Indiana University 2014 Recruitment

[Rhomom]

Originally Posted by pinksequins

Rhomom -- you note that the actives are disgusted with the process. The good news is that they are the ones with the power to change it.

No, unfortunately the current actives do not. In fact, they have very little control (individually) of who gets through. Perhaps as alums they will become involved--then they may be able to change things. But for now, they too play with the cards they are dealt.

[Hoosierxgirl]

Originally Posted by HQWest

Mostly positive is by definition not positive.
And just because it is different then your experience does not mean it could not be as good or better.

I never said that. Once again I am making clearly that these are not MY opinions. These are things that have been brought up many people in the Greek System and contribute to why this system hasn't changed in 30+ years.

I know the process is flawed and I know it needs to be changed. When I was a Rho Gamma, it broke my heart that almost half of my group didn't receive bids. Especially because I knew most of them would have made very positive additions to the Greek System. It also broke my heart that my sister and I were the only women from our dorm floor to get bids - and we were both CORs. It's awful for everyone involved.

I think many of your have excellent points and the further removed I get from the IU recruitment process, the more I see the issues. I think we can all agree that something needs to be and that is going to take a huge shift in attitude and culture.

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by Hoosierxgirl

Maybe this is the wrong time to bring this up but I've been thinking today about what adding 20-30 more women to my pledge class would have done to my experience. I'm sure it would've been mostly positive - more women to get to know, more diversity, etc. Then I started to think about all the logistics - risk management, planning events, etc. Even silly things like chapter meetings. Where would we put another 70-100 girls (if each pledge class was increased)? Would it be responsible to have our risk management chair and Exec board in charge of another 100 women? Some of the chapters at IU are already some of the largest chapters of their respective GLO - I just wonder if the current infrastructure of our chapters would be able to support a dramatic increase in membership. I guess it would be done over time but I think these are considerations that need to be made. I'd be lying if I didn't acknowledge that a lot of resistance to change at IU is because of the exclusivity factor of recruitment - if you happen to make it through the Games, you consider yourself a survivor and expect the same selection process of future pledge classes.

Like I said before, I know how heartbreaking this process is. It's not fair but I also don't know how much else can be done to expand the current size of chapters under a quota system.

QFP
(and also in post #366)

[pinksequins]

RhoMom -- they do. If as many women as you allege are unhappy with the process they can make it known to their Panhellenic delegates and alumnae. So, either the degree of dissatisfaction is overstated or it's another rationalization for not doing anything. I just keep reading lame excuses.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Titchou

I have no clue how this got slanted to house corporations being an issue.

I don't either, except for maybe the house corps are the ones most concerned with OMG MUST FILL HOUSE and not wanting to do anything to upset the applecart. That is how I took it, anyway.

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I...can't think of a single chapter for which that is true.

I can.

Originally Posted by HQWest

(BTW - Texas A&M, U. Texas, The Ohio State, Penn State, Florida - are all bigger than IUB AND have flourishing Greek life AND they rank higher too.)

I know the argument you're trying to make and agree with it, but Penn State really isn't a good one to throw into this since the sororities have suites instead of houses. Also the fact that Pennsylvania has extremely parochial liquor laws (i.e. you don't mind leaving the suite your senior year) plays into it too.

Originally Posted by Rhomom

Lastly, IU admissions has no control over the current system, nor does the administration, the board of trustees or the dean of students. Short of removing sororities from campus, their hands are tied. I know this because I am also an IU "employee". Believe me, we are bracing for unhappy students and parents, and are very, very tired of the way things are done. The only people that can change this is panhel, individual nationals and NPC.

Could the administration derecognize groups if they don't adopt (example) a senior live-out policy? Kind of like if the states didn't adopt the 21 drinking age they forfeited federal highway funding?

If you are comfortable with it, could you elaborate as to why exactly their hands are so tied? GLOs are on campuses at the invitation of the campus. There have been lots of instances of things on here that GLOs didn't like or were flat out against policy that they had to do because the campus said so.

And everyone needs to chill on the IU students that are posting here and think about how you would have felt when you were 18-21 and someone proposed something that to your line of thinking would completely change your life. Good Lord, I've heard of knock down drag-outs in Panhellenics over raising or lowering total by 5 people. This is quite a bit more of a deal.

[pinksequins]

Oh, the hyperbole. Will change your entire life? Please.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by pinksequins

Oh, the hyperbole. Will change your entire life? Please.

Put on your 18 year old brain, dear.

[gatordeltapgh]

Originally Posted by Rhomom

The only people that can change this is panhel, individual nationals and NPC.

I've been reading and trying to stay out of the discussion. The only ones who can change this system is the individual chapters via vote at a Panhellenic meeting. NPC has been trying to get IU on board with the quota/total system for YEARS. YEARS! The biggest head honchos have tried and these women are past national presidents!

NPC can't force anyone's had because that is against the Unanimous Agreements and member groups sovereign rights. The Univ can't force the had technically due to freedom of association. They could apply pressure, but please let's not compare IU to Bama right now. The national HQ's have talked about the issue collectively and with the chapters. The feedback has been that the collegians don't want change. Maybe with the added disaster of the weather and an even more brutal recruitment, the community will begin to consider change. Bottom line is that the chapters have to want it and vote for the quota/total system.

