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

[WTH]

As an advisor of many years both to my own chapter and the local chapter of my fraternity, I've noticed a phenomenon that is troubling me, and I'm hoping to get some input from others.

Back in my days as an active (mid to late 70s), it was implicitly understood in our chapter that membership was a lifetime commitment. Dropping out as an active was almost unheard of. Accordingly, we had a long pledge program (or associate membership program, to use the modern term), with initiation taking place in the first week after Christmas break. In my mind, this was good from two points of view: (1) we had the fall grades in hand, and (2) the Christmas break gave some of the pledges a chance to think over if they -really- wanted to make that commitment. Some guys came back from break and decided to drop, and in my mind that was a good thing. Not everyone was cut out to take a lifetime oath, and it was better for them to go their own way.

However, today our national HQ is strongly pushing a six-week associate membership program for all chapters, with initiation taking place before Thanksgiving. I've seen this program applied at the local chapter, and I've also noticed that the initiated brothers seem to think nothing of turning in their pins and dropping out whenever it suits them. The local chapter has lost maybe a dozen brothers over the past year and a half, mostly with excuses of "I don't have time" or "It's too expensive". I can't help but think that this behavior is strongly correlated with the abbreviated associate member program; the percentage of guys that drop seems to be equivalent to the percentage that used to drop at the start of spring semester back in my day, except that today these guys have paid the initiation fee and gone through the ritual. My concern is that this "brotherhood is no big deal" behavior is affecting the entire chapter as a consequence. When brothers see members walk out the door without shame or concern, it undermines the entire concept of "a lifetime of brotherhood".

For years my own chapter resisted this trend of an abbreviated associate member program, but now our national office has threatened to pull our insurance unless we comply. My concern is that my own chapter will now begin to see the same trend of drop-outs after initiation that the local chapter is dealing with. I've talked to the BOG chairman for my home chapter, and he says that our national officers have noticed this trend in many chapters, and that they are concerned about it. On the other hand, the push for a 6 to 8 week program coupled with fall semester initiation is, as I understand, an idea that many other national fraternities are pursuing with equal fervor.

My personal opinion is that our national HQ pushed for this change because they noticed how fewer men paid the initiation fee than the association fee. They wanted that extra money, and forcing a quick initiation was the best way to improve the percentage. On the other hand, it seems that two years later you've lost just as many members, but (in my mind) in a manner that is much more demoralizing to the chapter. The whole point of the pledge program was for everyone to figure out who was, or was not, a good fit for the chapter. Now it seems the entire process is being short-circuited for the sake of short-term financial gain.

So my question is this: has anyone else noticed a similar trend of "quitting the brotherhood is no big deal" in correlation with a shortened associate membership program? Or has this always been an issue in other fraternity chapters? Any thoughts on ways to turn this trend around?

[33girl]

Men and women are different, but back when I pledged in the 1980s, we also had a 6 week pledge program. We had a 100% initiation rate and very few self-terminations.

We also had +/- 40 sisters and a smallish campus. To my knowledge, most of the guys initiated their members within the semester (no holdovers over break) as well.

If 6 weeks is not enough FOR YOUR CHAPTER to impart the following information:
-all pledges to know (at least in passing) all brothers;
-basic history, symbols, etc;
-familiarity with what each office does;
-familiarity (name and gender) with ALL the other Greek groups on campus;

THEN 6 weeks is too short.

However, if your only reason for wanting to keep it a semester long is the "back in the day, WE did it this way" reason, that really doesn't fly, and really never flew.

6 weeks is not too short of a time for pledges to understand a lifetime commitment, IF the program is effective and IF the current brothers are showing THEY are committed as well. If the current brothers are big sacks of poo, a semester long program isn't going to help.

[ThetaPrincess24]

Another reason that more groups are moving to shorter new member periods is to help lessen the risk for hazing. Having said that, it is possible with some groups that shorter new member periods can be the result of the fraternity's own insurance policy they must follow in order to be covered.

[33girl]

Another reason that more groups are moving to shorter new member periods is to help lessen the risk for hazing.

See, I don't think this is a legitimate reason.

The "new brothers/sisters" can be hazed just as easily after they're initiated. If a chapter wants to haze that badly, it's going to do so. We always heard about the locals at a local church sponsored college hazing like crazy, and their pledging was only 2 weeks long.

[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.

[knight_shadow]

See, I don't think this is a legitimate reason.

The "new brothers/sisters" can be hazed just as easily after they're initiated. If a chapter wants to haze that badly, it's going to do so. We always heard about the locals at a local church sponsored college hazing like crazy, and their pledging was only 2 weeks long.

Yea, I was going to say the same thing.

Going from a semester down to 6 weeks can just mean "get more hazing bang for your buck" to the ones that want to do it.

[WTH]

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.

[Mevara]

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.

[KSUViolet06]

To be honest, it's easy to get NMs initiated.

The real retention issue is that critical first year after initiation (the period from after initiation to about fall of sophomore year.) That's where I find that sororities have the biggest issues retention-wise.

I don't know how it is for fraternities though.

[33girl]

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.

[Jen]

I think too that there might be a degree of people just not valuing "lifetime" anything anymore. It's so easy to switch things, change things up, change jobs, move, transfer schools ... technology has made everything so easy and fast, that I can see people not really appreciating the "lifetime" vow and feeling like "eh, this is hard/not fun/boring, I'll go find another group" and then realizing they can't and feeling trapped because they are so used to just switching things whenever they hit a rough patch.

[33girl]

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]

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.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^This is why I was SUPER happy that when we launched Essential Sigma (switching from just NM ed to total member ed) that we kept our New Member Test as a component of the NM sequence of the program. I feel like it impresses important info into your brain because you have to pass to initiate.

[Leslie Anne]

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.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^A big part of retention = the extent to which NMs responsibilities match up with the responsibilities they WILL have once initiated.

For example: if you go from "cake, presents, not actually being required to attend anything, YAY!" to "you must hold a chair or be on a committee, meet 90% of attendance points, and participate in at least x study hours per week" you're going to have a retention issue because your NMs are going from zero to 60 in 2 months.

I'm a big fan of programs that require some of the same things of NMs that will be required of them once initiated. For example: Requiring NMs to do study hours and meet attendance points and come to chapter every week just like everyone else. I know that ours and a few other NPC's programs are the same way.

I've heard of situations in some NM programs where you can miss like half of your NM meetings, come to like one event, and you are still allowed to be initiated. Obviously that NM is going to terminate her membership once she sees that she went from having to do nothing to having a full slate of expectations.

[aephi alum]

The real retention issue is that critical first year after initiation (the period from after initiation to about fall of sophomore year.) That's where I find that sororities have the biggest issues retention-wise.

That, plus the retention of seniors who rushed and pledged the moment they set foot on campus, and have gotten burned out.

^^^A big part of retention = the extent to which NMs responsibilities match up with the responsibilities they WILL have once initiated.

For example: if you go from "cake, presents, not actually being required to attend anything, YAY!" to "you must hold a chair or be on a committee, meet 90% of attendance points, and participate in at least x study hours per week" you're going to have a retention issue because your NMs are going from zero to 60 in 2 months.

