chance my son please

Colleges and Universities A-Z College of William and Mary
41

<p>Namtrag-</p>

<p>It's not a matter of whining and complaining, and it's not an indictment of your son or his qualifications, and it certainly should not be an exercise in futility to challenge discrimination where you perceive it and ask for explanations. </p>

<p>The original poster asked for an assessment of her son's chances for admissions; I responded that they are better than if her son were her daughter; since then, in the face of the overwhelming evidence that I've offered to support this position I've been met with nothing but insults and defensiveness in return. Pretty incredible.</p>

<p>Finally, remember, it's not the "state" that's made this decision -- it's William and Mary only. The same thing is NOT happening at any other state school in Virginia. And it's not happening because it's not legal. </p>

<p>Is anyone reading this thread a high school student or parent in Virginia? If so, ask your school guidance counselors what they tell boys and girls applying to William and Mary. I'm willing to bet they are not going to tell you anything different from what I'm saying.</p>

42

<p>so glad I started this.....</p>

43

<p>LOL. You and me both! Good luck to your son. No more posts will be coming from me on this topic, I promise.</p>

44

<p>What I get from this is, NOT that the boys are less qualified, but that a girl has more competition at W&M for admittance, since more girls apply. Doh!</p>

<p>Thanks for your explanation!</p>

45

<p>It was just like this when I went to W&M, only worse. The boys average SAT scores were much lower than the girls, at least that's what I remember. I got in with a 1260, and a 3.6 gpa (of course, they didn't weight grades back then since there were no AP classes), was in the band as my only extracurricular.</p>

46

<p>parent2009, you call it 'discrimination', which is a pretty loaded word. If you look at admissions decisions anywhere, virtually every top school engages in such 'discrimination'. Most colleges look to admit a 'diverse' class; implicit in that word is the idea that the admissions decision will <em>not</em> be a strict statistical meritocracy. If it were otherwise, then applications should only ask SAT, GPA, class standing, and a transcript - no sex, race, extra-curriculars, social standing, income, or even essay questions (if those previous questions were forbidden, no doubt students would game the system in the essays.) </p>

<p>And, in fact, one common complaint about W&M in recent years was that it was too homogeneous in make-up, that it was primarily composed of middle-class white kids from Northern Virginia. In that regard, Nichol has left his mark upon the college; the recent incoming classes are certainly more diverse. But the downside of managing for diversity sometimes means that deserving, even "more deserving" students are left out - we probably all know someone who was denied admission who was statistically more qualified than some that were admitted. When it's personal, it's hard to see the "fairness" in such a system, but that's a different debate. </p>

<p>I'm a little surprised at how W&M does enroll a balanced (m/f) class - I didn't look back through the years to see if the relatively high enrollment rate for admitted males holds true year after year. </p>

<p>I think most colleges have made a conscious decision to try to keep m:f ratios balanced (at least those that have experienced a large divergence of application ratios.) To be out-of-balance, to be viewed as a "girls school" or a "boys school" ultimately works against the interests of the college, and makes it more difficult to attract the best students of either sex. </p>

<p>JMU is clearly not managing their class ratios in the same manner. And it's academic reputation suffers for it.</p>

<p>For those who bristle when it's mentioned how hard it is for girls to be admitted, don't interpret that as meaning, somehow, that the males admitted are somehow inferior. As I said, those that apply to W&M are a self-selecting group - unless they're hopelessly deluded, they're not applying because they want to a "party school" or because it's an "easy 4.0" or to be a big fish in a small pond. Everyone knows what kind of school it is, and so the vast majority of those that apply are already "qualified" to attend.</p>

47

<p>I was reading this and became interested in the legality of disproportionate admissions based on sex discussion that has been going on. </p>

<p>I remembered something from government class from high school about race and sex being viewed differently in the courts for discriminatory cases (something about "scrutiny", I remembered). A quick google search revealed that gender does not face strict scrutiny in the courts like race does, but rather faces a medium level of scrutiny. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The government must show that the challenged classification [in this case gender] serves an important state interest and that the classification [gender] is at least substantially related to serving that interest.

