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

[33girl]

Originally Posted by jwright25

How do you say to a big group of excited PNMs, "So the really strong, popular chapters will be cutting half of you after the first round. This is so you will get a chance to meet the average and weak chapters and they will get a chance to make Quota." They are already freaking out as it is and stressing over the cuts.

How do we deliver this education without furthering stereotypes and bringing more attention to things like tiers and strong vs. weak chapters?

Not at all picking on FR here - she's just the one I quoted. I am genuinely curious as to some ideas for what to tell PNMs about RFM. Does this education happen in a large group setting? Is it given by the recruitment counselors? What kinds of language should be used and what should be avoided?

I don't think you CAN say that, because there may be times when groups are cutting lots of people for reasons that have nothing to do with release figures - grade requirements or the like.

The rushees just need to be told that 90% (or pick your figure) of them WILL be cut from at least one chapter, probably more, if that is the case. I think what gets to some girls is they think no one is getting cut but them.

And yes definitely, if the sororities are cutting harder because of RFM, the PNMs should see their choices before they rank. They should still have to go back to their max amount of parties though.

[lyrelyre]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

I think sometimes the ranking of the chapters by the rushees before the sororities make cuts confuses the rushees as well. It makes the rushee think that since they ranked the group #1, they will be back there. Then they get cut. Why not just have the rushee chose from the groups that invited them back rather than doing a ranking before the invites to the next round have been extended?

Originally Posted by Kansas City

Panhel should probably not go into too much information about how the chapters make cuts just that they all will have to make cuts and will likely labor over these decisions for different reasons. I also like the idea of a PNM selecting max number of chapters to attend during round two, three, etc. based on their invites back. Having PNMs essentially rank post cuts seems to make more sense if you are trying to save hurt feelings. Having Panhel offer TMI about release figures will just serve to confuse the PNM and foster the sterotype of strong vs weak chapters on campus.

Originally Posted by 33girl

The rushees just need to be told that 90% (or pick your figure) of them WILL be cut from at least one chapter, probably more, if that is the case. I think what gets to some girls is they think no one is getting cut but them.

And yes definitely, if the sororities are cutting harder because of RFM, the PNMs should see their choices before they rank. They should still have to go back to their max amount of parties though.

I think this would be a very good start. Letting the PNMs know, in a smaller setting (like Recruitment Counselor groups), that most of them will be released from at least one chapter.

Additionally, having a PNM choose from the chapters that invited them back helps to not give them unrealistic expectations. When you spend all evening, night, and morning thinking you have released a chapter, it can be quite a surprise to see that you will be returning to that chapter. Likewise, PNMs expect to return to chapters they ranked highly and it's unpleasant to realize that not only will you not be returning to that chapter you like, but also that you have only a few minutes to get composed before events begin.

The only problem I see with this is logistics. At my campus, at least, the PNMs are no longer confined to a particular area. When I went through, we lived on a dorm floor with our Recruitment Counselors. They woke us up as soon as our invites were ready (usually about 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning) and we chose which ones to accept. Also, you were not allowed to withdraw in the middle of the night, which gave PNMs a chance to sleep on it for a few hours. I thought this was helpful, because a PNM had time to recover and gain a little perspective. Often now, a PNM will see her invites less than an hour before events begin and make the snap decision to withdraw. We've had PNMs standing in line to withdraw change their minds and then it's too late, they have to withdraw because they've missed an event. It would be nearly impossible, given current time constraints, to get their list of invites to them and have them accept, regret, or regret with interest, then feed that into the computer and have events scheduled.

I have suggested changes such as these to college Panhellenics and they seem to think that the way it is "weeds out PNMs who would make less than desirable members."

On to the original question: As a recruitment advisor, I think the new release figures have been very good for the Greek system overall. I was absolutely terrified the first year we used them. I got our suggested numbers and realized that we were going to be required to release over one-third of the PNMs after open house. I thought there was no way it was going to work and nobody would make quota. After many obsessive conversations with the director of Greek life and a thorough explanation of Flex lists, I was still unsure. However, that first year all but one chapter made quota and a chapter that had historically struggled had the most quota additions. I’m now a believer. Since we’ve instituted the new release figures every chapter has either made quota or been no more than 4-6 away from quota. We’ve even had a few years where every chapter makes at least quota.