<snip>

I've heard of situations in some NM programs where you can miss like half of your NM meetings, come to like one event, and you are still allowed to be initiated. Obviously that NM is going to terminate her membership once she sees that she went from having to do nothing to having a full slate of expectations.

Agreed.

Our NMs have to meet certain minimum requirements before they can be initiated. A portion of those requirements can be met by attending chapter or by joining committees (they're obviously not allowed if anything ritual is going on, but they can at least get a whiff of the business aspect of being a sister). This way, they have a decent understanding of what it means to be a full sister, before they actually become full sisters.

One chapter at my school ran a 4-week NM program during my freshman year. They met quota, but fewer than half of that class were still affiliated when we graduated.

[melindawarren]

First, I have a question: when did the shift from longer NM periods to shorter NM periods begin?

I ask because I wonder if maybe-just maybe-the economy of the last few years could be a cause of larger post-initiation dropouts. But I don't know when the NM period went from a semester to a few weeks, so I could be totally off-base.

I know some people who dropped during the NM period (several different sororities. I hate to sound clueless, but I only know-like, actually KNOW well enough to comment-three guys in fraternities, and I know they're all still in their respective orgs) because they realized the time commitment was too great. Unless there are groups out there where the time thing really just doesn't get mentioned until after initiation, I don't really see that as the problem.

Another thing I've wondered about-and this is just speculation, and I hope I don't get jumped all over for saying this, but it's something I've thought about-how big are the groups we're talking about here? I mean, there've been monster pledge classes in the last few years. I just think that there may be girls who drop after a certain amount of time because they just don't feel like they can make any headway in such a large group (I don't just mean leadership-wise. How can such a large group mix with a fraternity? What about sisterhood activities?). I can't really speak to it because I'm not in something very big, but I can only imagine that, with a huge group, someone could get lost in the shuffle. But this is all just speculation.

One last idea: maybe new member programs aren't targeting the important information. Maybe, if retention really is an issue, the new member program needs to address the lifelong bonds of a fraternity or sorority. My best friend and I just had a conversation about how most people our age are very focused on what's going on right now. Today's Wednesday (yes, it's very early Wednesday, but it's Wednesday nonetheless), and I've barely heard discussion of anything going on beyond Friday (she hadn't heard discussion of anything beyond the weekend, either, and she goes to another school). The concept of "lifetime membership" or, well, anything lasting a lifetime seems intangible to this generation because everything gets upgraded and re-released as new tomorrow, the next day or the day after. The concept of lifelong membership thrills me, but I get how some people just don't get the "lifelong" part.

Ok, I don't know if anything I've said links to anything else I've said. I just had some ideas/questions and the title of the thread intrigued me.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

MW brings up finances, which are really important. NM's in my chapter got hit with a lot of stuff up front (badge fee, initiation fee, parlor fee), and if they had trouble, we'd put them on payment plans to space it out more, but if someone really can't pay, they can't pay. I hate to say it, but GLOs cost money, and if someone is really not in a financial position to be in one, we shouldn't delay the inevitable.

[agzg]

I thought for sure this would be a conversation about accelerated associate degree programs (16-18 months) and was going to say "yes, I do think that many people who can't hang with being in class 38-40 hours a week drop out quite often."

[DaffyKD]

First, I have a question: when did the shift from longer NM periods to shorter NM periods begin?


MW, I don't know about any other sororities, but Kappa Delta changed to a shorter NM period at their 1993 convention. I do not know how the NM period works as I had been a alumna for a long time before the change. I do know that at least one chapter does do something with one of the local alumnae chapters so that the NMs can be introduced at a very early stage to the long time bonds that are formed. My AC will be meeting with some of the girls (initiated members and a few girls who became new members 2 weeks ago) for lunch on Saturday. We will do a Founder's Day event and share how KD is a long term part of our lives.

DaffyKD

[Blondie93]

I hold a position where I have access to my chapter's member database. The increase in resignations increased dramatically in the immediate years after the shortened iniation period was instituted and has held steady since that time. I won't release the exact numbers, as I feel that should be member info only, but suffice it to say that I think there is a statistically significant link.

For context, this is a chapter where total was 120 in the 90s, now 150. Dues are not astronomical, as the chapter houses are owned by the university and the 36 students who live in them pay the housing portion of dues. Any student who worked even 10 hours a week would be able to cover her dues each semester.


First, I have a question: when did the shift from longer NM periods to shorter NM periods begin?

I ask because I wonder if maybe-just maybe-the economy of the last few years could be a cause of larger post-initiation dropouts. But I don't know when the NM period went from a semester to a few weeks, so I could be totally off-base.


I pledged in 1992, and my Theta chapter was among the very last to switch to a shorter new member period. By Fall 1993, when we switched, I believe all Theta chapters were shortened. At that time, ADPi nationally had completed (or almost completed, not sure) their switch. None of the other 8 chapters on my campus had switched, but many of them were being encouraged to do so by their HQs. I suspect the switch really ramped up by the mid 90s.

[Mevara]

^^^This is why I was SUPER happy that when we launched Essential Sigma (switching from just NM ed to total member ed) that we kept our New Member Test as a component of the NM sequence of the program. I feel like it impresses important info into your brain because you have to pass to initiate.



When I was in the chapter I was in charge of Initiation one year. I tried to give the NMs a test about our history,founders etc. and was told I could not. Giving them a test was considered hazing and we were very good about not hazing. Ever since then I have felt the NMs (and later as actives) knew very little about what our sorority on a local or national level really was about.

[melindawarren]

My AC will be meeting with some of the girls (initiated members and a few girls who became new members 2 weeks ago) for lunch on Saturday. We will do a Founder's Day event and share how KD is a long term part of our lives.


That sounds like a really good way to reinforce the concept of lifelong commitment.

MW, I don't know about any other sororities, but Kappa Delta changed to a shorter NM period at their 1993 convention. I do not know how the NM period works as I had been a alumna for a long time before the change.

I pledged in 1992, and my Theta chapter was among the very last to switch to a shorter new member period. By Fall 1993, when we switched, I believe all Theta chapters were shortened. At that time, ADPi nationally had completed (or almost completed, not sure) their switch. None of the other 8 chapters on my campus had switched, but many of them were being encouraged to do so by their HQs. I suspect the switch really ramped up by the mid 90s.

DaffyKD doesn't know (as she says in her post), but this leads me to another question: what is the difference between longer and shorter NM programs? That sounds like a ridiculous question, but did groups cut large amounts of information from their educational programs and things like that? How did they shorten them, and what did they lose in the shortening process? Did they have to cram so much in that the girls just feel lost?

Obviously, that's a tough question to answer, and you can't answer in too much detail, but I'm curious how NM programs changed once they were shortened.

