<p>“But admission based on something you’re born with ( whether race or gender)…”</p>
<p>Or “scoring a 202 on the PSAT in the 8th with no prep” as is so often described here on CC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Interesting! </p>
<p>What are the top LACs that are trying to maintain a ratio of men/women at 60/40 - as in 150% of men over women? Are those the top ten LACs minus Wellesley? </p>
<p>What is your definition of “less qualified” when it applies to men? Lower GPA? Lower SAT? </p>
<p>Do you have a source that could lend some credibility to your statements? Or do they come from the source as Pugmadkate’s?</p>
<p>[College</a> Navigator - Swarthmore College](<a href=“College Navigator - Search Results”>College Navigator - Swarthmore College)</p>
<p><a href=“College Navigator - Search Results”>College Navigator - Middlebury College;
<p>male vs female admission rates; don’t know what it means about stats</p>
<p>My (Jewish) kid will be applying to Brandeis. Jewish kids from the burbs are hardly novelties in their applicant pool If he doesn’t get in, I’ll be sure to say that his spot was taken by a Methodist or Lutheran. Hee hee.</p>
<p>Jewish kids are over represented at all top tier schools, so you will be covered.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why should one look at admission rates to ascertain the enrollment percentages. We know that Swarthmore has been at 52% and 48% for a number of years. So, that is at least one of the LACs that does NOT have 60 percent of men in its dorms. Harvey Mudd might … but I am quite curious about the others. </p>
<p>PS You added Midd … and that is a 49/60 ratio. Still looking for the … 60/40 claimed by NSM. Washington and Lee is a 50/50. USNews added the military academies, but I seriously doubt that she had those in mind.</p>
<p>“We all complain about legacy, athlete, residency, race, sex, first generation…as hooks. But it is race that is a taboo. (it is not possible that URM could possibly be accepted with lower stats, but atheletes, yes”</p>
<p>Sure, it’s possible that a URM could be accepted with lower stats. However, that doesn’t mean that the URM was unqualified for admission nor does it indicate that all Asians and whites who are admitted have stats far above the school’s average.</p>
<p>A few years ago on CC, a white male from rural Virginia posted about being accepted to an Ivy – Harvard, I think-- with stats that most people here would have thought would have caused him to be rejected.</p>
<p>His being admitted didn’t surprise me. It’s hard for places like Harvard to attract students from rural areas. Rural public schools are not in general as good as public schools that have select admission or are in well off areas.</p>
<p>He probably had done extraordinarily well considering the restrictions of his environment, and he may indeed have been far brighter than are some of his classmates who have had the benefit of excellent secondary and elementary schooling.</p>
<p>“Why should one look at admission rates to ascertain the enrollment percentages?”</p>
<p>I was assuming it was impossible to keep it 50:50 below the “top 10” or so schools, and that many schools try to keep it less than 60 percent woman. I have not checked out the loftier schools, but it seems a struggle for many schools I’ve looked at for my son. I look at admission rates because it is inferred that IF all things are equal, boys are admitted at a higher rate. Isn’t that what folks do with urm admission rates? Of course, there, we don’t assume all things are equal.</p>
<p>Shrinkrap, there is a world of difference between trying to maintain a 50/50 ratio, and trying to have **1.5 man for each women **… and that is what NSM claimed the “top LACs” do. </p>
<p>This makes no sense to anyone with a modicum of knowledge of LAC admissions. I am just trying to understand the statistics that people love to add to the discussion. And, of course, then trying to reconcile the “quoted” numbers with the available data. This and the claim that Harvard has disclosed its **admission rates **for rural students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you are an admissions officer, and know nothing else about these two, and must pick only one, which do you take?</p>
<p>“If you are an admissions officer, and know nothing else about these two, and must pick only one, which do you take?”</p>
<p>That’s not the way admissions officers at schools like Harvard assess applicants: They look at far more than applicants’ scores and gpas, so your hypothetical is not pertinent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not particularly relevant to this thread, but interestingly, it appears that this year’s incoming freshman class at Mudd will be close to a 50/50 ratio, as discussed here:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvey-mudd-college/908801-girl-guy-ratio-class-2014-a.html?highlight=girls[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvey-mudd-college/908801-girl-guy-ratio-class-2014-a.html?highlight=girls</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is pertinent to the issue that a higher score makes someone better qualified. The idea that some score (say 2100) is enough, and then only the other factors are considered is ridiculous.</p>
<p>“It is pertinent to the issue that a higher score makes someone better qualified. The idea that some some score (say 2100) is enough, and then only the other factors are considered is ridiculous.”</p>
<p>It’s not pertinent for Harvard, which is the school that is under discussion for this thread. If you’d prefer a college where the stats are all that counts, go to college abroad or start your own university and set the rules for it.</p>
<p>I never said it is “all that counts”. That’s ridiculous. It is also ridiculous to think that Harvard is indifferent to a score of 2400 vs 2100, other factors being more or less equal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Funny Pizzagirl. I’m wondering what would have happened if my D would have applied to certain schools. She is AA (bi-racial,) Catholic, but has a 100% Jewish name. If you google her, everything that doesn’t pertain to her is for Jewish people of her same name. Wow, she could have confused quite a few schools. Brandies (was on her list)…yes her name is Jewish but she is Catholic. Notre Dame…she is Catholic even though her name is Jewish. Throw in her ethnicity, and she could have befuddled many schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, going back to your earlier statement about “less qualified” men at LACs, what was your basis fot “measuring” the qualifications, especially since scores and GPAs are NOT pertinent. </p>
<p>Or are you suggesting that Harvard does things very differently from the “top” LACs?</p>
<p>I flip a coin, sorghum, because I don’t have enough information to make a determination.</p>
<p>Look, why can’t some of you get that there is just some level of randomness in the process? Today the adcom might like the 3.95 kid over the 3.9 kid. Tomorrow, the 3.9 kid’s really cool essays on fireflies might make him stand out. </p>
<p>The very concept of “I lost my spot to the black kid” presupposes that there was some quantifiable metric in the first place. After establishing a minimum level of academics, they pick who is interesting to them in the moment. Which might be the kid from Idaho, the Intel winner, the kid with the really cool essay or the kid who was a volunteer fireman. Why persist in pretending there were spots “owed” people? Rejected violin players don’t claim their spots were unfairly taken by oboists. Rejected kids from Massachusetts don’t claim their spots were unfairly taken by Idahoans. </p>
<p>Why are some of you so uncomfortable with the inherent randomness? Apply to a by the numbers state school if you want to be assured admissions is solely on academic merit as measured by SAT/GPA. But till then, stop acting as though any given kid has a spot that then got preempted.</p>
<p>Oldfort - I get that Jewish kids are overrepresented at all top schools. Brandeis is one, however, in which they are PARTICULARLY overrepresented and in which being Jewish is a real yawner and indeed the Catholic, Lutheran, etc student is more of a diversity-bringer than at other schools. Oh well. If Brandeis wants to take a Catholic kid with lower scores than my kid because being Catholic is more interesting to them than yet another Jewish kid, them’s the breaks.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, how about 2100 vs 2400, you still flip a coin?</p>