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

[AXOrushadvisor]

Someone mentioned the getting to know you activities that were dropped. In our Chapter they were called "coke dates". All pledges had a little book and they had to meet with every active in the Chapter and ask her questions. This took sometimes weeks, but it was a good investment IMO. This is now considered hazing.

In the early 80's the programs were very structured with exams throughout the program on different aspects of the sorority. You then had to pass a big exam at the end AND your grades had better be at or above the requirement to get initiated when you came back in January.

When you spend a semester to get initiated instead of 6-8 weeks you have a bigger investment and in my opinion more of an ownership of the Chapter and process. I do think the shortened period does lead to people quitting, not staying involved and really missing the true essence of sisterhood. And I do seem to remember the big push for a shortened period was hazing. My opinion on hazing though is that Chapters either do it or don't. Hazing, I believe, is based more on the traditions of the Chapter as a whole and there are still Chapters participating in hazing with shortened periods. One had their Charter pulled last year for it.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by AXOrushadvisor

Someone mentioned the getting to know you activities that were dropped. In our Chapter they were called "coke dates". All pledges had a little book and they had to meet with every active in the Chapter and ask her questions. This took sometimes weeks, but it was a good investment IMO. This is now considered hazing.

The thing is, nothing says this has to be done before initiation. I think it would be great if the older girls planned "coke dates" throughout the first semester or year or whatever. That would help to cut down on the "I just initiated and don't feel connected" that we see so often.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it has less to do with the actual length of the pledge period, and more to do with the way you pledge, initiate, and then....nothing...In housed chapters, you generally don't move in until the following year, and in unhoused chapters, you may not start to hold offices and stuff until later. I think a short pledge program is fine (if it really does cut down on hazing), but then it needs to be followed up with a new initiate program or something.

I know some NPC's are trying to restructure their member ed. to go all four years, and I think that's critical. How about NM programming, then New Initiate programming, then minor officer/committee member programming, then e-board programming, then senior programming? That's oversimplifying, but I think we have just as much trouble losing seniors as New-I's. Seniors may not leave, but they pay their dues and only show up to totally mandatory events.

I think SigEp really does a great job on this stuff in their Balanced Man program. I don't know much about it, but maybe it could be emulated elsewhere.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

The thing is, nothing says this has to be done before initiation. I think it would be great if the older girls planned "coke dates" throughout the first semester or year or whatever. That would help to cut down on the "I just initiated and don't feel connected" that we see so often.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it has less to do with the actual length of the pledge period, and more to do with the way you pledge, initiate, and then....nothing...In housed chapters, you generally don't move in until the following year, and in unhoused chapters, you may not start to hold offices and stuff until later. I think a short pledge program is fine (if it really does cut down on hazing), but then it needs to be followed up with a new initiate program or something.

We had a program called KROP - Keep Rushing Our Pledges (I guess now it would be Keep Recruiting Our Pearls) that addressed these concerns.

I think that kind of disconnectedness is a lot worse in chapters where formal rush, homecoming and Greek week are all in the same semester. We had 2 rushes a year so the newest girls were doing it right away, plus they had (depending on when they initiated) either homecoming or Greek week to look forward to. I mean what do you do in spring at Ole Miss? Go on spring break?

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

That's oversimplifying, but I think we have just as much trouble losing seniors as New-I's. Seniors may not leave, but they pay their dues and only show up to totally mandatory events.

I know we've talked about this before, and I think that sometimes the programs that are supposed to help seniors "look to the future" are more likely making them feel like they're being pushed out of the chapter.

[ree-Xi]

Originally Posted by AXOrushadvisor

Someone mentioned the getting to know you activities that were dropped. In our Chapter they were called "coke dates". All pledges had a little book and they had to meet with every active in the Chapter and ask her questions. This took sometimes weeks, but it was a good investment IMO. This is now considered hazing.

In the early 80's the programs were very structured with exams throughout the program on different aspects of the sorority. You then had to pass a big exam at the end AND your grades had better be at or above the requirement to get initiated when you came back in January.

When you spend a semester to get initiated instead of 6-8 weeks you have a bigger investment and in my opinion more of an ownership of the Chapter and process. I do think the shortened period does lead to people quitting, not staying involved and really missing the true essence of sisterhood. And I do seem to remember the big push for a shortened period was hazing. My opinion on hazing though is that Chapters either do it or don't. Hazing, I believe, is based more on the traditions of the Chapter as a whole and there are still Chapters participating in hazing with shortened periods. One had their Charter pulled last year for it.

In AXiD, we had something similar. We had to interview and get a signature from every active sister (at the time, there were 56). In addition to basic interview questions, we had to add our own "fun" questions.

The interaction had to last a minimum of 10 minutes, and could consist of any activity - lunch at the cafeteria, hanging out in her room, etc. It forced us - though I don't like the word "force" - to meet and at least get to know each member on a basic level. Twenty years later, I still remember little bits of facts such as middle names and hometowns. Sometimes, an active would give us a "task" to earn her signature, usually something silly like bringing a note to someone else and waiting for a reply or singing a song, or answering a question about fraternity history.

