<p>"Don’t know why the LACs and Catholic schools are getting so many more female applicants. "</p>
<p>Because males are more likely to want to go to a big football, hockey or basketball school.</p>
<p>LACs also tend not to be known for excellent engineering and computer majors, fields that are male dominated. </p>
<p>LACs often are known for the arts and humanities, fields that attract many more women than men.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, thank you, NSM for posting such a personal, detailed and comprehensive explanation for your previous statements. </p>
<p>Perhaps we should look at the identity of the Liberal Arts Colleges being “investigated” by Ms. Heriot’s commission:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Four historically black institutions, Howard University, Lincoln University in Pennsylvania, Virginia Union University and the University of Maryland Eastern Shore; </p></li>
<li><p>Three religious schools, Catholic University in the District, Loyola University in Maryland and Messiah College in Pennsylvania;</p></li>
<li><p>Three “highly selective” schools, Georgetown, Hopkins and Gettysburg College in Pennsylvania; </p></li>
<li><p>One “very selective” school, the University of Richmond; </p></li>
<li><p>Four “moderately selective” private colleges, York College in Pennsylvania, Goucher College in Baltimore, Goldey-Beacom College in Delaware and Washington College in Chestertown, Md.; </p></li>
<li><p>Four moderately selective publics, Shepherd University in West Virginia, Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania, the University of Delaware and the University of Maryland Baltimore County.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Obviously, the scope of the investigation solidly espouses the terms used in its incendiary announcement! Plenty of known LACs on that list!</p>
<p>A 2000 Time magazine article: "[M]en’s enrollment in higher education has declined since 1992. Males now make up just 44% of undergraduate students nationwide. And federal projections show their share shrinking to as little as 42% by 2010. This trend is among the hottest topics of debate among college-admissions officers. And some private liberal arts colleges have quietly begun special efforts to recruit men — including admissions preferences for them.</p>
<p>Why the shortage? There are few hard facts, but lots of theories. Anecdotal evidence suggests that more men than women respond to the lure of high-tech jobs that don’t require a bachelor’s degree. Some call this the Bill Gates syndrome, after the college-dropout chairman of Microsoft. But high-tech industries employ only about 9% of the U.S. work force. Amid the hot economy of recent years, a larger group of men — especially those from lower-income families — might be heading straight from high school into fields like aircraft mechanics and telephone- and power-line repair that pay an average of $850 a week rather than taking on a load of college debt. Some social critics blame a dearth of male role models among schoolteachers, and a culture that promotes anti-intellectualism among boys. And, especially in inner cities, crime and gangs entice more boys than girls away from learning.</p>
<p>How pervasive is the gender gap? According to Thomas Mortenson, an education analyst in Oskaloosa, Iowa, the share of college degrees earned by males has been declining for decades. U.S. government figures show that from 1970 to 1996, as the number of bachelor’s degrees earned by women increased 77%, the number earned by men rose 19%. Not all schools are feeling the imbalance; many elite colleges and universities have seen applications soar from both sexes. But the overall numbers, says Mortenson, should make us “wake up and see that boys are in trouble.”…</p>
<p>Some private liberal arts colleges are making it easier for men to get in. At Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa., this year’s freshman class is 43% male — up from 36% last year — in part because the school gave preference to “qualified male candidates on the margin,” says Robert Massa, vice president for enrollment and student life. The idea gets mixed reviews among Dickinson’s students. “It reeks of affirmative action,” says physics major Michelle Edwards. But Massa emphasizes that “the men we admitted were as qualified as the women.”</p>
<p>Read more: <a href=“http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,90446,00.html#ixzz0uMvKtDZQ[/url]”>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,90446,00.html#ixzz0uMvKtDZQ</a></p>
<p>Read more: [The</a> Male Minority - TIME](<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,90446,00.html#ixzz0uMuyFmDg]The”>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,90446,00.html#ixzz0uMuyFmDg)</p>
<p>Hopkins surprises me. That was once an all male school. It also has engineering, sciences, computer/math sciences which are predominantly male fields. Several of the named schools are ones that I would have listed too. UDel also surprises me. I knew Catholic schools had this issue, LACs, and former all female schools, but the some of the other names are a surprise.</p>
<p>Many Catholic schools do have full athletic programs with a big deal put on basketball and football. Many of these schools are Davids in the world of Goliaths in terms of sports, but they insist on staying in D-1. In fact, that is a source of a number of athletic scholarships for those who are not big 10 athletes but want some scholarship money.</p>
<p>Dickinson, Gettysburg, Washington College, Catholic U, Loyola of Balt are all schools on the list for my son, in part because it gives him a bit of boost being male. Since he isn’t interested in looking at geographics that would give him a bit of a tip, that is a factor we have in consideration.</p>
<p>For virtually all colleges now, males are at a premium.</p>
<p>“Projections by the U.S. Department of Education indicate that by 2010, the gender gap will grow to 138 women enrolled for every 100 men”</p>
<p>From a paper by the vice chancellor of U Wis.-River Falls:</p>
<p><a href=“http://handouts.aacrao.org/am08/finished/W1030a_A_Tuchtenhagen.pdf[/url]”>http://handouts.aacrao.org/am08/finished/W1030a_A_Tuchtenhagen.pdf</a></p>
<p>UMBC has significantly more males than females.</p>
<p>I figured that, Greenwitch. Was there at some swimming events and noticed a predominantly male population there. Why do you think this is the case? St Mary’s College, on the other hand, is predominantly female. Don’t know how Towson, Frostburg, Salisbury are in ratios.</p>
