<p>I’m not sure if this has been posted yet. But very interesting comment on the upsurge of highly qualified female applicants.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html?ex=1143781200&en=93dac5ba192a7f44&ei=5070&emc=eta1[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html?ex=1143781200&en=93dac5ba192a7f44&ei=5070&emc=eta1</a></p>
<p>Well, my answer to the argument presented by the author: stop caring about your male/female balance. If the women present better applications, admit more women. </p>
<p>(The author asks this: “What are the consequences of young men discovering that even if they do less, they have more options? And what messages are we sending young women that they must, nearly 25 years after the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment, be even more accomplished than men to gain admission to the nation’s top colleges? These are questions that admissions officers like me grapple with.”)</p>
<p>What is interesting about this to me is the fact that this developing dilemma for female applicants is exactly the dilemma faced currently by Asian applicants. Because they are overrepresented, they must be more highly qualified than other applicants…‘the bar is raised’ so to speak. I struggle with the fairness of this. I know it serves a social purpose to have diversity and I support AA. My own child, who is Mexican American, benefits from AA. But there is that part of me that feels strongly for candidates who work so hard and get it totally right and who are set aside for demographic’s sake. And good grief…what is an Asian female to do?</p>
<p>I do hope admissions officer do more than grapple with this. Perhaps increasing the size of the student body is one thing to be considered.</p>
<p>Interesting viewpoint. </p>
<p>However, should this viewpoint not be compared to the often repeated claim that the best non-coed school such as Wellesley, Smith, Mount Holyoke have problems gathering a number of applications comparable to their rankings or standards?</p>
<p>And for good measure, could we ask for a counterpoint from the admissions’ officers at MIT or Harvey Mudd?</p>
<p>There’s another thread about this article already.
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=160482[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=160482</a></p>
<p>I also admire the success of our daughters. I don’t think that one rejection or waitlist is anything to “ache” over or feel angry about, however, especially if the student has four acceptances in hand.
This admissions dean is from a small midwestern LAC. Why aren’t more young men applying? There certainly is no shortage of talented males applying to HYPS, MIT or Cal Tech.
I am all for gender balance. It was important when the schools were primarily men, and it’s important if the schools become primarily women. Remembering that our boys are often late bloomers (mothers of sons will attest to this fact) who often supass the women once they get to college might help admissions officers give a qualified young man a tip over a similarly qualified young woman with a slightly higher gpa or an endless list of ECs.
I would think at an LAC, a slight tip to the males would be as important as a slight tip to females might be at a Cal Tech or Harvey Mudd - which also happens. For the students who are admitted, a healthy gender balance makes life more interesting for everyone.
But another point, isn’t it wonderful that our problem is too many talented kids, of either sex? This fact gives me great hope for our future.</p>
<p>Ldmom, we have had hundreds of discussions about the over-representation of Asians and most, if not all, of the claims of discrimination or different standards end up being spurious. One of the reasons that causes the unsupported claims is that asians are applying in disproportionate numbers to a very select numbers of schools, often using the USNews as sole guideline to compose a list of targeted schools. You can easily ascertain this for yourself by taking the USNews rankings and checking the racial distribution of applicants and enrolled students. On the LAC side, compare the numbers at Wellesley with other non-coed schools or the numbers at Amherst with lower ranked schools. </p>
<p>Further, using absolute numbers (the total of applicants) and adding the distribution of the SAT scores, and especially the verbal scores easily show that most asian students fill the slots at our top 50% institutions. In other words, based on their correct qualifications, they DO find appropriate schools.</p>
