Many Colleges Reject Women at Higher Rates Than for Men

[tako]

<p>

These days, the student body [of University of Richmond] is 49 percent male and 51 percent female—a ratio that the college insists is determined by the availability of on-campus housing. Maintaining that equilibrium, however, has in the past few years meant rejecting many more female applicants than male ones. In practical terms, in the past decade, female applicants have faced an admissions rate that is an average 13 percentage points lower than that of their male peers just for the sake of keeping that girl-boy balance.

</p>

<p>

The reason for these lower admissions rates for female students is simple, if bitterly ironic: From the early grades on up, girls tend to be better students. By the time college admissions come into the picture, many watchers of the “boy gap” agree, it’s too late for the lads to catch up on their own. Indeed, beginning in those formative K-12 years, girls watch less television, spend less time playing sports, and are far less likely to find themselves in detention. They are more likely to participate in drama, art, and music classes—extracurriculars that are catnip for admissions officers. Across the board, girls study more, score better, and are less likely to find themselves in special education classes.

</p>

<p>

Colleges, meanwhile, contend that their schools are best served by keeping things balanced. “I don’t think that’s an issue of equity; it’s an issue of institutional prerogative [to create] a community that will best serve both the men and the women who elect to be members of that community,” says Henry Broaddus, director of admission at William and Mary. “Even women who enroll…expect to see men on campus. It’s not the College of Mary and Mary; it’s the College of William and Mary.”

</p>

<p>

What does all of this mean for applicants? For girls, making the cut might come down to something as simple as the expected field of study. As an admissions officer from a small midwestern liberal arts college puts it: “God help the female English majors who apply to this school.” In fact, women hoping to study engineering will find themselves at an advantage at schools like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which over the past decade has admitted women at a rate that is 17 percentage points higher than for men.

</p>

<p>

Male applicants are often in an advantaged position—so much so that college counselors have begun advising some boys to “emphasize their maleness,” says Steve Goodman, a longtime independent college counselor. He encourages male students to submit pictures or trumpet their sports activities. “Anything to catch an admissions officer’s eye.”

</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/articles/070617/25gender.htm[/url]”>http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/articles/070617/25gender.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Wow, QUITE an interesting article. Poor me, I plan to be one of those “female English majors” applying to school. I guess it’s understandable, the whole keeping the balance between female/male, but it seems quite ironic that colleges are “punishing” females for being successful - at one school, the female admissions rate is 21% percent less than the male admissions rate!</p>

[GAclassof2008]

<p>this sounds like underrepresented and overrepresented stuff to me. in my future field- (science/doctor) i am the double minority (female and african american), therefore at an advantage so i love the system.</p>

[ses]

<p>And there are more females in the world then men, because they have a SLIGHTLY higher infant survival rate for some reason.</p>

<p>So it’s actually not shocking.</p>

<p>The bigger problem is being a middle class, white girl who wants to major in english and hasn’t done anything in particular. Then you’re screwed.</p>

[Charisma]

<p>@ GAclassof2008, actually being female makes you part of the majority.</p>

<p>^ While it’s true that there’s a higher survival rate, there’s still way more females applying to college than males that accounted by to the actual % of females to males.</p>

[sdong]

<p>Yea females do tend to be more competitive. Reminds me of one year where the top 15 in the graduating class at my school were called up, one by one, onto the stage - all female. Typically females will outnumber the guys 2:1 on these occasions…</p>

[oldfort]

<p>My D believes that all guys just decided one day to just get Bs and below to have more time to pursue their personal interest, because you know what, those schools are going to have to fill their schools with 50% of males anyway. Meanwhile, girls are killing themselves competiting with each other to get into those schools.</p>

[CBlaettler10]

<p>How did she find out about that meeting? Whoever told her is dead…</p>

[enderkin]

<p>already done. no worries, CBlaettler10.</p>

[GAclassof2008]

<p>@charisma… being a female is never and will never be a majority in science…especially doctors.</p>

[Charisma]

<p>^ oops, I didn’t notice you said it was for science, but still, the percentage of women is increasing and I highly doubt that women will remain the minority forever at this rate.</p>

[standrews]

<p>With a HS S & D, I look at the imbalance from both points of view. I’ve thought about it at length and I don’t know that there is an easy solution.</p>

[ConLax11]

<p>Male students are often late-bloomers. They mature later mentally and physically because they reach puberty later and it extends deep into high school whereas female students are often done growing freshman or sophomore year of high school. Some men stop growing freshman year in college. The chemical changes going on are enough that many young men are unfocused at a point in their lives where they are supposed to be focused. High school just ends too early for guys so the maturity is not always there at that age making them weaker students, weaker applicants. Its not really that the girls are smarter because they get better grades. Men have higher average test scores meaning their intelligence is often high but unharnessed. Just a collection of thoughts from studies I’ve read…</p>

[Oiram]

<p>

And there are more females in the world then men, because they have a SLIGHTLY higher infant survival rate for some reason.

</p>

<p>I wouldn’t say all over the world because female babies are stilled killed in China and India. Women are more likely to be illiterate, malnourished and treated harshly under certain governments across the gobble.</p>

[Ray192]

<p>Actually, already women are 50% of medical school applicants in the US. So the possibility of them eventually being a majority in the industry is quite realistic.</p>

[gchris07]

<p>Men often take jobs (i.e., construction, armed services) that pay well and don’t require a college education.</p>

[PutschCasusBelli]

<p>

across the gobble

lol! (Ten Chars)</p>

[zucky07]

<p>So do women (i.e., waitress, fry cook, stripper)</p>

[sarahhhh]

<p>i think were going to take over the world. mwhaha jk
i think its because girls dont play video games all day.</p>

<p>“stripper” lol yea that def is lucrative.</p>

[zoogies]

<p>And some colleges reject men at higher rates than they reject women…</p>

[billybobbyk]

<p>sarahhh: for medicine, playing video games all day is good for you. All the best surgeons these days are the ones that were video gamers as kids–they understand how to do those new endoscopic, computer-assisted surgeries better than everyone.</p>

<p>Btw, as a male applicant to Brown, where only 39% of the applicants are guys, I love this system. When you’re the one benefiting, affirmative action is freakin awesome! </p>

<p>That being said, I’m not yet enough of a minority for there to be scholarships for middle-class white guys. Keep dropping those grades boys, I’d love to get a free college education!</p>