<p>However, since it is an online application and not transmittable until completed entirely, even the most hard headed will eventually figure out that it must be filled out prior to submittal.</p>
<p>
It is a check all appropriate boxes of pre-defined races; therefore, self expression is not possible. 'White' is one as is 'Black or African American'. Your son's friend would been required to select 'White' which would have negated any racial targeting.</p>
<p>my son just completed the CIS and no matter what he did, the system did not allow him to leave the area for ethnicity blank. Check mark or not, it did not matter, he was compelled to write something in the comment area to allow submission so he ended up describing our White European "multi-ethnic" background. We certainly did not consider it unique but found we were forced to note something for the system to complete submission.</p>
<p>Oops. Most candidates use the 'Comments' section to explain why they want to go to the Naval Academy. Sounds like your son wasted his opportunity.</p>
<p>I am referring to the comment section below the area for ethnic or racial background. The point is that he was REQUIRED to write something in the empty spot there--the page would not advance without it--it was an issue with the CIS system. He would have preferred to leave it blank as indicated initially in the thread. While interesting it seemed kind of ridiculous to expound on his white European heritage. The CIS system does have some glitches--this was one one of them for us. I was wondering if anyone else ran into this.
No confusion with the personal statement......he thought long and hard about that one!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Up until this year, females were also given special consideration- however the percentage of females at the academy currently exceeds that of the fleet- so they will compete as any other group.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'd always heard the opposite. It is my understanding that, in the very early years, there were more qualified women applying to USNA than available slots. Thus, women's records were reviewed separately to ensure too many women weren't admitted because, in the days before women could be in combat, there was a limited number of billets for them in the fleet and the # of women at USNA was tied to the # of Ensign billets availble to them.</p>
<p>I was told as far back as 10 years ago by the then-head of CGO (my former CO) that USNA had gone to "gender-blind" admissions b/c the number of qualified women applying basically was the same as the number of places for women in the entering class. Thus, women's applications were no longer considered separately from men's applications -- USNA simply took the number they wanted across both genders and figured they'd get about the number of women they wanted.</p>
<p>That strategy was re-confirmed approx. four years ago at BGO training, when we were told that women were not separately considered for the same reason discussed above. We were told that women received no special consideration. It is possible that this position has changed since I attended training but I've not heard that it has.</p>
<p>Based on the above, I see no evidence that women were ever given "special consideration" in admissions -- in fact, quite the opposite based on what I know. There has been an effort to increase the number of women at USNA for a variety of reasons, but that does not mean that special consideration was needed to do so.</p>
<p>usna1985-
no doubt you have far more experience than I have, so I can only go by the brief from this summer- but perhaps I am just not reading your post correctly- it seems like we are talking about the same thing.</p>
<p>Females- at one time, the push was to get the percentage up- it is currently hovering around 20%, give or take 1-2%- and it is my understanding this is where the level will remain for now- give or take. So for awhile there was an advantage for female applicants- small as it might have been- but no more, as the admissions dept feels they are attracting a fair enough pool in which to get the yield they want. </p>
<p>As far as I remember, there was no mention of viewing male-female applications seperately or distinctly from one another- they are in the same "pool"- however I do not recall the term "gender blind" being mentioned, although I might have missed it. But I fully agree that the message was that women would not be given any special consideration in the admission process- no need based on the number that apply. </p>
<p>Other minorities- African Americans, Hispanics - ADM Fowler wants the numbers up- significantly- so would venture to say that will amount to a bit of an "edge"- but they still want the cream of the crop from the pool.</p>