<p>I've heard that it is easier for girls to get accepted into MIT than boys...is this true for all the HYPSM and Ivy League schools to some extent?</p>
<p>At schools that are not science- or engineering-focused, admissions is roughly the same for both genders. However, males may have a very slight advantage; they, on average, have lower high school GPAs but higher test scores (the former of which is generally more important). At schools like MIT, the acceptance rate for girls is quite a bit higher than that for guys. An MIT representative on CC claimed that this differential does not indicate different admissions standards, but many doubt that.</p>
<p>(By the way, bumping is only necessary when a thread has moved to the second page.)</p>
<p>Silverturtle is right about admissions.</p>
<p>“However, males may have a very slight advantage; they, on average, have lower high school GPAs but higher test scores (the former of which is generally more important).”</p>
<p>Averages aren’t important here. What’s important is the number of boys and girls who score above a certain threshold on the SAT or earn above a certain GPA. </p>
<p>Boys significantly outnumber girls in the upper score ranges on the math SAT, and moderately outnumber them in the upper score ranges on the verbal SAT. And since high GPAs are far more common than high SAT scores, girls have a considerable advantage in admission to top universities.</p>
<p>“And since high GPAs are far more rare than high SAT scores, girls have a considerable advantage in admission to top universities.”</p>
<p>Do you mean high SAT scores are more rare than GPAs? In that case, would a girl with a high SAT score have a considerable advantage over a boy with that same score?</p>
<p>"At schools that are not science- or engineering-focused, admissions is roughly the same for both genders. "</p>
<p>Are there any top schools besides MIT and Caltech?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do not see how you supported this. GPA (more generally, the transcript) is widely reported by admissions officers to be the most important factor in making decisions. Females have, on average, higher high school GPAs than do males; this difference in average is likely reflected even at the high end. Although males’ higher standardized test scores do mitigate this somewhat (though not to a fully compensatory extent), it is still reasonable to conclude that females have stronger applications, on average, as defined by what admissions officers look for. Thus, males are in a less competitive pool and, in turn, have a slight advantage. Indeed, MIT claims that females have stronger applications on average.</p>
<p>Moreover, unless you’re using a radical definition for “high,” this claim is false:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At most public schools, which produce the majority of applicants to top schools, high GPAs are very common; very high SAT scores are not nearly as prevalant.</p>
<p>“At most public schools, which produce the majority of applicants to top schools, high GPAs are very common; very high SAT scores are not nearly as prevalant.” </p>
<p>I thought I edited my post in time, but apparently I didn’t!</p>
<p>Anyway, the logic behind my point is simple and sound: High GPAs are very common. High SAT scores are rare. Thus, having an SAT boost – which is it what girls receive – is far more valuable than having a GPA boost – which may be what boys receive.</p>
<p>^ I am not aware of any specific “boost” conferred to applicants as you described, nor am I aware of an absolute correlation between rarity and effect on admission. Please respond to my argument in the first paragraph of post #8.</p>
<p>If you want that kind advantage, apply to Georgia Tech.</p>
<p>Based on an admittedly limited number of observations, I’d say girls with strong achievement and a declared interest in math and science also fare considerably better than their male counterparts at ALL selective institutions – not just MIT and Caltech. You can see that most clearly at schools w/ separate engineering program admissions like Columbia, but, based on what I’ve observed, it’s also true at HYPS. It only makes sense, because as the colleges attempt to achieve a “balanced class”, they’re looking for rough parity of the sexes even WITHIN disciplines. Girls who do very well in the Intel Science competition w/ high scores and grades, for example, are a white hot commodity at all of the top schools; boys w/ similar qualifications do well, but not as well.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/us/01girls.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/us/01girls.html</a></p>
<p>According a 2007 NYTimes article, more girls apply to college than boys. I believe that is still true today, which is why it’s harder for girls to get into any college, let alone HYPSM.</p>
<p>I would say admissions is easier iff you’re a girl who does (meaning is good at. Meaning usamo and/or other stuff) math. Anyone who does math seriously will know that, especially as you get towards the top, the number of girls dwindles.</p>
<p>
This may be said to console kids who have low scores, and the importance of high scores may seem de-emphasized on CC, but I wouldn’t agree on that GPA’s are MORE important than test scores in the admission process of the schools at discussion.</p>
<p>Gibby, we’re talking about HYPSM, not all colleges! The total number of boys and girls applying to all colleges in American is irrelevant.</p>
<p>Silverturtle, I’m not suggesting that elite colleges actually give girls a numerical boost on the SAT. They do, however, effectively give girls a boost by trying to balance gender ratios.</p>
<p>I’m not even going to respond to your argument in post 8 until you provide evidence for your claim that “this difference in average [GPA] is likely reflected even at the high end.” Then you need to demonstrate that this discrepancy – if it exists – produces a paucity of boys with exceptionally high GPAs, just as the discrepancy in math SAT scores produces a shortage of girls with exceptionally high scores.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, it’s difficult to debate this objectively, as we cannot easily quantify “more important.” I should say, however, that every single admissions officer I have ever talked to (and that’s about thirty) says that the transcript is the most important part of an application by a large margin. But I’m the last person to think that high scores are not important; I have chronically written on CC about the importance of high scores.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe this applies to HYPSM to an even greater extent.</p>
<p>“I believe this applies to HYPSM to an even greater extent.”</p>
<p>Really? Why don’t you look at the data before making such absurd statements.</p>
<p>I just looked at the common data sets for HYPSM and found that only Yale has significantly more female applicants than male applicants (about 18% more). MIT, on the other hand, has nearly 140% more male applicants than female applicants.</p>
<p>It is probably harder for girls to get into HYPSM if you look purely at grades. Girls tend to have higher GPAs. If you combine grades with SAT scores, extracurriculars, essays, etc, then I think the pool is pretty even.</p>
<p>I did not intend to group MIT when I made that statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did not communicate the idea as a fact, nor would I consider it absurd (it is congruent with what I have heard from a few admissions officers). Could you link to the data for HPS? I cannot seem to locate it.</p>
<p>Moreover, my argument does not incorporate differences in applicant numbers by gender. Nonetheless, Harvard and Yale both have more female applicants (the latter quite significantly).</p>