[HQWest]

One last idea: maybe new member programs aren't targeting the important information. Maybe, if retention really is an issue, the new member program needs to address the lifelong bonds of a fraternity or sorority. My best friend and I just had a conversation about how most people our age are very focused on what's going on right now. Today's Wednesday (yes, it's very early Wednesday, but it's Wednesday nonetheless), and I've barely heard discussion of anything going on beyond Friday (she hadn't heard discussion of anything beyond the weekend, either, and she goes to another school). The concept of "lifetime membership" or, well, anything lasting a lifetime seems intangible to this generation because everything gets upgraded and re-released as new tomorrow, the next day or the day after. The concept of lifelong membership thrills me, but I get how some people just don't get the "lifelong" part.
.

I don't think it has anything to do with the shortened new member period. I think that this might be why we see more women resigning as members, but I think the more girls were resigning as new members early. I think MW hit it on the head when she mentioned the generational shift to a very now focused group in combination with huge recruitment numbers. I think there are a lot of girls who walk in on Bid Day and expect to have 100 new best friends, and when they aren't suddenly Miss Popular Elle Woods they are disappointed. They set their expectations so high that when we don't meet them or they don't get their first choice they get unhappy. RPW helps more women get placed, but still a lot of girls get their second choice, and its getting a lot harder to help them find their way and be happy in the chapter.

On the one hand we encourage women to go through recruitment to meet people, but some of them, once they do, that was really all they wanted to do. Others like the idea of a sorority, but once they found out about grade requirements, study hours, philanthropy hours, and that sorority women are expected to behave like ladies, they lost interest. Throw in a tough economy and that can be one more thing they are trying to juggle with college.

[HQWest]

That sounds like a really good way to reinforce the concept of lifelong commitment.

DaffyKD doesn't know (as she says in her post), but this leads me to another question: what is the difference between longer and shorter NM programs? That sounds like a ridiculous question, but did groups cut large amounts of information from their educational programs and things like that? How did they shorten them, and what did they lose in the shortening process? Did they have to cram so much in that the girls just feel lost?

Obviously, that's a tough question to answer, and you can't answer in too much detail, but I'm curious how NM programs changed once they were shortened.

When our group shortened the NM program, it took out some of the "getting to know you" activities, and switched to a more focused, meeting type format to cover specific important historical or philosophical ideal material. The problem is it is a kind of seminar format with outside reading, and before it was more like history class or learning with games. We have to be more organized now for it to work well. Several Big/Lil sis activities are now combined with chapter meetings. We actually have more than one option so that you can extend this out a little - say skip a meeting for Greek week when the girls will be doing a lot with the chapter anyway. The meetings are more focused on the new members and less on becoming involved with the chapter.

If you go and look at the chapter myths thread - famous people that aren't really Greek or weird legends that can't be true, I think a bunch of that springs up from the girls not really retaining that information when you have a really short pledge period.

[crescent&pearls]

I can't help but think that the changes in demands on students since we went to the shortened NM period in the early 90s, as well as the explosion of opportunities for students combined with changing student demographics have affected member retention across the board. For example, there wasn't a single member of my chapter during the four years I was an "active" who participated in a study abroad or semester-at-sea program. Today, the same university actively encourages every student in every major program to study abroad and even requires it for some majors. Few students lived on campus in university housing. Today, the univ requires most frosh to live in the dorms they built, and they offer incentives to sophs to stay living in the dorms even though the cost is far above living in Greek or off campus housing.

Almost every member of my chapter worked part time, but few took more than 12-14 units per semester. Most students expected to be on the 5 year plan, or more if they intended to get a teaching credential or professional license i.e. CPA, real estate, nursing, PT etc. Today I see fewer students are working while in college, both because there are fewer jobs for college students and there is a lot more pressure to graduate on schedule in 4 years because the cost of tuition and housing has multiplied exponentially. Financial aid makes it possible for more kids to go to college, and increasing enrollment has resulted in big recruitment numbers and opened up the doors for a more socio-economically diverse group of students to experience Greek Life. That's great, but overall GLOs haven't really adapted the programming or the member expectations much to mesh well with the broad group of students who are our members today. Even though we've made modifications to recruitment and the new member period, overall we're all still pretty much following the same model we were in the 1950's when most members were more alike socio-economically than they are today. So maybe we shouldn't be that surprised that what worked 50-60 years ago, or even 20-25 years ago, does not create the same results today.

[KSUViolet06]

When I was in the chapter I was in charge of Initiation one year. I tried to give the NMs a test about our history,founders etc. and was told I could not. Giving them a test was considered hazing and we were very good about not hazing. Ever since then I have felt the NMs (and later as actives) knew very little about what our sorority on a local or national level really was about.

Yeah, the only reason it's not for us is because it's a part of the program. I don't know if every chapter does this, but mine had initiated members re-take it every year with the NMs too, just as a refresher.

Also, and this is just my own opinion here, I feel like there's a link in retention and the Big-Little Sis program. Too often, I think the Big/Little relationship becomes mostly about gifts and chapters don't use it to its full potential as a MENTOR relationship, which is what I feel it's meant to be. My Big did WAY more for me than just give me presents. I am who I am today in Sigma because she modeled involvement to me and I said "I want to be like that."

[thetalady]

Also, and this is just my own opinion here, I feel like there's a link in retention and the Big-Little Sis program. Too often, I think the Big/Little relationship becomes mostly about gifts and chapters don't use it to its full potential as a MENTOR relationship,

AMEN!!! I agree that the Big/ Little program is absolutely key to retention, a cohesive chapter and even involvement as an alum after graduation.

[33girl]

Another thing I've wondered about-and this is just speculation, and I hope I don't get jumped all over for saying this, but it's something I've thought about-how big are the groups we're talking about here? I mean, there've been monster pledge classes in the last few years. I just think that there may be girls who drop after a certain amount of time because they just don't feel like they can make any headway in such a large group (I don't just mean leadership-wise. How can such a large group mix with a fraternity? What about sisterhood activities?). I can't really speak to it because I'm not in something very big, but I can only imagine that, with a huge group, someone could get lost in the shuffle. But this is all just speculation.


I think that the girls who would drop out solely because of a ginourmous pledge class size are girls who were led to expect (by moms or sisters who attended VERY different type schools) a completely different experience. Ditto girls who were raised hearing about SEC size classes and then come to the Northeast for school and are flabbergasted by their "big" pledge class of 20.

The softer (I won't say shorter, because for many chapters, it HASN'T become any shorter) approach to pledging begain in the mid 90s. Greek life was in the toilet and I think this was a desperate attempt to retain members. It has backfired completely, IMO.

Much of what has been cut out has been the time available for the women to get to know the history, and also to get to know the chapter members (through interviews, coke dates etc). It's pretty delusional to rush the way that we do, and then not carry that on into pledging, i.e. "you joined not because you love the philanthropy or our values, but mainly because you liked the girls you met at this particular chapter. However, continuing to build that relationship isn't really going to be part of your pledging - everything is going to be focused on the national organization." In other words...the NPC groups are trying to rush like they always did, and then thinking they'll be able to get the kind of member loyalty the NPHC groups have. It doesn't work that way.

