Quote:
Originally Posted by jwright25
This is where the concept of Quota Range comes into play. Under the old matching methods, quota was set usually by the number of women attending the round before preference OR the number of women receiving preference invitations. And it rarely changed. Now that we use Quota Range, we can run quota at several different numbers and see which one achieves the greatest parity. Oftentimes that makes quota on the lower end of the range. That leaves more women unmatched. So they wind up as QAs. But the tradeoff is that more chapters make quota with women who get their first choice.
And you make a point about chapters doing better than expected. That always happens - and that's good! We want chapters to improve their operations. If the campus uses priority ranking rather than accept/regret, those situations can usually be addressed with flex lists.
The bottom line is that while there may still be quota additions, weaker chapters are pledging quota or very close.
|
Gotcha. So mathematically, probably about the same total overall # of PNMs will get bids, they'll just be spread around more evenly, with the possibility of one or two chapters pledging a very large number of QAs pretty much eliminated .
As far as the chapters go, under the new system, what incentive do they have to play fair with each other as far as sticking to their max recommended invite #?