UCLA Recruitment begins Wednesday!

[bruinaphi]

Originally Posted by BlueOwl

The upperclassmen quota in NOT optional. Each sorority is required to take quite a few, usually about one third of the new member class will be non- freshman women! This policy began about five years ago. As I said before, the sororities aren't exactly in love with this requirement.

As the RFM Specialist and NPC Area Advisor for UCLA, I can tell you that this is not true. It is up to each national organization to determine whether or not their chapter wants to fulfill their upperclass Quota, just like every other campus that has an upperclass Quota. It is my understanding that each of the national organizations on campus have decided to participate in the upperclass Quota. The upperclass Quota is determined using the same Quota Range system that is used for freshmen women. There are no mandatory carry figures.

The chapters themselves voted to have an upperclass Quota, as the demographics of UCLA PNMs had shifted and we were losing great women from recruitment because chapters wanted to affiliate freshmen to maintain their class balance.

[BlueOwl]

Thank you so much for the clarification! That makes sense.

[DTD Alum]

Originally Posted by bruinaphi

As the RFM Specialist and NPC Area Advisor for UCLA, I can tell you that this is not true. It is up to each national organization to determine whether or not their chapter wants to fulfill their upperclass Quota, just like every other campus that has an upperclass Quota.

Just a clarification, because I find sorority rush so interesting compared to fraternity rush, then would that mean that the national organization is dictating to the individual chapter what to do? If it's up to the national organization to determine whether the individual chapter fulfills the separate quota, then I think the spirit of BlueOwl's post could still ring true in that chapters could feel like they are forced to take women they may not necessarily want. If it's the individual chapters making the decision then BlueOwl's point is moot though.

Also, you say the chapters voted for it, but would that mean that only a simple majority would have had to vote yes? I could see many chapters loving this policy, but I could also see how certain chapters that are used to being really selective may be frustrated that they "have" to give bids to a group of girls who may not have made the cut as freshmen. Once again, that only applies if the individual chapters are being told to take the full separate quota, whether from their nationals, their adviser or Panhellenic.

[bruinaphi]

Originally Posted by DTD Alum

Just a clarification, because I find sorority rush so interesting compared to fraternity rush, then would that mean that the national organization is dictating to the individual chapter what to do?

I cannot profess to know the inner workings of the various NPC groups. My guess is that most groups get their chapters to understand that it is advantageous to them to participate fully in the upperclass Quota, since these women make up 33% of the women going through recruitment. BlueOwl's point was that the college panhellenic was forcing groups to take women. This is incorrect.

But they are required to fulfill a non-freshman quota. A sorority can't just say "we don't want to take any junior transfers". So, they do try to get the girls that they want from that pool of PNM's. Would they much rather fill those slots with freshman? For the most part, YES. Could most of the UCLA chapters fill all quota numbers with just freshman?

Actually, a sorority can say "we don't want to take any junior transfers." No group is forced to affiliate anyone by the college panhellenic. And the reason why we have an upperclass quota is that most of the UCLA chapters cannot fill their Quota numbers with freshmen, that is why the numbers are separated out.

With respect to retention of juniors, I am not sure some of the "data" on here is accurate, but I also don't get class year breakdowns of chapter sizes. There was higher than usual attrition last year, but not the year before.