[KSUViolet06]

AMEN!!! I agree that the Big/ Little program is absolutely key to retention, a cohesive chapter and even involvement as an alum after graduation.

I'm glad I'm not the only person with that opinion.

It's SUCH a valuable tool that chapters don't use to its fullest extent/potential. So many positive things can come out of taking it to that mentorship level instead of letting it just be a presentfest.

[melindawarren]

Also, and this is just my own opinion here, I feel like there's a link in retention and the Big-Little Sis program. Too often, I think the Big/Little relationship becomes mostly about gifts and chapters don't use it to its full potential as a MENTOR relationship, which is what I feel it's meant to be. My Big did WAY more for me than just give me presents. I am who I am today in Sigma because she modeled involvement to me and I said "I want to be like that."

See, that's the thing. We didn't get any gifts from our bigs (that's a lie: we got a small gift during the reveal, but it's not like we got gifts throughout the week). Instead, we spent the week "getting to know" our bigs (without knowing who they were, obviously). I liked ours a lot, actually. I felt like, even though my big and I were close before, I didn't really know her that well until big/little week. But we also learned a lot about each other's bigs and our other "family members." In short, our big/little week was centered on bonding and getting to know each other better. It was really enjoyable and I remember leaving the revelation and thinking, "wow, I am so glad I got to know this group of girls!" I seriously loved them a million times more after that week. I don't know if I would have felt so close to everyone if I'd just gotten a bunch of gifts.

Much of what has been cut out has been the time available for the women to get to know the history, and also to get to know the chapter members (through interviews, coke dates etc). It's pretty delusional to rush the way that we do, and then not carry that on into pledging, i.e. "you joined not because you love the philanthropy or our values, but mainly because you liked the girls you met at this particular chapter. However, continuing to build that relationship isn't really going to be part of your pledging - everything is going to be focused on the national organization." In other words...the NPC groups are trying to rush like they always did, and then thinking they'll be able to get the kind of member loyalty the NPHC groups have. It doesn't work that way.

Wow, definitely. I mean, during rush, you're supposed to get to know the girls. You aren't supposed to become an XYZ because Heal the Bay is your favorite charity, nor are you supposed to fall in love with ABC because their values and mission closely align with your personal views. You're supposed to find the place where you fit best. But then, when you're a new member, as you said, it's all about the history and philanthropy and values. That's quite a disconnect, actually.

Admittedly, I'm the researching type (no duh) and I actually made charts with the name, founding date and location, colors, symbols, mascots, jewels, flowers and philanthropies of each sorority on the USC campus (I did one for Berkeley, too, because my best friend goes there and I hoped that she'd rush. She didn't), mostly so I didn't wear something I shouldn't wear (like anchor jewelry or anything with a fleur-de-lis), but also to familiarize myself with the histories of the groups. Most of my friends who rushed were kind of shocked to discover that they had to learn about the orgs they joined (not SC people; high school people).

There's definitely a disconnect, but I would assume that this disconnect would cause more dropouts right off the bat (like, the day that new members start new member education), rather than after initiation.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

See, that's the thing. We didn't get any gifts from our bigs (that's a lie: we got a small gift during the reveal, but it's not like we got gifts throughout the week). Instead, we spent the week "getting to know" our bigs (without knowing who they were, obviously). I liked ours a lot, actually. I felt like, even though my big and I were close before, I didn't really know her that well until big/little week. But we also learned a lot about each other's bigs and our other "family members." In short, our big/little week was centered on bonding and getting to know each other better. It was really enjoyable and I remember leaving the revelation and thinking, "wow, I am so glad I got to know this group of girls!" I seriously loved them a million times more after that week. I don't know if I would have felt so close to everyone if I'd just gotten a bunch of gifts.

You know, this just reminded me of something...during rush, you put the girls you want most with the best rushers, but during big/little pairings, everyone gets a little, so some "littles" are left with the girls who were not great rushers. But only one of them was my little; the other actually went to someone who had been on the computer committee. I took the other girl out for coffee or something shortly after the reveal, but it's just not the same. I would guess that maybe one-third of my class preffed more than two-thirds of the class below us.

This isn't to say that someone can't be a great big if they are a lousy rusher, but the better rushers are more likely to make the little feel like an insta-friend.

[KSUViolet06]

My chapter didn't do "everyone gets a Little." NMs had a list of women eligible to be Bigs and listed their top 5 in a ranked order, potential Bigs did the same and they were matched as best as possible. This obviously leads to some people not getting Littles, as the more outgoing chapter members are usually the top choices.

I went 2 years without getting one (at the time it was "zomg I'll never get one and no one likes meee!!!" but looking back it was because I wasn't extra outgoing--I was an okay rusher, not the best) then I ended up meshing really well with my Little because she (like me) wasn't really super outgoing. So I think it just depends on how chapters do things.

Also, I've seen it happen where a chapter makes Big/Little all about "we only want the super cute blondes in our fam because our fam is the supercute fam, yay!!!" and that (again) sells the relationship short and reduces it to pointless present giving and "omg yayyyy cutest fam EVER!"

Sidenote: Murphy's Law of Sorority Life states that "zomg supercutest little EVERRRRR" type pairs WILL hate each other by senior year and nothing good will come of their pairing except drama which results in one or more people quitting.

[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.

[DudeFromAcacia]

In my Acacia chapter, the pledging process still take an entire trimester and our initiation week was after the break also beginning with week 1 of winter term.

From what I can understand, it all depends on how much stuff you can get done with the amount of time you have for the pledges to go through their pledging process. If you can fit in a lot of activities that allow you to dor more bonding and get to know each other better, then you're set. Sometimes you might have an entire term, but if the house doesn't take a lot of initiative to start planning events and activities, then it'll be harder to get a good grip on the pledges who are potential members of the organization. Having more time leads to more potential of creating a stronger bond with the house, but utilizing the time you have is all that matter in my opinion.

As for hazing, it's pretty subjective. I mean, I've heard of certain houses that holds "pledge meetings" and "pledge education" where they get to learn more about the house/organization and stuff like that, and some people think of it as hazing if it's forced onto the pledges and it's an absolute requirement for them to attend it. I think it's pretty silly but that's just my opinion, the pledges are pledging the house for a reason and if it's not important for them to be there to learn about the house that they will about to become a part of then what's the point of pledging in the first place?

[DeltaBetaBaby]

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.

[ree-Xi]

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]

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.

[Mevara]

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.

[AOIIalum]

I'm glad I'm not the only person with that opinion.

It's SUCH a valuable tool that chapters don't use to its fullest extent/potential. So many positive things can come out of taking it to that mentorship level instead of letting it just be a presentfest.

YES!!! It's so not about presents, although it's nice to get a bunch of letter items or sorority gifts. It's also not (necessarily) about being best friends, either. If you get your New Member programming correct--and continue to build on that throughout the years I believe it'll be a lot easier to retain those members. Member education and attention just doesn't end after initiation!

[melindawarren]

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]

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.

[33girl]

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. :rolleyes:

[33girl]

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?

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.

