<p>Think of it this way, even if girls have an easier time getting in... girls STILL make better grades in classes AND run most of the campus activities... if you were a college would you choose a guy that picks his nose playing computer games all day or a girl that makes a difference?</p>
<p>Why are URMs and females so attractive to MIT? Because by nature they posess good personal qualities. Despite the fact that it is, statistically speaking, easier for a female to get in, they still only make up 43% of the university. As someone said, the female pool is highly self-selecting. Those females who wish to be scientists or engineers have already broken the mold, something that MIT definitely looks for. Same thing with URMs. Think of it this way, females may have a statistically easier time getting in, but males had an easier time dealing with the social norms.</p>
<p>EDIT: Does that make sense to anyone? For some reason I'm having an insanely hard time writing tonight, and I don't know if I'm sounding coherent.</p>
<p>Transfering to MIT is nastily difficult no matter who you are. It might have been better to apply to MIT for freshman admission in the first place, but one might as well apply for transfer to MIT and make sure not to burn any bridges at the current college in the meanwhile.</p>
<p>Let's get real here: 2.5 times the difference in acceptance rate between males and females. And there are those on this board willing to attribute it to better 'personal skills/qualities?'" Hah! In the real world (take avergae college, ivy league college, average engineering school, prestigious engineering program all as examples), is a simple random samle of women 2.5 times likelier to get good grades, 2.5 times likelier to succeed, 2.5 times likelier to be smart? No! But if MIT admits 2.5 times more women than men, and they succeed at least marginally more compared to men once they get to MIT, that that's what we're saying about MIT women applicants. The fact that the women more likely to succeed trends are not replicated anywhere: not in SAT scores (specifically not even in male/female ratio of perfect 1600 scorers), not in high school perfect 4.0 uw grade average male/female ration, not in HS leadership position m/f ratio, etc demonstrates either:</p>
<p>a) an inconsistency in MIT statistics, most likely meaning that all those statistics about women succeeding at MIT more than men are false</p>
<p>b) Mysteriously, women applying to MIT are 2.5 times more qualified/successful than men. I do not think this option can feasibly account for a 2.5 time difference, using similar logic to Byerly's claims that the huge difference in early vs. regular admission rates cannot be accounted for merely by stronger early applicant pools (see Harvard/Yale board)</p>
<p>c) that MIT mysteriously grows entering female students' success much faster than it does male students' success. The difficulty in explaining such a phenomenon / lack of supporting evidence makes it likewise improbable.</p>
<p>So there you have it. Three variants, with two improbable ones. I conclude that the statistics claiming MIT women do better than men in the three categories are false. The next likeliest is variant c.</p>
<p>That was by far my longest post on CC...ever.</p>
<p>Summary. Now.</p>
<p>I find sleet's theory very interesting. It would be nice to see what ben has to say about it. Perhaps, Ben, could you enlighten us with the GPA's of male/female MIT students, as well as the dropout rates of male/female MIT students?</p>
<p>Oh wait except you're the same person... maybe you didn't get in because the admissions people got confused and *thought you applied to UPenn ED! Why would they admit you if you were already committed to another school?</p>
<p>gg "sleet" <> "theleet"</p>
<p>go ask the mods to check IPs k?</p>
<p>When did I say that I would kill myself?</p>
<p>And I took writing twice...</p>
<p>where did you get this info?</p>
<p>If you mean when I said:</p>
<p>" rejection from mit =</p>
<p>/part life
quit in life console
slit wrists</p>
<p>there is no life without mit!"</p>
<p>i was being facetious, and i was stupid back then. mit is hardly the best ever.</p>
<p>LOL WOW!</p>
<p>this kid dug through all my old posts.</p>
<p>when i said: </p>
<p>"anything less than 750 = retake. no question about it."</p>
<p>I was clearly joking since the OP was complaining about a 730. XD</p>
<p>Apparently, you shouldn't get into MIT since you can't take a joke...</p>
<p>theeleet: thanks for the support.</p>
<p>Penthesilea: Where did you fish out this quote:</p>
<p>"From my previous experience on CC, you will be surprised to find a lot of people ditch the site as soon as they get their decisions...especially the unsatisfied ones...so make plans in advance, guys!"</p>
<p>You claim I said that? If I did, it was like half a year ago! I couldn't even find it doing a search on myself. Now who's obsessive compulsive/lame/desperate to go fishing like that? Additionally, If I said that, I was commenting how bad it was that people leave so soon, often without leaving valuable info about their college admissions results. CC is a valuable place to learn about the college admissions process, and it isn't over for me until i decide where I'm going! And even then, maybe I'll use it to make some contacts. </p>
<p>So stop the hysteria, "mate!" And don't confuse me with theeleet. If he wanted several accounts, he wouldn't be stupid enough to make them rhyme. Why would you ever conclude we were the same person based on that? How simpletonic.</p>
<p>I'm curious to see what would happen if you guys get in during the regular round...</p>
<p>You could wear matching shirts with "theleet" and "sleet" to the admitted students program! :D</p>
<p>thats my question too...what WILL you guys do if admitted regularly?</p>
<p>oh and different ips doesnt mean different people either :P</p>
<p>along the lines of the original intent, there's a slashdot discussion right now (...yeah...) on this topic as well. <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/26/193215&tid=146%5B/url%5D">http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/26/193215&tid=146</a></p>
<p>puhleaze, how come whenever there are 2 people with the same views on female/non-Asian admission to MIT then everyone says they are the same person?</p>
<p>pebbles > If I get in I probably won't go.</p>
<p>Penthesilea > you have too much free time if your digging through people's old posts like that. And you call me OCD?</p>
<p>well - I can't help but pity you then.</p>
<p>Good luck with life.</p>
<p>puhleaze, how come whenever there are 2 people with the same views on female/non-Asian admission to MIT then everyone says they are the same person?</p>
<p>im starting to think you see people as either asian/non-Asian rather than people with their own individuality,</p>