Hopefully Good Enrollment News....

[kemajic]

I stand by my statement. 123% more means 100% + 123% or 223% of the original. If what they meant was 23% more than last year then that is what they should/would have said.

You are the one that right in this stupid argument.

 

[Grisly Fan]

I stand by my statement. 123% more means 100% + 123% or 223% of the original. If what they meant was 23% more than last year then that is what they should/would have said.

If the number of Freshman at UM next year is even close to twice as many Freshman at UM this year. I will publicly apologize to you and buy you whatever drink you want. :thumb:

Warning, Angel's Envy is $90 a fifth...

 

[grizpsych]

Ill have to agree, a statistician would not say increase in that fashion as they are using 100% as the baseline of what they are making the judgement off off. So no matter if you say they had a 23% increase or increase of 123% ...the result is the same. In stats a 200% increase is a double of your baseline which is 100%. Much like if you are operating a business and you are 123% to your goal. That means you grew business by 23 total percent above the goal. Nobody is really wrong here you guys are just talking in different forms.

No GrislyFan actually thinks there might be more than double the amount of Freshman on Campus next year than this year.

Its not what I think, it is what they article says in plain English. If the article is mistaken then that isn't my problem. And besides, it says a 123% more applications and if true that doesn't necessarily mean 123% more freshman. They all would certainly not be accepted -- or maybe they would? No insight there.

That's not what it says at all. 100% of 10 is still 10. thats basic basic math in 5th grade probably earlier now a days. so if 100% of 10 is 10 than 123 percent is not over double. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

You and I are obviously wrong here /s. So, UM should start building another dorm.

 

[Grisly Fan]

It would be nice to see the actual numbers which would then end any debate. And to Kem, yeah it is a stupid argument unlike so many of the really intelligent ones that go on here (like the millionth one about Hauck vs. Stitt).

 

[signedbewildered]

Who's on first?

 

[Spanky2]

At this point, any increase is good news.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Remember all of the posters that said they knew of prospective students that didn't receive squat from The U of M?

Welp…..


https://missoulian.com/news/local/university-of-montana-applications-from-prospective-students-up-percent/article_38421043-41c8-53f7-8774-96ee6882bb33.html#tracking-source=home-top-stories

University of Montana: Applications from prospective students up 123 percent

KEILA SZPALLER [email protected]

The University of Montana has drawn 123 percent more applications from prospective students this year than it did last year at the same time, according to a UM vice president.

Cathy Cole, vice president for enrollment management and strategic communications, also said the number of acceptances has grown 333 percent this year compared to last year.

"That's a lot," Cole said Thursday.

The vice president shared the data at a meeting of the Faculty Senate, where senators heard more about Cole's efforts in recruitment. They also heard from President Seth Bodnar and Provost Jon Harbor about their work to close a $10 million budget hole, a student who raised concerns about cuts to the humanities and a member of the public and faculty leader about a draft open meeting policy.

In recruitment, Cole said she discovered UM's computer system for tracking prospective students was broken. Before she took the job, she had signed up her dog as a prospective student at UM to see the type of material the flagship provided, but the campus didn't send information. Once she started the job, she saw the computer wrongly noted it had sent a set of messages.

"We had a fairly enthusiastic phone call with the owner of the company," Cole said. "I may have said my favorite word a number of times."

Since then, she said the computer system has been correctly tracking sent messages.

UM is redirecting money to recruitment, and although Cole said she cannot afford to send a lot of snail mail to students, students live on their screens, and she is reaching them digitally.

In public comment, humanities student Eli Brown noted President Bodnar and Provost Harbor state a commitment to the humanities. But he said all but two of the programs being cut more than 20 percent are in the humanities. He feared the university was making a "covert return to professional education."

He said he understood the fiscal needs of the campus, but he urged a close evaluation of the processes administrators used to inform budget decisions. Brown said the president talked about the "power of the 'and,'" meaning UM offers not just liberal arts, but liberal arts and sciences.

Brown asked the administration to be more transparent, and he requested students and faculty to also "embrace the power of the 'and,'" but a different "and'' — faculty and students.

