A new spring dilemma

Revising this original section of RT has been interesting (and well needed), but writing and reading all of this stuff on Spring recruitment has led to a new question:

Is Spring recruitment necessary at MIT?

Most of this chapter is spent explaining why general year-round recruitment efforts don't work for us, and how modifying these isn't exactly the answer either. So doesn't that say something on its own? Maybe spring recruitment (what year-round becomes at MIT) just isn't worth it at the Institute after all. Hmm...

Passive Recruitment complete

Finally! The chapter I thought I finished years ago just finished its facelift and is officially draft ready. It finishes at a light 7-pages (single spaced; standard margins). Let me know if you're interested in proofreading. Unfortunately it will not be electronic draft, so you'll have to request a hard copy.

Now on to a much larger task: revising Active Recruitment. Remember that Recruitment Theory was born from its section on Spring Recruitment, so finally smoothing this out should be fun. And by fun I mean not. But you get the picture.

Passive recruitment (cont'd)

There's a lot more here than I initially thought. Originally the discussion was a little jumbled, mixing the general goal of passive recruitment (establishing a reputation, etc.) with the ideal goal (establishing a positive reputation). But I realized that not all houses may want to realize the ideal; i.e. maybe they don't want to epitomize the general fraternity values (brotherhood, leadership, scholarship, etc.) Nevertheless, such chapters should still be aware of all the passive recruitment concepts.

But that leads to something else. Fraternities don't exist in a vacuum, so what one of us does impacts everyone else. Surely that's a "global" form of passive recruitment, too?