How do you think Marilee JOnes' resignation will affect the MIT admissions process?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
101

<p>


You're pretty out of line here pebbles.</p>

<p>


It doesn't bother us because a) Caltech is very good with need based aid, so anyone admitted will get the chance to come, b) Caltech also offers even more money on the sole basis of academics, and c) because we do have some responsibility for making sure that qualified high school females get technical degrees - that helps out not only our community, but also has great societal good.</p>

<p>


As I showed in the previous post, the ratio of guys to girls who matriculate at Caltech is VERY COMPARABLE to that at MIT. In more simpler terms, girls do not choose to matriculate at MIT any more often than at Caltech (compared to males). Your false stereotypes and anecdotes do not make that any less of a reality. </p>

<p>


Please, pebbles, show me where Caltech students are discriminating against women on these boards. Start backing up your claims with some facts and references instead of making broad, stereotypical claims.</p>

102

<p>i admit that i am a little biased but that last post is what i would put under "owned" in the dictionary.</p>

103

<p>lol, a little biased liked a little uptight.</p>

104

<p>whereupon both shattered into little pieces a little ridiculous. :)</p>

<p>also i think comparing college admissions to prostitution to make a cheap point that turns out to be wrong is really way below you and i don't think it's uptight to point that out.</p>

105

<p>Ben - bravo on how Caltech treats applicants - I think it's a sign of true respect to treat all applicants equally - offering a "leg up" to people of certain races or genders implies (and creates) disrespect because the implication is that "you couldn't be here on your own merit". When you see a woman or a URM at CalTech you don't have to wonder if they would have been there but for their color/gender.</p>

106

<p>Although you've been pretty well refuted already, Pebbles, it's worth noting that only one of the articles I posted was "opinion". I posted it because I found it interesting--and I have to ask you this question--do you think the writer of the opinion column was lying when she saw that she had been marked for "diversity"? That's really the key point of the article. The author's actual opinions don't have much to do with the point I was making.</p>

107

<p>As we've all agreed before (lo so many times!), Caltech can pat itself on the back for being fair in one way, and MIT can pat itself on the back for being fair in another. We don't have to approve of the way Caltech does admissions, and Caltech students don't have to approve of the way MIT does admissions.</p>

<p>Maybe we can all agree to meet back here 50 years from now to see who won (I'll bring the potato salad!). Other than that, it's just going to be pages upon pages of pointless wanking.</p>

108

<p>mollie,</p>

<p>I'm not trying to argue one way is better than the other; I fully understand the merits of both systems. All I'm trying to argue is that, in fact, both schools do have different systems. While that seems clear as day (not Pasadena mind you) to me, everyone continues to refute that claim, which I found absolutely baffling.</p>

<p>In particular, I'm referring to quotes like:

[quote=pebbles]
With that in mind, it seems to me the two institutions have almost identical admissions policies regarding men and women.<a href="post%20#89">/quote</a>.</p>

109

<p>Making jokes shouldn't be "below" anyone with a sense of humor :P</p>

<p>25 merit scholarships TOTAL for women and minorities?? Seriously, there aren't any partial merit scholarships or extra financial incentives?? I am shocked by this and I will retract my point about Caltech having trouble attracting women if it really only gives out special minority money to 12-15% of its minority admits. Because the number of people I know who have received them takes up a significant portion of the 25 a year. </p>

<p>Look, I don't mean to rock the happy meritocracy boat or anything I just wonder how come exactly 30% vs 17% can be attributed to pure meritocracy whereas 26% vs. 10% cannot. You can do the "is x times" calculations but that skews the importance of smaller percentage points. I'm no math major but I know saying 2% vs. 1% is TWICE AS MUCH!!!111 is really not as representative as saying 50% vs. 25% is twice as much. So, yeah, calling me out on the rounding is a cheap shot since you did not take this into account either. Really looking at the raw data says a lot more I think. So how come 30% vs. 17% can be discounted (exactly, might I add) for "more self selective applicant pool of women" but 26% vs. 10% cannot? Is it just that the admit pool of MIT is "dangerous close to 50-50"?? There are a lot of coincidences in life and speculation does not prove anything. Again, my guess is that BOTH schools are a little biased toward women applicants but Caltech likes to put on the show that it is most fervently NOT. Well then, why the 30% vs 17%??</p>

