<p>"but where did anyone say that the males that were admitted were less qualified…? "</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pugmadkate, Vassar does not give merit money. I believe that they also meet need and are need blind, are they not?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m saying it, in a devil’s advocate kind of way. </p>
<p>A lot of white people, as we’ve seen here, are very angry when they find out that people of color at admitted at higher rates. The only conclusion they can draw is that “better qualified” white students are being forced out by “lesser qualified” students of color.</p>
<p>Yet when the evidence is presented that men are being given this same treatment at some colleges, there is furor over the idea that these men in anyway are “less qualified.” </p>
<p>I believe that colleges should strive for diversity in all areas, if for no other reason that the world is becoming more diverse by the day and our kids need to be ready for that. I’m just wondering why those who are so angry about the advantadge that students of color are given at some schools are not in an uproar about he advantadge that men are being given at many of the top LACs.</p>
<p>“. I didn’t see many schools that generous with merit money with those who were borderline admits and would be the ones who benefited from the males getting some preference”</p>
<p>They may tip merit aid toward high stat males, who presumably would be the hardest males to recruit since they would be in more demand than would lower stat males, who may simply be happy to b accepted.</p>
<p>cptofthehouse, I don’t know about Vassar and merit money, that’s not a school we looked at.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is that what they are saying? Are they really … struggling to build the class they want? Is a school with admission below 20% really … struggling? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you believe? And isn’t it why I asked NSM to explain or justify her statement about the lesser qualifications of men! </p>
<p>How does she and YOU ascertain the qualifications of men versus women? Stats? GPA? Something else?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Post 122 of NSM was not a devil’s advocate position! She wrote “LACs admit that to try to maintain at least a 60:40 balance of males to females, they admit men who are less qualified than are women”</p>
<p>^ pugmad: okay. i see. </p>
<p>well, carry on people! lol</p>
<p>I can tell you that at some schools, the SAT/gpa is lower for those males accepted than females. I’ve also had college counselors with strong LAC connections out and out say that males are favored at certain schools. I don’t see the what the brougha is about all of this. It’s been pretty much known at Catholic schools for some time. I read some minutes of Providence College meetings where this very issue was discussed. </p>
<p>Even in competitive nursery school admissions, it’s pretty much known that girls have it a bit more difficult. Little boys tend not to be as advanced overall as girls, but most schools want close to an 50/50 mix. One school I know was never in the 10 years that I checked the year book, more than one kid over for that mix. Coincidence? I don’t think so. My son who was in performing arts and auditioned for admission often commented how much more difficult the girls had it since there were more of them for an equal number of spots in a class. My son benefitted greatly being male, since outstanding male dancers are rare, and he was given a pass on his dance abilities that would not have happened with the girls, because nearly all of them were very good to fantastic dancers. When a school does not have engineering, computer science or a business school, it gets tough to attract those males.</p>
<p>My S would be more than happy to serve as a diversity champion and be admitted to the 3 all-female LACs his twin sister is considering. Only because he values diversity, of course!</p>
<p>The use of the word “struggling” when a school has such low accept numbers is not a good choice and does not fit. That a school will have an eye on the ratio and make sure that it does not tip too far over the 40/60 is not struggling but it certainly does give males an edge in that admissions scenario. </p>
<p>You could well be right, NSM, in terms of the higher scoring males and merit money, but this is an area that I really have seen no stats and therefore cannot say. But I do know that even the former all female schools that do have to make an effort to keep close to a 40/60 do not give out significant money to males without those stats. Accepting them is enough of a give.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I asked you what you believe. I’d like to hear it.</p>
<p>As for me, it’s not what I believe, it’s what the statistics show. Men are accepted at higher rates than women because LAC’s are struggling to enroll enough men. </p>
<p>Why this is so galling to you, I have no idea. I hope you’ll share that as well.</p>
<p>I disagree since “struggling” is the word that many people associated with LACs use when discussing the issue. Contrary to what is being stated here, this is not a new nor hidden issue. There is a lot of material out there to read and “struggling” is a word you will see used.</p>
<p>As I stated in an earlier post, the gpa/test scores of URMs are often lower than the averages at many select colleges. That URM status does give the applicant a tip, hook, or whatever you want to call it is apparent. The same stats occur for legacies and athletes. I’ve seen them. For males/females, ummm. I’ve seen them only in a few cases, and for Catholic colleges. But I would dare venture to say that there would be a similar result at schools such as Skidmore, Vassar, Sarah Lawrence, Wheaton, Goucher, Ithaca, Bennington, to name a few. For schools like Swarthmore, Williams, etc where the acceptance rate is ever so low, I think the ranges may be too narrow to make any kind of clear conclusion. Some schools have razor thin ranges, particularly on class rank/grades. But it’s been often said that the females as a group do have better grades. But again, at such high selectivities, I would not venture to say any such thing.</p>