<p>Though I am not adept as NSM and Xiggi with coming up with the stats and cites, I want to say, that the reason schools get nervous when the male enrollment starts dipping below 40% is because, this then starts affecting the female applications to the school as well. Females apparently are not as eager to apply to schools that are predominantly female. This is something I read in education journals that makes sense to me since there really is no problem in having a school or college population that has more females than males in it. I don’t think a 50/50 mix in gender in everything is that important.</p>
<p>Maybe it’s their national championship chess team? Just kidding, I have no idea.</p>
<p>More males at UMBC? It’s because they don’t care about pretty builidngs. Oh, and the chess team.</p>
<p>How much impact would the chess team have? It’s not that big, is it? I can’t believe that there are more males because fewer females apply because of the lack of pretty buildings.</p>
<p>Greenwitch and I think we are funny. That was the attempt.</p>
<p>Oh, and the chess team is almost all immigrants from Russia and the former Soviet Bloc. Maybe the higher number of males is driven by international students? </p>
<p>This statistics business, if you’re trying to arrive at the truth, is damn complicated.</p>
<p>I know all about the chess team. My kids play chess. One of mine was quite good and in the championship category. I’ve been going to chess tournaments for the past 10 years. I believe UMBC and UTexas-Dallas are the two schools that give chess scholarships. </p>
<p>Actually with many of the schools, you can come up with some reasonable theories as to why there is a dearth of one sex or the other. UMBC is one that I don’t get. Hopkins was also a surprise in terms of having more female applicants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>/Sigh! </p>
<p>And is THAT the point we are discussing? How hard is it to find statistics that show that there are more women graduating from high school, applying, attending, and graduating from colleges in the country. A class of 8th graders in South Carolina could come up with such numbers before opening their lunchbox. If that was the core of the discussion, it will have been over and done hundreds of posts ago. </p>
<p>The issue is still about your statement that LACs (and the top LACs) are struggling with a gender imbalanced enrollment and are forced to admit LESSER qualified male applicants to maintain a “reasonable” balance. A balance that you pegged at 60 woman to 40 men. </p>
<p>It’s really not that hard … do you have ANY evidence that the top LACs are struggling to find a sufficient number of well qualified men to fill their fresh(wo)men class? And then what is the basis you use to define the lesser qualifications that seem to afflict those poor men at the top LACs. </p>
<p>By the way, a simple “I don’t know and I just assume that would be the case” will be fine. I have given up all hopes for a reasonable answer from you on this subject several pages ago. And, fwiw, everything was fine until you had to push the envelope with the statement that some top schools had to admit lesser qualified males to maintain a gender balance. You could have alleged … pure discrimination and digged deeper into an issue that already pits families against each other on the basis of race. </p>
<p>Oh well. C’est la vie!</p>
<p>Some time ago, maybe post #169</p>
<p>“I’m thinking she might have meant 60/40 women to men, not the other way around. And not to achieve this exact value, but to be less than 60/40, and more towards 50/50. It seems that some places are not achieving this, even now.”</p>
<p>“Yes, I meant 60% female…”</p>
<p>Xiggi, I know that a number of Catholic colleges are concerned about this issue. This has been a topic of discussion for a number of them. Providence college had their minutes available on line one year and this was an area of great concern. Catholic educators here in the NY area talk about this as well. Some are saying that is the reason that some CAtholic Us are stubbornly hanging onto D1 athletic status so that they can keep the male ratios from shrinking.</p>
<p>I don’t think the concern is so much for those schools with ratios that have stabilized, those with so many applicants that they can afford to be ultra selective, and those schools that are just reflecting the number of college eligible females that now exceed males. It is those schools that are having enrollment issues anyways, that fear that when the ratio goes too far one way, that it affects the entire enrollment. </p>
<p>Of the schools mentioned, we visited Dickinson, Gettysburg, Catholic, Loyola, Washington College, and the not mentioned Mary Washington. All of these schools did say straight out that the odds are better for a male due to the imbalance in applicants. </p>
<p>And I can see why a school like Mary Washington would have problems attracting males. As wonderful as the school was; I give high points in just about every pertinent area for us, it was a bit discomfitting tome when I perused some college magazines and noted that the older alums were all female. Yeah, I guess it is prejudice, but I did not like that. The other way around would not have bothered me as much. Pragmatically, males tend to be in better positions, job wise.</p>
<p>There is no problem about having a college with a lopsided gender ratio unless it threatens applicantions as a whole.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That was only addressing the blatantly wrong number, but none of the real issues listed below.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with both statements. I do not see any problem in having a gender balance that is not equal. Fwiw, this happens in many majors, and especially in graduate school. Since selective and highly selective schools ate hardly following the racial distribution of the land, why would there be an expectation that the schools would have perfect balances along gender lines? </p>
<p>Better odds are not necessarily equal to better odds … for less qualified applicants. For instance, a smaller group of applicants might comprise a greater number of well qualified applicants, while the larger group might have a much higher percentage of applicants that have sub-par conditions. The fact that a school would reject more of the larger group does not necessarily mean that it DOES favor one group over the other, and this despite the statistically different results. </p>
<p>Belgium could send the exact same number of athletes to the next Olympics as the United States and despite having equal odds of winning medals end up with a much poorer result.</p>