Why are recs absolutely necessary at some schools, while not expected at others?

[adpiucf]

Originally Posted by Hartofsec

Remedies under educational law are not necessarily those one might expect in a civil court (monetary damages, for instance). A complaint filed with FPCO, and found to have merit, could result in some repercussions for the district (and therefore the employee).

Nonetheless, if I called the guidance counselor at my local high school, explained that I am an XYZ alum and would like some info on a list of female seniors there, I would fully expect her to hang up.

To her credit, since that would eliminate the need for any legal guidance, one way or another. We live in a litigious society.

The academic info necessary for membership perusal would appear on the transcript that was submitted officially to the school of application, and then unofficially with the rec packet -- both with the consent and knowledge of the PNM.

Educational law? I believe you mean administrative law. Yes, FERPA claims go to an administrative body to adjudicate whether a school has committed a violation. Again, the penalty is loss of federal funding for the school.

A guidance counselor penalized in return is not liable. In fact, she can file a lawsuit. The school cannot seek indemnity or contribution in a against the guidance counselor in an administrative proceeding for a FERPA violation. They can't make the guidance counselor pay to replace fedearl funds or state that is her fault or have her take the blame.

Thus, you are incorrect. A guidance counselor has no liability for a FERPA violation in an administrative hearing and any attempt at retaliation for the school's FERPA violation is going to land the school, the school district, and the state in a lawsuit for wrongful termination.

The only repercussions are to the school. Your original argument asserted that the counselor would be open to liability. You are now attempting to change your hypothetical to talk of nebulous "repercussions" for the guidance counselor because you are determined to be right. You're wrong.

[gee_ess]

I think this is what I take issue with...I really don't believe that there is that much difference between a good candidate for Kappa and a good candidate for DPhiE and a good candidate for Phi Mu, and so on

I agree. We are all looking for quality young women who will become quality members. Some groups take alumnae input into more consideration than others.

I've seen plenty of "SEC quality" recs from non-SEC alumnae...not all, but a good many. Also seen a lot of "non-SEC quality" from SEC alums...it's not your conference, it's your training.

Love this!

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I think this is what I take issue with...I really don't believe that there is that much difference between a good candidate for Kappa and a good candidate for DPhiE and a good candidate for Phi Mu, and so on.

Now, obviously I am not privy to MS, so maybe that's not the case, and each group values something different, but my general sense is that the vast, vast majority of women who participate in FR meet the requirements of all NPC groups, save for the obvious grade risks and criminal pasts.

I think this is well said. We wouldn't all be fighting over the same PNMs if a good candidate for one isn't also a good candidate for others. I think that we, as NPCers have far more in common than differences.

And I'd still like to hear from some more actives. Where's Old Row?

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by adpiucf

Educational law? I believe you mean administrative law. Yes, FERPA claims go to an administrative body to adjudicate whether a school has committed a violation. Again, the penalty is loss of federal funding for the school.

A guidance counselor penalized in return is not liable. In fact, she can file a lawsuit. The school cannot seek indemnity or contribution in a against the guidance counselor in an administrative proceeding for a FERPA violation. They can't make the guidance counselor pay to replace fedearl funds or state that is her fault or have her take the blame.

Thus, you are incorrect. A guidance counselor has no liability for a FERPA violation in an administrative hearing and any attempt at retaliation for the school's FERPA violation is going to land the school, the school district, and the state in a lawsuit for wrongful termination.

The only repercussions are to the school. Your original argument asserted that the counselor would be open to liability. You are now attempting to change your hypothetical to talk of nebulous "repercussions" for the guidance counselor because you are determined to be right. You're wrong.

Oh keep your shorts on. I'll change "educational" law to "administrative" law, and "liability" to "expose one's district to potential repercussions" if you like.

Originally Posted by adpiucf

You are now attempting to change your hypothetical to talk of nebulous "repercussions" for the guidance counselor because you are determined to be right. You're wrong.

I'm really not that invested in being correct about the participation of the high school guidance counselor -- it doesn't seem necessary if the info needed for recruitment is on the transcript. Subjective opinions, particularly negative judgements or predictions made by the guidance counselor, may be another matter.

I think you may just be determined to split hairs and wave around a law degree.

Which might be handy for your guidance counselor friends in the event sorority alums come calling and ask for information on a list of female seniors (unsolicited by the female seniors, and without their knowledge or consent).
.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I have been told that this is necessary to maintain single sex status, according to federal requirements and/or guidelines.