In the real world if the "social leaders" support change it will happen easily. If not then the other chapters need to band together and get the discussion going. I'm not sure anyone will step up and that might be the most tragic thing of all.

[pinksequins]

Still hyperbole -- affects their social life, sure.

[Rhomom]

Originally Posted by pinksequins

RhoMom -- they do. If as many women as you allege are unhappy with the process they can make it known to their Panhellenic delegates and alumnae. So, either the degree of dissatisfaction is overstated or it's another rationalization for not doing anything. I just keep reading lame excuses.

I "allege" nothing. This is simply the way it is. Actives HAVE expressed their concerns--to panhel, to nationals and they have worked with NPC. IU has opened up for expansion, many houses are allowing live outs and there are some small strides being made. It is however Panhel with direction from Nationals and alums who make the process decisions, not current members. If you are affiliated with an organization that allows current actives to drive the recruitment process, that is terrific, however it is not that simple. This is a complex system issue requiring a major shift in culture. The actives who feel this way today must continue to pursue change when they do have the power to impact things--as alumna.

[APhiO&ADPiGal]

Originally Posted by Rhomom

No, unfortunately the current actives do not. In fact, they have very little control (individually) of who gets through. Perhaps as alums they will become involved--then they may be able to change things. But for now, they too play with the cards they are dealt.

I've been reading through this thread and just banging my head at the insanity of the whole process, but I really can't let this comment slide. As a senior in my chapter and a former (2 term) Panhellenic delegate for my chapter, I'm pretty baffled.

It's simple - talk to or email your President. Your chapter delegate. Your PHC officers. Email doesn't work? Go to a Panhellenic meeting and state your views. (I'm not sure about every school, but we had PHC association meetings occasionally that we encouraged women from all chapters to attend.) I understand IU is a far bigger school than my own (less than 5 chapters), but communicating with each other's pretty darn simple with email, texting, phones, and just stopping by the dorm/meeting room.

Change may not happen overnight, but it is the women in the chapters right now that vote on Panhellenic as delegates, propose Panhellenic legislation, serve as officers, and run the governing body - and not the alumnae of each chapter.

[Rhomom]

Originally Posted by pinksequins

RhoMom -- they do. If as many women as you allege are unhappy with the process they can make it known to their Panhellenic delegates and alumnae. So, either the degree of dissatisfaction is overstated or it's another rationalization for not doing anything. I just keep reading lame excuses.

I am not alleging this--it is reality. And, these women HAVE expressed their concerns--to nationals, to panhel, and they have worked with NPC. IU has opened up for expansion, and many chapters are allowing live-outs--small but significant steps. It is however, Panhel with direction from Nationals and alums who make the process decisions, not current members. If you are affiliated with an organization that allows current actives to drive the recruitment process, that is terrific, but it is not that simple. This is a complex system issue requiring a major shift in culture. Current actives must continue to focus on the process after they graduate. Alumna are heard, collegians, not so much.

[arrowlady]

As Panhellenic co-chair for my area I know personally girls at many different campuses. We have a number of girls at Bama and Arkansas, both schools with huge pledge classes. The thing about having an 85% + placement rate using RFM is that girls are dying to live in the house. These campuses have point systems based on grades, volunteer hours and participation. By encouraging these things you get well rounded young women.

Have all the girls from my area made it though the process and gotten bids at these schools.... no. The girls that do not have lower high school grades and not enough activities and we tell them to keep a very open mind as the will get tough cuts. Many do keep an open mind and find great sisterhoods.

My own daughter's chapter at Texas A&M has over 200 girls, while she doesn't know them all really well, she knows where everyone is from and a little about them. She loves her sisters and would be there for any of them. They manage to fit all the girls in the house for meetings, have date parties etc.

She is living in the house this year as a sophomore and will be in again next year as an exec officer. Most girls do one year in the house then move off campus. They treasure their year in the house but are happy to let the younger girls move in and have some freedom.

It is a travesty to say that campuses with larger quotas/chapters are not having a special experience.

[33girl]

I know this is probably different for every group, but can a housing corp place any restrictions on the women who live in the house (i.e. can they say seniors have to live out)? Or do they not have that much power?

[arrowlady]

Originally Posted by Rhomom

I am not alleging this--it is reality. And, these women HAVE expressed their concerns--to nationals, to panhel, and they have worked with NPC. IU has opened up for expansion, and many chapters are allowing live-outs--small but significant steps. It is however, Panhel with direction from Nationals and alums who make the process decisions, not current members. If you are affiliated with an organization that allows current actives to drive the recruitment process, that is terrific, but it is not that simple. This is a complex system issue requiring a major shift in culture. Current actives must continue to focus on the process after they graduate. Alumna are heard, collegians, not so much.

I would think the collegians would be the ones with the voice as they comprise the CPC. They would need buy in from the alumnae but they can drive the process.