The only negative from my perspective is that our placement rate has gone down. A much higher percentage of PNMs withdraw than before new release figures. However, I believe that with some of the things discussed in this thread this could be minimized as well. As I said before, the college Panhellenics I have talked to indicate that this larger number of PNMs withdrawing should lead to higher retention within the chapters. They have tended to articulate that the PNMs who withdraw are the same ones that would likely resign from membership. I haven’t done any research on that, but it would be interesting to see what the statistics indicate.

[ForeverRoses]

Originally Posted by lyrelyre

The only problem I see with this is logistics. At my campus, at least, the PNMs are no longer confined to a particular area. When I went through, we lived on a dorm floor with our Recruitment Counselors. They woke us up as soon as our invites were ready (usually about 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning) and we chose which ones to accept. Also, you were not allowed to withdraw in the middle of the night, which gave PNMs a chance to sleep on it for a few hours. I thought this was helpful, because a PNM had time to recover and gain a little perspective. Often now, a PNM will see her invites less than an hour before events begin and make the snap decision to withdraw. We've had PNMs standing in line to withdraw change their minds and then it's too late, they have to withdraw because they've missed an event. It would be nearly impossible, given current time constraints, to get their list of invites to them and have them accept, regret, or regret with interest, then feed that into the computer and have events scheduled.

This would extend the recruitment period, however maybe it should go back to the way it was when I rushed. We went to parties, then the day after we had something called "post office". We would go around a certain time and get the invite list- who invited us back. We would see the list, select which ones to go to, and then go on our way. If you were upset, then the Rho Chis were there to talk to you for as long as you needed. The parties were not until several hours later. You would meet at a certain time and get your schedule of parties, but you already knew who was on the list. So say first parties ended at 9pm on Sunday. From 10am-2pm on Monday you could go to post office. The second parties would then start at 6pm.

[ComradesTrue]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

This would extend the recruitment period, however maybe it should go back to the way it was when I rushed. We went to parties, then the day after we had something called "post office". We would go around a certain time and get the invite list- who invited us back. We would see the list, select which ones to go to, and then go on our way. If you were upset, then the Rho Chis were there to talk to you for as long as you needed. The parties were not until several hours later. You would meet at a certain time and get your schedule of parties, but you already knew who was on the list. So say first parties ended at 9pm on Sunday. From 10am-2pm on Monday you could go to post office. The second parties would then start at 6pm.

Yes, it worked this way at my school in the early 90s, on a campus with 10 houses and over 600 women going through Recruitment. We got our invites at 8am, and parties began early afternoon. If the computers of that day could make it work, then I have absolutely no doubt that logistically (referring back to LyreLyre's post) it could work today with even better technology.

(**for those who were upset and wanted to drop... they were encouraged to accept the invites they wanted/had, return to dorm and sleep on it a bit, and then they could drop out right before the parties. This usually allowed them time to get over the hurt and most plugged right along with the rest of the week)

I agree wholeheartedly that PNMs should be choosing from the groups that invited them and not the newer method of having them rank immediately after parties. I have spoken with quite a few PNMs who stated that they "would be doing all the choosing." It has been clear that they do not understand fully that there will be cuts on the sororites' parts too, and I agree that this leads to more women dropping.

I do not agree that all of those who drop would not be devoted members. Eighteen year olds make impulsive decisions, especially when emotions are running high. I know a few from my campus who really regretted their decision to drop and could have been outstanding members. They just allowed their emotions to get the better of them.

[jwright25]

Originally Posted by 33girl

And yes definitely, if the sororities are cutting harder because of RFM, the PNMs should see their choices before they rank.

