Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) Headlines and titles, while being technically accurate, can convey a false impression. Such is the case with a thread title currently on the board. It states "Missionary Number Has Declined". To give some perspective, I am starting this thread. See the other thread for the background, but briefly stated, there were 58,000 missionaries when the age changes were announced in 2012. Today there are 75,000. That's a net increase of 17,000 or 29 percent in about three years. Edited February 11, 2016 by Scott Lloyd 2
VideoGameJunkie Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 Why do you feel they lowered the ages for missionaries?
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 3 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Why do you feel they lowered the ages for missionaries? President Nelson said the prophet was inspired to. 1
Five Solas Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 Curious, Scott, how much of the change in numbers of missionaries you attribute to closing the gap to a single year between the young men (previously 19, now 18) and young women (previously 21, now 19). And if women are now nearly as encouraged as men to serve as missionaries--why haven't we seen a much more dramatic and sustainable increase? --Erik
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Five Solas said: Curious, Scott, how much of the change in numbers of missionaries you attribute to closing the gap to a single year between the young men (previously 19, now 18) and young women (previously 21, now 19). And if women are now nearly as encouraged as men to serve as missionaries--why haven't we seen a much more dramatic and sustainable increase? --Erik Not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but I don't see what, if anything, an "age gap" would have to do with it. That strikes me as a rather weird conjecture on your part, frankly. And it astounds me you don't see a 29 percent increase in three years as dramatic. I don't know what it is you're expecting or what your basis is for expecting it. Finally, I wonder what your definition of "sustainable" is. After a surge and expected subsiding of that surge, the number has leveled off at 75,000 and is now rising again. That seems pretty sustainable to me, and for you to ask why it is not sustainable strikes me as a loaded question of the "are you still beating your wife" category. Edited February 11, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
Five Solas Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but I don't see what, if anything, an "age gap" would have to do with it. That strikes me as a rather weird conjecture on your part, frankly. And it astounds me you don't see a 29 percent increase in three years as dramatic. I don't know what it is you're expecting or what your basis is for expecting it. Finally, I wonder what your definition of "sustainable" is. After a surge and expected subsiding of that surge, the number has leveled off at 75,000 and is now rising again. That seems pretty sustainable to me, and for you to ask why it is not sustainable strikes me as a loaded question of the "are you still beating your wife" category. My apology for my lack of clarity. Try it this way: Prior to the change, LDS women had to wait two years past a man's eligibility. And some fraction of these women still served as missionaries. Keep in mind a 21-year old is likely to be a lot further into her education, career, etc. than at 19. Therefore it was considerably more disruptive for an LDS woman to serve than it was for her male counterpart. That should be pretty evident, right? Today, the situation is closer to parity and I *assume* this is a significant encouragement for more women to serve. Women make up ~ half the population, so the result of the change should be very large and sustained (not merely a temporary "surge" attributable to 18 year-old men signing up). I'm not saying it should have exactly doubled, since there were some women serving already. But certainly more than 29%. What am I missing, Scott? --Erik
ALarson Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 1 minute ago, Five Solas said: Today, the situation is closer to parity and I *assume* this is a significant encouragement for more women to serve. Women make up ~ half the population, so the result of the change should be very large and sustained (not merely a temporary "surge" attributable to 18 year-old men signing up). I'm not saying it should have exactly doubled, since there were some women serving already. But certainly more than 29%. As you state above, the age change (for men and women) caused this increase since 2012. Like I posted on the other thread, this is old news. So, I'm not sure why it's being discussed here again unless there is something new. Everyone expected a surge in numbers and that did happen. What's of interest is the recent decrease in numbers of missionaries serving in light of the prediction from Elder Holland that there would be 100,000 missionaries serving by 2019. What will happen to turn the now decreasing numbers into an increase before then if his prediction turns out to be accurate? Maybe more changes are in coming.... 3
Senator Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: President Nelson said the prophet was inspired to. I wonder who first came up with the idea?
