<p>Hey OHMom, I don’t know about JHU or Emory, but I know that the physics/math requirements of Caltech are pretty much brutal compared to anywhere else. So yeah, different colleges do have different levels of difficulty in teaching STEM. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Humm, I think that females have higher HS stats (GPA or ranks) but still trail in standardized tests. </p>
<p>GAmom Never said that she didn’t have to take and fulfill her Classics curriculum requirements. I doubt that physics, chem&organic, biology, calculus, are standard required courses for a Classics major. Your daughter had to take these courses and do well in them for medical school. And yes, STEM is more difficult than the Classics based upon the data. </p>
<p>I don’t ever recall saying that I “equate the size of ones paycheck to success.” If saying that kids who wanted to get STEM degrees transferred out to other less difficult majors because of academic mismatch is saying the above, that is some distorted logic. </p>
<p>Why do you believe that your “URM daughter did not steal somebody’s spot” in medical school?" Don’t believe anyone ever commented that she did.</p>
<p>“Periwinkle I am amazed at the salary of Museum Directors I appreciate the DATA, so how does a recent Fine Arts grad get one of these jobs?”</p>
<p>Why would it amaze you that someone in a high position with a lot of responsibility would indeed make a good deal of money?</p>
<p>Someone’s been lying to you, or you’re just not very observant, if you think that the only way to make money is through STEM. You’re seeing only a very small facet of the world. </p>
<p>And of course a recent fine arts grad can’t snap her fingers and become a museum director. So what? Everyone’s got to work their way up and prove themselves in whatever organization. </p>
<p>VOR…I added that in because it is often said here on CC as well IRL it is “assumed” by many the URM’s as well as athletes and legacies get in for something other than just their application . And yes, I am assuming you think that way based on your thinking.</p>
<p>@OHmomof2, the question is where the balance tips and why it is more acceptable to limit women’s representation than it is to limit racial representation. The same logic applies to racial and gender limitations: if you admit too many of [specified group], the school will lose its luster. I don’t know that it’s true but without arguing for or against, I think it’s worth looking at how we treat different groups and when we accept the higher bar vs. when we file lawsuits decrying it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Likely more brutal than Harvard’s, since that is Caltech’s specialty. That is part of my point here.</p>
<p>Well, I think that women really don’t want less men on campus. So, there will be a dearth of plantifs… haha!</p>
<p>At UNC the female to male ratio is wild. I wouldn’t have even applied to a school with that many women v. men, unless it had been an all women’s college. JMO</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know what data you refer to but kids like my own daughter would do Calc problem sets all day long before having to write a paper on the Iliad in Classic Greek. [shudder].</p>
<p>xiggi divide and conquer, distract and confuse. Why do you continue to do this? Not one person has commented that Harvard does not have a high graduation rate. What has been discussed is the low STEM degree attainment by those with academic profile in the bottom end of the incoming class. Given that many at the bottom of the profile are URM, this affects URM likelihood to successfully obtain their desired STEM degree. No one stated that if these students who changed to different majors did not graduate.</p>
<p>OHMom Please take the time to read the link to post 267. It is clear that you have not.</p>
<p>Zekesima good luck with your search for your son’s education.</p>
<p>3girls3cats1mom:
</p>
<p>It appears that the top, top schools, discrimination does not happen. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe it does happen, but you can’t necessarily get that from an admission rate. MIT has been claiming for years that the big disparity in admission rate between genders (much different than 3%) is due to self-selection, and I believe it is at least a significant factor. </p>
<p>But the bottom line is, how can you get around the following SAT data:
critical reading</p>
<p><a href=“https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-crit-reading-2014.pdf”>https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-crit-reading-2014.pdf</a> </p>
<p>math
<a href=“https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-mathematics-2014.pdf”>https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-mathematics-2014.pdf</a>
Look at the numbers above 650.</p>
<p>Males outnumber females in the higher ranges of both math and critical reading subsections.</p>
<p>So how can females be vastly more qualified for top colleges than the males?</p>
<p>I have a friend who is a museum director and boy can she sell!!! It’s not her art degree that made her, it was her ability to sell. Now, she would have made much more money if she worked in something like selling junk bonds but she is happy where she is. Fact though and she admits this freely her education had nothing to do with her success it was just her ability to sell. Money rules everywhere. </p>
<p>One thing I think Asian kids lack are strong role models in selling. Sales is what makes the world go around.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@voiceofreason66. You are hillarious. Do you think your link is “required reading?” B-) </p>
<p>Yeah so OHMom, Harvard has a top-2 math program, while JHU and Emory doesn’t. So it’s likely that Harvard math is more difficult than Emory math or whatever.</p>
<p>Seriously though kids who scored 700 in SAT math shouldn’t be a math major. Ok I am snooty because I am a math major hahah.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At the top levels we are really splitting atoms, here. However, it is a fact that GPA is a better indicator of future college success than the SAT. But who cares? Many more students than are admitted to any of these places are fully capable of doing the work there, and women don’t want to fight about this anyway.</p>
<p>That said, all you do here is point out the problematic nature of the SAT.</p>
<p>I will really be interested to see how things go with the new SAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As the mother of a high-achieving daughter, I don’t think it’s more acceptable at all. I completely agree with you, was only guessing as to why people don’t file lawsuits about it.</p>
<p>And I agree that a school “loses some luster” when it is too much of any one group - gender, race, whatever. D is turned off by schools where there isn’t a racial balance (though mostly white is difficult to escape) or the gender ratio is much beyond 60/40 in either direction. </p>
<p>I think your point is absolutely valid in this discussion.</p>
<p>
Under the Constitution, Harvard wins. 
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>GPA and rank, I imagine.</p>
<p>poetgrl No but if you are trying to make an intelligent rebuttal, one should at least have read where the data is coming from. </p>
<p>eh. There’s data all over the place. You can cherry pick where you will. A lot of us have already read that stuff.</p>