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

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Just interested

All I know is I applaud Chi O for sticking to their guns and waiting until after the semester and grades are made to initiate. I feel it makes membership much more special and moms I've talked to like it as well. I don't know about retention and all that but I think the way it is now girls feel they are just joining a club and not a life long affiliation. Change is good but at what cost, numbers or lifelong members. Just random thoughts

Well, if everyone would just wait and have rush second semester like they should, this would be a moot point.

I mean, is there anything showing that Chi Omega has lower disaffiliation figures than other groups because of this?

[agzg]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Well, if everyone would just wait and have rush second semester like they should, this would be a moot point.

I mean, is there anything showing that Chi Omega has lower disaffiliation figures than other groups because of this?

I know there have been debates about deferred recruitment here and I hope this doesn't turn into one. I also know that you know I agree with you.

Deferred recruitment, while it has many cons, has many pros. One of which is that you have college grades to go on, rather than high school. It doesn't guarantee that every new member will make grades, but the majority will. Just like you can't guarantee that every active will make grades on a given semester.

I still believe that the only reason why I was able to maintain my grades during my new member period (lovin' these PC terms) was because I'd been through a couple semesters before (I didn't join until the fall of my sophomore year). I may not have had my best grades ever (I was sick most of the semester, was still joining, and a full courseload - honestly I don't know how I lived through that semester), but at least I was able to maintain my dean's list status.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

I know there have been debates about deferred recruitment here and I hope this doesn't turn into one.

Hence my .

I just think of people like my high school's yearbook editor and NHS president (among other things) who got to Penn State, partied too much, and promptly flunked out. She looked fabulous on paper and had a great personality - any chapter would have been falling over themselves to bid her. But the fact is, she just couldn't handle college life - at least at that college - and knowing her, I don't think study hours or (in the case of Chi O) the threat of not initiating would have changed that.

Danielle, this is an odd question, but do you think there are people from a wider geographic area going to Pitt & going Greek there now?

[honeychile]

Pre-shortened NM periods, we pledged more than one woman who never did make the grades, so that's not the only reason I'm against the shortened NM periods. We also had women who were so grade-oriented, they only attended sorority functions which were mandatory. I will always say that one of the biggest advantages of being in a sorority is learning how to balance grades (job) and social obligations responsibly!

ThetaGirl, when I was a pledge, we had a 15-18 week pledge period, and had to have one term's GPA prior to initiation. During Recruitment, many sororities wouldn't cut PNMs until the last moment, keeping the quota really high, and having the PNMs hold out to see if they were going to get a invitation to Pref from the "highly regarded" sororities.

[Thetagirl218]

Originally Posted by honeychile

Pre-shortened NM periods, we pledged more than one woman who never did make the grades, so that's not the only reason I'm against the shortened NM periods. We also had women who were so grade-oriented, they only attended sorority functions which were mandatory. I will always say that one of the biggest advantages of being in a sorority is learning how to balance grades (job) and social obligations responsibly!

ThetaGirl, when I was a pledge, we had a 15-18 week pledge period, and had to have one term's GPA prior to initiation. During Recruitment, many sororities wouldn't cut PNMs until the last moment, keeping the quota really high, and having the PNMs hold out to see if they were going to get a invitation to Pref from the "highly regarded" sororities.

Sounds like I like the previous system better! When I was an active I would have loved to have had a longer NM period for are girls....

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by Thetagirl218

Sounds like I like the previous system better! When I was an active I would have loved to have had a longer NM period for are girls....

The rationale behind changing the programs to 6-8 weeks from 1 semester was to fight hazing in chapters. If you only had 6-8 weeks as a new member, then you would have a much shorter time to be considered "less than." The reaction to the change is very different depending on who you speak to about this. Some women who pledged an entire semester think that it needs to be re-instituted, but some women (like my bio sister) see no difference and are happy with the change.

I'm curious why you would have loved a longer NM period? What did you feel was missing?

[ForeverRoses]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

The rationale behind changing the programs to 6-8 weeks from 1 semester was to fight hazing in chapters. If you only had 6-8 weeks as a new member, then you would have a much shorter time to be considered "less than." The reaction to the change is very different depending on who you speak to about this. Some women who pledged an entire semester think that it needs to be re-instituted, but some women (like my bio sister) see no difference and are happy with the change.

I'm curious why you would have loved a longer NM period? What did you feel was missing?

I was in the first year my chapter shifted to the 6 week NM period (it was called Bridges at the time). So maybe becuase it was the first year, but lots of things seemed really rushed. For example, our bid day buddy was our big. So if you didn't click with them, you were SOL. We also busted our butts trying to learn everything- national history, chapter history, etc. We were lucky that our chapter was fairly new, I can't imagine trying to fit everthing in for a 100 yr old chapter! A couple of more weeks would have given a little more time to digest everything. Plus thrown into that 6week process was Homecoming- so that week was a loss in terms of pledge activities, plus mid-terms were another week. I remember one new member meeting lasting 3 hours just so that we could cover everything in the pledge manual. We had 5 manditory new member meetings plus one overnight retreat. Add pledge pinning and then initiation into that.

One other reason a longer pledge period might be good- it might lessen the post initiation let-down. If you can spread out some of the fun activities, then it might not be such a downer when they come to an end after initiation.

[Thetagirl218]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

The rationale behind changing the programs to 6-8 weeks from 1 semester was to fight hazing in chapters. If you only had 6-8 weeks as a new member, then you would have a much shorter time to be considered "less than." The reaction to the change is very different depending on who you speak to about this. Some women who pledged an entire semester think that it needs to be re-instituted, but some women (like my bio sister) see no difference and are happy with the change.

I'm curious why you would have loved a longer NM period? What did you feel was missing?

Personally, my NM period was slightly longer, about 10 weeks because I was a founder of my chapter. However, I noticed in later NM classes that they felt they were rushed through the NM period, and didn't learn as much as the founding class did. Also I think we would have had less problems with newly initiated members if they had more time as a NM. Of course this is just IMO.