Questions about GPA Requirements and PNMs

[DrPhil]

lane swerve/

I do not know where some NPC discussions come from. I keep reading certain threads about letters of recommendation and mutual selection and saying to myself "I feel slow as hell...what is the point of contention." I'm sure some non-NPHCers feel that way about NPHC discussions.

/lane swerve

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

lane swerve/

I do not know where some NPC discussions come from. I keep reading certain threads about letters of recommendation and mutual selection and saying to myself "I feel slow as hell...what is the point of contention." I'm sure some non-NPHCers feel that way about NPHC discussions.

/lane swerve

I'm totally with you. The problem comes when people think they can make a system designed to fit a region work in a place it isn't used or think they can make a system suddenly stop using them. They have their place. Since Towson was the bone of contention in this thread, I'll explain the difficulties trying to suddenly require women to come up with recs when they have no idea what they are. Most women who go through recruitment in the south are locals to their respective schools. At Towson, MD, a large proportion are from Long Island and other New York locations. It is cheaper to go to school at Towson. Since these recs are for OUR benefit, getting these women to get recommendations is not realistic when they have never done them before. Our alumnae in MD have no idea what recommendations are (I personally had to do any recs for students heading down to Bama and Ole Miss requesting recs from our alum chapter when I lived there.) We do have an alumnae chapter in Long Island, but considering that New York schools don't require recs either, the likelihood is that those women are not likely to go out of their way to take time from their busy schedules to hunt down the GPAs for women attending college in a different state. And...they couldn't get those GPAs without permission of the women going through recruitment anyway so the whole point is moot. Recs are a mostly southern thing. I am from the south and from a chapter from the south that used recs so I'm fully aware of them. You just can't shove a square peg in a round hole.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

I'm totally with you. The problem comes when people think they can make a system designed to fit a region work in a place it isn't used or think they can make a system suddenly stop using them. They have their place. Since Towson was the bone of contention in this thread, I'll explain the difficulties trying to suddenly require women to come up with recs when they have no idea what they are. Most women who go through recruitment in the south are locals to their respective schools. At Towson, MD, a large proportion are from Long Island and other New York locations. It is cheaper to go to school at Towson. Since these recs are for OUR benefit, getting these women to get recommendations is not realistic when they have never done them before. Our alumnae in MD have no idea what recommendations are (I personally had to do any recs for students heading down to Bama and Ole Miss requesting recs from our alum chapter when I lived there.) We do have an alumnae chapter in Long Island, but considering that New York schools don't require recs either, the likelihood is that those women are not likely to go out of their way to take time from their busy schedules to hunt down the GPAs for women attending college in a different state. And...they couldn't get those GPAs without permission of the women going through recruitment anyway so the whole point is moot. Recs are a mostly southern thing. I am from the south and from a chapter from the south that used recs so I'm fully aware of them. You just can't shove a square peg in a round hole.

That makes sense. I guess NPC cannot make a mandate that would span across regions and schools. The whole recruitment system is interesting to me because it is one of the explanations for why NPCers across sororities have so many back and forths and share opinions.

At the same time, aspirants/PNMs who really want something will take the necessary steps to make it happen regardless of the region and so forth. NPHC GLOs that require letters of recommendation typically do not remove that requirement for any demographic. It does not matter whether you are a legacy or first generation college student. It does not matter whether all of your high school teachers or people in your church are NPHCers; or whether you do not recall ever meeting an NPHCer before you came to college. You can be from a city with collegiate chapters and alumnae/alumni/graduate chapters or you can be from a city where chapters are more scarce or most chapters have their charter revoked. Regardless of whatever, no exceptions. You better have the basic requirements and it is up to individual chapters and/or schools to assign additional requirements. Despite the fact that many NPHC aspirants have been aspiring and planning prior to their first year in college, the average racial and ethnic minority is a first generation college student who may or may not have any NPHC background info and networks. There are also financial/active NPHCers who have never done a letter of recommendation for an aspirant or who have not kept up to date on their GLO's requirements. Either way, it must all be figured out if aspirants want to be in the NPHC GLOs that have letters of recommendation as a basic requirement.

(The letter of rec contention makes more sense now that I have typed that. The mutual selection contention still doesn't make sense. LOL. Ignore me, though.)


/lane swerve

[Titchou]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

(The letter of rec contention makes more sense now that I have typed that. The mutual selection contention still doesn't make sense. LOL. Ignore me, though.)


/lane swerve

NPHC is actually doing "mutual selection" just in a different way. Your org is sitting there, needing aspirants. So, the aspirant (PNM) does his/her due diligence and follows your intake process. He/she has selected XXX as GLO of choice. Then, XXX decides if they want the aspirant (you select). So you both have selected and that is mutual selection. I don't know why everyone gets so wound up about the term. If a PNM or aspirant could choose any group and be assured of membership, it wouldn't be mutual! And if the GLO could pick any PNM/aspirant and demand they join, that wouldn't be mutual either. Somewhere along the line people have placed a different meaning on "mutual selection" than was intended.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Titchou

I don't know why everyone gets so wound up about the term. If a PNM or aspirant could choose any group and be assured of membership, it wouldn't be mutual! And if the GLO could pick any PNM/aspirant and demand they join, that wouldn't be mutual either. Somewhere along the line people have placed a different meaning on "mutual selection" than was intended.

The bolded is what I do not understand. Why is this idea a point of contention for some NPCers?

GLOs do not force aspirants/PNMs to be interested in us, aspirants/PNMs do not force us to choose them, and GLOs do not force aspirants/PNMs to decide to join if they are chosen. Even if there is sometimes an implication of snootyness and rejectment, is that not okay considering that GLOs are among the organizations in the world with selection processes and no aspirant sense of entitlement?

/lane swerve