Does a shorter associate program lead to more drop-outs?

[Leslie Anne]

When I pledged in the 1980s we had a three month pledge period. I thought it worked quite well. We might have a couple members drop out over the semester for various reasons. Once initiated though, dropping out was pretty much unheard of.

Of course since then most of the NPC sororities have moved to a shortened (6 to 8 week) new member period.

About 8 years ago I was on House Corp for another chapter of KD and I noticed a very high rate of drop outs both before and after initiation. I thought it might be a different campus/chapter culture. I also thought it could be the shortened new member program. I had an opportunity to speak very briefly with KD's National President about the drop out rate and the shortened program. She told me that since the pledge program had been shortened the drop out rate of initiated members had gone up astronomically. (I wish I could remember the exact percentage she mentioned.) She added that it wasn't just with KD but pretty much NPC-wide. Unfortunately, we didn't have time to talk more about the issue. I certainly had several more questions to ask.

We're all still producing outstanding members so I suppose a longer pledge period isn't an absolute necessity but I'm troubled by the number of drop outs especially since they are dropping out after having been initiated. I tend to believe that the importance of the commitment isn't coming across as well anymore.

Just my 2 cents.

[WTH]

Originally Posted by Leslie Anne

I had an opportunity to speak very briefly with KD's National President about the drop out rate and the shortened program. She told me that since the pledge program had been shortened the drop out rate of initiated members had gone up astronomically. (I wish I could remember the exact percentage she mentioned.) She added that it wasn't just with KD but pretty much NPC-wide. Unfortunately, we didn't have time to talk more about the issue. I certainly had several more questions to ask.

Very interesting, and not surprising given my own experience. What puzzles me is this: if this phenomenon is so common, then why the insistence on maintaining the shortened associate membership program? Why not move back to a longer program to alleviate this problem?

I have seen no evidence that the shorter program has led to any increase in numbers or quality of overall membership; quite the contrary. I really wish I understood the rationale of doing this besides "everyone else is doing it", which seems to be the only reason I've heard so far.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by WTH

Very interesting, and not surprising given my own experience. What puzzles me is this: if this phenomenon is so common, then why the insistence on maintaining the shortened associate membership program? Why not move back to a longer program to alleviate this problem?

I have seen no evidence that the shorter program has led to any increase in numbers or quality of overall membership; quite the contrary. I really wish I understood the rationale of doing this besides "everyone else is doing it", which seems to be the only reason I've heard so far.

Many schools erroneously think a shorter pledge program cuts down on hazing. Since they are our host institutions, we have to play their game, whether we like it or not.

I don't think that it's the shortness of the program, but the content. We had a very simple (nationally produced) book that all pledges were issued...but it also had a list of all our chapters, all the NPC and IFC chapters, and everything else I mentioned in my response to you above. It was a super handy reference and I still use it. Our current NM manuals (which are actually part of a lifetime membership program) are probably 5 times bigger and more full of "exercises" than information, IMO. Naturally some people are going to memorize more quickly than others...and some groups are going to have more history than others...and some chapters are going to have bigger Greek communities with which to familiarize themselves than others...which means that each GLO AND each chapter should be able to pick the amount of time that works for them.

The insistence on not setting apart pledges and trying to fully integrate them into the chapter more quickly really doesn't help, either. It's like kids don't have Driver's Ed or practicing anymore, they just are supposed to hop in the car when they turn 16 and know what to do.

[AnchorAlumna]

I would certainly support a move to lengthen the new member period. I have not seen that the dropout rate has increased, but I am discouraged by how many girls don't know a good bit of basic information.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I would certainly support a move to lengthen the new member period. I have not seen that the dropout rate has increased, but I am discouraged by how many girls don't know a good bit of basic information.

Because they don't have to. There is no consequence if they don't learn it. That has nothing to do with a pledge period being 2 weeks long or 20 weeks long.

[Leslie Anne]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Because they don't have to. There is no consequence if they don't learn it. That has nothing to do with a pledge period being 2 weeks long or 20 weeks long.

Absolutely agree. We barely ask anything of "pledges" anymore. It's what is done with the time they have that makes a difference.

The drop out rate I talked about with the KD Pres. could very well have a great deal to do with this new softened approach to "new member" programs rather than just the shortened period. I think the shift happened for both around the same time. I wish I could have had that discussion with her.

[Mevara]

Originally Posted by Leslie Anne

When I pledged in the 1980s we had a three month pledge period. I thought it worked quite well. We might have a couple members drop out over the semester for various reasons. Once initiated though, dropping out was pretty much unheard of.

Of course since then most of the NPC sororities have moved to a shortened (6 to 8 week) new member period.

About 8 years ago I was on House Corp for another chapter of KD and I noticed a very high rate of drop outs both before and after initiation. I thought it might be a different campus/chapter culture. I also thought it could be the shortened new member program. I had an opportunity to speak very briefly with KD's National President about the drop out rate and the shortened program. She told me that since the pledge program had been shortened the drop out rate of initiated members had gone up astronomically. (I wish I could remember the exact percentage she mentioned.) She added that it wasn't just with KD but pretty much NPC-wide. Unfortunately, we didn't have time to talk more about the issue. I certainly had several more questions to ask.

We're all still producing outstanding members so I suppose a longer pledge period isn't an absolute necessity but I'm troubled by the number of drop outs especially since they are dropping out after having been initiated. I tend to believe that the importance of the commitment isn't coming across as well anymore.

Just my 2 cents.

I wonder if the shorten program just happened to coincide with the higher drop out rate. Do you suppose it could be a generational problem?

[Leslie Anne]

I wish I had had the opportunity to discuss the matter further with her. I certainly would have asked why we continue with the shorter pledge period and what else may be causing the drop outs. Personally, I have no idea.

As for whether or not it could be generational, I'll leave that up to the GC intelligentsia.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Leslie Anne

I wish I had had the opportunity to discuss the matter further with her. I certainly would have asked why we continue with the shorter pledge period and what else may be causing the drop outs. Personally, I have no idea.

As for whether or not it could be generational, I'll leave that up to the GC intelligentsia.

If it is a generational issue, the problem is not the shorter pledge period in and of itself...the problem is that once members are initiated, they don't feel they are getting a good value for their money. And no, I'm not being like that dick from Campuspeak who says if you drop out because of money you don't love your GLO. I'm talking about the people who are completely able to pay for it and say "well, here I am...I'm a member...my life is still pretty much the same as it was before I joined. Why did I bother?"

We are social Greek organizations. If you aren't getting an improved social life from your membership (and by that, I mean friendships with your brothers or sisters and social interaction with other Greek groups) you'll probably quit. Social life in Greek organizations isn't what it used to be.

If we aren't going to be social - as in, what the average college student defines as social - we should stop defining ourselves as such. If we want to be purely philanthropic groups, we need to follow that path and jettison the chapters that don't agree. You can't have it both ways, and GLOs have been trying to do that for quite a while now.