<p>Lastly, one should not forget that the group did not become over-represented overnight. In reality, asians have strongly benefitted from AA measures before earning the label of model minority. As usual, the pendulum does overswing and the group is now over-represented at a number of schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Xiggi, I enjoy your comments, but sometimes I think you may miss the larger picture. Of course adcoms, living in a political fishbowl as they do, will not engage in overt discriminatory practices. That does not mean they do not have ways to control the makeup of their student bodies. Just re-read the series of articles from the Daily Princetonian from around 2000, where they discussed the huge drop in jewish enrolees at princeton, then tell me nothing goes on. </p>
<p>Much as the Kenyon director talks about how apps drop if a school becomes too female, the same applies to some other groups, too. And the way it is handled is more subtle. Just give more emphasis on athletic ec’s, for instance, and less on music. Voila, fewer asians.</p>
<p>Really now, this is all so easy, and so subtle.</p>
<p>Your other statement, </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>puzzles me. Are you now saying SAT scores, especially VERBAL scores, especially for non native english speakers, are good criteria? Geesh, no wonder you think they’re being treated fairly.</p>
<p>I also wonder if your statement
can be backed up? Or is this just repeating a commonly stated stereotype/slur?</p>
<p>Without access to raw admissions data, which we don’t have, I just don’t see how one can come to the conclusions you do, especially because discrimination is often subtle, often implicit, not explicit, and sometimes even unconscious. So it CAN be hard to prove, just as many claim that african americans are given too many breaks in jobs and admissions. </p>
<p>Perhaps of greater concern to me is that a group, asians, PERCEIVES biases. We’d like to think we’re a fair society, driven by merit. When some disbelieve this, we all all have a problem.</p>
<p>I think the artwork is cool.</p>
<p>Xiggi, as for Smith/Wellesley/Mount Holyoke, the article states that once a school is seen as predominantly female it becomes less attractive to both male <em>and</em> female applicants. </p>
<p>I’ve met several dozen Smith students over the past few years. Virtually every single one of them, if they talk about their college experience long enough, will say something along the lines of, “Well, I never <em>meant</em> to attend a womens college.” </p>
<p>Indeed, they discovered something very attractive about these colleges in the course of their process…but the schools were seldom on their original “target” list ab initio.</p>
<p>The artwork is cool…had to go back to notice the letter play with the words applicant and ‘i can’t’. And the pre-ERA Fifties style mani on the woman’s hand sends a message as well…</p>
<p>Frankly, I see this article biased in the usual way: “Oh, the poor (sniff sniff) girls.”</p>
<p>I think this quote is probably what society should be worrying about instead:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>TheDad, I think there is a difference between a school that really focuses on women’s thriving and one that just has trouble attracting men. Some would cite Smith vs. Vassar on that score.</p>
<p>I thought the op-ed piece was lacking in substance (where were the stats?) and was surprisingly weak in opening with the writer’s daughter who – OMG! quel horreur! – was actually wait-listed at one college instead of being admitted to all 5 where she applied. There may be more girls applying but, when I last checked, they still lagged behind in the top rank of SAT scorers, and that needs to be factored into any discussion of gender and admissions. And the swipe at the “women’s liberation” movement (who calls it that anymore?) was gratuitous.</p>
<p>“Well, my answer to the argument presented by the author: stop caring about your male/female balance. If the women present better applications, admit more women.”</p>
<p>dmd77, does this apply to URM’s, too? Should we quit admitting as many URM’s, despite the fact that whites and asians are currently presenting better applications?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I found this interesting, because in the context of my top choice, MIT, it’s the other way around: What’s an Asian male to do? You win some, you lose some. Female applicants to MIT are admitted at a percentage twice that of their male counterparts. You win some, you lose some. But the end result benefits everyone accepted, in my opinion. As an asian male, it would be no fun going to a school where over half the students are asian and where over seventy percent are male.</p>
<p>Very interesting that a senior adcom sounded the warning bell. That the bell was rung in the NYT is also interesting–and worrying. My minor concerns must be a very big worry for adcoms.</p>
<p>It could be that this is a pendulum swing that will right itself over the next few decades. That would be the best scenario.</p>
<p>However, I disagree with you, dmd. Gender imbalance is not a good thing.</p>