"We can hold the administration accountable to their words, but only if we act together," Brown said.

In response, Harbor noted UM is reinvesting money into programs, and he said the largest dollar investments are going to the arts, human sciences and business. He also said the administration's approach to fixing the budget is coming from the campus community itself, whose members have commented on both the process and an earlier proposal for cuts.

Both Harbor and Bodnar noted the challenge of closing the $10 million gap. Harbor said UM is down some 4,000 students for a 30 percent budget reduction, but it isn't reducing instructional staffing that amount.

Plus, cuts aren't the only solution, Bodnar said. He said UM not only launched its most ambitious capital campaign ever to raise at least $400 million, it plans to also recruit and retain more students.

One faculty member wanted to know if UM would scrutinize administrators and athletics as closely as it did academic programs, and Bodnar said "absolutely." He noted the budget for faculty is down just 3 percent or 4 percent, while the budget for administration is down 20 percent the last four years, which he said has resulted in some of UM's current challenges.

"We're looking for efficiencies every single day," Bodnar said.

Professor Dave Beck noted faculty numbers are down closer to 8 percent to 15 percent, and he wanted to know if administrators used data programs in order to make their budget decisions.

Bodnar said he didn't have the exact numbers in front of him so could not be precise on the percent of faculty reductions, but he said UM is spending 14 percent more on instructional staffing than it did a decade ago. And the provost said data and narratives all were used in making decisions.

In his remarks, Bodnar also thanked faculty for their work with students, and he noted the business community is supporting UM. He said every student at UM spends some $10,000 a year in Missoula, including money spent by their family.

UM is getting help from the community to "jump start this machine and get it humming again," he said. "It is of the utmost urgency that we fix this.''

The Faculty Senate also briefly reviewed a draft "open meeting policy" but did not take action on it.

However, UM student and citizen activist Ross Best said the policy still needs work to comply with Montana law. He said UM officials have been trying to go around their constitutional obligations by curating cabinet meetings and describing other gatherings as "huddles" instead of official meetings.

"The university is systematically playing word games to keep things secret," said Best, who has pushed the Montana University System to adopt coordinated rules of public participation.

Faculty Senate chair-elect Mark Pershouse encouraged senators to comment on the policy and said a forum with legal scholars might be held on the topic.

what do you suppose is her favorite word?

moist

 

[Ursa Major]

Marketing 101: what looks better? 23% increase or 123% increase?

Archimedes

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

No GrislyFan actually thinks there might be more than double the amount of Freshman on Campus next year than this year.

Its not what I think, it is what they article says in plain English. If the article is mistaken then that isn't my problem. And besides, it says a 123% more applications and if true that doesn't necessarily mean 123% more freshman. They all would certainly not be accepted -- or maybe they would? No insight there.

That's not what it says at all. 100% of 10 is still 10. thats basic basic math in 5th grade probably earlier now a days. so if 100% of 10 is 10 than 123 percent is not over double. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

You and I are obviously wrong here /s. So, UM should start building another dorm.

1st off...I would hope to god that we are not not accepting anybody..lol, IDC what their grades look like...

2nd...the main key is the way they worded the article.."increase" is important here. If they would have said applications are @ 123% of what they were last year that is different than an increase of 123%

 

[firtrader]

Man I need some clarification:

So a mathematician who uses percentages to calculate an answer is better off getting a 100 % raise in pay than a statistican. The math guy doubled his earnings and the stat guy earns the same as the prior year.

Apps are 123% of last years, I agree.
Are they UP 123%, no, they are UP 23% compared to last year. They also could be up TO 123% of last year.

Stock market is big believer in stats. When they say a stock is up 100% why don’t they just say it is unchanged in statistical parlance, but mathematically speaking it has doubled. And I thought math was the universal language.

 

[grizpsych]

Man I need some clarification:

So a mathematician who uses percentages to calculate an answer is better off getting a 100 % raise in pay than a statistican. The math guy doubled his earnings and the stat guy earns the same as the prior year.

