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

[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.

[Minoafrau]

Is there a standard formula about what percentage of girls each house must cut each round under this system?

[jwright25]

Originally Posted by Minoafrau

Is there a standard formula about what percentage of girls each house must cut each round under this system?

It's based on three years' worth of return rates for each round, priority percentages (how many PNMs rank the chapter in their cluster of 1st choice), how far down their bid list they go to make quota, etc. So there is a formula, but it's not the kind of formula like a + b / c = return rate that can just be thrown out there. And it's always overseen by actual humans to take into account factors that computer formulas don't know - like the addition or loss of a chapter, the over- or under-performance of a chapter, etc. And of course Flex Lists are great for making these midstream corrections.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

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.

And sure, we all do things to save our egos, so it's understandable on a human level that the individuals tell themselves fibs. But if no one ever speaks the truth about the situation to explain that everything actually going great even if everyone who got cut by the #1 group is unhappy about it. The problem is the lack of good or realist information that would kind of balance the wild rumors out.

And I know that I'm probably coming off as too much "we should just crush their spirits with the bad news first," but one of the best things I think we could do is to really talk about what placement rates mean. When PNMS hear that last year ___ percentage got their first choice, they think first choice of ALL the groups, rather than first choice of whom they had left at the end.

There's absolutely no guarantee any PNMS will listen, but at the same time RCs are saying, some chapters have to cut 50% after first round, they should go ahead and say 100% number of PNMS last year listed these chapter among their number ones in their rankings after first round. (I mean give them the real number from the year before, but my guess is that if PNMS get to rank six houses #1, your top return rate chapters really probably do have nearly 100% who rank them among the top parties they want to go back to.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

And I know that I'm probably coming off as too much "we should just crush their spirits with the bad news first," but one of the best things I think we could do is to really talk about what placement rates mean.

No you're not. I agree with you. Even if we just forewarned them that with the RFM, the heaviest cuts occur early on, they'd be a little less stunned and more likely to stick it out (I think).

Now I am NOT saying that we should tell them every single thing about the RFM (like who makes the heaviest cuts or the formula that's used to calculate the # to cut), but I think just a little forewarning about the early heavy cuts would help.

Also, I think that PXs and Greek Life staff need to be sure that they're telling the PNMs that:

1. Recruitment is not guaranteed.
2. Not every girl gets their first choice.

[33girl]

Oh, there were sorority MEMBERS on here too saying things like "UGA has the toughest recruitment in the country - 75% of the girls get cut" which is bull poo. It's to make them look more "elite." Obviously if 75% of the girls were getting cut in formal they'd stop having it or something.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Oh, there were sorority MEMBERS on here too saying things like "UGA has the toughest recruitment in the country - 75% of the girls get cut" which is bull poo. It's to make them look more "elite." Obviously if 75% of the girls were getting cut in formal they'd stop having it or something.

Oh of coruse. I remember hearing once on campus, "Gosh recruitment was so tough this year, like half the girls who went through got cut." False.

I don't even know where they get it from. If 50% of the girls got cut, that would have made quota an outrageously low number like 8. It was 17 that year!

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Oh, there were sorority MEMBERS on here too saying things like "UGA has the toughest recruitment in the country - 75% of the girls get cut" which is bull poo. It's to make them look more "elite." Obviously if 75% of the girls were getting cut in formal they'd stop having it or something.

Well, close to 100% probably do get cut by someone, but they don't get cut by all the chapters.

I think maybe you're remembering the claim that I kind of though was false as well that top chapters have to cut 75% after first round. On the one hand, it's possible because some chapters at UGA really could expect close to 100% return rates all the way through prefs so they wouldn't need too many to actually make quota at the end. On the other hand, I doubt too many chapters are in that position and they'd still be competing with each other during prefs. ETA: maybe I'm a dummy for doubting it; I honestly have no idea what the releases are like at chapters at UGA.

ETA: and any sorority member who looked at quota times 17 and the number who started recruitment can see that the vast majority of girls finish recruitment and get bids. To claim otherwise is just insulting to other people's intelligence, as KSUViolet has already pointed out with her example.