<p>Right. scarcity of resources is crowding everybody out, to some extent.</p>
<p>Try the other schools in the top 25 - 50. You’ll find some great faculty there, too.</p>
<p>If you look at the listing of grad students, you can form an impression of the fraction of European-American women grad students in physics at the University of Illinois (which is about as Midwestern as you can get, in the sense of the old Northwest Territory), and the fraction of either Chinese or Chinese-American students in physics. I am concerned about the under-representation of women in physics, but I think that the problem is located at a different career stage than it is for people of Chinese heritage.</p>
<p>I haven’t really looked at the physics faculty at various schools from this perspective before, but since poetgrl brought up other schools in the top 25-50, here is Tufts:
<a href=“https://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/physics/Faculty[/url]”>https://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/physics/Faculty</a></p>
<p>@fostej15, White men discriminated (reverse discrimination) is the biggest joke. How many Fortune 500 CEOs are non-white men? How many Presidents of US are non-white men?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m sorry if this is an idiotic question, but what do you mean by this?</p>
<p>
AFAIK there’s only one President of the United States and he’s a non-white man. :)</p>
<p>Now, if you’re talking about past Presidents, that’s another matter.</p>
<p>“I wanted to participate in one of MIT’s summer programs this year, but as I am male and white, I cannot, because all of them are either for women, minority races, or for poor kids.”</p>
<p>Go far the RSI program, which opens to anyone. Most likely you won’t get in though, since its acceptance rate is in the low single digit. Good luck.</p>
<p>Re poetgrl, #1205: I suppose that “career stage” is not really the right term for it, but it seems to me that the proportion of women has dropped off very steeply below 50% by the time they reach grad school in physics. As I understand it, there is a drop in the percentage of women at each transition: undergrad to grad to post-doc to junior faculty to tenured faculty. I no longer believe that the drop from junior faculty to tenured faculty is attributable to women not being in the “pipeline” long enough. </p>
<p>In contrast, there does not seem to be an under-representation of people of Chinese heritage, among the students in grad school (just from quick impressions of a few departments), although one cannot easily determine which students are American citizens or green card holders. The attrition or lack of conversion to tenured faculty positions seems to come after grad school, in this case.</p>
<p>Hmm, release the data to whom? A bunch of posters on CC? Unz or USA Today? Does it matter that the prior SCOTUS words allowed for what the elites are doing? </p>
<p>Gen-u-ine Affirmative Action should cover issues with faculty balance, no?</p>
<p>@bovertine, Read newspapers. Obama is 50% white. How can he be non-white? He is not 49.9% white.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does that prove discrimination in hiring practices? I don’t have any Native Americans at my company. Does that mean we are discriminatory?</p>
<p>PG, in hiring, it could- but if you had 4x the representative number, they wouldn’t bug you about the last 6 hires being other sorts.</p>
<p>Joshua, sorry, but do read the thread. It’s all been said. And disputed. We’re on round 3 or 4 or 9.</p>
<p>thanks QM, interesting to know.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not if no Native Americans ever applied, it couldn’t.</p>
<p>@lookingforward, What did you dispute? Without the Ivys releasing all the facts, you can cover up whatever you want. If there is no discrimination, the colleges should be happy to release the data on admissions, unless they feel like they have something to hide.</p>
<p>Actually Josh, the problem with what you are asking is that there are privacy issues surrounding a lot of that information.</p>
<p>You can’t release LORs or whatnot.</p>
<p>They actually do release a great deal of information, though. At this point, I just think they might want to open it up to some outside objective observers, who could splain it better to those who think the only thing that “should” be looked at is the SAT, which is one factor, but not even the most important factor, in admissions.</p>
<p>Maybe they can all go test optional. That’s the ticket.</p>
<p>Bahahahaha. God, that would be so great, wouldn’t it? :p</p>
<p>Back to an earlier part of the thread…as far as using the “last name” methodology, due to intermarriage & conversion, that just does not work any more for Jews (though it probably still does for Asians.) </p>
<p>There are Jews with last names Chua, Lee, McOskar, and Hatfield. There is even a Rabbi O’Toole, as well as rabbis with other TOTALLY unexpected last names. :)</p>
<p>Social science is getting ever softer.</p>
<p>It should be pretty obvious that you can’t look at the faces of the Yale physics faculty, count them up, and derive from that data a conclusion on whether Yale is discriminating against women, or Asians, or people with curly hair. You’d have to know a lot more about the pool of people that are applying for these jobs. Indeed, the low representation of women (for example) might be the result of discrimination, but not by Yale’s physics department–it could be the result of more general discrimination at top undergraduate physics programs that discourage women. It could be that in some cultural groups the top performers are more likely to go into industry.</p>