<p>So, I was looking at profiles for some schools; namely UNC, NYU and UVa. And I noticed that they all had majority girls, 60%+ for NYU.</p>
<p>Firstly, why is this? is there an inherent bias or are girls better applicants in terms of ECs and essays (guys are statistically better at SAT if i'm not mistaken).</p>
<p>And secondly, does this mean that ceteris paribus (everything equal) a guy has a better shot at these unis?</p>
<p>im not trying to be sexist or anything, just wondering.</p>
<p>If you are a relatively strong student it should give you a tip factor, but 60% indicates they are willing to take the stronger student. That’s my 2cents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I imagine it’s because more girls apply. Right now, there are more women than men going to college.</p>
<p>so in a similar manner to URMs, if there are more women than men applying men should have a slight advantage right? not to the extent of URMs obviously, but an edge</p>
<p>This is true at some colleges with a high female-to-male ratio, but I don’t know if it’s a universal thing.</p>
<p>UNC and UVa do not adjust admissions standards to balance gender ratio. They get more applications from women and those applicants are strong. As you can see below, woman and men are admitted statistically at the same rate (ie. there is no tip). I’m not familiar with NYU admissions so I’m not going to guess as to their methods. </p>
<p>Acceptance percentage by gender from the most recent common data sets:</p>
<p>UVa: women: 30.66% men: 28.38%</p>
<p>UNC: women: 26.43% men: 27.18%</p>
<p>NYU: women: 50.02% men: 57.75%</p>
<p>It’s worth noting that both UNC and UVa receive more applications from women then men. NYU receives more application from men then women.</p>
<p>Cool thanks for that! clears it all up, no advantage at UNC/UVa for guys. slight advantage for guys at NYU though. but not sure why theres ‘more applications are from guys at nyu’ considerings its a 60/40 split girls to guys in the end. must be some weird yield rates between the genders or something.</p>
<p>“It’s worth noting that both UNC and UVa receive more applications from women then men.”</p>
<p>does that matter much since we’re looking at percentages??</p>
<p>Check their gender admission statistics. They’re in the CDS and on parchment.com for the particular school.</p>
<p>No it doesn’t matter much. I wrote it initially to give context to the admissions percentages, then added the explanation on top making the last comment less important. To get the full context, if you really want it, you can google “name of school common data set” and get all sorts of statistical information. Someone at NYU may be able to help further explain their numbers. The yield didn’t look that different, but I was eyeballing.</p>
<p>@ Victory, Great idea! I posted that info for the OP in post #16. :)</p>
<p>I think we need to see the stats of the two applicant pools and the stats of the respective accepted groups to answer that question. </p>
<p>I remember seeing the average GPA (not sure if median or mean) across the US being 0.2 lower for males, but I don’t know if that difference holds for top students. </p>
<p>If males are applying and are getting accepted with lower GPAs, then we can say that that particular standard is lower for males, even if the male acceptance rate is identical to the female acceptance rate.</p>
<p>Sorry about that blueiguana, I’m on my phone and didn’t see your post! Great minds think alike!</p>
<p>Depending on the school, it can be easier for one group over another to be admitted. For example, at Bowdoin, the male/female admit ratio is nearly 50/50, but a third more women applied than men, so obviously it’s easier to get in if you’re a guy. (No stats on if the GPA/Test Scores are different.) </p>
<p>CalTech reportedly recently lowered the bar on women getting in to try to balance out the male/female ratio, so that women reportedly have lower stats than men, but I don’t have the time to look that up at the moment.</p>
<p>For the stat above, there probably isn’t a gender preference as the acceptance rates are so close. It could be simply the female applicants to have slightly better credential in average. Nevertheless, there are clear advantages for female students in applying to many engineering schools.</p>
<p>Most of the colleges I’ve studied accept at very similar ratios. Young women are out-performing young men in most areas other than the STEM subjects and, to a lesser extent, Business. You’ll find, therefore, that most liberal arts colleges have more women than men. College Prowler (sorry, CC, but I had to mention a rival site) breaks down admissions statistics by gender. You’ll see that a lot of colleges get more female applicants, and they accept near-identical percentages of men and women. I think they’d like to have greater gender balance, but they also want to keep their academic standards and stats high. Men do have a distinct numerical advantage in performing arts programs, where the schools need to maintain close gender balances and female applicants heavily outnumber male. </p>
<p>At certain schools being male is a hook. Seems like certain LACs more, being small their gender balance probably matters more: <a href=“Opinion | To All the Girls I've Rejected - The New York Times”>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>CalTech definitely could benefit from balancing out its gender ratio. Last year’s breakdown was roughly 60-40 (male-female).</p>
<p>I find it strange that you get a perceived “bump” in admissions when applying to a school that has much less of your gender, but URMs get a perceived “bump” in admissions when applying to a school that has more of their particular race. Could someone explain that? It would make more sense if both certain genders and URMs had more of a hook if applying to schools that had less of each category (because colleges want to balance gender ratios and create more diversity).</p>
<p><a href=“http://higheredlive.com/missing-men/”>http://higheredlive.com/missing-men/</a> indicates that overall college enrollment in the US is now about 57% female, and is expected to become even more unbalanced in the future.</p>
<p>However, the gender ratios vary significantly by major, according to <a href=“http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/05/the-college-class-of-2011-by-academic-discipline-and-gender-and-the-selective-concern-about-gender-imbalances/”>http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/05/the-college-class-of-2011-by-academic-discipline-and-gender-and-the-selective-concern-about-gender-imbalances/</a> .</p>
<p>I would agree that schools specialization plays a big role. Cal Tech for example specializes in things like Math and Engineering, which are usually male-dominated. Likewise, NYU specializes in Liberal and Performing arts, things typically female dominated. </p>
<p>But, I do believe more women than men are enrolled in College right now, so men would probably get a slight bump.</p>
<p>Two words: Affirmative Action. </p>
<p>There are more women because colleges make it easier for women to get in and offer more scholarships/incentives for women to go to college. Plain and simple. </p>
<p>In my opinion, it’s unfair and ■■■■■■■■. Equality should be the goal, and equality doesn’t mean you give someone a scholarship because they have a vagina. </p>
<p>Not necessarily.</p>
<p>Although my current high school class is pretty much male-dominated (maybe 3-4 girls in the top 15), last year’s was female-dominated. I’m not sure if there’s much of an academic difference between the genders, but then again, this is taking the top of the class. I believe that the discrepancy arises with the ones who may or may not end up attending college.</p>
<p>But I do agree that there are many more scholarships/incentives for women to go to college, which I find unfair, especially when the large difference in college attendance is already there. I recently took a scholarship newsletter from my school’s office. I qualified for only about 50% of them because the rest were for URMs/females. URMs I can understand, but someone explain the females, please…</p>