schedule. In other words, if a potential member listed a sorority last, she did not release them, she only let us know that this was the chapter she least wanted to return to. But, if there weren’t enough invitations from chapters she would rather visit, she would be sent to that sixteenth choice if the invitation was there. This system is not a brand new concept, but a system that has been in use for a while at schools with Panhellenics comparable to Auburn's. In addition, quota was the same for each chapter. We did not set a quota of 70 for some and 55 for others.
• While Auburn can’t guarantee bids to anyone, we have matched everyone who maximized her options in preference for the past three years. Every potential member who participated in bid matching and did not receive a bid this year did not list all of her choices in her preference rankings. You will find the same is true for schools that offer guaranteed bids. Our potential members also receive a Pref Day Primer describing all of the options available and what the outcomes might be. This year, we pledged just over 80% of the women who attended recruitment. We matched all but 43 of the women who participated in bid matching, an accomplishment that’s hard to beat with a Panhellenic and potential member pool as large as ours.
• Our website states that it is the responsibility of the sororities to find recommendations for the potential members. It is. However, the website also goes into detail about how to secure your own recommendations if you want to do that. It is not misleading to say that our sororities look for their own recommendations. They do. Our sororities do work to find recommendations for potential members they want to pledge who don’t have recommendations of their own. I have seen their processes at work. The bottom line is that no sorority is going to say, “This woman would be an ideal new member here… too bad she doesn’t have a recommendation.” There are many cases where a potential member does not have an invitation to a chapter where she did not secure her own reference, but she would not have received the invitation even with the reference. Some of our chapters receive thousands of recommendations over the summer, meaning that many potential members, even legacies, are released by chapters they like after our open house round. Additionally, many people forget that not every chapter requires a recommendation on a woman to pledge her. There are some chapters who find recommendations helpful, but don’t find one necessary. Others require that the recommendation be found sometime before initiation, so if the recommendation isn’t in by recruitment, the chapter has another month or so to find one.
• This year, our recruitment counselor team was truly fabulous. They were thoroughly trained and tested, from February right up to recruitment. They are taught to ask the potential members questions and to let them arrive at their own decisions. They also know that some potential members are going to withdraw. The recruitment counselors were told to discourage withdrawals, but not to stand in the way of a potential member who wants to withdraw. They are also told to encourage potential members to list every preference option available to them, but not to force anyone to list an option she doesn’t want to list. We face some no-win situations here. We receive calls from people who thought we should have worked harder at talking their daughter out of withdrawing. We also receive calls from people who are angry that we talked their daughter, who now has a bid she is unhappy with, out of withdrawing. The bottom line is that the recruitment counselors are there to inform and counsel, but never to instruct. All of the information is there for the potential members and they are ultimately responsible for their own decisions and the outcomes.
• Last, and most importantly, we have sixteen wonderful chapters who all contribute a great deal to our campus. We pride ourselves in how well our chapters work together and in the great relationship that we have with the National Panhellenic Conference. The National Panhellenic Conference has great knowledge, leadership, and foresight, offering big-picture information and advice that benefits potential members, our community, and its member groups. It is of the utmost importance to me that our council abides by the letter and spirit of Panhellenic policies, not only on principle, but because it is important to my employer. Think of it this way: Our athletic coaches report to Auburn’s Director of Athletics, but isn’t is part of each coach’s job to know and abide by NCAA policies? Auburn’s Panhellenic council does so much more than just recruitment, and it is not worth sacrificing a great relationship with the NPC just to go against them during recruitment. The idea that NPC policies should be tailored to schools like Auburn shows complete ignorance of National Panhellenic in general. There are over 600 College Panhellenics and the average one has 6 or fewer chapters. It is the schools with large Panhellenics that are the exception and not the rule.

When incorrect information is spread, it results in unrealistic expectations and even more confusion in what is already a confusing process. It is so important to me that interested people have the most updated and accurate information. If anyone has any questions about any of these explanations or anything else regarding Panhellenic life at Auburn, I invite you to call me at 334-844-4600 to discuss, rather than posting speculations in public chatrooms.

Thanks!
Jill Moore
www.auburn.edu/panhellenic

^^^

Thank you so much for your informed response, Jill.

[Zillini]

Welcome AUJM, aka Jill. Thank you so much for the wonderful information. I truly hope you continue posting on GC as I believe it would benefit everyone to hear more from a Panhellenic Advisor's perspective.

[NutBrnHair]

Thanks for taking the time to be so thorough, Jill. This will be very helpful.

IMAGINE...Greek Chatters giving incorrect information!?!?

[carnation]

ROTFL! War Eagle!