[/quote]

For William and Mary, that would be the the maintaining of a productive and desirable student body composition. Someone said that when schools get over the 60-40 ratio, that the school is viewed as not being as good by both sexes. That, in a nutshell, would be the legal defense, and it would take a new precedence by the courts to overrule it.</p>

<p>Source:
Levels</a> of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause</p>

<p>Disclosure:
I am a Freshman at The College.</p>

<p>Hope I was helpful =D</p>

48

<p>Here to Help-</p>

<p>I appreciate your input, but the situation is actually more complicated than you suggest. First, you're talking about what test is applied when a law or practice that appears to ALLOW discrimination is challenged as being unconstitutional. Here, though, we're talking about discrimination occurring AGAINST a law, Title IX, that expressly PROHIBITS gender discrimination in public undergraduate colleges. The constitution only sets minimum standards. Many legal commentators believe that, constitutional or not, an undergraduate admissions policy in a public college that favors one gender over another is a per se violation of Title IX.</p>

<p>Furthermore, as one commentator has noted in "Inside Higher Ed," the Supreme Court has never ruled on the use of gender-based affirmative action in higher education," but "in the Supreme Court’s 1996 decision finding that Virginia Military Institute, as a public institution, could not deny admission to women, the justices said that under the Constitution, any public institution using gender-based distinctions in admissions needed an 'exceedingly persuasive justification' that was 'substantially related' to an 'mportant government interest.' While trying to read the minds of Supreme Court justices is risky, it seems hard to imagine that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, author of the decision, was thinking about a good ratio of dance partners as such a government interest.'"</p>

<p>Similarly, Squiddy's argument wrongly suggests that one can justify gender discrimination in the same way that one can support affirmative action for members of minority groups. In fact, the standards are quite different. Unlike in the case of racial minorities, no one can reasonably argue that there isn't a critical mass of men appyling to colleges; there is, they're just not applying to William and Mary.</p>

49

<p>Indeed, it seems to be much more complicated than I first assumed. But please note that Justice Ginsberg used similar language to what I quoted above.</p>

<p>From what I've seen, and from what numbers people have quoted on this board, this issue isn't just related to W&M, it seems to be a common theme in many colleges and universities. It will be interesting to see if this ever reenters the national debate sometime soon. </p>

<p>Its exam-time here, but I'm going to look more into this.</p>

50

<p>Actually, judging from the numbers that I've posted -- the admit rates by gender for U.S. News' top 20 public colleges as well as the top publics with which William and Mary shares the most cross-applications (UNC, JMU, Mary Washington, Tech, and St. Mary's of Maryland) -- this issue IS in fact only related to William and Mary. None of these other schools reports a similar disparity between male admit rates and female admit rates. None. In fact, I'm betting no one can find ANY other public college in America whose admit rates for women are more disparate than William and Mary's.</p>

51

<p>and as a result, JMU is like 70% women</p>

<p>you can find another public college that has such a disparity in number of applications for women compared to men?</p>

52

<p>Sure. You've already identified one, JMU, and there are others. UNC-Chapel Hill, for example, isn't far off: it had 11,991 women apply for Fall 2007 admission but only 8099 men. They admitted 4177 of the women (34.8 percent) and 2822 of the men (also 34.8 percent), They ended up with a class of 2338 women and 1542 men. </p>

<p>I don't hear too many complaints that UNC-Chapel Hill is an undesirable school that no guy wants to go to. </p>

<p>In any event, disparity in applications by gender is no excuse for discriminating in admissions by gender.</p>

53

<p>First of all, it's not William and Mary's "fault" that they have more female applying than males. That alone would negate any successful litigation. A public school that would be comparable in some aspects, would be the University of Mary Washington. This college has far more female applicants than male and yet their gender ratio's are more even than JMU's. </p>

<p>Any college could successfully argue that creating a balanced learning environment includes gender balancing. </p>

<p>Parent, don't you think that William and Mary would be very careful with regards to this? Do you honestly believe that they don't consult with legal counsel with respect to their admissions' decisons? Why don't you call the admissions office and ask them point blank about some of the issues you've been stirring up on the William and Mary thread? </p>

<p>This issue has been discussed ad nausem............still no lawsuit. That's because there are no legal grounds for any of your issues. This can not be successfully litigated. All applications are gone over with a fine toothed comb and admission is not solely based on Stat's alone. It comes down to looking at a slew of applicant's who look very much the same in terms of qualifications. An admissions office looks for student who will create a balanced and diverse student body. They have that discretion. You are ill informed if you belive otherwise.</p>

<p>I suggest you stop right now and call William and Mary and get your answers. I can assure you that you will find them today.</p>

<p>Doubt you will come back afterwards and fill us all in, though.</p>

<p>Peace as always,
pedsox</p>

54

<p>I said gender balancing, not gender bias. </p>

<p>The lack of the large sports environment along with William and Mary being more of a liberal arts education, add to that the fact that the college has a reputation for being very adademically challenging, not a huge party atmosphere.............all of this equals less male applicants. </p>

<p>Why is this so hard to get? Any lawyer would be glad to slam dunk this.</p>

55

<p>Parent, it's a fact that 65% of all college applicants are female. So you are wrong in saying that there is a "critical mass" of male applicants. While there are a large number of males seeking college admission, they are a minority as compared to females. </p>