<p>Gender imbalance for maturing and mating adults is a terrible thing. It is particularily dangerous when the imbalance is male. China is buying sex slaves by the thousands to try to appease their male gender imbalance. Men without mates–and they have millions and millions–turn into frustrated men. Frustrated young men become aggressive agitators. This is a massive worry for China.</p>
<p>Choosing gender imbalance for a few years of schooling is one thing, going to a coed school where it is impossible to find a decent date is another matter. Besides all that learning and achieving, college kids should be meeting and dating and sorting out their ‘other’ life. </p>
<p>In a 60/40 school, beautiful, wonderful, smart girls are not getting a chance to date wonderful guys because there aren’t enough to go around. College should be a time to meet hundreds and hundreds of potential mates and sort out particular preferences. </p>
<p>Instead, it is hugely frustrating. What happens when you are gorgeous in every sense but cannot get a date? You lose confidence about your sexual appeal. You become over eager. You lower your standards.</p>
<p>In one way, semi-decent, nice looking guys are living the life of Riley at 60/40 schools. On the other hand, is that a good thing? They are surrounded by brilliant girls who are so over-eager, they diminish themselves and their talents. In a twisted catch-22, nice looking, semi-decent guys end up with incredible social power. </p>
<p>On top of that, it may be that top schools are accepting more troubled boys with high stats in order to meet the USNews quota. In recent weeks, we’ve discussed a boy accepted at top LAC despite a sociability warning from his high school and a boy who was accepted at an Ivy despite a 10 day suspension from his high school. A girl with those blemishes on her record would be binned without a second look.</p>
<p>None of this is good for mating folks. As a society, we want these brilliant women to feel powerful. We want them to have a huge selection of wonderful men to choose from. We want them to marry wonderful, smart, healthy guys because we want them to have a few children. I want that becuase I want to feel the love of grandchildren but I also want that for all of your amazing daughters because I know those girls will educate those children to impeccable standards. </p>
<p>And that’s a good thing.</p>
<p>So, hopefully this is just a pendulum swing, but if it isn’t, leading institutions will have to readjust their ‘merit’ system in order to produce a balanced environment for brilliant women.</p>
<p>I think the dating math is relative. If students only dated fellow students, students at single-gender schools would never date. In fact, most individual campuses are part of a larger community that may include other colleges, not to mention other individuals not currently attending college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Give me a break! Perhaps it’s off to the slightly less selective college, which is not the end of the world. I think this essay is just thinly disguised college marketing. Whether it’s a press release or an op-ed essay they all want to brag about how their applications are up 20% and their admit ratio is down 25% and they have soooooo many qualified applicants they just don’t know what to do. Almost every small LAC we visited was 55/45 female/male, or thereabouts. There are plenty of spots out there for girls.</p>
<p>Co-ed schools can’t just admit more women just because they are more qualified. </p>
<p>It’s a money thing (very different from the usual “want diversity” thing which doesn’t affect income and cause decreases in applications/enrollment). Although there are women who want to go to “all girl” colleges, most women want to go to a school that is pretty evenly mixed. It’s interesting that once a co-ed school starts going “too pink”, women AND men stop wanting to go there! For that reason, schools that start having a gender imbalance (in the female direction) start getting worried. This isn’t so much a typical “diversity” issue, it’s a money issue. No school wants less students applying for admission.</p>
<p>“The dating issue” is real. Although people do date people that don’t attend their colleges (as in the case of single gender schools), many people attending co-ed schools expect to meet/date people at their colleges (Why else do frats/dorms have so many parties???).</p>
<p>As a parent of a daughter, the demographic issues do scare me a bit, especially given the long established pattern of men marrying “down” in education and women marrying up. </p>
<p>If my D continues on her current path, getting a graduate degree, the demographics will be stacked heavily against her. That is the reality.</p>
<p>Now for a question:</p>
<ul>
<li> do any posters have any idea why the gender inbalance exists? Is it widespread through all SES groups? I would like to think that among higher income higher education families, that sons are as likely to go to college as daughters, for example. Is this not true?</li>
</ul>