What you all are discussing here is the difference between Priority Ranking and Accept/Regret. The advantages of Priority FAR outweigh the advantages of Accept/Regret - and that's why we've seen the vast majority of college Panhellenics switch to it. Consider this: Campus has 12 chapters. PNMs go to all 12 first round and can go to 8 the second round. Super Susie PNM gets invited to all 12 chapters for second round. Average Annie gets invited to 6. With A/R, Annie is somewhat depressed because she was invited to HALF the number of chapters as Susie. With Priority, Susie's list has 8 chapters and Annie's has 6. So she doesn't feel as bad. Plus she could (theoretically) "save face" and say that she got invited to her top choices if she wants.

That's just one instance. Not to mention that you can't do flexing unless you use Priority, and the advantages of flexing alone are too great to give up.

I remember one university's Panhellenic handling the ranking very well. The recruitment counselors told the PNMs to rank the 8 chapters that they loved as #1, and then the chapters that they liked as 2, 3, 4, 5. So it wasn't ever "who do you want to go back to?" or "who do you like the least?" The vocabulary was always very positive.

And regarding the A/R method of having PNMs look at invites in the morning and go to parties in the evening.... WAY more PNMs drop out when it is done this way. When PNMs get their invitations 15-30 minutes prior to the parties, they are already dressed, they are already there. There's no time for tent talking and others trying to convince them to drop. Then they go to the parties and many times actually make a connection and wind up joining a sorority. Sure, some still drop, and that's fine. But at least they gave it a chance.

(I realize that we've wandered into A/R vs. Priority discussion, but this discussion does weigh in very heavily to RFM. )

[ForeverRoses]

^^^ what is flexing?

[gatordeltapgh]

I completely agree with Priority vs. Accept/Regret - although some still believe in AR.

I also think that Clustering is the way to go - as it was explained if you can go back to 8 chapters the next day out of 12 you give 8 a #1 and the rest a #2. This way the PNM's doesn't see each chapter with a rank but rather they see that group as the one they prefer. If one of those chapters with a #2 cluster appears on their schedule the next day it is not so bad because PNM's are clustering and not cutting certain chapters.

Flex lists work as follows:
Minus Flex Lists - Minus Flex List are required for every chapter on a campus where RFM is used. If asked for a minus flex list, your chapter must rank a number of women that you would be willing to release in addition to your carry figure. The RFM Specialist working with your campus will determine when Minus Flex List will be used and how many women must be on your chapter's Minus Flex List. The Minus Flex Lists are used by the RFM Specialists to make adjustments during recruitment as campus patterns change from year to year.

Plus Flex Lists - Most NPC groups highly recommend that all of our chapters use Plus Flex Lists, but they would never tell a chapter to take someone who did not meet their membership criteria. Plus Flex Lists allow our chapter to invite additional women to the next round of events if necessary. From time to time, one day or one party does not have the same spark as the others, Plus Flex Lists provides the chapter with protection so that the chapter has the best opportunity for a successful recruitment. Chapters that do not use the Plus Flex List greatly increase the chance that they will not make quota during recruitment.

[KSUViolet06]

I totally agree with you on the importance of educating chapters fuly about how the system works. I think 99% of the issues we had in the first year of using them resulted from the chapters not understanding how it worked and not having it explained to them well enough.

[jwright25]

(More on Flexing)

Using Flex Lists allow for adjustments to the return rates in real time - as gatordeltapgh mentioned to take into account the cyclical nature of recruiting strength seen on campuses. Especially now - as RFM is allowing more chapters the chance to pledge Quota, these chapters are becoming stronger recruiters. So they might not need all of the PNMs that have accepted their invitations.

And having PNMs flexed on or off does NOT necessarily indicate a change in your chapter's performance. It is always done by looking at retention and other considerations as a whole. Flexing on and off affects everyone, and it's always done in a way to give PNMs and chapters the best options possible.

[AXOrushadvisor]

Originally Posted by gatordeltapgh

I completely agree with Priority vs. Accept/Regret - although some still believe in AR.

I also think that Clustering is the way to go - as it was explained if you can go back to 8 chapters the next day out of 12 you give 8 a #1 and the rest a #2. This way the PNM's doesn't see each chapter with a rank but rather they see that group as the one they prefer. If one of those chapters with a #2 cluster appears on their schedule the next day it is not so bad because PNM's are clustering and not cutting certain chapters.

