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

[FSUZeta]

con:at schools with larger panhellenic systems, pnms seem to still be confused when they receive invitations from the chapters they ranked lowest on their list. seems that pnms either aren't listening when it is being explained, or it is not being explained thoroughly enough.

pro:rfm seems to be working. it's not perfect, but it is much better than the previous system.

[carnation]

FSUZeta, here's how I remember the system in the past: the bigger groups at each university wouldn't make many cuts until after theme parties, then they'd cut very heavily. That's when we had all the recruitment dropouts.

Quota wouldn't be set until after theme parties, resulting in the bigger groups getting quota with huge pledge classes and several smaller groups making a fraction of quota. Actually, I can't remember any NPC-wide rules, only that each campus seemed to set its own rules.

[VandalSquirrel]

I've got a lot to say on the subject, need to formulate my ideas (plus some people have already said what I wanted to say), but if some girl wants to drop out and not attend parties because some group is that offensive to her, let her. Sure she'd be out of recruitment, but at least she wouldn't be leading a chapter on, or taking the place of a more open minded person. The sooner they drop out the sooner groups can see who is committed to giving everyone a chance, and girls who may have been released (though desirable to some groups) will have a decent chance.

I hate seeing groups work hard for those who won't give them a chance for whatever reason. I find it really offensive and tacky when a group of women open their home and sisterhood to someone, and that woman can't even give them a chance.

Yeah this will ruffle some feathers, but frankly I don't care. I am tired of groups catering to PNMs with superficial issues and I think RFM is one way we can really weed out women who would join a group at school X and transfer to school Y for the prestige.

[AOII Angel]

I choose to take little stock in the anecdotal stories of increased drop out rates because of the shorter new member period or RFM. Change always makes people long for the old days, but until you can give actual research that supports these anecdotal stories, they are nothing but stories. The research says that the system is working better. It makes sense. As for PH calling a chapter and harrassing them to take a girl they cut, it's ridiculous. The chapter I advise cuts more than their release figures recommend every year. They don't get to take quota additions since they didn't "maximize their options," but they are willing to take that risk so they only take women they want. PH can complain, but they can't make you do anything!

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by carnation

FSUZeta, here's how I remember the system in the past: the bigger groups at each university wouldn't make many cuts until after theme parties, then they'd cut very heavily. That's when we had all the recruitment dropouts.

That's how I remember it too, especially at Auburn, where blanket invitations were issued through 3-party day (I think). A member of one of the biggest groups actually told me they didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings, so they kept inviting them back - with no intention of pledging these girls!
The new method has strengthened the weaker chapters, and isn't that good, in the long run, for everybody? The big groups who choose their NM classes before the first party still do that (which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't).

I, too, hate the shortened NM period. Even a couple of weeks longer would help, I think. Members don't know histories, policies or procedures as well. I've seen members clueless about our Founders, and we only have 3!

[AGDee]

Back in my day, we had formal recruitment twice each year. The fall semester pledge class got their bids in early to mid October and had to wait until January for Initiation so that they had college grades. The Spring pledge class got their bids in early February and were Initiated at the end of March. That makes it seem like one class had a lot longer to learn the material and stuff, but it didn't really work out that way. If you think about the timing, our pledge periods were really about the same in actual time spent on pledging. The fall class had meetings from early-mid October until early-mid December.. about 8 weeks. Then we had dead week (week before finals) and finals week, then two weeks away from school completely. They were initiated the first weekend back at school. The spring pledge class had meetings from early Feb to early April and were initiated right around the 8 week mark. The additional time for the fall class was not spent doing anything except finals and being home for Christmas, in reality. Both classes truly had 8 weeks of pledging either way. The "shortened" pledge period of 8 weeks doesn't seem shortened to me at all. Ours was that long 25 years ago when I pledged.

[33girl]

I think that since interviews and things like that have been eradicated (worst idea ever but that isn't the point of this post) 6 weeks should be ample to complete a nationally mandated, cookie cutter pledge program. The only thing that I think would suck is getting to know enough people well enough to choose your big.

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I, too, hate the shortened NM period. Even a couple of weeks longer would help, I think. Members don't know histories, policies or procedures as well. I've seen members clueless about our Founders, and we only have 3!

That isn't because they don't have time to learn it. That's because your national program isn't making it a priority. Which seems to be a trend, sadly.

[DoctorD]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I, too, hate the shortened NM period. Even a couple of weeks longer would help, I think. Members don't know histories, policies or procedures as well. I've seen members clueless about our Founders, and we only have 3!

Originally Posted by 33girl

I think that since interviews and things like that have been eradicated (worst idea ever but that isn't the point of this post) 6 weeks should be ample to complete a nationally mandated, cookie cutter pledge program. The only thing that I think would suck is getting to know enough people well enough to choose your big.


That isn't because they don't have time to learn it. That's because your national program isn't making it a priority. Which seems to be a trend, sadly.

But seriously, folks - do you REALLY need to learn EVERYTHING in the new member period? Can't some of this be spread out and learned later on? What is really the most important for an 18 year old to learn as she joins an organization? In my mind, it is to learn that the women she is with are fabulous people, and these are the people she will WANT to be with for the next few years [and beyond] - she wants to bond with these women and make connections. Interviewing folks doesn't make connections... doing things with them does. New member periods should be about beginnings.... not about everything. Cramming in information that is book work or just like school is boring. Have education, yes, but make it interesting and fun. The new member period should still be a recruitment period... a 6-8 week "wooing" that "teaches" the new member "yep, I chose wisely... and I want others to experience this, too." It should be "the basics" - how do I function within this particular chapter?