<p>When we visited Mary Washington University, some years ago, the admissions director flat out said that males had it a bit easier in admissions since the school which was formerly all female is trying to keep a male/female ratio constant.</p>
<p>"The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has started an inquiry into the extent to which liberal arts colleges discriminate against female applicants in an attempt to minimize gender imbalances in the student body. On Friday, the commission agreed on a set of colleges – primarily in the Washington area – to investigate, but declined to release a full list.</p>
<p>The issue is an extremely sensitive one for liberal arts colleges, many of which in recent years have worried about their gender ratios reaching points (60 percent female is commonly cited) where they face difficulty in attracting both male and female applicants. Generally private undergraduate colleges have the legal right to consider gender in admissions. They were specifically exempted from the admissions provisions of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.</p>
<p>But despite that legal right, many at liberal arts colleges are uncomfortable about either the extent of admissions favoritism some colleges may engage in, or are embarrassed about it receiving public attention. Further, the Civil Rights Commission’s inquiry is based on concerns about another part of Title IX – its requirement that colleges provide equitable athletic opportunities to male and female athletes. A theory behind the inquiry, outlined in the proposal used to launch the probe, is that colleges may be favoring men in admissions because they are worried about gender-neutral changes they might otherwise use to attract more male students. Foremost among such strategies would be adding more male athletic teams, a move some colleges may be reluctant to make out of fear of the expense of then being required to add more women’s teams."
[News:</a> Probe of Extra Help for Men - Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/11/02/admit]News:”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/11/02/admit)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I am not sure why I should respond to a group of people who visibly prefer to ignore basic request for clarifications and continue to posts incorrect statements, I will “bite” as Pizzagirl says.</p>
<p>So here we go:</p>
<p>I am happy to read that this should not be about what someone merely believes, but what the statistics show. I wish Northstarmom would heed your advice and abandon the practice of confusing what she merely believes and what is based on statistical evidence. </p>
<p>What is galling me? See the above comment about not having the decency to respond to posts for starters that are asking to clarify statements that are obviously wrong (such as the 60% men) or obviously misleading (read struggle and lesser qualifications.)</p>
<p>And, as far as what I believe, here it is. The statistics hardly show that schools are struggling to maintain balance in their enrollment, inasmuch as they face a more rapidly growing pool of female applicants. Further, and inasmuch NSM preferred not to provide details on her interpretation of qualification, I will assume that it is based on GPA and tests scores. In this regard, it is known that the female applicants have closed the gap and might have surpassed the male applicants in GPA, they have yet to accomplish the same in test scores, and especially in the highest range. </p>
<p>If you like statistics, few schools are presenting their admission and enrollment data as the UC does. It has a tool that allows mere mortals to query their entire database for the most minute details. You might be surprised that, for instance, there are a greater number of males enrolled at Berkeley and UCLA with GPA higher than 4.2 and SAT scores above 700. </p>
<p>In the end, there are no universal statistics, and with a bit of research, one can find support for most positions. However, in this case, the assertions made by Northstarmom are simply baseless and misleading, and simply show a blatant disregard for both factual evidence and the intelligence of people who have learned how to read the data correctly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really. And who are those “many people associated” to LACs? If this is not a hidden issue, it should be easy to offer a short list of names and schools. </p>
<p>Since there is a LOT of material out there, why not offer a few links to verifiable sources!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t really understand this statement. Can you explain what a college would like with diversity “in all areas”? What does that mean? And how is the world becoming “more diverse” by the day?</p>
<p>Every time aliens arrive from a new planet, Earth becomes more diverse.</p>
<p>Also there are more races than there used to be. Like, Yugoslavians split up into Serbo-Croatians and Bosnians, and most Czechoslovakians turned into Czechs, but some mutated and became Slovaks, which are very similar to the untrained eye.</p>
<p>Providence College took a hit on male applicants when it got rid of some sports for men. Hardly a move recommended for a school that had more females than males applying, but they could not keep up with Title 9 rules without spending more money on female teams. Seems crazy when they school has more females than males, but that is what happened. They were putting in a business school–don’t know if they did it yet, but it was underway, and some other programs designed to attract male applicants.</p>
<p>Don’t know why the LACs and Catholic schools are getting so many more female applicants. Perhaps you can explain why, Xiggi. Yes, the females grades are higher, but the males test scores tend to be higher, particularly in the maths. I don’t know if the IT schools and others with engineering are what make up the lopsidedness. I know a number of IT schools and engineering programs that have far more males than females. The story there, is that females get a bit of a pass in admissions. At CMU, there is a special merit award for women majoring in engineering to attract more of them. Haven’t seen a major school that has the nerve to advertise a scholarship for men only in a discipline, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t quietly done…</p>