<p>Why are less males applying to the public University of Mary Washington? They've gone on the record as saying that they are trying to create a more balanced student body with respect to male/female ratios. They have been trying to shake the "all girls school" image since MW went co-ed in the 70's. The only way to successfully do this is to work towards more of a balanced male/female environment. This is not discrimination.</p>

56

<p>The University of Mary Washington has a very similar situation. It is a small, PUBLIC university in Virginia.</p>

<p>2007-2009</p>

<p>1,416 male applications
3,059 female applications</p>

<p>1,144 males offered admission
2,446 females offered admission</p>

<p>309 males enrolled
659 females enrolled</p>

<p>Any comments?</p>

57

<p>I'm sorry, I meant to write 2007-2008 Common dataset.</p>

58

<p>Um, I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with the Mary Washington numbers because they serve only to prove my point. The numbers appear to show that, despite having many more women apply than men, Mary Washington continues to resist making admissions decisions while taking gender appreciably into account. They accepted 80.8 percent of male applicants and 80.0 percent of female applicants -- essentially no difference. Contrast this with William & Mary, where the numbers for the same year show that 43.6 percent of male applicants were accepted but only 28.1 percent of women were. And if you look back further you'll see similar disparities for William and Mary going back for years. You'll also find no other public college with similar disparities.</p>

<p>I'm not arguing that William and Mary is the only public college in America where lots more women are applying than men. What I'm arguing is that no other public college in America is dealing with the issue by favoring men in the admissions process to the extent that William and Mary is. And your position has shifted from arguing that the college isn't biased towards men in admissions to the college IS biased towards men but that the bias is justifiable. That's fine; you can justify all you want. Personally, I think there's a big difference between making allowances for an economically disadvantaged African American student from an inner city high school when comparing his application to a white suburban kid than having a policy or practice that takes gender into account when making admissions decisions -- legal or not, I happen to think that one is fair and the other isn't -- but we can agree to disagree on that. Just don't try and tell me that William and Mary's admissions policy doesn't favor men. </p>

<p>I won't bother responding to your legal arguments since you're not a lawyer and nobody's going to sue anybody (although I will say that from a legal standpoint "critical mass" doesn't mean what you think).</p>

59

<p>JMU and Mary Wash were also both founded as public all girls schools, which are now virtually illegal.</p>

<p>Basically what this boils down to is: what kind of school do you want it to be? The State and College obviously have a valid interest in wanting to keep the school competitive, and evidence suggest that a great disparity in enrollment between the sexes reduces the stature and desirability of a school. Students have a hesitancy about going to a school that has too few of their or the other gender. Then, just as affirmative action is not labeled discrimination, neither would this, making it fall in line with title IX and the Constitution. Legally, there is nothing wrong. The case could be made that it is unfair, and it is, but it is for the better interest of all involved. Kind of like how Presidential term limits are inheritantly unfair, yet they could be necessary.</p>

60

<p>No my position hasn't changed. You first spouted off about how it was "easier" for a male to gain admission than a female. It seems that you have now realized that the males admitted to William and Mary are in no way inferior, academically or otherwise to the female applicants. Remember, a 4.0 is a 4.0, is a 4.0. Got that? Good. My position never changed on that one.</p>

<p>Now I am responding to your comments about a "lawsuit". It's laughable that you would think that the board of directors as well as the admissions officers at William and Mary, are somehow being blatantly discriminating. You have to know that some rejected 4.0 girl's parents have already tried your argument and have failed. I would even venture to say that some white male's parents have probably called the admissions office up because their 4.0 son was rejected over a black student from the same high school who had a 3.4 and lower SAT's. Welcome to the real world and learning to deal with "what is". No, my positions haven't changed. By the way, you are incorrect to assume that the black males and females who are admitted with lower stats because of their race, are "inner city poor kids". On the contrary, many come from very privileged backgrounds. Your concerns could not be successfully litigated. So, my positon hasn't changed on that.</p>

<p>It gets under my skin, the comments you make without any knowledge of fact about The College of William and Mary. It bothers me because I am a student there and feel loyal to the college. We have a happy, balanced, friendly, campus. My need to defend is justified. I just wonder why you even care so much. </p>

<p>Call the admissions office and ask them point, flipping blank about "gender bias", etc. They will shut you down in a very short conversation, I suspect. </p>

<p>No, I am not a lawyer, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night!</p>

<p>Look at William and Mary's Common Dataset. Fewer girls, of those offered admission, chose to attend. A larger percentage of the admitted males chose to attend. You would have to prove that this fact can't be taken into consideration. I'm sure these past statistics are used.</p>