<p>
</p>
<p>Ignore this request. I have found all the relevant pages.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The same reason for girls’ having higher grades (greater motivation) underlies other aspects of the application as well, especially extracurricular involvement. It is unlikely that males’ higher scores compensate for this. Indeed, Northstarmom agrees.</p>
<p>I’ve often told my non-URM non-Legacy non-Hooked son at Harvard that he was hooked after all just by being a boy.</p>
<p>This is a helpful site for those who want to compare admission stats by gender: [College</a> Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics](<a href=“http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/]College”>College Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics)</p>
<p>Enter the name of the college that interests you. Then click on through until you get to its profile and select “Admissions.” The current stats are for the class entering in Fall 2009.</p>
<p>boys vs. girls. This topic has been bandied about throughout the years here at CC. However, the concensus in past years seems to have been that you are at an advantage if you are the minority sex for the field of study, and boys seemed to have had an advantage because many schools try to balance the percentage of sexes at the school, and it has been discussed that the numbers of qualified girls applying has increased dramatically over the numbers of boys applying for the same spots, so overall, boys have the advantage. That said, if you are a girl in a traditionally male field (which still is mostly male, and you are qualified you should have a boost.)</p>
<p>Unfortunately, my daughter in high school who will finish BC Calc at the end of junior year and sails through science classes wants to be an anthropologist . . . I haven’t checked but pretty sure the female applicants outnumber the males by a a wide margin.</p>
<p>Is it easier to get into MIT if you are a girl?</p>
<p>Answer - no.</p>
<p>And even if it were, MIT took less than 10% of the applicants this year so any statistical difference/advantage would be negligible.</p>
<p>Boys have an edge-- fewer of them apply and colleges want to keep their numbers balanced-- partly because the girls, understandably, want it that way!</p>
<p>According to the college navigator website, last year MIT admitted 8% of male applicants and 17% of female applicants, so obviously, females receive a significant admissions bump at MIT. However, I doubt that’s true for not technical schools. For example, at Harvard the acceptance rate was 7% was both males and females.</p>
<p>Midatimom</p>
<p>Because boys apply in greater numbers. Schools still seem predisposed to favor boys in math and science over girls prior to college.</p>
<p>But I wouldn’t say that taking a “smaller percentage of boys” means that girls have some automatic advantage. There is not “quota system” and the girls who tend to apply tend to be self-selecting - i.e. extremely strong applications and may have had to jump more hurdles to get to that point.</p>
<p>So it is safe to say that “some girls” may have an advantage because the pool is smaller - but in general, implying that girls in general have an admission’s advantage at MIT is misleading. I say that as an interviewer.</p>
<p>Which is why the university puts out stats, but they are often twisted to mean the wrong thing because the underlying data that forms the basis for them is not published.</p>
<p>And hence, people read into them, what they want to.</p>
<p>Exie</p>
<p>I wasn’t posting to suggest that girls at MIT are weaker, stronger or whatever. But facts are facts. 10,970 boys apply to MIT and 4,693 girls. 8% of the boys gain admittance, versus 17% of the girls. Maybe the girls have stronger stats (or maybe they are weaker and hoping for an admissions edge), but regardless, at this point, MIT is still accepting a significantly higher percentage of girls than boys. I believe that the school is doing this partially because the yield for girls is about 10% lower than boys and also because like most schools they would like to keep the male/female ratio as even as possible.</p>
<p>However, given the strength of MIT’s academic programs, I am certain that no one is admitted who is not completely capable of doing the work and is not an incredibly strong applicant.</p>
<p>Interesting that self-selection is only at work for girls at MIT but not for boys at Yale. </p>
<p>Anyway, regardless of the fact that girls get better grades, the mean is not relevant for HPMS. We’re talking about the 1450+/1600 SAT cohort here. And in that cohort, boys outnumber girls.</p>
<p>The extreme case of gender imbalance at Yale may be a separate case, but boys having an advantage at Harvard and Princeton? No.</p>
<p>For the most recent years common data set data, Yale had 8 thousand something male applicants and 12 thousand something female applicants. It was harder for the female applicants that year. Brown had more female than male applicants as well (not as dramatic a difference) and also accepted a higher number of men (not just a higher percentage). So it was harder for female applicants that year at Brown too.</p>
<p>I haven’t read the whole thread but did anyone mention the article by a Kenyon adcom titled “To all the girls I’ve rejected”?</p>
<p>It seems that LAC’s and art schools are easier for men to get into because they have a much higher number of female applicants. For tech schools, and big engineering and ag schools, the reverse is true. It’s reasonable that schools would try to not let their male/female ratio get too skewed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Highly speculative. Unless you live in some hick town somewhere, I have never heard of this happening anymore. I know women engineers and scientists who are from older generations, so I’ve heard pretty extreme cases of bias. </p>
<p>Do more boys gravitate away from humanities majors because of bias in the school system.</p>
<p>I think it is necessary to point out that the difference in scores at the higher levels is only very slight. </p>
<p>A large amount of girls still do very well on the test. For some scores there may be ~30% more boys, but overall, the discrepancy is not as huge as others are making it out to be.</p>
<p><a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/sat_percentile_ranks_composite_cr_m_w.pdf[/url]”>Higher Education Professionals | College Board;
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, every time I hear that elite colleges favor boys, the name Kenyon College comes up. When I think elite LAC, I think Amherst, Williams, Pomona, and a few others. But not Kenyon. I think I looked at the demographics at Amherst and Williams, and I don’t think the female vs. male applicant numbers were much different.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Despite the fact that 15.1% more females than males take the SAT, there are 27.4% more males who score 2300+. That is significant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did not know that 15.1% more females took the SAT. Even though 27.4% is significant, it is not as large as others were making it out to be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, and there are 21% more males scoring 2250+.</p>
<p>Another thing to think about is whether the cumulative scores are biased against males. When they were deciding to add writing to the SATI, a College Board representative was quoted in Newsweek that one of the primary motivations behind adding the writing section was because they felt it would put females on an equal footing score-wise. In other words, since females tended to have somewhat of an advantage at english, the strategy was to make the cumulative score a sum of one math section and two english sections.</p>
<p>I found this pretty unbelievable. If there is a gender bias at the high school and college level, it doesn’t seem like it is against females.</p>
<p>
I wholly agree with midatlmom. This is pretty strong evidence that shows females have the upper edge when it comes to applying to engineering schools/programs like MIT, Caltech, and Cornell. These colleges clearly attempt to keep the gender ratio the same.</p>