[DubaiSis]

I think there's something to feeling like you've "earned it" and I think the definition of hazing needs to be revised. The example above is great. Doing little things like those mentioned are not harmful and build rapport. If someone does something that IS hazing, that should be punished, but sending you to have a note signed by another member just introduces you to another gal and helps you figure out chapter dynamics (who's friends with whom). I also think there should be tests, but having the entire chapter take that test is fine with me. People mention a lot that they don't remember the details of their pledge period. Taking the test 4 or more times would certainly resolve that issue!

I am most definitely not a fan of the slippery slope argument, and I think you can teach 18-22 year olds the difference between fun, challenging and bonding exercises and abusive, dangerous or humiliating ones. And a test that requires you to name the founders, the year of your founding, the Greek alphabet and the other chapters on campus is not too much to ask. If someone won't commit to learning that much in 6 weeks, how much commitment are you really going to get out of her over a lifetime?

[ree-Xi]

I think there's something to feeling like you've "earned it" and I think the definition of hazing needs to be revised. The example above is great. Doing little things like those mentioned are not harmful and build rapport. If someone does something that IS hazing, that should be punished, but sending you to have a note signed by another member just introduces you to another gal and helps you figure out chapter dynamics (who's friends with whom). I also think there should be tests, but having the entire chapter take that test is fine with me. People mention a lot that they don't remember the details of their pledge period. Taking the test 4 or more times would certainly resolve that issue!

I am most definitely not a fan of the slippery slope argument, and I think you can teach 18-22 year olds the difference between fun, challenging and bonding exercises and abusive, dangerous or humiliating ones. And a test that requires you to name the founders, the year of your founding, the Greek alphabet and the other chapters on campus is not too much to ask. If someone won't commit to learning that much in 6 weeks, how much commitment are you really going to get out of her over a lifetime?

Exactly. And that's what those little exercises did. I was able to figure out best friends, big/littles, etc. I also found out who has a sense of humor, who were the "stricter" sisters, who were the "sympathetic" or sweet sisters, etc.

I also believe a test should have to be passed. We had to take weekly quizzes and then a big test. The weekly quizzes were based on the previous week's "history" part of the pledge education meetings (hence the term, "pledge education."

I'm glad that our Founder's Day ritual goes rather deeply into the lives of our founders, because it reiterates the very important story of how we came to exist. I've met currently active sisters who could not name all the founders or even the national President of the day. I think that should be easy information to hold onto. But that's just my opinion of my personal experience with my fraternity.*

Edited to add: *Fraternity here refers to the official name of Alpha Xi Delta Women's Fraternity.

[melindawarren]

I also believe a test should have to be passed. We had to take weekly quizzes and then a big test. The weekly quizzes were based on the previous week's "history" part of the pledge education meetings (hence the term, "pledge education."

I'm glad that our Founder's Day ritual goes rather deeply into the lives of our founders, because it reiterates the very important story of how we came to exist. I've met currently active sisters who could not name all the founders or even the national President of the day. I think that should be easy information to hold onto. But that's just my opinion of my personal experience with my fraternity.*

Edited to add: *Fraternity here refers to the official name of Alpha Xi Delta Women's Fraternity.

I can't understand why a history test (a flat-out history test) is hazing. I guess it's because only new members do it? What if everyone had to do it? Really, there's no excuse for not knowing the basic facts of the group.

I don't know if I mentioned this in my story, but I am Jewish, and learning about the history of SDT was a really great experience. Our founders were pretty fascinating women for their time, and I'm proud to be part of their vision (especially as a young Jewish woman who has actually felt anti-Semitism. Yes, it still exists). I'm sure that anyone who takes the time to learn about their sorority's history would share my feelings. How could anyone familiar with how their group came to be not feel a sense of pride? The idea that people can wear letters and NOT know what's behind them is just mind-boggling to me.

[MysticCat]

I can't understand why a history test (a flat-out history test) is hazing. I guess it's because only new members do it? What if everyone had to do it? Really, there's no excuse for not knowing the basic facts of the group.As has been noted before in other threads, there are groups that require such tests prior to initiation. Under our national governing documents, you can't get initiated without scoring 100 on the national exam. This is one of those cases of some groups considering it hazing, not a general consensus that it's hazing.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^Is there a thread here somewhere aout which groups have them? I'm curious. I know that there are some NPCs (I think Delta Gamma but I could be totally off base) that HAD them but have gotten rid of them in the past 5 or so years.

[MysticCat]

^^^Is there a thread here somewhere aout which groups have them? I'm curious. I know that there are some NPCs (I think Delta Gamma but I could be totally off base) that HAD them but have gotten rid of them in the past 5 or so years. This is the closest I could find (http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=108442). I didn't read the whole thing, but I did see a post where AOII Angel says AOII has one.

[NUKaydee]

Kappa Delta has a test as well.

[Mevara]

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]

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]

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. :confused:

[melindawarren]

Sigma Delta Tau has a test.

[pam713]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Chi Omega still have a semester-long pledge program? It would be interesting to see how their retention numbers compare to other NPC groups with six to eight week programs.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

We have a test, but it's not like there is a real consequence for failing it.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^Really? That's weird. It defeats the purpose if you can bomb it and still get initiated.

I forget what the percentage is that you need to earn on ours now to be initiated, but when I was initiated it was 85%. You CAN retake it if you don't pass. However, if you have been attending your Arc Sequence (NM) meetings and participating fully, you should. Most NMs do just because the program prepares you pretty well.

[DudeFromAcacia]

^^^ I believe it's made clear to all the pledges what score they must get in order to be initiated, something along that line. It's all in the trick of rite of passage and initiation.

I actually shouldn't be talking too much about these kind of stuff, although it's a standard in many Greek houses.

[AGDee]

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. :rolleyes:

I was originally going to answer, but 33girl did it for me. I see both sides and was one of those who had to do the interviews thing. It wasn't abused in my chapter when I was a pledge, but I saw it go bad in my chapter and in other chapters on my campus. It would have been nice if the ones who abused it were the only ones punished, but sometimes it became a whole chapter culture to abuse it, so nobody was going to squeal because they were all doing it. The abuse became too wide spread and the insurance companies said "no more". The vast majority of our risk management policies are dicated by what the insurance companies say.

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

We used the KROP idea in Alpha Gam also.

We also have a test. Back in my day, it was an oral exam, in front of the whole chapter and was pretty intimidating, honestly. Now it is written with a certain required score to pass and it can be taken as many times as needed. I don't see a test as hazing under these conditions: 1) It's a test that is pushed out by the inter/national organization, not one that is made up by the chapter, 2) it is documented as part of the inter/national program, 3) consequences of not passing the test are known and sanctioned by the inter/national program (not being Initiated versus doing a shot, etc.), 4) new members get multiple opportunities to pass the test, 5) new members know exactly when their test will be and 6) the test is taken in a private way (paper/pencil or online, not in a line-up).