ALarson Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Headlines and titles, while being technically accurate, can convey a false impression. Such is the case with a thread title currently on the board. It states "Missionary Number Has Declined". If the word "Recently" was inserted before "Declined", that would have been more accurate, I agree, That is the topic of the other thread, (the "recent decline" in missionary numbers). 1
Five Solas Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) It would be interesting to know (and no, I haven't seen this discussed elsewhere) how much of the increase is attributable to women. My hypothesis - perhaps all of it, given how much bigger a change it was for them. It might even be that the number of men is in decline but the number of women joining the LDS mission service is offsetting it. Can we test that hypothesis? :0) --Erik edited to spell hypothesis right Edited February 11, 2016 by Five Solas
ALarson Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: After a surge and expected subsiding of that surge, the number has leveled off at 75,000 and is now rising again. There was a drop of 18,000 missionaries from the end of 2014 to reach the 75,000 number stated a few weeks ago. Do you have statistics that show it's now "rising again"? (If you already posted these, I missed them, I'll go look again on the other thread). From January 20, 2016: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865645872/Elder-Dallin-H-Oaks-speaks-at-Worldwide-Missionary-Broadcast-Our-message-for-missionaries.html The meeting, which originated in the Conference Center Theater, was translated and broadcast to the Church's 75,000 full-time missionaries serving across the globe
Johnnie Cake Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Headlines and titles, while being technically accurate, can convey a false impression. Such is the case with a thread title currently on the board. It states "Missionary Number Has Declined". To give some perspective, I am starting this thread. See the other thread for the background, but briefly stated, there were 58,000 missionaries when the age changes were announced in 2012. Today there are 75,000. That's a net increase of 17,000 or 29 percent in about three years. So you're measuring from the pre-surge mark through to today while stemelbow is measuring from the surge high water mark through to today. So what's your point? You both are making different points and measuring different numbers. You seem to offended that stemelbow exposed the drop in missionary numbers and felt inclined to post numbers that are more flattering to your view...to what end? The fact remains that in truth there was a surge in missionary numbers...and now there is an expected drop in missionary numbers...in all honestly your point while technically true is less reflective of what is actually happening in missionary numbers and paints a distorted picture of current reality. Edited February 11, 2016 by Johnnie Cake 2
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 18 minutes ago, ALarson said: As you state above, the age change (for men and women) caused this increase since 2012. Like I posted on the other thread, this is old news. So, I'm not sure why it's being discussed here again unless there is something new. Everyone expected a surge in numbers and that did happen. What's of interest is the recent decrease in numbers of missionaries serving in light of the prediction from Elder Holland that there would be 100,000 missionaries serving by 2019. What will happen to turn the now decreasing numbers into an increase before then if his prediction turns out to be accurate? Maybe more changes are in coming.... What I'm hearing is that the number has already begun to increase. It's not all that remarkable that there would be a decrease after the surge; that was foregone. The remarkable thing is that it bottomed out at a full 29 percent above what it was when the age changes were announced. Much is being made here of Elder Holland's projection. Was he claiming to be uttering divinely directed prophecy, as Erik seems determined to take it? Or was he merely giving his best guess at the time? I hold toward the latter. So I don't agree with your assumption that there has to be some major initiative by the Church to bring about Elder Holland's projection. The important thing is that the number has now bottomed out at a level substantially higher than when the age changes announcement set in motion a surge and that it is now increasing. Whether it reaches 100,000 by 2019 or whether it takes longer than that is of no great moment.
ALarson Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: What I'm hearing is that the number has already begun to increase. Since January 20, 2016 (when the number of 75,000 missionaries was given)? 16 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: The important thing is that the number has now bottomed out at a level substantially higher than when the age changes announcement set in motion a surge and that it is now increasing. Whether it reaches 100,000 by 2019 or whether it takes longer than that is of no great moment. Which is what the other discussion is really about (from stemelbow's opening post). With the recent decrease (to 75,000 missionaries), will we be able to reach the predicted 100,000 number by 2019? That is an interesting discussion, but everything is speculation regarding that too. No one is disputing that there was a surge. But, again...that's old news here. . Edited February 11, 2016 by ALarson
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 46 minutes ago, Five Solas said: My apology for my lack of clarity. Try it this way: Prior to the change, LDS women had to wait two years past a man's eligibility. And some fraction of these women still served as missionaries. Keep in mind a 21-year old is likely to be a lot further into her education, career, etc. than at 19. Therefore it was considerably more disruptive for an LDS woman to serve than it was for her male counterpart. That should be pretty evident, right? Today, the situation is closer to parity and I *assume* this is a significant encouragement for more women to serve. Women make up ~ half the population, so the result of the change should be very large and sustained (not merely a temporary "surge" attributable to 18 year-old men signing up). I'm not saying it should have exactly doubled, since there were some women serving already. But certainly more than 29%. What am I missing, Scott? --Erik There are already more women serving -- many more. But in the Church of Jesus Christ, full time missionary service has never been an expectation for young women the way it is for young men -- not even now. Their service is welcome but not required. That has always been the way it is expressed. Your notion that the result should have been greater than it is is simply that: your notion.