what you need to understand about recruitment

Not exactly, I still don't believe that there's a objective way to rank houses based on whether they were successful in getting the girls they wanted. A house's rank is based on many things; it's retention rate ( DG brings girls in but has had retention problems), it's sisterhood, it's philanthropy, it's network which includes alumni (which can help girls launch careers), it's resources, social life etc. Just to look at who got the girls they wanted and rank all 12 houses is very myopic. It's misleading cause freshmen who are totally new to cal and greek life just assume that higher ranked are "better" houses when that's not that case. They then rank these houses higher during rush and those same houses get who they want and the cycle of exclusivity perpetuates itself. And it's not based on anything really substantive! We need to break this and only we can!

To Hmmm, thanks for the technical info. But I have a question for you. All the numbers and technicalities aside what do you think panhel could have done better this fall and what changes do you suggest? I think a number of the comments above have good points about some changes. The Fixit comment is wonderful in that it addresses head on the issue of transparency. Truly I think we lost alot of credibility and trust this year. I also wonder if so many of the comments about kappa and dg being finished with recruitment before it started doesn't simply describe some of the math you described combined with houses that might have had to deal with legacy issues and friends of inhouse sisters going through recruitment? Once you factor out legacies and inhouse friends the already small numbers get even smaller fast! I think the Hmm explanation also sets the stage for pnms to have realistic expectations for recruitment. Hopefully understanding the process a bit better might lead pnms down the path to look at all the houses. I disagree with you though on new houses. We have lost a house and for whatever reason a number of people left rush for a variety of reasons including possibly not vibing with the houses we have. Maybe starting from scratch might attract people in a different way because it would be the initial class that is forming the house and determining the culture. I think this could attract a certain person that was tuned out this fall. What do you think Hmm?

Forgot to mention Hmm. I realize from the tone of you posts that you are a bit perturbed that people don't understand all the details of quota and panhel etc. I get you and your sisters worked hard to put on the show that was fall recruitment and I totally believe that you believe you did the best you could as a group. But lack of knowledge about terminology and panhel doesn't mean that people came on here to throw stones unnecessarily at all. The rumors were fast a furious this year and I think many didn't feel comfortable talking to recruitment counselors or panhel for whatever reason. There were so many comments here about people not feeling comfortable in houses etc. I am sure your initial reaction to someone not feeling comfortable would be to rank that house low and not come back. Really I don't think its that simple as so many of the comments dealt with not experiencing basic respect when entering a house. I don't think if this were true that the houses did do the best that they could. I am also not sure all the pnms understood the ramifications of the rankings that they were doing after each event so as to 'maximize their options'. Ideas?

Again hmm I think you absolutely nailed the three big issues. 1) lack of transparency 2) power not equally divided between the houses and the pnm's. The houses have more power until the pref night. 3) little or no information distributed to pnm's on how rush works and how they could increase their odds and the impact of their ranking on the choices they get.
I think the solutions could be :
1) for transparency problem please consider data collection and releasing this data on background of applicants and those that get in versus get dropped. Maybe the stats dept at Cal would consider this a great collaborative research project! Maybe we could shed light on some things objectively and work constructively toward change. The racial divide is a huge issue in my mind and while all the attention is on the mechanics we are forgetting core values. Transparency is needed ASAP. The basis of selection needs examination.
2) The power imbalce I'm clueless about how to fix cause I don't know enough technical info. But you have brilliantly identified the problem! Where there's a will there's a way! Let's find it.
3) great idea about handouts before rush explaining the process! Very doable. Let's implement it.
In addition I would look at tighter controls all around in terms of information released. Do all sisters need to know the identities of all who are rushing so that social media searches don't create bias before the process begins?

This may be completely unrelated but today's and yesterday's news was all about racial conflict. The root cause is that we simply do not care to get to know one another. We work, go to school, play sport together but we don't bother really knowing each other. This Greek system as it works right now oerpetuates this divide. The comments made on some of the threads against integration of minorities is apalling and Im scrratching my head as to how that person managed to be seen as a perfect fit for what I suspect is one of the top houses. No, the system is terribly broken. It's centered around mechanics rather than around values. It's a private institution but it's not supposed to be exclusive, I don't think. Yes, it rejects some people and accepts others but that does not make it exclusive. It makes it selective. Stanford accepts some students and rejects others but it's very inclusive in it's selection. It ensures that it's inclusive because diversity brings in different world views and expands the mind. This leads to progress. Being selective is not being exclusive. The Greek system has confused the two. In the absence of accountability and transparency unfortunately selectivity is used as a excuse to exclude. The "fit" is a very ambiguous term and somehow the misfits to some houses look very similar and the perfect fits look alike! Hmmm, I smell a rat! Finally this is not a dating organization. For sisterhood I don't think one needs a fit. Instead one needs acceptance

Hmm, another thank you for taking the time for following this thread and responding. Even though this site is what it is, I truly think the info you shared helped both pnms and actives. I hope others read through this thread and some of the others. For better or worse we are in a system and have to work within the system to move forward. I am going to bring up some of these comments on my house but so far most people here don't seem too receptive and think it's all good. How is your house responding to this discussion? Do you feel there is a shot at discussion or do you feel you will be blown off? I do disagee with you though on the pledge class size issue. This year was so large that now people aren't guaranteed housing second year. I love all my new sisters but I do think that we have these large classes because of the AOPi situation that hasn't been resolved and probably won't be resolved before we graduate. So, I think panhel should look at another house as I'm not sure we can sustain these sized classes for very long. We can't wait for the zeta situation to change as building a house takes years and I don't think we have years before we run out of capacity. I'm truly not sure what to do so I am curious if you have any ideas on a way forward for panhel.