We are also one of the NPCs that has moved toward Member Development rather than new member education. We have an Alpha Experience (for new members), Gamma Experience (2nd and 3rd year) and Delta Experience (senior year). It refocuses programming on our Purpose and educating members throughout their collegiate experience. Some aspects of Delta can include getting to know the alumnae chapters/clubs but it also focuses on their development level in college. It is a more values based, personal development based program that actually reduces overall programming for the members but targeting it toward living our Purpose.

I personally didn't see a big difference in retention when we shortened our new member period (early 90s). I do see big differences when the economy is rough. The other big factor I've seen make a difference is the study abroad phenomena. I see a much higher drop out rate for schools where almost everybody goes away for a term. We all know that one new member class can really change a chapter dynamic and I think when women get back from a semester abroad they are 1) more financially strained and 2) feel out of the loop of chapter happenings. Combine that with the "what's in it for me" trends of the millennials and you see some member loss.

The trend that concerns me more is the lack of alumnae volunteers and international level volunteers. I hope that our Delta program helps turn that around but in general, I'm not seeing younger members joining alumnae groups or volunteering like they used to. I think several trends have led to this ... it used to be THE way to stay in touch with sisters or hear chapter news but with social media, we can know everything that's going on and stay in touch without ever actually talking to anybody from the chapter. We, as women, are busier than we ever have been before. More are going to grad school, more are working mothers with overscheduled kids so it is harder to find time to dedicate to this kind of volunteer work. We are also a more mobile society so we aren't in the area where we went to school. We used to tend to volunteer because we felt a connection to our local chapter. We don't feel those same connections to other chapters and might be hesitant to volunteer where we don't know anybody.

[aephi alum]

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

We used the KROP idea in Alpha Gam also.

Same here. When I joined AEPhi, AEPhi was just switching over from the old terminology to the new, and I remember the TEC who was placed with my colony saying, "What are we going to call it now that we're switching from 'pledge' to 'new member'? KRONM?" :p A lot of the onus was placed on the sisters, to make sure NMs got to meet different people in the chapter - rather than the NMs having to get hold of a chapter roster and saying, "OK, I had lunch with Sally yesterday, check; I had coffee with Anne this afternoon, check; I really need to track down Leah, I've called her three times already..."

As for the test, I don't recall if I mentioned this upthread, but we do have a written test that all NMs must pass before initiation. In my day, the entire NM class took the test at a set date and time. If you passed (scored 100%), great. If you failed, you could retake the test as many times as necessary until you passed. I can think of a few instances where NMs had to retake the test, but I can't think of an instance where a NM hadn't passed it before initiation.

[itb2a]

In fraternities, shorter initiation periods in themselves are not the sole problem. There are other factors that influence this. I'm not going to address sororities in this post; their pledge selection is altogether different.

The colleges/Greek Life offices tend to have more sway over greek eligibility. Because more colleges are funding house expansion/building, they feel that they have standing to influence pledgings as well; after all, why not make sure that the house can repay the college's funding?

Another aspect is how the current college age kids interact. Now, interaction is considered to be a text message, a tweet, or a facebook update. It's the instant gratification that's important. And if that is the focus, turnover will just happen.

The last item is that the existing members seem to lack the skills of how to recruit a prospect. Selection is more important than before; if you
screw up a selection, it may be after initiation that it is found that there are issues or problems, hence turnover. The shorter period is not an issue as long as the chapter and the pledge can still discern whether compatibility exists. Most rush chairmen do not want to take the harder path of 'hey, this guy has qualities we like and we can help develop', althought this is typically how a business would recruit a new employee. After all, if the chapter is not helping it's members, what's the attraction to staying a member? And that's where the chapters seem to forget the advise of an alumni group or alumni advisor; because the rush chairmen do not perceive a benefit in asking alumni for help in recruiting, and because of that the rush chairmen tend to lose legacies.

Just my opinion.

[33girl]

The colleges/Greek Life offices tend to have more sway over greek eligibility. Because more colleges are funding house expansion/building, they feel that they have standing to influence pledgings as well; after all, why not make sure that the house can repay the college's funding?



Are you blaming deferred rush for this? Because I don't think deferred rush has a thing to do with it (guys or girls). Same goes for a GPA. Most schools have a minimum GPA for rushing/pledging that is FAR LESS than the national offices of the GLOs.

Or are you intimating that GL offices and administrators actually tell fraternities who to pledge? If that's the case, I'd like to see some concrete information.

[HQWest]

Are you blaming deferred rush for this? Because I don't think deferred rush has a thing to do with it (guys or girls). Same goes for a GPA. Most schools have a minimum GPA for rushing/pledging that is FAR LESS than the national offices of the GLOs.

Or are you intimating that GL offices and administrators actually tell fraternities who to pledge? If that's the case, I'd like to see some concrete information.

I think what they are trying to say is that GL offices are being conditioned to think more (i.e. more pledging) or bigger is better. This is leading to situations where they are encouraging expansion because quota is up even if one or two chapters are struggling to stay afloat. Another example would be bringing on a new chapter so the university doesn't have empty dorm space or an empty lodge.

Deferred recruitment (or semi-deferred recruitment like Cal) can be good - but ONLY if you have trouble convincing PNMs to try recruitment and explore Greek Life. It does not make you any less likely to have grade risks. It does not limit social behavior risks. (Anyone can be on their best behavior for one semester.) It does increase "tent talk", name calling, dirty rushing, and inappropriate bid promising.

[33girl]

I think what they are trying to say is that GL offices are being conditioned to think more (i.e. more pledging) or bigger is better. This is leading to situations where they are encouraging expansion because quota is up even if one or two chapters are struggling to stay afloat. Another example would be bringing on a new chapter so the university doesn't have empty dorm space or an empty lodge.

Expansion has nothing to do with who you (an individual GLO you) choose to pledge, which is what itb seemed to be talking about. And I've NEVER heard of a GL office who gave a shit whether an individual group's numbers were up or down - that is not their province. Ditto the empty dorm space - I've never heard of such a thing. More likely, the school eliminates it as Greek housing and turns it over to another student group or just opens it up to the general student population. I'll say again, concrete evidence of these things you cite please (i.e. name of school and GLO).


Deferred recruitment (or semi-deferred recruitment like Cal) can be good - but ONLY if you have trouble convincing PNMs to try recruitment and explore Greek Life. It does not make you any less likely to have grade risks. It does not limit social behavior risks. (Anyone can be on their best behavior for one semester.) It does increase "tent talk", name calling, dirty rushing, and inappropriate bid promising.

It also increases the amount of members who know EXACTLY what they're getting into (i.e. they know the group they're choosing is the "fat chapter" and they don't care because they've seen the "popular chapter" being bitches for a semester) - and most likely decreases dropouts during pledging or disaffiliation after initiation. And as has been pointed out on GC MANY MANY times, lots of the most competitive rushes - which take place before students have even had one college class - are already full of tent talk, name calling, dirty rushing and inappropriate bid promising.

Anyone who still views pre-freshman rush as a panacea making all things perfectly even is beyond having their head in the sand. It never was, and with the internet, it's even worse now.