<p>
[quote]
implies (and creates) disrespect because the implication is that "you couldn't be here on your own merit".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>that's exactly my point though. Where you expect to see disrespect, you know, from MIT boys going "HA HA HA I deserve to be here more than you!!", you don't see that at all. At least I've never heard anything along those lines. Yet I hear that endlessly on the MIT BOARD FROM THE CALTECH FOLKS. It doesn't make any sense to me. The not-being-around-enough-girls thing was a joke but maybe spending some time on the MIT campus and getting to know a lot of the girls here may convince you in a way that statistics can't, that, really, the bar isn't lowered.</p>

110

<p>I'm sorry pebbles, but if I made a joke that characterized MIT women as hookers, you would probably have a forum burning at the stake for me :)</p>

111

<p>
[quote]
do you think the writer of the opinion column was lying when she saw that she had been marked for "diversity"? That's really the key point of the article.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You can ask the admissions officers what "diversity" means but I'm saying that the conclusions she drew from that are not fact. It could have been marked for the fact she was a girl, yeah! But it could have been marked for her hometown in Missouri (I didn't read the article carefully, was it Missouri??) or for her serious interest in the classics, or for the sake of having an idea what the class you're admitting would look like. Equating "diversity" check mark with "leg up" is incorrect and getting sad and defensive over it enough to write to the Tech doesn't make it any claim more valid. What if I told you I looked at my E3 card and it didn't have diversity checked?? This is not true bc I've never seen it but I'm just saying one example doesn't prove anything just because it is published in a school newspaper.</p>

112

<p>"I'm sorry pebbles, but if I made a joke that characterized MIT women as hookers, you would probably have a forum burning at the stake for me "</p>

<p>because I'm a feminist??</p>

113

<p>


</p>

<p>From ( <a href="http://www.admissions.caltech.edu/affording/scholarships%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.admissions.caltech.edu/affording/scholarships&lt;/a> ):
"Caltech students admitted as freshmen are automatically considered for Lingle, Axline, and President's Scholarships.</p>

<p>2 Lingles, 25 Axlines, and 25 President's Scholarships are typically awarded each year. Freshman scholarship winners are selected by the Freshman Admissions Committee. Regular Decision candidates are notified with their offer of admission. Early Action candidates are notified by express mail in mid to late March.</p>

<p>The Lingle Scholarships are offered in addition to an Axline award and cover the cost of books, living expenses and additional meals—$7,080 in 2007-08. Axline Scholarships included tuition, room and board—$39,480 in 2007-08. President's Scholarships are intended increase the diversity of the Caltech undergraduate population. President's Scholarships are awarded in the amount of tuition—$29,940 in 2007-08. The Lingle, Axline and President’s scholarships are four year awards. </p>

<p>Upperclass Merit Scholarships are available to continuing students. These awards range from $5,000 to full tuition. Scholarship winners are selected by the Scholarships and Financial Aid Committee."</p>

<p>There are no freshman scholarships for fewer than full tuition, so whatever you're referring to must be from need based financial aid. As I said, Caltech is very generous for need based financial aid, but to the best of my knowledge, they don't make any distinction between genders.</p>

<p>The people you know may gotten an Axline (or Lingle) scholarship: both of which should not have anything to do with gender.</p>

<p>edit: It's also worth noting that while only ~12-15 percent of these are offered to URMs and women, they may form a larger fraction of the matriculated pool. Though, if the Axline yield is any indication, the opposite would be true.</p>

114

<p>pebbles: because it's in incredibly poor taste, and because you probably have enough respect for MIT women that you wouldn't want them characterized in such a way. It has nothing to do with feminism.</p>

115

<p>Oh, how could I have forgotten, I only respect women that go to MIT.</p>

116

<p>Pebbles, you're being unnecessarily combative.</p>

<p>It was a bad analogy and a bad attempt at a joke. </p>

<p>Why dwell on it?</p>

117

<p>WHAT DO YOU MEAN I'M BEING UNECESSARILY COMBATIVE??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>

<p>Some people found it funny.</p>

<p>Besides, I think flipping out at a harmless joke (good or bad) is what actually qualifies as "unnecessarily combative". jus' sayin' not combatin' or nuttin.</p>

118

<p>I think I'd be combative if people kept incessantly questioning the validity of my admission.</p>

119

<p>
[quote]
I think I'd be combative if people kept incessantly questioning the validity of my admission.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd be too. But nobody is questioning pebbles's admission.</p>

120

<p>Oh, so you're restricting your statements about underqualified females to the OTHER 1,999 women undergrads.</p>

<p>Would it be too forward of me to publicly request my own exemption from the generalizations about my gender?</p>