<p>^ Is that from their CDS, publications, staff interviews, or ???</p>
<p>Let’s list them.</p>
<p>Here’s a thesis on the topic: [Selective</a> college admissions and the gender gap](<a href=“http://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/handle/10724/11850]Selective”>http://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/handle/10724/11850). Statistical analysis over a large data set, and interviews with admissions directors.</p>
<p>““men now make up only 42 percent of the nation’s college students.”” This is an alarming figure and needs to be addressed immediately.</p>
<p><a href=“At Colleges, Women Are Leaving Men in the Dust - The New York Times”>At Colleges, Women Are Leaving Men in the Dust - The New York Times;
<p>One would think college trustees/admissions would be doing something to rectify the gross imbalance between the sexes graduating colleges these days. Maybe the pendulum has swung to far one way for too long? Maybe it’s time to switch out the Admissions offices for a more male friendly group? In 1965 Yale had a problem with being prejudice against Jewish applicants. [The</a> Myth of American Meritocracy | The American Conservative](<a href=“http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/]The”>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/) In 1965 Yale brought in a new Admissions team and was able to change the percentage of Jews being admitted to Yale favorably. I’m sure the same was done to effectually bring in more women and the under-represented to our universities. When does the pendulum middle out or do well qualified white and Asian males always get the short end of the stick over women and so called minorities??</p>
<p>The issue is that females are MORE qualified (whatever that means to schools). Kenyon said they started taking less qualified men because they didn’t want to eventually become an all-female school. Improving men’s qualifications will be challenging.</p>
<p>Periwinkle’s submission on <a href=“http://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/bitstream/handle/10724/11850/suggs_david_w_200912_phd.pdf?sequence=1[/url]”>http://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/bitstream/handle/10724/11850/suggs_david_w_200912_phd.pdf?sequence=1</a> , work done by DAVID WELCH SUGGS, JR. in 2009, I would suggest that new data and results are probably in but not addressed. This is the elephant in the room.</p>
<p>Vonlost, it must have been challenging to bring in more qualified minorities or Jews back in the day. The point is it needs to be done now for males.</p>
<p>Back in the day the more qualified were being excluded.</p>
<p>The other factor that you have to keep in mind is that there is a strong bias by most college AOs to chose the student from the less advantaged background, whenever possible. All things being equal, or even less than equal, HPY would rather admit the kid from a lower-middle class family who had to overcome adversity than a superior candidate from an elite boarding school who hails from a more economically successful family. This urge to social engineer and remove “class bias” is very strong. There is simply no way that my DS, who is in the top 10% of his class at a HADES school and a captain of a varsity team, is less qualified for HPY than most anyone HPY will accept from the public schools, yet my view is that the odds will be against him when he applies next year. Reverse “class bias” is very real and a major impediment. It’s crazy how the world has been turned upside down since I went to boarding school. Back then 2/3 of my class went to four schools – HPY and Dartmouth.</p>
<p>@ Devolution " Back then 2/3 of my class went to four schools – HPY and Dartmouth. "</p>
<p>Chances are they even paid their way…and folks didn’t hate them for doing so!</p>
<p>@sarum - I don’t get your point? Males already have an advantage.</p>
<p>From page 2 of the Abstract that periwinkle linked:
“and it also finds that being male offers a statistically significant advantage in admissions at elite institutions, all other factors being equal.”</p>
<p>Case in Point:</p>
<p>Middlebury CDS 2011-12
Male applications: 3,431 Male acceptances: 764 Acceptance rate for males: 22.2%
Female applications: 5,102 Female acceptances: 799 Acceptance rate for females: 15.6%</p>
<p>Vanderbilt CDS 2011-12
Male applications: 12,463 Male acceptances: 2,082 Acceptance rate for males:16.7%
Female applications: 15,885 Female Acceptances: 1,952 Acceptance rates for females: 12.3%</p>
<p>These are the first 2 schools I searched for BTW. It did not take long to prove the point.</p>
<p>It’s a fallacy that white males are disadvantaged in college admissions. That boat sailed long ago.</p>
<p>Creative your point is not made until you include the racial breakdowns of the Asian/White Prep School males accepted at the top schools. Are the whites/Asian males athletes, legacies or something else? That boat might have sailed long ago, but is headed back to port for a thorough re evaluation of it’s integrity. It couldn’t hurt.</p>
<p>Vonlost more qualified candidates are being excluded today as well. Today we have White males and Asian males being side tracked.
I wonder how goes the tracking of these underrepresented admits to the good colleges? How do they do in the real world compared to the male white or Asian who went to the school of second choice? Do they contribute as much to the Development of the school in later life? Does it really make a difference in life achievement anymore where they go , and is the reverse discrimination just being done to make the Trustees “feel good about themselves” and deflect criticism from the main stream media?</p>
<p>Sarum - I am giving you facts on male/female numbers. What are you basing your assumptions on that white/asian males from boarding schools are being disadvantaged? or side tracked? If you are comparing white/asian males to URM males, you may be correct. However, when you compare white/asian males to white/asian females, the males have a distinct advantage.</p>
<p>“more qualified candidates are being excluded today as well”</p>
<p>Since each school sets its own qualifications, how can this be known? Which statistics support the claim?</p>
<p>Just to clarify: the reason i felt my DS being male was a negative factor is because he was applying to tech schools or as STEM major to the other schools. These fields at the STEM programs receive about twice as many apps from males vs females. That’s why it was a disadvantage statistically.</p>
<p>Hotchkiss 0 - 30 with Yale this year? From a good source, but seriously, some defective Yale Admissions folks if out of 30 apps not one was an accept.</p>
<p>^^If true, where did the students eventually get in? Are they satisfied with their choices now, in April? And how does Hotchkiss handle applications to the Ivy League?</p>
<p>^^ No surprise; close to zero percent of US high schools get a Yale admit in a given year.</p>
<p>With respect, Vonlost, it would be a surprise for Hotchkiss (again, if true.) According to their matriculation list, over the last four years, 28 graduates matriculated at Yale. [The</a> Hotchkiss School - Academics - College Advising - Matriculation List](<a href=“http://www.hotchkiss.org/academics/college-advising/matriculation-list/index.aspx]The”>http://www.hotchkiss.org/academics/college-advising/matriculation-list/index.aspx)</p>
<p>Shows how much I know. 
Perhaps Yale is abandoning old habits.</p>