Flex lists work as follows:
Minus Flex Lists - Minus Flex List are required for every chapter on a campus where RFM is used. If asked for a minus flex list, your chapter must rank a number of women that you would be willing to release in addition to your carry figure. The RFM Specialist working with your campus will determine when Minus Flex List will be used and how many women must be on your chapter's Minus Flex List. The Minus Flex Lists are used by the RFM Specialists to make adjustments during recruitment as campus patterns change from year to year.

Plus Flex Lists - Most NPC groups highly recommend that all of our chapters use Plus Flex Lists, but they would never tell a chapter to take someone who did not meet their membership criteria. Plus Flex Lists allow our chapter to invite additional women to the next round of events if necessary. From time to time, one day or one party does not have the same spark as the others, Plus Flex Lists provides the chapter with protection so that the chapter has the best opportunity for a successful recruitment. Chapters that do not use the Plus Flex List greatly increase the chance that they will not make quota during recruitment.

The flex list in my opinion is the WORST part of the whole thing. We hate to do them.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AXOrushadvisor

The flex list in my opinion is the WORST part of the whole thing. We hate to do them.

Why? It seems like they'd be great. Is it simply uncomfortable to have a category of women who you want to keep but that you don't know if you will? Or is it that people read too much into them about how the chapter is performing and get anxious?


About JWright's great post about what to tell PNMs to "educate" them: I think you tell them at the very first meeting with the Recruitment Counselors that some chapter are required to cut a large number of PNMs after the first day and without naming any chapters, then actually give the percentages for some of the top chapters from recruitment the year before. Sure, if you get cut by a chapter you like it hurts your feelings, but if you knew that it might be one of the chapters that had to cut 50% or more, you would know you were among the majority of PNMS when you didn't get asked back to popular houses A and B.

And at the very same time that you tell the PNMS about the percentages the chapters release, you remind them that they system still works and that the groups that released that hard all made quota (or whatever) and XX% of PNMS who stayed in recruitment got bids over the last X number of years.

One of the things I've noticed is that PNMS always seem to believe there's something exceptionally hard about recruitment their year and will repeat complete myths about the number of girls dropping or being cut out or whatever being totally unprecedented. So it also might help for Recruitment Counselors to give little updates when the results are positive and maybe even to have statistics about what's normal for recruitment over the last five years, so that girls would know the system is working, rather than the PNMs telling each other, "Did you know this is the worst recruitment in the history of the SEC? The computer must be messed up. Half the PNMS have dropped out and none of the chapters are going to make quota."

The data about how things are going system wide exists, why not let PNMS in on it? "No, actually 80% of PNMs were invited to at least half the number of parties for third round, which is exactly where we were at this point last year when 90% of chapters made quota and 84% *of PNMS got the first group they listed on their bid card and another 12% got the second group. Only 2% didn't get bids, and half of them were SIPs. So RELAX, you freaks."

*I have no idea what number is realistic and this doesn't even seem mathematically possible, but you can understand my point, which is to reassure the PNMS that things are going normally.

[GammaPhi88]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

About JWright's great post about what to tell PNMs to "educate" them: I think you tell them at the very first meeting with the Recruitment Counselors that some chapter are required to cut a large number of PNMs after the first day and without naming any chapters, then actually give the percentages for some of the top chapters from recruitment the year before. Sure, if you get cut by a chapter you like it hurts your feelings, but if you knew that it might be one of the chapters that had to cut 50% or more, you would know you were among the majority of PNMS when you didn't get asked back to popular houses A and B.

I really wish my Rho Gammas had told me that. I heard as gossip that the only reason a person would get cut after the first round is for grades, or if they really sucked. I had a steller GPA first semester freshman year, and I WAS released by a few groups (though I wasn't cut that heavily), but I still thought that these top groups thought I was awful. I know now that I was likely cut due to RFM (I was comfortable at the houses, didn't make any major faux pas, I wasn't a visible freshman partying wreck, and I didn't have a bad history with anyone in the sororities...but I digress.), but at the time, I had no idea what RFM was, so I just thought I sucked. I wish wish wish this could have been explained to me.

