<p>^That’s different. men-only/female-only schools are different from regular schools with 15% men or 15% female. He is saying that nobody wants to go to a really lopsided school (co-ed is implied).</p>
<p>Collegekid: Of course they’re different. But is one worse than the other? What if it was a cultural norm that a range of colleges existed? From 50/50 to 60/40 to 70/30 to 0/100?</p>
<p>I still don’t see the point you are trying to make…</p>
<p>HS seniors will seek out whatever gender ratio they want in a college, just like they seek out other criteria.</p>
<p>Gender AA isn’t necessary.</p>
<p>Some students are interested in a 60/40, some 50/50, some 100/0.</p>
<p>Gender AA isn’t any more necessary than race AA.</p>
<p>“a variety of different skin colors on campus, has no proven benefits, whereas I think the benefits of gender-equity are fairly obvious- and necessary in order for a campus to have a healthy social atmosphere.” I think the benefit of both of these things are obvious. You need both racial diversity and a good gender ratio for a school to thrive. And race AA is necessary. I don’t know enough about this gender issue to make a good solid judgement, but race AA is almost definately necessary, and does in fact make the admissions process fair.</p>
<p>I agree. Ever thing college admissions are right in what they do? In all the ‘mysterious’ rejecting of high scorers (but w/ no ecs) and the quotas to balance races, recruited athletes, genders, and everything?</p>
<p>It’s to preserve a strong community that allows people to truly see the world and reflect on it. College’s goal is not just to get you in and then get you out as fast as it can so you can go make your $$ salary (except for mabye community colleges or public institutions). </p>
<p>Real top universities want take you in the prime of your life, put you into an enviornment, and then mold you into what they view as the ideal human being. If they see the potential of development as a human being to be lacking, then they do not want you. And part of creating that enviornment is by having a person experience everything, which includes diversity (gender and ethnicity), which is the reason why they have those AA/gender based admissions.</p>
<p>College Admission Offices are not full of evil people trying to screw around w/ you. They have a purpose in mind, and its not as stupid or simple as just wanting to increase their USNEWS ranking through increasing minority ratios or gender percentages.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Give me a break.</p>
<p>To Ernie H:</p>
<p>How many times have you seen the repeated comment, “You’re a URM and you have great SAT scores and grades, you have a GREAT chance at HYPS” versus “Since you’re Asian, your three leadership positions and top-of-the-line SAT scores don’t make you stand out…” on these threads? As a protected minority, a lot of people would be shoo-ins. </p>
<p>But…that’s not what this thread is about… and I agree that only at a few colleges does being male increase preference significantly. But if this trend is allowed to grow…</p>
<p>Agreed, but nobody, at any college, is a walk-on because he is male.</p>
<p>And, the “better” a college is, the less likely it is to care about your gender. The Ivies and other peer schools admit men and women at the same rate.</p>
<p>^^ I would have to concur with Ernie.</p>
<p>I’ll agree and disagree with Ernie.</p>
<p>Using the example, a guy can be a shoe-in if he fit the stats, while the girl may have to be a little above and beyond the stats.</p>
<p>Mind you, I’m applying into engineering programs as a girl, so I’m on the “benefit” side of this. I’m also applying to ga-tech; I don’t see how anyone can claim that I won’t be given a boost in admissions to ga-tech because I’m female.
N.B., I’m anti AA for gender or race (I’m only pro for economic reasons, of which would have absolutely no benefit to me).</p>
<p>The difference between wether you are male or female is minute when compared to wether you are a URM or non-URM. For example, no one gets into a college primarily because they are a particular gender but plenty get in primarily because of their skin color.</p>
<p>^untrue. A person gets in on their gender just as much as on their race. If you define them as having “gotten in” based on either of those qualities.</p>
<p>you’re also much more likely to not be accepted “because you’re not of the favored sex” than because a “minority took your spot” simply because of the small volume, about 5-6% of a school, that consists of “AA tipped” admits.</p>
<p>^…</p>
<p>…less than .1% are “lol gender tipped” applicants</p>
<p>Edited post</p>
<p>its definitely way more than .1% Rootbeer, you obviously don’t even know the situation.</p>
<p>“you’re also much more likely to not be accepted “because you’re not of the favored sex” than because a “minority took your spot” simply because of the small volume, about 5-6% of a school, that consists of “AA tipped” admits.”</p>
<p>African americans and hispanics make up approximately 15-20% of the student population at the HYPSM. From what kind of information do you conclude that only 5-6% of these groups are “AA tipped”?
I think anyone who has frequented results threads enough on CC realizes that the figure is likely far higher than 5-6%.
I also think a more correct term also would be “AA admitted”. You seriously cannot argue that when URMs with 1800 SATs and mediocre ECs get into schools like MIT that this is “AA tipped”. Being white or asian with those SATs, you would literally have to have been internationally recognized multiple times in order to get in.</p>
<p>the amount of urms that post results threads is far too small a group to make any conclusion lol. </p>
<p>And can you provide any concrete evidence that “URMs with 1800 SATs and mediocre ECs get into schools like MIT” any more often than a student of any other race is?</p>
<p>and nobody is “AA admitted” any more than they are “SAT admitted”, Its all about what tips an already qualified applicant in.</p>
<p>If you are citing CC as evidence to be applied to some sort of inductive reasoning, you are doing something wrong. CC is not a random sampling of college applicants nor is its distribution of SAT scores reflective of the populace.</p>