[HQWest]

Expansion has nothing to do with who you (an individual GLO you) choose to pledge, which is what itb seemed to be talking about. And I've NEVER heard of a GL office who gave a shit whether an individual group's numbers were up or down - that is not their province. Ditto the empty dorm space - I've never heard of such a thing. More likely, the school eliminates it as Greek housing and turns it over to another student group or just opens it up to the general student population. I'll say again, concrete evidence of these things you cite please (i.e. name of school and GLO).



It also increases the amount of members who know EXACTLY what they're getting into (i.e. they know the group they're choosing is the "fat chapter" and they don't care because they've seen the "popular chapter" being bitches for a semester) - and most likely decreases dropouts during pledging or disaffiliation after initiation. And as has been pointed out on GC MANY MANY times, lots of the most competitive rushes - which take place before students have even had one college class - are already full of tent talk, name calling, dirty rushing and inappropriate bid promising.

Anyone who still views pre-freshman rush as a panacea making all things perfectly even is beyond having their head in the sand. It never was, and with the internet, it's even worse now.

Hey you asked - I answered.

If you want to spend your whole life thinking about nothing but recruitment then by all means come up with whatever crazy deferred recruitment you want or you can do recruitment within the first couple months of school starting (a la Ole Miss or Cal) get it over with and spend the rest of the school year on all of the reasons people wanted to be Greek in the first place.

[melindawarren]

It also increases the amount of members who know EXACTLY what they're getting into (i.e. they know the group they're choosing is the "fat chapter" and they don't care because they've seen the "popular chapter" being bitches for a semester) - and most likely decreases dropouts during pledging or disaffiliation after initiation. And as has been pointed out on GC MANY MANY times, lots of the most competitive rushes - which take place before students have even had one college class - are already full of tent talk, name calling, dirty rushing and inappropriate bid promising.

Anyone who still views pre-freshman rush as a panacea making all things perfectly even is beyond having their head in the sand. It never was, and with the internet, it's even worse now.

Or, honestly, first week of freshman year rush (which is what I had, and, at the time, seemed worse than pre-freshman rush-hey, pre-freshmen don't have homework! :p).

I see nothing wrong with deferred recruitment? Maybe I'm the one missing something?

[pearlbubbles]

When I went through recruitment at my university, it was deferred. At the beginning of my Junior year, we switched back to to formal fall. I also saw a chapter close due to numbers during that time. My first two years in my chapter, quota was around thirty. Since my Junior year, it's been somewhere between seventy and eighty.

At the same time, we had maybe two to five people drop from each incoming pledge class my freshman and sophomore years. When we went back to formal fall, the number was a bit higher the first year, but dropped a bit the next year (and I can't comment on current statistics--though the economy certainly "helped" a bit when I was still there). In my experience, it seems like if a university has deferred recruitment, less women go through, but generally tend to stay in the organizations. With a formal fall style, the women you tend to lose would have been the ones that wouldn't have participated in a deferred recruitment to begin with. But, in my later years, I did see many members who probably wouldn't have gone through deferred recruitment really jump into the chapter and do great things. The same can be said for women who went through informal and COB. So in that case, I can't really say whether a fall recruitment or a spring recruitment is necessarily better, from a sorority standpoint, at least. (Fraternity recruitment, however, has its own idiosyncrasies.)

I definitely agree that it has a lot to do with the "instant gratification" nature of this generation. People go in expecting certain things and if they don't get them, it's not worth their time. (I've seen a lot of people doing this at my job recently too, which seems worse to me, but it's the same idea.) I do think that the years we focused on KROP ideas, even with the sophomores moving into the house, we had less dropping.

I think the important thing to keep members in the organizations is to continue specific programming with everyone. We used to have senior meetings my last year, and it was definitely nice to still feel like you had a voice and a role, even when you weren't necessarily as active in chapter proceedings.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Or, honestly, first week of freshman year rush (which is what I had, and, at the time, seemed worse than pre-freshman rush-hey, pre-freshmen don't have homework! :p).

I see nothing wrong with deferred recruitment? Maybe I'm the one missing something?

One of the big issues is that it doesn't work on campuses where you have to sign housing contracts in the fall. In Champaign, if you wanted a good apartment, you had to sign a lease by October or so for the following year.

[33girl]

Hey you asked - I answered.

Actually, I asked itb2a. He/she didn't seem to be talking about deferred rush.

If you want to spend your whole life thinking about nothing but recruitment then by all means come up with whatever crazy deferred recruitment you want or you can do recruitment within the first couple months of school starting (a la Ole Miss or Cal) get it over with and spend the rest of the school year on all of the reasons people wanted to be Greek in the first place.

You honestly think that's how it works? That sorority members at, say, SMU spend all of fall semester doing nothing but planning for rush, practicing for rush, talking about rush, thinking about rush?

The clue store is open till 2 every night. Please, for the love of all that's holy, pay a visit.

[KSUViolet06]

For what it's worth here, every school I work with in my volunteer role has deferred recruitment (second semester.)

All fall semester isn't spent prepping for FR. Prepping tends to start around the middle of Octoberish, and it definitely doesn't consume the entire sorority experience any more than having fall recruitment does. They still have and enjoy the same fall activities as every other school (Homecoming, date parties, etc.)

[VandalSquirrel]

Or, honestly, first week of freshman year rush (which is what I had, and, at the time, seemed worse than pre-freshman rush-hey, pre-freshmen don't have homework! :p).

I see nothing wrong with deferred recruitment? Maybe I'm the one missing something?

I think deferred recruitment is a dandy idea, as does 33girl, welcome to our vocal minority ;) Whether later in a semester, spread out over a few weekends from one semester or quarter into the next, students coming back early after the New Year, it would vary for each campus. I see chapter housing facilities as driving a lot of this, and though they are great, they are also an albatross around the neck of many a chapter when there aren't enough members to pay the bills.

If there is an insistence on rush and joining before sitting in a class room, then don't allow new members to move in right away and live on campus (which many schools require). Meeting other people, having a space away from the chapter for reflection or to take a break, making friends who live in your hall (who could be potential future members) as well as having a support system and friends in the event one decides Greek Life isn't for them, some people outside the system including an RA who aren't members and may see warning signs or be able to report hazing, and so many more reasons play into my support of deferred recruitment.

Maybe if new members didn't move in right away and weren't isolated we could go back to longer new member periods to assuage the ideas of hazing since non-Greeks are living with freshmen. I also think that moving in right away may deepen or widen the schism between those who join and those who don't. I'm a huge supporter of waiting for semester or quarter grades to initiate and letting people get their bearings as I've seen plenty of kids fail first semester, get a waiver and be on academic and chapter probation, do it again, and leave school at the end of the first year.

If we're really life long organizations then waiting a semester is not going to hurt us in the long run. People say "we have to get them before they join other stuff!" but that makes me feel like we can't let our organizations stand on their own and let people get to know us and be sure they want to join for a life time by making educated and informed decisions. All groups have alumnae who have had no contact since graduation and maybe they were burnt out or it wasn't important to them, but if we're going to "keep rushing our pledges" we should keep rushing our alumnae as well.