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

The data about how things are going system wide exists, why not let PNMS in on it? "No, actually 80% of PNMs were invited to at least half the number of parties for third round, which is exactly where we were at this point last year when 90% of chapters made quota and 84% *of PNMS got the first group they listed on their bid card and another 12% got the second group. Only 2% didn't get bids, and half of them were SIPs. So RELAX, you freaks."

*I have no idea what number is realistic and this doesn't even seem mathematically possible, but you can understand my point, which is to reassure the PNMS that things are going normally.

Another thing I wish my Rho Gammas could have told me, so I could have seen that I stood a way better chance than I thought. I was the PNM doing all sorts of google searches trying to find placement rates at my school for the past five years. It was pathetic, yes, but I won at being the most terrified PNM in the history of sororities, and my system, while competitive, is NOTHING like the SEC and doesn't even require (or regularly receive) recs. While I was an extreme bundle of nerves, I know that there were, are, and will be tons of frazzled stressed out PNMs, and past placement rates will generally help to let them know the truth's of that campus's system. (Though I think at campuses like Indiana, LSU, Bama, ect, they could be a rather unsettling thought). I think UGAalum's ideas are terrific for calming the nerves of the stressed PNMs as well as thwarting rumors of scary rush statistics, and I fully intend to bring it up to my school's Panhellenic.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

One of the things I've noticed is that PNMS always seem to believe there's something exceptionally hard about recruitment their year and will repeat complete myths about the number of girls dropping or being cut out or whatever being totally unprecedented.


PNMS tell each other: "Did you know this is the worst recruitment in the history of the SEC? The computer must be messed up. Half the PNMS have dropped out and none of the chapters are going to make quota."

I LOLed @ this because it seemed like girls ALWAYS came up with some crazy story when they got cut heavily, cut by the groups who had to release the most PNMs, or withdrew because they didn't like the groups they had left.

It almost always inolves a "computer glitch."

It's usually some outlandish statement like:

"Well I dropped out because I got cut by ABC and DEF. But Amy from my group told me that there was a computer glitch and ABC & DEF could only invite back girls with last names that start with vowels. So I got cut because my last name starts with M."

Either that, or they always think that they were "this close" to getting a bid to a sorority, but didn't because some crazy thing happened:

"I got cut by ABC after 2nd party, but this girl in my group said that there was a computer glitch and ABC's list erased my name!"

If girls KNEW a little about how the RFM worked, maybe girls would be less likely to think that something crazy happened and they got cut by certain chapters or didn't get a bid at all. They're also less likely to think "I was thisclose to getting a bid to ABC but _______."

I think that even just telling them that the heaviest cuts will occur earlier on would be beneficial. At least they're prepared.

[lyrelyre]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

This would extend the recruitment period, however maybe it should go back to the way it was when I rushed. We went to parties, then the day after we had something called "post office". We would go around a certain time and get the invite list- who invited us back. We would see the list, select which ones to go to, and then go on our way. If you were upset, then the Rho Chis were there to talk to you for as long as you needed. The parties were not until several hours later. You would meet at a certain time and get your schedule of parties, but you already knew who was on the list. So say first parties ended at 9pm on Sunday. From 10am-2pm on Monday you could go to post office. The second parties would then start at 6pm.

Originally Posted by Blondie93

Yes, it worked this way at my school in the early 90s, on a campus with 10 houses and over 600 women going through Recruitment. We got our invites at 8am, and parties began early afternoon. If the computers of that day could make it work, then I have absolutely no doubt that logistically (referring back to LyreLyre's post) it could work today with even better technology.

(**for those who were upset and wanted to drop... they were encouraged to accept the invites they wanted/had, return to dorm and sleep on it a bit, and then they could drop out right before the parties. This usually allowed them time to get over the hurt and most plugged right along with the rest of the week)

I agree wholeheartedly that PNMs should be choosing from the groups that invited them and not the newer method of having them rank immediately after parties. I have spoken with quite a few PNMs who stated that they "would be doing all the choosing." It has been clear that they do not understand fully that there will be cuts on the sororites' parts too, and I agree that this leads to more women dropping.