If so, then anyone insisting that their sorority or chapter doesn't "do" recs or doesn't have to consider them may be a) not following the requirements of their group b)jeopardizing the group's single sex status.

Maybe I have this wrong?

But if that were the case, then most if not all GLOs outside the NPC may be jeopardizing their single-sex status. Obviously, I don't fully know the policies of any groups but my own, but I've never heard of anything like NPC-style recs outside of NPC sororities. The idea that not using recs like that could jeopardize single-sex status sounds like post hoc rationalization.

[adpiucf]

Originally Posted by Hartofsec

Oh keep your shorts on. I'll change "educational" law to "administrative" law, and "liability" to "expose one's district to potential repercussions" if you like.



I'm really not that invested in being correct about the participation of the high school guidance counselor -- it doesn't seem necessary if the info needed for recruitment is on the transcript. Subjective opinions, particularly negative judgements or predictions made by the guidance counselor, may be another matter.

I think you may just be determined to split hairs and wave around a law degree.

Which might be handy for your guidance counselor friends in the event sorority alums come calling and ask for information on a list of female seniors (unsolicited by the female seniors, and without their knowledge or consent).
.

You may not be invested in being correct, but you sure act like it. You shouldn't throw around terms and laws and procedures if you don't have even a layman's understanding of them. And there's no need to launch into personal attacks.

I'm not splitting hairs. I'm calling you out because you have no idea what you're talking about, and you insist you backtracking or changing the scenario to attempt to make yourself right.

TL;DR: You made an incorrect assertion.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by MaryPoppins

We have seen women coming through at Ole Miss with several DUIs on their records. Sometimes those are on the letters of reference and sometimes not.

In one rec I wrote, for a woman rushing a Midwestern university, I included newspaper articles concerning her underage drinking bust (large party=big news here) the summer prior to her beginning college. She was turned away from my group, but joined another.

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by adpiucf

You may not be invested in being correct, but you sure act like it. You shouldn't throw around terms and laws and procedures if you don't have even a layman's understanding of them. And there's no need to launch into personal attacks.

lol, I agree:

I'm not splitting hairs. I'm calling you out because you have no idea what you're talking about, and you insist you backtracking or changing the scenario to attempt to make yourself right.

TL;DR: You made an incorrect assertion.

Back to topic, let me ask the question another way (and I would appreciate your legal justification for this practice, in terms of protecting confidential student information):

If Mildred A. Lum from XYZ sorority calls a local high school guidance counselor, and asks for information on a list of senior females, the guidance counselor is free to disclose this information -- including info and potentially negative opinions concerning academic struggles and remedial classes taken (as previously mentioned on this thread) -- without the knowledge or consent of the senior females?

At my local high school, the guidance counselor would probably hang up. In layman's terms of course.

It just seems pretty straightforward to me:

Quick Guide to Privacy of Student Records (FERPA)
http://sja.ucdavis.edu/files/quickguide.pdf

Even parents need written consent from their student on file to access their own child's records once they turn 18.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

In one rec I wrote, for a woman rushing a Midwestern university, I included newspaper articles concerning her underage drinking bust (large party=big news here) the summer prior to her beginning college. She was turned away from my group, but joined another.

And I would simply not send a rec instead of doing this. Especially if a ton of kids in town got in trouble for the same party.

Wondering when carnation's going to shut this one down.

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

I don't think there IS a difference. That's why us yankees think the whole process is just silly. And you can't use number of rushees or number of chapters as a reason. Most of the Big 10 is comparable or larger in number of rushees, although in general there are more chapters at the Big 10 schools so it's spread out a little more. You also can't use age of the chapters as a reason because most of the oldest chapters are Midwestern or Northern. I think the southern chapters didn't really kick off until the 20th century for some obvious reasons.

I can accept that there is a fear of no longer relying on recommendations, but, just as RFM didn't kill sororities, eliminating this tedious step also wouldn't. But that being said, I still think there IS a role for alumnae. I just don't think paperwork is where it's at.

This is actually the issue I'm interested in talking about.

I'm in the rec-writing always-done-it-this-way group, but it seems to me that chapters all over recruit and pledge great girls into (our own) sisterhoods without going through all these motions.