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 51 minutes ago, ALarson said: There was a drop of 18,000 missionaries from the end of 2014 to reach the 75,000 number stated a few weeks ago. Do you have statistics that show it's now "rising again"? (If you already posted these, I missed them, I'll go look again on the other thread). From January 20, 2016: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865645872/Elder-Dallin-H-Oaks-speaks-at-Worldwide-Missionary-Broadcast-Our-message-for-missionaries.html The meeting, which originated in the Conference Center Theater, was translated and broadcast to the Church's 75,000 full-time missionaries serving across the globe In January -- prior to the worldwide missionary broadcast you reference in your link, which I attended and which I helped to cover -- there was an annual seminar for new MTC presidents and directors of Church visitor centers and historic sites. I didn't cover that seminar as I typically do, but I learned from my colleague who did cover it that it was said during the seminar that the number of missionaries has begun to increase again. I've mentioned this before, in a post of a few weeks ago in th thread that Mike Reed resurrected. Edited February 11, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: So you're measuring from the pre-surge mark through to today while stemelbow is measuring from the surge high water mark through to today. So what's your point? You both are making different points and measuring different numbers. You seem to offended that stemelbow exposed the drop in missionary numbers and felt inclined to post numbers that are more flattering to your view...to what end? The fact remains that in truth there was a surge in missionary numbers...and now there is an expected drop in missionary numbers...in all honestly your point while technically true is less reflective of what is actually happening in missionary numbers and paints a distorted picture of current reality. I reject your assertion that my metric is "less reflective of what is actually happening" and "paints a distorted picture of reality." We could compare it to two photographic images, the one a close-up image with the surroundings cropped out and the other a wide-angle view showing everything that is in the closeup plus its surroundings. Apparently, you don't care for a broad view, context or perspective. But don't accuse me of distortion because I do. It makes no sense and it's a bad rap. If anything, my measure avoids distortion because it allows sufficient time for the surge to have transpired and subsided and the numbers to have stabilized. Edited February 11, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
stemelbow Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 42 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: What I'm hearing is that the number has already begun to increase. It's not all that remarkable that there would be a decrease after the surge; that was foregone. The remarkable thing is that it bottomed out at a full 29 percent above what it was when the age changes were announced. Much is being made here of Elder Holland's projection. Was he claiming to be uttering divinely directed prophecy, as Erik seems determined to take it? Or was he merely giving his best guess at the time? I hold toward the latter. So I don't agree with your assumption that there has to be some major initiative by the Church to bring about Elder Holland's projection. The important thing is that the number has now bottomed out at a level substantially higher than when the age changes announcement set in motion a surge and that it is now increasing. Whether it reaches 100,000 by 2019 or whether it takes longer than that is of no great moment. Are you predicting this is the point of bottoming out? What gives you that impression?
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 4 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Are you predicting this is the point of bottoming out? What gives you that impression? Asked and answered. Please familiarize yourself with the thread.
ALarson Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: In January -- prior to the worldwide missionary broadcast you reference in your link, which I attended and which I helped to cover -- there was an annual seminar for new MTC presidents and directors of Church visitor centers and historic sites. I didn't cover that seminar as I typically do, but I learned from my colleague who did cover it that it was said during the seminar that the number of missionaries has begun to increase again. That would be great and it will be interesting to see if the actual stats given in General Conference in April support an increase (rather than just hearsay, which I understand may be all we have right now). . Edited February 11, 2016 by ALarson
Scott Lloyd Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, ALarson said: That would be great and it will be interesting to see the actual stats given in General Conference in April support an increase rather than just hearsay (which I understand may be all we have right now). Since the stats given in general conference only cover through the end of the prior calendar year, don't expect anything new there. The figure there will probably be around 75,000 -- about what was said in early January. Edited February 11, 2016 by Scott Lloyd 1
stemelbow Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 To be clear, on mormonnewsroom/facts-and-statistics right now, the reported number of missionaries is 74,079. We're a thousand less than what was reported by Elder Oaks. Not sure if his number came from before or after the 74,000 currently as reported on the site. Or if his was a rounding up. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-statistics At the end of 2014 "peaked at nearly 89,000" http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865619186/Creation-of-11-new-missions-indicates-the-work-continues-apace.html We're down 15,000 missionaries in 14 months. 1
ALarson Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Since the stats given in general conference only cover through the end of the prior calendar year, don't expect anything new there. It will probably be around 75,000 -- about what was said in early January. Ok, so it'll still show a decrease and those are the stats we have for now. Maybe by the next conference, new numbers will show the increase you heard about? (Or will the same stats be used then too?). Going by stemmelbow's post above, the numbers have even dropped more now.
stemelbow Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Asked and answered. Please familiarize yourself with the thread. I'm not sure saying a colleague heard someone say the number of missionaries has begun to increase is a reliable source to conclude the number bottomed out at 75,000. Particularly since mormonnewsroom is currently telling us 74,000 is the current number.
stemelbow Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Since the stats given in general conference only cover through the end of the prior calendar year, don't expect anything new there. It will probably be around 75,000 -- about what was said in early January. I'm curious how often the mormonnewsroom site is updated. yearly? Was the number reported on that side from end 2015?
Recommended Posts