One of the big issues is that it doesn't work on campuses where you have to sign housing contracts in the fall. In Champaign, if you wanted a good apartment, you had to sign a lease by October or so for the following year.

We have recruitment before classes start, and all freshman are required to live on campus so those who receive bids move in on Bid Day and the women who don't complete the process are guaranteed campus housing. Including Greek Chapter Facilities as housing for freshman men and women is not something many schools allow. Students who are interested in Greek Life are told to not sign housing contracts, which includes non-freshman students as moving in right away is expected and often required. Currently Delta Zeta is based in a Residence Hall, but when there is "overflow" women's chapters often have sisters live in a residence hall as a group and rotate in and out of the house, or upperclasswomen will move out of the facility to make space for freshmen/new members as finding off campus lodging in Moscow is not a problem.

Our nearby neighbors at Washington State University require freshmen to live on campus and for men have approved living facilities, women move into the dorms. Some are able to move into the chapters between semesters but many move in as sophomores. We're also alike as we have sleeping porches (cold dorms to some) so there is some flexibility for some chapters of how many people live in to pay the bills to comfortable space, to a rush hour train in Tokyo. Often women who join through informal recruitment will be expected and/or required to move into the house as soon as their lease or housing contract is up, and some chapters would financially help a woman who broke a lease or housing contract as the money will be recouped with her living in and being a full dues paying member. To be honest I think that practice is fading into the distance as chapters were robust enough that we opened for expansion and Delta Zeta became a colony.

[AOII Angel]

Maybe if new members didn't move in right away and weren't isolated we could go back to longer new member periods to assuage the ideas of hazing since non-Greeks are living with freshmen. I also think that moving in right away may deepen or widen the schism between those who join and those who don't. I'm a huge supporter of waiting for semester or quarter grades to initiate and letting people get their bearings as I've seen plenty of kids fail first semester, get a waiver and be on academic and chapter probation, do it again, and leave school at the end of the first year.


Very few schools have NMs move into chapter housing right away. VERY FEW.

[KSUViolet06]

I can only think of one or 2 (either WSU or Washington does, or both.) It's not a common practice.

With my deferred recruitment chapters who have housing, the women don't have the option to move in until fall. No one moves in right after recruitment in January.

[AXOmom]

Not WSU (which is Washington State). As VandalSquirrel mentioned - they move in mostly at semester and some sophomore year (but I think every single one of daughter's friends in sororities her freshman year moved in at semester break). UW moves in right away.

The problem with some schools and the housing contract (UO is in this situation) is that there is not enough housing for freshman and the school cannot require them to live in campus housing. They can't always assure housing to freshman. If you want housing you pretty much have to sign a contract with someone (school, rental, chapter house) by the spring. I would think that's a situation a lot of schools find themselves in.

In addition, there is no guarantee at a lot of the chapters that you will get to live in your sophomore year and some girls by junior year are settled in apartments and never end up living in.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^completely unrelated sidenote: even in the recession, I'm seeing a LOT of schools with on-campus housing that is literally overflowing. When I was in undergrad, the school was really strict with the live-on requirement because the dorms weren't always full (the rule was 2 years unless you owned a home or commuted within x miles.) There were situations where chapters had space in their houses for additional women halfway through the year, and had to go through Residence Service to pull teeth to get someone an exception to their housing requirement.

Fast forward to now: Residence Services will GLADLY let any freshman or soph out of their contract to move into Greek Housing as a fresh or soph (if the sorority has room) because the dorms are all full.

[AXOmom]

Yep, its different world than when I was there and most people lived in campus dorms at least two years. They rent out space at apartment complexes for freshman and they are building new dorms as we speak, but they've had a tough time keeping up. Interestingly, they aren't great about letting them out of the contracts (at least that's my understanding from people who have tried) and as you said, it would make more sense for them to be lenient.

For a number of reasons that have to do with the sororities housing contracts being a little behind in terms of need, they didn't have much room either (hers and I assume others have changed some bylaws to better address that issue).

Anyway, sorry to get things off track. Just wanted to point out that the requirements Vandal Squirrel mentioned at University of Idaho - students live on campus freshman year or at least first semester or in chapters and being guaranteed housing if they don't end up in a sorority- isn't currently an option at many schools.

[*winter*]

This thread has been very interesting. About 8 or 9 years after college, I started hanging around here and reading about sororities. I was shocked to find out that many of the things I did to get into Gamma Sigma Sigma would now be considered hazing! We did pledge books, interviews, pledge projects/activities, tests, etc. Of course none of it was done in a "hazing" sort of way...but there were points assigned and it was expected that you would WANT to get to know the history, the other sisters, and the organization. I personally liked the interviews, we got to make up our own questions so I found out some interesting things about people. I'm shy so it was a good conversation starter and a great way to discover connections with active sisters (shared major, interests, etc.) From there things develop into spending time together studying or sharing those interests, then into real friendships.

I get why anti-hazing is important, but I think we've reached a point where we are throwing out the baby with the bath water. People don't feel connected to organizations or to their "sisters" so why stick around? You can use these sorts of activities as "hazing" opportunities, but then again, even with all the "bans" on this, that and the other thing...people still get hazed. If people are that intent on hazing their NMs they will find a way...

[DGTess]

This thread has been very interesting. About 8 or 9 years after college, I started hanging around here and reading about sororities. I was shocked to find out that many of the things I did to get into Gamma Sigma Sigma would now be considered hazing! We did pledge books, interviews, pledge projects/activities, tests, etc. Of course none of it was done in a "hazing" sort of way...but there were points assigned and it was expected that you would WANT to get to know the history, the other sisters, and the organization. I personally liked the interviews, we got to make up our own questions so I found out some interesting things about people. I'm shy so it was a good conversation starter and a great way to discover connections with active sisters (shared major, interests, etc.) From there things develop into spending time together studying or sharing those interests, then into real friendships.

I get why anti-hazing is important, but I think we've reached a point where we are throwing out the baby with the bath water. People don't feel connected to organizations or to their "sisters" so why stick around? You can use these sorts of activities as "hazing" opportunities, but then again, even with all the "bans" on this, that and the other thing...people still get hazed. If people are that intent on hazing their NMs they will find a way...

I agree with you.

I nearly lost it when I was told one of my most cherished traditions as a collegian was eliminated because "someone" "might" consider it hazing. It had never (to the best of my knowledge) been anything but a pleasant occasion for any of the sisters in my year groups. I had not heard of any issues, but since there was no "education value" to it, it went away. I thought sororities were supposed to be another form of education, and never wanted to see a pledge period as just another class.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Lawyers and insurance companies, my friends, lawyers and insurance companies.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^Right.

It only takess one (for lack of a better word) asshole to take a tradition/event/etc. in a completely wrong direction.

Like people were bringing up the interview thing. That is probably a really great activity in the way that you all experienced it (harmless, fun, getting to know people, etc.)

Then some asshole decided, "after we're done interviewing that pledge, let's make her do 20 push ups to get our signatures." That activity has just taken a pointless and stupid turn.