Girls vs. boys - the EA stats

<p>We know the overall breakdown of girls and boys admitted to MIT, but are the stats consistent for EA and RD?</p>

<p>girls get in much easier</p>

<p>I believe most stats are consistent for EA vs. RD.</p>

<p>And don't confuse "more girls get in relative to how many apply" with "it's easier for girls to get in".</p>

<p>I believe that there are instances in which a girl is accepted with similar qualification that a rejected boy has.</p>

<p>There are instances where a <em>boy</em> is accepted "with similar qualification that a rejected boy has". :) Numbers do not a complete application make.</p>

<p>MIT accepts many more girls than boys, percentagewise, to say it is balanced. Other schools like Caltech don't.</p>

<p>Girls definitely have the edge in applications. You can't argue with that.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And don't confuse "more girls get in relative to how many apply" with "it's easier for girls to get in".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm pretty sure I read somewhere on these boards that the rate for girls is around 25%? You could argue that the female applicant pool is more self-selective (which I doubt), but it still would not account for the huge percentage difference.</p>

<p>Not that I mind really mind. I think the other tech school's 70-30 ratios are... :( Just another (small) reason I choose MIT as my first choice.</p>

<p>Well if they say 70% of applicants are qualified... Then there should be admittable men and women who don't get it. So it makes sense that it's no <em>easier</em> to get in as a girl, just more likely.</p>

<p>Does that make sense? It's sort of on the border of not making sense.</p>

<p>mognoose: that makes a lot of sense to me. In fact, I think I really like that explanation. =)</p>

<p>
[quote]

You could argue that the female applicant pool is more self-selective (which I doubt

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I believe I have heard just that rationale given.</p>

<p>Ah, this thread again. Comes up every year!</p>

<p>Something that no one has mentioned yet is the fact that women in high school are simply not supported and/or encouraged to go into math and science in the ways that their male counterparts are. For this reason, many women feel they have to work harder, feel as though they must "prove" that they're just as worthy as the men.</p>

<p>For this reason - at least in our applicant pool - the women often pwn the men.</p>

<p>And this continues at MIT. Graduation rate? Women > Men. Leadership positions? Women > Men. Etc. Etc.</p>

<p>It's a shame that women have to read stuff like "girls get in much easier" and "girls definitely have the edge" on boards like this. Because first of all, it's not true, and second, it reinforces the stereotype that women only get into math and science because the world makes it easier for them to do so.</p>

<p>Those stereotypes - and this thread - are worthless.</p>

<p>Hahaha...
Well Ben this is one conflict even god cannot make avoidable.
As far as MIT goes I think getting in is the thing whether boy or girl..If you get in you are special.</p>

<p>haha, its interesting to see that the word "pwn" gets used by a MIT admissions officer; you're one of us!!
^_^</p>

<p>I actually learned it on this board. ;)</p>

<p>-shrug- </p>

<p>woman or man, 8.012 pwned us all today.</p>

<p>Haha, I was up late helping people with the 8.012 pset all last week. Was the test that bad?</p>

<p>uh... then i'm screwed... the girl from my school is amazing (in terms of math science) so it's not fair to say they're unqualified or have it easier</p>

<p>How do you explain the fact that MIT has a 50-50 male to female ratio while at Caltech it is 70-30?</p>

<p>well... caltech is in california... ucla... usc... plenty of girls there lol</p>