[latex]\displaystyle\frac{243}{400}=0.6075=\frac{60.75}{100}[/latex] This is 60.75%.

Notice that the percent can be found from the equivalent decimal by moving the decimal point two places to the right.

1. [latex]\displaystyle\frac{1}{4}=0.25[/latex] = 25%
2. 0.02 = 2%
3. 2.35 = 235%

The tuition next year will be the current tuition plus an additional 7%, so it will be 107% of this year’s tuition: $1200(1.07) = $1284.

Alternatively, we could have first calculated 7% of $1200: $1200(0.07) = $84.

Notice this is not the expected tuition for next year (we could only wish). Instead, this is the expected increase, so to calculate the expected tuition, we’ll need to add this change to the previous year’s tuition: $1200 + $84 = $1284.

To compute the percent change, we first need to find the dollar value change: $6800 – $7400 = –$600. Often we will take the absolute value of this amount, which is called the absolute change: |–600| = 600.

Since we are computing the decrease relative to the starting value, we compute this percent out of $7400:

[latex]\displaystyle\frac{600}{7400}=0.081=[/latex] 8.1% decrease. This is called a relative change.

When we make comparisons, we must ask first whether an absolute or relative comparison. The absolute difference is 215 – 75 = 140. From this, we could say “Albertsons has 140 more stores than QFC.” However, if you wrote this in an article or paper, that number does not mean much. The relative difference may be more meaningful. There are two different relative changes we could calculate, depending on which store we use as the base:

Using QFC as the base, [latex]\displaystyle\frac{140}{75}=1.867[/latex].

This tells us Albertsons is 186.7% larger than QFC.

Using Albertsons as the base,[latex]\displaystyle\frac{140}{215}=0.651[/latex].

This tells us QFC is 65.1% smaller than Albertsons.

Notice both of these are showing percent differences. We could also calculate the size of Albertsons relative to QFC:[latex]\displaystyle\frac{215}{75}=2.867[/latex], which tells us Albertsons is 2.867 times the size of QFC. Likewise, we could calculate the size of QFC relative to Albertsons:[latex]\displaystyle\frac{75}{215}=0.349[/latex], which tells us that QFC is 34.9% of the size of Albertsons.

To answer this question, suppose the value started at $100. After one week, the value dropped by 60%: $100 – $100(0.60) = $100 – $60 = $40.

In the next week, notice that base of the percent has changed to the new value, $40. Computing the 75% increase: $40 + $40(0.75) = $40 + $30 = $70.

In the end, the stock is still $30 lower, or [latex]\displaystyle\frac{\$30}{100}[/latex] = 30% lower, valued than it started.

1. This number is hard to evaluate, since we have no basis for judging whether this is a larger or small change. If the number of “dropout factories” dropped from 20 to 3, that’d be a very significant change, but if the number dropped from 217 to 200, that’d be less of an improvement.
2. The last sentence provides relative change, which helps put the first sentence in perspective. We can estimate that the number of “dropout factories” was probably previously around 34. However, it’s possible that students simply moved schools rather than the school improving, so that estimate might not be fully accurate.

Without more information, it is hard for us to judge who is correct, but we can easily conclude that these two percents are talking about different things, so one does not necessarily contradict the other. Edward’s claim was a percent with coalition forces as the base of the percent, while Cheney’s claim was a percent with both coalition and Iraqi security forces as the base of the percent. It turns out both statistics are in fact fairly accurate.

We could describe this using an absolute change: [latex]|50\%-40\%|=10\%[/latex]. Notice that since the original quantities were percents, this change also has the units of percent. In this case, it is best to describe this as an increase of 10 percentage points.

In contrast, we could compute the percent change:[latex]\displaystyle\frac{10\%}{40\%}=0.25=25\%[/latex] increase. This is the relative change, and we’d say the politician’s support has increased by 25%.

It is very tempting to average these values, and claim the overall average is 35%, but this is likely not correct, since most players make many more 2-point attempts than 3-point attempts. We don’t actually have enough information to answer the question. Suppose the player attempted 200 2-point field goals and 100 3-point field goals. Then that player made 200(0.40) = 80 2-point shots and 100(0.30) = 30 3-point shots. Overall, they player made 110 shots out of 300, for a [latex]\displaystyle\frac{110}{300}=0.367=36.7\%[/latex] overall field goal percentage.