There's plenty of time for education about the sorority if you look at the opportunities for education about the organization over the course of 3-4 years vs. 6-8 weeks. I know that is how our organization is moving, and from what I can tell a number of others are doing the same. Learning about the founders, our history, and our values is STILL a priority - but only the groundwork has to be accomplished during the new member period.

My $.02. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by DoctorD

But seriously, folks - do you REALLY need to learn EVERYTHING in the new member period? Can't some of this be spread out and learned later on? What is really the most important for an 18 year old to learn as she joins an organization? In my mind, it is to learn that the women she is with are fabulous people, and these are the people she will WANT to be with for the next few years [and beyond] - she wants to bond with these women and make connections. Interviewing folks doesn't make connections... doing things with them does. New member periods should be about beginnings.... not about everything. Cramming in information that is book work or just like school is boring. Have education, yes, but make it interesting and fun. The new member period should still be a recruitment period... a 6-8 week "wooing" that "teaches" the new member "yep, I chose wisely... and I want others to experience this, too." It should be "the basics" - how do I function within this particular chapter?

There's plenty of time for education about the sorority if you look at the opportunities for education about the organization over the course of 3-4 years vs. 6-8 weeks. I know that is how our organization is moving, and from what I can tell a number of others are doing the same. Learning about the founders, our history, and our values is STILL a priority - but only the groundwork has to be accomplished during the new member period.

My $.02. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Ditto!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DoctorD

But seriously, folks - do you REALLY need to learn EVERYTHING in the new member period? Can't some of this be spread out and learned later on? What is really the most important for an 18 year old to learn as she joins an organization? In my mind, it is to learn that the women she is with are fabulous people, and these are the people she will WANT to be with for the next few years [and beyond] - she wants to bond with these women and make connections. Interviewing folks doesn't make connections... doing things with them does. New member periods should be about beginnings.... not about everything. Cramming in information that is book work or just like school is boring. Have education, yes, but make it interesting and fun. The new member period should still be a recruitment period... a 6-8 week "wooing" that "teaches" the new member "yep, I chose wisely... and I want others to experience this, too." It should be "the basics" - how do I function within this particular chapter?

There's plenty of time for education about the sorority if you look at the opportunities for education about the organization over the course of 3-4 years vs. 6-8 weeks. I know that is how our organization is moving, and from what I can tell a number of others are doing the same. Learning about the founders, our history, and our values is STILL a priority - but only the groundwork has to be accomplished during the new member period.

My $.02. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

I disagree that interviews don't make connections but whatever, that's your opinion and I'm sorry if you didn't get the positive full effect of them. Part of the problem isn't just that interviews have been eliminated, but in some cases ALL one on one contact has. Not everyone shines in a group or is bold enough to start to make connections on their own. We see that over and over in posts on here.

As far as the history - no you won't learn everything, but for God's sake, a college educated woman can't learn the names of THREE women for a membership test? That's shameful.

And in some smaller chapters, you go from being a pledge right into offices that are important. You NEED to know what you're doing.

ETA: Can we please split this into another topic? Shortened NM periods have nothing to do with release figures during rush.

[KSUViolet06]

My campus started using the RFM in my senior year. There were some pros and cons to it. Overall, I feel as though they work well.

[UGAalum94]

33Girl, I apologize for continuing the shortened new member period conversation here, but. . .

and as always, I want to make clear that I have no formal position in my group other than being an alumna.

Here's my deal about shortened new member periods: I do think that when the new member period was direct instruction and little assessments about knowledge of the group or required projects and you had to make grades, it build a sense of anticipation about initiation. It reflected the idea of initiation as we probably really think of initiation generally (assuming you think about the word "initiation" ever): a sort of transformational ceremony at which because you had acquired the required knowledge or demonstrated your worthiness, you became a full member of a group and gained any knowledge that members had to be a full participant within that body.

I don't know how accurate our perceptions were, but you had a sense that there were hard and fast requirements about what you had to do to be eligible to be initiated and they required that you demonstrate traits rather than merely showing up at required meetings and going through the motions. (And by showing up and going through the motions, I mean the difference in participating in a learning activity for the fun of it vs. the sense that if you fail your membership test, you won't get initiated.)

While most of us, I think, accept that because hazing was a real issue at some chapters that the idea of proving your worthiness had to be diminished in importance, I wonder if a process that includes un-initiated members into more things previously reserved for full members (like chapter) and that reduces or even eliminates the previous "requirements" for initiation, allows people to value being initiated as much as the old system.

I think most of us see anticipation as heightening positive experiences generally. Think about little kids and Christmas. Would they get as much out of their presents and toys if they were just there one day when they came home from school. Or maybe more seriously, with the idea of religious seasons at church thorough the year. Does the season of Advent make the celebration of Christmas better? Does observing Lent heighten your awareness of Easter?

I'm not trying to equate Greek membership with religion sincerely, but my point is that it kind of makes sense that a reduction in the things that build anticipation for initiation might make initiation less special and less valued.

Sure, I can see that you probably don't remember your pledge test material any better 20 years later than if you had learned it after initiation and I even doubt that this anticipation would necessarily make you more likely to stick around for senior year, but I just think that the once in a lifetime experience of being initiated is that much more spectacular the more you've looked forward to and anticipated it.

[Thetagirl218]

Originally Posted by FSUZeta

pro:rfm seems to be working. it's not perfect, but it is much better than the previous system.

Being someone who was initiated in the last ten years...what was the previous system?