Quote:
Originally Posted by SoProud2BeAnAlphaXi
With due respect to my good Sister, I need to say as a seasoned RFM specialist that I have been party to many, MANY conversations and strategy sessions with IU's (equally seasoned) RFM specialist as she has worked to make the best of this exceptionally challenging situation. She has spent probably an entire week of her life -- volunteer time of course -- not just handling the numbers but explaining in various ways to the administration, and to the chapters on campus and their inter/national counterparts (the latter of which might also be referred to as "the choir") why the current setup is far less than ideal and should be changed in order to meet the demand for the sorority experience at IU. She has been beating this drum and advocating change for years, not just this year when it became "news". Meanwhile, there are NPC groups who will tell you their chapter's health at Indiana has been significantly improved under her RFM guidance, working the numbers as best she could.
It is unfair, at best, to blame someone who has taken on the thankless task of trying to manage numbers for a community where chapters simply won't consider taking nearly half the women going through recruitment (but all with different numbers, which sometimes change after recruitment's already begun). I know the whole situation is very frustrating, but let's not attribute fault where it does not belong.
|
Thank you for that clarification of the RFM part of this puzzle. I think it is very important to point out that NPC (which RFM specialists represent) have only an advisory role on a campus. They have no power to make these chapters agree to massive overhaul of the system. I honestly don't know how you would decide on release numbers in this situation. Blaming the people who are trying to make a difference is not the way to go, obviously, but so many people don't understand who is to blame.
Hybrid Mode
