Quote:
Originally Posted by bejazd
But doesn't a large number of QA's also indicate that somewhere in the the statistical end of recruitment, there are several chapters (maybe most of them) that simply kept inviting too many women to their parties (even if it was only by say 4-5?) and when they ended up having a better recruitment than they expected, these women sort of piled up and became the "mismatched." ????
|
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.
Threaded Mode