I do not agree that all of those who drop would not be devoted members. Eighteen year olds make impulsive decisions, especially when emotions are running high. I know a few from my campus who really regretted their decision to drop and could have been outstanding members. They just allowed their emotions to get the better of them.

With this system how long did recruitment end up lasting? Our recruitment currently begins on a Monday with Bid Day on Saturday. We have 11 chapters and about 650-700 PNMs.

I absolutely agree that PNMs who withdraw are not necessarily undesirable members. That is the answer I have gotten when I voiced my concerns about decreasing placement rates to various college Panhellenics. I overall like the new release figures, but if there are ways to increase PNMs placement I think they should be explored. Does anyone know if retention rates have increased with the new release figures?

Originally Posted by jwright25

What you all are discussing here is the difference between Priority Ranking and Accept/Regret. The advantages of Priority FAR outweigh the advantages of Accept/Regret - and that's why we've seen the vast majority of college Panhellenics switch to it. Consider this: Campus has 12 chapters. PNMs go to all 12 first round and can go to 8 the second round. Super Susie PNM gets invited to all 12 chapters for second round. Average Annie gets invited to 6. With A/R, Annie is somewhat depressed because she was invited to HALF the number of chapters as Susie. With Priority, Susie's list has 8 chapters and Annie's has 6. So she doesn't feel as bad. Plus she could (theoretically) "save face" and say that she got invited to her top choices if she wants.

That's just one instance. Not to mention that you can't do flexing unless you use Priority, and the advantages of flexing alone are too great to give up.

I remember one university's Panhellenic handling the ranking very well. The recruitment counselors told the PNMs to rank the 8 chapters that they loved as #1, and then the chapters that they liked as 2, 3, 4, 5. So it wasn't ever "who do you want to go back to?" or "who do you like the least?" The vocabulary was always very positive.

And regarding the A/R method of having PNMs look at invites in the morning and go to parties in the evening.... WAY more PNMs drop out when it is done this way. When PNMs get their invitations 15-30 minutes prior to the parties, they are already dressed, they are already there. There's no time for tent talking and others trying to convince them to drop. Then they go to the parties and many times actually make a connection and wind up joining a sorority. Sure, some still drop, and that's fine. But at least they gave it a chance.

(I realize that we've wandered into A/R vs. Priority discussion, but this discussion does weigh in very heavily to RFM. )

In your hypothetical, Susie and Annie would only know about each other’s schedules if they shared that information. Theoretically, a PNM could always “save face” by keeping quiet about her preferences throughout Recruitment. I know this is unlikely, as Recruitment is such a social event, but no system is going to make someone who got fewer invites feel better about themselves. If Annie and Susie are going to share schedules and invites, they’ve probably already shared the order in which they ranked the chapters.

I wholeheartedly agree that Flexing is fantastic. In my opinion, it’s one of the best parts of the new release figures.

I’m not sure even the most positive description of ranking by a Recruitment Counselor could get through to an excited 18 or 19 year old. In my experience, once a PNM knows the maximum number of chapters she can visit next round, she tends to think of chapters she ranked lower than that as “cut” by her.

As far as way more PNMs dropping out under A/R, I can only speak for the campuses (campi?) where I have advised, when I say that the number of PNMs withdrawing from recruitment increased. If that’s not true across the board, then it is even more reason for me to endorse the new release figures.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by lyrelyre

. Does anyone know if retention rates have increased with the new release figures?

I found that at my school, while there were some drop-outs after the first cut (which was on Day 2 of 4 with the new RFM), we had higher numbers of women who attended Preference and received/accepted bids.

This was different from the years before the new RFM where we didn't make any cuts until Day 3 (of 4). We would have hardly any drop-outs for the first 2 days, then there were MASSIVE drop-outs after that first cut which was halfway through recruitment. Then more would drop by Pref and we ended up with fewer than half of the girls we started with.