<p>Of course, I don’t have exact applications from females and males to compare, like MIT actually does…but I’m still weary. I remember reading MIT’s statement on URMs and females, and they make it seem like those two groups try harder. I don’t understand how the females could be more qualified. Like ^omega sanction said, then why are there not more females winning USAMO, Intel science fair instead of men if they are more “qualified”?? I’m a female myself, and I thought about applying to MIT but I would think that if two applicants were exactly the same and only one was to be chosen, the female would probably win out. I wonder if there are numbers on how many females vs. males apply to MIT. I’m sure more guys apply which means less competition for females</p>
<p>I don’t think Caltech decisions are a good indicator for HYPSM decision either way. I was accepted to Caltech but rejected from Stanford, Harvard, and MIT (waitlisted at Yale). Caltech is VERY different in what it looks for–people they know can seriously succeed academically, or at least reasonably handle the workload. I don’t truly have a basis for this statement (except my own acceptance, and the fact that a lot of Caltech acceptees get rejected from MIT and others on CC), but I really feel Caltech cares much more about passion and potential than what students have already accomplished; it seems like they don’t really care much for other fluff stuff.</p>
<p>Has anyone seen the 2010 admit percentages for HYPM? I’m having a hard time imagining that even Harvard could have a lower admission rate than Stanford’s this year.</p>
<p>You act as if the decisions are still being made. The University of Pennsylvania has already revealed its admit rate (14.2%) and it is releasing at the same time as HYP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The speculation is about 6.7%, or 2000 acceptances in 30000 applications.</p>
<p>My counselor informed me that my Princeton decision was still open as of yesterday, as revealed by her correspondence with the school. Apparently, Princeton had some questions regarding my unique personal situation.</p>
<p>The average female is more qualified than the average male. I would agree that the highest-performing males are likely more successful than the highest-performing females in science competitions.</p>
<p>We will take the American Mathematics Competition as an example. I’m sure this could be applied to many similar contests in different math/science/technology fields.</p>
<p>According to the statistics on the preliminary round this year, males not only outnumbered females in number of takers (something, perhaps, you attest to self-selection), but did better on average. Furthermore, a headcount at the higher levels (USAMO and above) for previous years suggests an overwhelming male majority (to the point of unanimity).</p>