<p>Why do people like karajanhra just make statements without any evidence? If you look at the evidence, which I have now posted twice, boys have a MUCH tougher time getting into top colleges, ESPECIALLY (not exclusively) for math programs.</p>
<p>housecat1234,
I accept the validity of your evidence, but I don’t follow your reasoning. You say applicants with SAT CR + M scores of less than 1400 will be automatically screened out at the top schools. But even at HYPSM, 50% of the entering class has SAT CR+M scores of less than 1500, and at least a quarter (significantly more at some of these schools) have CR + M of less than 1400. At Stanford, for example, the middle 50% SAT CR + M is 1340-1550, so we may surmise something like two thirds of the class is below 1500 and at least a third of the class is below 1400. So clearly not everyone scoring less than 700 CR and 700 M is being screened out. They’re not “irrelevant,” as you put it. They’re being considered, and some are getting in. True, this group of slightly lower SAT scorers may include a lot of recruited athletes, legacies, development cases, and others with “hooks,” but I don’t think we have data on the gender distribution of that group. </p>
<p>Second, clearly being in the top 10% of your HS class is a stronger screen for colleges at this level than 1400+ SAT scores. At Harvard, 95% of enrolled freshmen were in the top 10% of their HS class; at Princeton, 96%; at Yale 97%; at MIT 97%; at Stanford (the laggard!) 91%. So it’s pretty clear that without top grades/class rank, you don’t stand much of a chance. To use your terminology, students in this category are “irrelevant,” even if they have top SAT scores.</p>
<p>Now what we don’t know—at least I don’t—is how many of those top SAT scorers do not have high GPAs/class ranks. You say you “find it hard to believe that among students who score above a 1400 on the SAT there would be a significant difference in GPA between genders.” But what’s your evidence for this? And why so hard to believe? One hears anecdotally all the time about the brilliant slackers who nail the SAT but have mediocre GPAs and class ranks because they’re inattentive to their studies, more interested in hanging with the guys, or sports, or other ECs. One doesn’t hear that as often about girls. About girls, the more common story is that she’s diligent and attentive to her studies and does terrifically well in school, but just can’t seem to score well on standardized tests, especially math. Now anecdotes aren’t data; but neither is "I find it hard to believe that . . . " I find it entirely plausible that there are far more girls in the top 10% of the HS class than boys; and that among girls, an extremely high percentage of 1400+ SAT-scorers would be in the top 10% of their HS class, but a somewhat lower percentage of 1400+ SAT-scoring boys would have comparable top grades. But I of course can’t prove it; neither can you. If anyone has statistical confirmation either way, I’d love to see it.</p>
<p>The College Board does have this data, but I’ve never seen these particular cross-tabs presented. They tell us that among the 1.5 million college-bound 2008 HS grads who took the SAT at any time in their HS career, 75,269 had HS GPAs in the A+ range; and of these, 60% were female and 40% were male. Similarly, of the 219,715 test-takers who reported being in the top 10th of their HS class, 57% were female and 42% were male. Among all test-takers, 53.8% were female, and 46.2% were male. So clearly, among SAT-takers, a higher percentage of the females than of the males were high GPA/high class rank individuals; yet a significantly higher percentage of the males got 700+ and 750+ SAT scores. That still doesn’t tell us how many of the 700+ and 750+ SAT scorers also had high grades/GPAs. But it is in a rough ad ready way confirmation of the anecdotes about the male high SAT/low GPA “brilliant slacker,” as well as the female high GPA/low math SAT “terrific student/bad test-taker.” </p>
<p>At the end of the day, I’m left wondering what it even means to say “it’s harder” for one gender than for the other. It’s apparently EASIER for boys to get top SAT scores than it is for girls; even, perhaps, some slacker boys. It’s apparently EASIER for girls to do well in school and get top grades than it is for boys; even, apparnetly, soem girls who don’t perform brilliantly on the SATs. So who has it “easier” in compiling the combination of top SAT scores PLUS top grades that, together with a lot of other factors, might possibly make you a contender for admission to an elite college? I don’t think we can really say. We know more girls apply and more get in, but more are rejected. We know more boys have top SAT scores, especially in math. We know more girls have top GPAs/class ranks. That’s about it, I think.</p>