MIT has made a point to say that regarding the gap in admissions rate that on average, women do not apply to MIT lightly and the women who do apply are very strong candidates.
Any bump they give must be small, because they have said that the women they did admit have been earning a higher gpa than the men.
@Much2learn Yes, I’ve read that too. But they don’t provide the data to back it up, so who knows if their assertion is really accurate. Universities say what they want you to hear.
As I mentioned earlier, it seems highly unlikely that the female applicant pool is so strong (relative to the male applicant pool) that stats primarily account for the fact that female applicants are accepted at over 2x the rate of male applicants. Occam’s Razor… Isn’t the simplest explanation (the desire for gender balance) the most plausible one?
Also, I don’t think that men apply to MIT lightly, either. Why would they? It’s pretty insulting and sexist to imply that men apply to MIT lightly, but women don’t. Where is the evidence for that?
As a parent with a STEM major D I think I would suggest not thinking about this way. If you get accepted to any of the schools you apply to you do it on your own merits not because you’re female. The pool of female applicants may be smaller but MIT is going to have plenty of female applicants equally as qualified as the male applicants. Conversely, if you’re male don’t assume that girl next to you in class is only there because she is a she. She’ll be smart hard working and tenacious. Respect that.
I agree that the admitted students (both male and female) are all highly qualified. It’s not in the university’s best interest to admit students that are unprepared for the academic rigor.
My points were 1) it is highly unlikely that the female applicant pool is vastly superior academically to the male applicant pool, and 2) that between two applicants (one male, one female) with comparable academic credentials, the female is likely to get the nod because of the desire for a gender-balanced class. There’s nothing wrong with that, IMO.
As the parent of a son about to attend one of these STEM-focused schools, if there were still only 30% or fewer females, we would have encouraged him to choose one of his more balanced options. But at 46% female, we think it will have a more healthy social atmosphere than in previous years. Big changes in the past 5 years. So, we are happy for whatever methods they use to obtain a better ratio. (Note that the methods include not just admissions, but also outreach and fly-in type programs.)
As mentioned above this works both ways. Some LACs and similar schools that were worried about being imbalances with too many women take steps to insure it doesn’t go too far including adding football teams, and engineering and physical science focused schools recruit women more to not have a strong imbalance to men. In both cases it is because what the undergrads themselves want for their undergrad experience. Also, as noted above, STEM is a too broad of a term for this (and many other times it is used) - bio is majority women I think, while engineering is highly male.
Take a look at what is happening at WPI regarding the rapidly improving female ratio @ https://www.wpi.edu/news/worcester-polytechnic-institute-welcomes-class-2021-and-more-women-ever. This is still a school concentrated in STEM fields, but it finally looks like "The Times They Are A Changin’ " :bz
No college wants kids who are unprepared (academically and in experiences) and might fail. It’s counterproductive to take someone into, say, engineering, thinking it boosts gender balance, only to see those kids leave the major.
So I agree with Much2Learn that it helps “when you are solidly in the group of good candidate anyway.” Of course, you need to know what that means to the U. It’s more than good stats and saying you “want” stem.
And any higher admit rate may really be about getting the yield that college wants.
No student should select engineering or any other field based solely on income prospects. Education is more than that!
What about the assertion that our culture is biased against women in the engineering fields? Do women as a group bring a different perspectives into the engineering fields?
It became apparent to me when I worked in engineering college admissions years ago that father’s did not want their daughters to hear construction workers swear on the work site. Our culture encourages the belief that women don’t have the muscle or brawn to work in the engineering fields. Is it possible that there are different cultural perspective that women can bring to the engineering fields?
Different perspectives develop a wider variety of design solutions. It is not about muscles, wrenches and grease!
It is about a balance in perspectives and opportunities just as has been recognized with other societal groupings.
:bz
@retiredfarmer That’s a very strange post. Muscle or brawn in engineering? I worked in engineering for 30 years. I never had to lift anything heavier than a book or binder. All the engineering I’ve known has been about pushing a pencil or typing on a keyboard… I guess one might be exposed to construction workers in some fields (structural engineering springs to mind) but I’ve never heard swearing on any work site. Regarding different perspectives, the main thing is to get the right answer (don’t make mistakes) and meet deadlines. It doesn’t matter what gender, race, or culture you are in, if you can do that, you’ll make your boss happy.
As strange as it may sound, it is/was a reality in the minds of much of the culture. The civil engineering dad was sure that his daughter would hear construction workers on the job. At the end of the interview we always spoke with parents for ten minutes. Mother came running up the stairs ahead of dad to forewarn me of Dad’s concerns. The father was a civil engineering alumnus.
I agree with your assessment of most engineering today. Today’s reality belies old cultural perspectives. We need to talk more about what engineers really do!
On this website in I encountered an LA major voicing concerns about going the engineering route which was available on her college campus. She was concerned that she did not have backyard experience working on cars like the boys seemed to have, but she still had an interest in studying ME. Historically, this debate centered around the focus on mechanical aptitude where traditional drafting/drawing courses were being dropped at engineering schools and hotly debated. We knew then that more science/math/theory were needed and there was no time for both. We needed more time for more theory and engineering course requirements had to change with the changing engineering realities.
Ask yourself this: Why do women apply to engineering majors in lower numbers than men when they actually represent the majority of college applicants? :bz
Because maybe it doesn’t appeal to them very much? I think that it depends on the STEM field. Women, for instance, are more prevalent in biology than in other sciences. Why is that? Idk.
I can say that in the corporate engineering world today, woman are very actively recruited. Companies don’t like having a work force that is very lopsided by gender. It looks discriminatory, and companies obviously don’t want to be open to that charge. Companies today also don’t like to have board rooms full of old white men. That too looks bad. I’m not saying that there aren’t companies that are still like that, but it’s not as common as it used to be.
Fortunately, those dads don’t often get to speak with interviewers about little Susie and the construction workers. Certainly not for their hs senior daughters. Nor do moms get involved in that. What happens at home may be a different matter.
I think one issue is the number of gals who understand what engineering is/does. Many kids (m/f) think it’s inventing, don’t realize roles can be more mundane, and how the team works. You don’t devise that new prosthetic limb or solar panel, you’re one part of a team. Many kids still think it’s just about math skills, without learning more.
And young women are just now showing up on, say, hs robotics teams in greater numbers, learning that sort of collaboration. Or in CE, taking on more challenge than programming Pong or “Hello World.”
I firmly believe we’ll get there.
The VAST majority of companies still look like that.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/ecpe/why-diversity-matters-women-on-boards-of-directors/
I was talking about engineering companies. I couldn’t find any mention of engineering in that article. The engineering companies that I worked with were more diverse in the boardroom. In fact, the CEO of the company that I worked for was a URM woman.
What is an “engineering company”? Don’t many kinds of companies hire engineers? Do you mean a manufacturing company or software company or what? @whatisyourquest