Apps are 123% of last years, I agree.
Are they UP 123%, no, they are UP 23% compared to last year. They also could be up TO 123% of last year.

Stock market is big believer in stats. When they say a stock is up 100% why don’t they just say it is unchanged in statistical parlance, but mathematically speaking it has doubled. And I thought math was the universal language.

You are right that the phrasing is everything here. Indeed, if my job gives me a 2% raise next year, I will make 102% of what I currently make. But, that does not mean that I will make over double of what I currently make. You are also correct that people will say a stock is up 100% from what it was previously when they mean that the price has doubled. They do this so that everyone can understand it. However, the calculation would be multiply the previous price by 2 (or 200%).

On a pragmatic level, can someone explain to me why the other side of this argument would ever be correct here? That is, why on earth would more than double the amount of people than last year choose to apply to UM? There is no common sense reason to believe this version of events.

 

[EverettGriz]

I think the confusion is arising from Kaila's tweet. Had she said UM's applications are 123% of last year, we all probably come to the conclusion that there has been a 23% increase. But because she tweeted that applications are "up 123%" she left the impression with some that the apps have more than doubled. Her article states it correctly, leading the reader to assume a 23% increase.

 

['68griz]

People, can't you simply appreciate that there IS an increase, and not spend way too much time arguing over how much that increase is? I'd say a lot of you need to get a life.

 

[EverettGriz]

Oh, and this is once again proof positive that we will argue about -- quite literally -- ANYthing on eGriz.

 

[grizpsych]

I think the confusion is arising from Kaila's tweet. Had she said UM's applications are 123% of last year, we all probably come to the conclusion that there has been a 23% increase. But because she tweeted that applications are "up 123%" she left the impression with some that the apps have more than doubled. Her article states it correctly, leading the reader to assume a 23% increase.

Her tweet just needed a comma or semicolon between up and 123%.

 

['68griz]

Oh, and this is once again proof positive that we will argue about -- quite literally -- ANYthing on eGriz.

 

[EverettGriz]

I think the confusion is arising from Kaila's tweet. Had she said UM's applications are 123% of last year, we all probably come to the conclusion that there has been a 23% increase. But because she tweeted that applications are "up 123%" she left the impression with some that the apps have more than doubled. Her article states it correctly, leading the reader to assume a 23% increase.

Her tweet just needed a comma or semicolon between up and 123%.

Yes. Or just not included "up".

 

[bgbigdog]

[media]https://twitter.com/aschmidtacular/status/1050518706307006464?s=21[/media]

 

[Grisly Fan]

A 123% increase (if that was what was truly meant) is not mathematically ridiculous. For the sake of argument lets say 1/4 of the students are freshman (not true I know but go with me on this for a minute). The enrollment is somewhere below 12,000 but let's use that nice round number for this example. That means at least 3000 people applied last year. And let's say that desperate for students they accepted 100% which would mean exactly 3000 applications were submitted last year. A 123% more this year would mean 6,690 applications this year. Yes, that is huge but not impossible. That said, I suspect that they mean 123% of last year instead of 123% more than last year. Still, that is not what it says in the Missoulian... And THAT is my only point. I'm out.

 

[srgrizizen]

A 123% increase (if that was what was truly meant) is not mathematically ridiculous. For the sake of argument lets say 1/4 of the students are freshman (not true I know but go with me on this for a minute). The enrollment is somewhere below 12,000 but let's use that nice round number for this example. That means at least 3000 people applied last year. And let's say that desperate for students they accepted 100% which would mean exactly 3000 applications were submitted last year. A 123% more this year would mean 6,690 applications this year. Yes, that is huge but not impossible. That said, I suspect that they mean 123% of last year instead of 123% more than last year. Still, that is not what it says in the Missoulian... And THAT is my only point. I'm out.

Jeez,Louise. Of course this poster has it right. Whatever the reality is, if they said the INCREASE was 123%, you multiply last year's figure by 1.23 AND THEN ADD LAST YEAR'S FIGURE. Last year = 100, then this year = 223. Trolls are going to have a field day ripping the mathematical illiteracy of many egrizzers.