<p>PapaC: Those are interesting percentages, and while the one for UNC-CH is correct, I will add that the first state-supported college for women in NC, was the Women's College of UNC, starting in 1891. (Under a different name back then, but changed to Women's College around 1930.). It was a truly outstanding school for women, up until around 1963, when UNC went co-ed and the Women's College was changed to UNC at Greensboro. </p>
<p>I'm not sure what all that means, really--or if it means anything--except that a lot of those smart young women who chose to go to a NC university after 1963--mostly went to Chapel Hill or to Duke's Trinity campus (for women) instead. And, so, perhaps--40+ years down the road, this is still the case? Not sure. Also, UNC-CH does not have an engineering school, and so the young men who stay in NC, and who are interested in engineering, may go to NCSU or Duke instead? Not to say women aren't in engineering, too, but I'm guessing that's still a male-dominated field.</p>
<p>That still doesn't explain where all the men have gone, except that universities that have a real gender imbalance must obviously operate gender-blind, and simply take what they view as the best qualified applicants.</p>
<p>still interested to know what really is causing this trend. Perhaps Catherine is onto it in part...a socioeconomic cause. Anyone have any data or links regarding college-age female-male ratios in the US? Not specific to HS graduates or college matriculation, just simply how many are out there. China certainly has a gender imbalance issue overall with more boys than girls....does the US show the opposite phenomenon?</p>
<p>I doubt that the US has a gender imbalance. China has one as the result of deliberate family decisions exacerbated by the one-child family policie. To wit, socio-cultural preferences for boys has led to sex selection before birth, female child-abandonment and female infanticide. The result is a huge gender imbalance that will have serious social and political effects. Already there's one book predicting that China will be more belligerent.</p>
<p>Papa, no research to point to. But, based purely on anecdotal observation, I'd say it's pretty simple. The girls are just plain kickin' the boys' butts in the high school classrooms.</p>
<p>More study, more interaction with teachers, more peer support for being studious, less videogames.</p>
<p>Frankly, the behaviors and social disincentives tend to continue in college with more boys drinking heavily, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Although there is a gender imbalance in the number of girls and boys taking the SATs, there is also an imbalance (in favor of Boys) in the scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True, although this doesn't mean too much. To take a global example: it is said that many countries outperform the US at the high school level. Possibly. However, we are among the few countries who offer true universal high school education - so the kids at the bottom of the analytic/motivational scale are bringing down the numbers. Important thing is that they are in there. Less intelligent but more diligent women may be taking the test, thereby bringing down women's overall scores. I could be wrong, but I think that the "gender gap" is shrinking every year. </p>
<p>Engineering males have lower scores than their female counterparts. It was hypothesized that women need the validation of the high scores to get the courage to apply to engineering programmes.</p>
<p>IMO, the SAT is a test of confidence as much as anything else. Do you have the guts to leave well enough alone and move on? Do you have the confidence to get your answer and not obsessively check them over, thereby allowing yourself enough time to complete the exam?</p>
<p>I definitely agree with the statement that girls are "kicking the boys butts in the classrooms". In my class, everyone with a 3.2 GPA was invited to apply to NHS. 40-50 students applied and nearly all of them got in. At the induction ceremony, it was apparent that there were at least 3 times more girls than boys...just shows that girls do much better in school on average. I myself am a guy but most of students in my AP classes are girls...you can usually pick out an AP/honors class by the number of girls it has--especially English classes.</p>
<p>You make a very good point. There are definitely more girls than boys taking the SAT. But if we look at the higher scorers, since males tend to outperform the females (I agree that the gap is closing), the gender imbalance is lessened; and this is the pool from which top colleges recruit, It is more pronounced at state universities whose student bodies reflect more closely the total pool of applicants. I don't know what the pool will look like in a decade or so, if the gap in scores will close totally.</p>
<p>You may also be right about the reasons why females may do less well on these tests. The problem, of course, is that adcoms can only go by the results and cannot take a guess at the reasons why scores are what they are.</p>
<p>I had a classmate in college who was incredibly smart and hard-working and was totally lacking in self-confidence. She bombed tests out of sheer nervousness (yet wrote a paper in sophomore year that our prof, a star in the field, said was of almost publishable quality). She was so concerned about her performance on tests that she decided to forgo grad school.</p>
<p>The fact remains that men can get high-paying jobs straight out of high school, whereas it is much more difficult for women to do the same. Many civil service jobs are traditionally male-dominated, and while not always glamorous, they often pay well and have amazing benefits. I live in NYC, and the average Sanitation worker here has a higher salary than most teachers at my school (many of whom have Master's or higher.)
There was an interesting article last week, I think in the Times Magazine, about women leaving the workforce and "wasting" their Harvard degrees to have babies--I'm oversimplifying, but you get the point. Is it time management? It seems to be a negation of the American dream to think it impossible for a woman to become a powerful executive and remain a good, caring mother. There are house-dads, or whatever they're called, but I don't think that the concept is entirely accepted yet.</p>
<p>one more article on the subject...this is the best one yet IMO entitled "Are girls smarter than boys?".....broader 1st-world context rather than pure US-centric........more cause put on girls' positives like better motivation, ability to "successively plan across age groups" (whatever that means), better reading skills, etc, rather than boys socioeconomic problems.</p>
<p>Regarding post #2 the inbalance in the scores is also against the boys. In other words, there are more boys on both the high end and the low end.</p>
<p>EDIT: I see you made the same comment in a later post.</p>
<p>Wait....there are more girls than guys at college...that means I should have had better odds in college of finding a hot girl....which seems to suggest, I don't know, that I am ugly, uncool, etc. </p>
<p>Thanks guys, thanks a lot for making me feel better. :(</p>
<p>Seriously though, I think a new study should be undertaken. I am alarmed at the fact that as the rank of the school goes higher, the uggliness of the girls at the school exponentially increases. Any thoughts on why this is case?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am alarmed at the fact that as the rank of the school goes higher, the uggliness of the girls at the school exponentially increases.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Now, where on earth did you get that bit of information? Brooke Shields, Princeton; Jodie Foster, Yale; Natalie Portman, Harvard; Mira Sorvino, Harvard. The Olsen twins, NYU. I am sure that other top schools have equally famous alumnae.</p>
<p>Oh, don't be shallow and ridiculous. I personally take offense at the supposition that intelligent girls cannot be attractive. Please, zap your way out of that Cold War Era mentality.</p>
<p>I thought this was obvious....but clearly I was JOKING. Of course a girl can be pretty and smart as she can be ugly and stupid. The same is true for guys.</p>