National Panhellenic Conference

Members of Sigma Sigma Sigma and Alpha Sigma Alpha organized the Association of Pedagogical Sororities on July 10, 1915. The membership consisted of sororities which were primarily located on state campuses predominantly attended by women entering the educational field. In 1917, Pi Kappa Sigma and Delta Sigma Epsilon joined the association, followed by Theta Sigma Upsilon in 1925, Alpha Sigma Tau in 1926, and Pi Delta Theta in 1931. At the third biennial conference, the name of the association was changed to the Association of Educational Sororities (AES). Later, the word "Educational" was changed to "Education".

From 1915 through 1926, the NPC and AES operated chapters in the same colleges and universities. In 1926, the NPC and AES made an agreement "defining fields of activities of each panhellenic". There was competition between NPC and AES sororities, and dual memberships were often held. By the 1940s, however, many teacher's colleges had begun to add liberal arts programs, and vice versa, which led to difficulties in functioning separately as they had had in the past.[2][7]

On November 12, 1947, at a conference in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the NPC considered and granted associate membership "with reservations" to the six AES sororities. The AES was holding its biennial meeting when it was notified of the NPC decision and, at that meeting, "completed the necessary business and took formal action to dissolve the Association of Education Sororities".[8] The NPC admitted five other sororities at that same time: Alpha Epsilon Phi, Delta Phi Epsilon, Phi Sigma Sigma, Sigma Delta Tau, and Theta Phi Alpha. In December 1951, all 11 of these sororities became full members of NPC. Since that time, three AES members have merged with other NPC groups, leaving Alpha Sigma Alpha, Alpha Sigma Tau, and Sigma Sigma Sigma as the remaining former AES members.

From the 1940s to the 1960s, various smaller organizations merged into larger ones. On some campuses with two different chapters from the sorority that merged and its merger sorority, a third sorority would colonize on that campus to absorb the smaller sorority's former chapter.[9]

By the end of the 1960s and the Civil rights movement, the NPC sororities eliminated official policies that prevented minority members from joining,[3] although diversity in Greek life would remain an issue.[10][11]

As of the 2010s, sorority members and outside observers noticed a shift in sorority culture; though sororities began as feminist organizations, emphasis during the mid-1900s on social reputations and exclusionary recruitment policies (such as refusal to bid Jewish and African-American women) had led to a reputation for following cultural hegemony and of being made up of traditionally white and upper-class women.[12] Though such issues continue to persist in various ways, sorority women and anti-sorority women alike observed more ethnic diversity and movement away from traditional power structures, back towards their organizations' feminist roots.[12] In this decade, sorority members began attempts to change how Greek life works from inside their own organizations.[12]

In November 2015, eight of the NPC members (Alpha Phi, Alpha Chi Omega, Phi Mu, Alpha Gamma Delta, Sigma Delta Tau, Delta Phi Epsilon, Delta Gamma, and Gamma Phi Beta) broke ranks from the NPC to withdraw support from the Safe Campus Act, a controversial bill that would have required campus sexual assault victims to report to police and submit to an investigation from law enforcement before their school would be able to begin any investigations of their own.[13]

Beginning in 2016, collegiate members began discussing membership offers for transgender women, which was supported by some national organizations with changes in their national policies;[14][15][16] however, some national organizations delayed membership offers for transwomen due to fears about Title IX exemption status, which caused dissent in local chapters.[17] Though the NPC created a Gender Identity Study Group to examine potential legal consequences, they concluded that legal precedents were "incomplete, inconclusive, and inconsistent," and did not enact official policy or recommendations.[18]