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

This lawyer disagrees with any reading of FERPA that limits its application to the sharing of written records. I have written FERPA releases for a major university. If a school employee's "knowledge of that student" is based on the fact that she gets to see the student's academic/disciplinary records in the course of her work, then FERPA applies to her "knowledge" and the personal opinion resulting therefrom. For example, if in the course of my work as a guidance counselor (or teacher or principal), I see that Suzy was internally reprimanded for cheating junior year, it is both unethical and a FERPA violation for me to then tell others orally, "Suzy is untrustworthy, don't bid her." There doesn't have to be any written record shared, or any mental health guidance relationship with Suzy, for that rule to kick in. If you only know she's untrustworthy because you were allowed to see her confidential records, you have to keep it to yourself.

Whether someone would actually be sued, in practice, is a different question. Both HIPAA and FERPA are violated every day around family dinner tables, and that's never going to lead to a lawsuit. But I think it is wrong to violate this rule in the recruitment context whether a lawsuit is likely or not. If I'm counsel to the school, I want everyone keeping confidential information inside the institution, period. The "Suzy is untrustworthy" example above would be a firing offense at the university where I've worked.

Thank you, Low C Sharp -- appreciate your legal expertise based on experience with FERPA.
.

[DubaiSis]

My biggest problem with the "recs required" systems is it is patently unfair to anyone who grew up outside the south, and since students are traveling all across the US (and worldwide) to go to school, this seems like a step to limit the chances or increase the stress factor for the girl who isn't from a large'ish southern city who's mom wasn't a socialite.

My guess is, and for dog's sake don't take this to the bank, there ARE chapters in the deep south where recs are actually NOT required. But would I want it put on record that my sorority doesn't? Hell no. It would have the affect of saying we are less selective. Unless my sorority's MS system has changed dramatically, recs have a role, but I can't imagine that one element being enough on its own to get a girl cut unless she was low on the bubble anyway. And if I'm correct in this thinking (that they don't hold as much weight as we like to say), then I think stopping talking about it so much would be really really helpful. If it were possible to go back to only writing recs for girls who you personally know so that they were an actual leg up, then I'd be all for that. But while we keep saying they are absolutely positively, you not only aren't getting a bid but you might get kicked out of school and probably will never have friends in your whole life required, then girls will continue getting them for every chapter, regardless of how tedious or unhelpful.

[adpiucf]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

If a school employee's "knowledge of that student" is based on the fact that she gets to see the student's academic/disciplinary records in the course of her work, then FERPA applies to her "knowledge" and the personal opinion resulting therefrom. For example, if in the course of my work as a guidance counselor (or teacher or principal), I see that Suzy was internally reprimanded for cheating junior year, it is both unethical and a FERPA violation for me to then tell others orally, "Suzy is untrustworthy, don't bid her." There doesn't have to be any written record shared, or any mental health guidance relationship with Suzy, for that rule to kick in. If you only know she's untrustworthy because you were allowed to see her confidential records, you have to keep it to yourself.

Absolutely agree with this narrow example provided and respect your experience. I will continue to contend that the hypothetical posed by the other poster implying blanket liability for saying anything about a student was incorrect.

I guess this is where I turn on my heel and flounce dramatically?

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

In one rec I wrote, for a woman rushing a Midwestern university, I included newspaper articles concerning her underage drinking bust...

Originally Posted by amIblue?

And I would simply not send a rec instead of doing this.

So...you don't send a rec. How is the chapter supposed to know if you don't tell them?
Really and truly, those ***warning*** recs are more valuable than the ones for the (presumably) "good" girls.
Please alumnae...if you know something, alert the chapter! Don't assume that if there's no rec, they won't pledge that candidate!

[greekdee]

As far as no recs go, I have never sent one in but sometimes you don't need to since people's reputations can precede them. Several years ago, there was a girl in my area who had a great resume of activities, strong GPA and very cute appearance. She also had the ability to bring to life Carrie Underwood's lyrics of "I took a Louisville Slugger to both headlights." She demolished the car of a fellow student, right in the high school parking lot...though I believe a crow bar was her actual tool of destruction. She did this junior year and the victim was not a cheating boyfriend -- it was a girl who was her competition in the race to win some guy's heart. (I believe she lost.) Anyway, the families of these two girls ended up handling it privately, so there is no info on Crow Bar Girl to be found via Google. She did, however, end up at a university attended by MANY girls from her high school and a lot are Greek. They already knew the story.