There were also requirements for things to be done as a pledge class, which essentially ensured that we spent time together.

Obviously, there is room for these sort of things to get out of control and be labeled as hazing, but I think that these type of "requirements" gave us plenty of opportunity to get to know each other.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

In AXiD, we had something similar. We had to interview and get a signature from every active sister (at the time, there were 56). . . . It forced us - though I don't like the word "force" - to meet and at least get to know each member on a basic level.

Not NPC, of course, but we did very much the same thing. In our case, it was a hat that had to be signed. By the end of the probationary member period (about 6 weeks at the time), your hat had to have the signatures of all active brothers. The only brother who would offer to sign your hat was your big brother. For all other brothers, you had to approach them and at the least have the kind of conversation you describe to get to know them. Some brothers would sign the hat at that point, while others might say something like they'd sign the hat when you gave them the answer to a fraternity trivia question. That sent you off to learn more about the Fraternity.

It's been decades, and I still have my hat.

[melindawarren]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

In AXiD, we had something similar. We had to interview and get a signature from every active sister (at the time, there were 56). In addition to basic interview questions, we had to add our own "fun" questions.

The interaction had to last a minimum of 10 minutes, and could consist of any activity - lunch at the cafeteria, hanging out in her room, etc. It forced us - though I don't like the word "force" - to meet and at least get to know each member on a basic level. Twenty years later, I still remember little bits of facts such as middle names and hometowns. Sometimes, an active would give us a "task" to earn her signature, usually something silly like bringing a note to someone else and waiting for a reply or singing a song, or answering a question about fraternity history.

Aside from the bold portion, I see no reason why chapters shouldn't expect everyone to do this. How else do you get to know people?

[33girl]

Originally Posted by melindawarren

Aside from the bold portion, I see no reason why chapters shouldn't expect everyone to do this. How else do you get to know people?

Because of the bold portion - this is why interviews were banned by NPC groups. Too many people went overboard with what you should have to do to "earn" the interview or signature. We NEVER used them in that way, even something mild like what ree-xi mentions makes me uncomfortable.

Of course, it would have been nice if the people abusing them would have been the only ones punished with their elimination and everyone else could have kept what was for many people their favorite part of pledging...but that would make too much sense.

[Mevara]

Originally Posted by AXOrushadvisor

Someone mentioned the getting to know you activities that were dropped. In our Chapter they were called "coke dates". All pledges had a little book and they had to meet with every active in the Chapter and ask her questions. This took sometimes weeks, but it was a good investment IMO. This is now considered hazing.

I really like the idea of "coke dates" and wish they would bring it back. I wonder if you did it as an entire chapter (since you are not singling anyone out) that it would not be considered hazing.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Mevara

I really like the idea of "coke dates" and wish they would bring it back. I wonder if you did it as an entire chapter (since you are not singling anyone out) that it would not be considered hazing.

If you do it as an entire chapter, it kind of defeats the purpose. Some people don't shine in a group situation and I had interviews one on one with sisters that were WAY better than they would have ever been had it been everyone together, going around the room answering questions or something.

[Mevara]

Originally Posted by 33girl

If you do it as an entire chapter, it kind of defeats the purpose. Some people don't shine in a group situation and I had interviews one on one with sisters that were WAY better than they would have ever been had it been everyone together, going around the room answering questions or something.

I didn't mean to have the whole chapter do it at the same time. But to require the whole chapter to do it on their own collecting the signatures of everyone in the chapter (actives & new members).

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Mevara

I didn't mean to have the whole chapter do it at the same time. But to require the whole chapter to do it on their own collecting the signatures of everyone in the chapter (actives & new members).

In my junior year, we instituted that sisters also interviewed pledges and I think that the sisters HAD to get them all (obviously this would need to be finessed in a 100+ member chapter). Even w/ the sisters doing the same thing the same way (having to set up the interviews, no "on the fly") we still weren't allowed to keep doing them.

Our first nationwide program was ridiculous. No one on one contact was allowed - ever. EVERYTHING was in groups, star circles, etc etc. Now IMO they've swung back too far the other way and the pledges - if the program isn't worked well - are responsible for way more on their own than they should be.

[Mevara]

Originally Posted by 33girl

In my junior year, we instituted that sisters also interviewed pledges and I think that the sisters HAD to get them all (obviously this would need to be finessed in a 100+ member chapter). Even w/ the sisters doing the same thing the same way (having to set up the interviews, no "on the fly") we still weren't allowed to keep doing them.

Our first nationwide program was ridiculous. No one on one contact was allowed - ever. EVERYTHING was in groups, star circles, etc etc. Now IMO they've swung back too far the other way and the pledges - if the program isn't worked well - are responsible for way more on their own than they should be.

I know what you mean about it swinging way too far in the opposite direction. Our chapter used to have meetings that the attire was jeans & letters. Since the new members didn't have letters it left them out hence considered hazing and we stopped doing it.