<p>
</p>
<p>In who’s opinion? I am sorry but many parents have a distorted view of the quality of their school as compared to others. That is part of the whole fallacy of this argument. Throw in they have no idea about the strength / weakness of their applicant compared to others across the country and the whole argument falls apart</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>Women are only considered to be a protected class, because society felt moved to make them one through laws, after piles of examples of where they weren’t being given equal opportunity.</p>
<p>I’m not suggesting that “protected status” needs to happen for any group of students, especially since these schools are private schools. (I would be against that on principal.)</p>
<p>But, I do think it would be interesting to hear an explanation from some of these schools. I do believe that their answers would ring just as hollow as any business who would say, “we’ve only hired men for the past 10 years, because those employees met our carefully-planned goal of having a well-rounded staff that our company desires.” The hoots that would result would be heard from coast to coast.</p>
<p>mathmom: Weird Emory stuff here as well; hasn’t admitted a female from our HS at any level for last 10 years…routinely waitlisted; admit males with equal or lower stats…</p>
<p>^That’s not at all unusal. Especially at LACs and especially at formally all female schools. Vassar tells you up front it’s easier to get in if you are a guy. Admit rate is quite a bit higher. See this essay: <a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html</a> ("To All the Girls I’ve Rejected " by Jennifer Delahunty Britz, the dean of admissions and financial aid at Kenyon College)</p>
<p>^^thank you…yes, I have seen that article…just surprising for Emory since the admissions stats from other top 20 schools do not reflect such an obvious bias around here…Emory definitely stands out in that regard…</p>
<p>Thanks, all. I’m not delighted by this seeming widespread bias against entire schools, namely my kid’s, but if I ran a college that was routinely always-a-bridesmaid to other contenders, I might develop some limits myself.</p>
<p>From the Kenyon article</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course as Dean she has the data and presumably looks at it. However, I cannot understand how her generalization can possibly be true. College board numbers clearly show that math and verbal scores are higher for men than for women (the writing addition is a different story). Unless there is some odd variation in applications, in general the male applicants will be more qualified than the women, based on the sole objective measure in the application. </p>
<p>If we take a math 700 score as an example, in 2008 there were 64000 or so males with that score or higher, and 33,000 females. At 600 math its about 228,000 males and 172,000 females. Looking at verbal , for 700 and above its 36,000 males and 33,000 females, while at 600 and above its 157,000 to 156,000. </p>
<p>Its blanket statements like that one that need examining. Fortunately we have the data to do it. Maybe Kenyon has an odd pattern of applications, but my point is that her generalization from it is wrong. It makes you wonder what her math score was. Or maybe its just an example of persuasive writing.</p>
<p>Our school regularly sent kids to all the Ivys (not all each year, but all over time) and other top schools- Duke, MIT, 7sisters, top LACs etc. Stanford has not taken a single applicant in 25 years. DD was contacted by a coach at Stanford and encouraged to apply. GC said they had applicants every year and she was the best suited in over 25 years and she did not get in. GC said he was just going to advise kids to save the $75 in the future, they obviously did not ‘get’ our school.</p>
<p>OP: It is a reality that colleges like/dislike different HS and that do factor into acceptances.
Till last year it was much easier to get into U.Penn than any other Ivy from D’s HS(10% of senior class used to get acceptances i.e around 35% acceptance rate), but with the change in the addmission staff that went down drastically last year.
But on the other hand Princeton accepted 10% of class with almost 35% acceptance rate last year while it used to accept much less.</p>
<p>dadx, But everything I’ve ever seen shows that girls have higher grades than boys so, to the degree that they’re looking at grades and scores, girls may be more competitive. Plus, my understanding is that more girls are in college than boys-- so, again, if you want an equal number of males and females, you may need to dip deeper into the male applicant stack. Additionally, my experience is that LACs are more attractive to girls. In other words, it might be that more top female applicants are likely to apply to LACs than top male applicants (or maybe not even apply-- attend). </p>
<p>I had looked into this when one of my kids was specifically interested in top LACs and they all said it was easier for a male to attend than a female. I’ve heard the opposite is at play at many tech schools.</p>
<p>dadx - most of the colleges my Jr. D has started looking at have far more female applicants than males - and since the colleges prefer a 50/50 mix, it is indeed harder for woman to get accepted than men. More competition whereas for men, they dip down further in their applicant pool</p>
<p>I found a followup statement that looks to me as though it was necessary because someone brought up something similar to what I have. She stops short of saying she was factually wrong, but obviously is backing away from her earlier article. </p>
<p>[A</a> Personal Statement from Jennifer Delahunty Britz - Kenyon College](<a href=“http://www.kenyon.edu/x31612.xml]A”>http://www.kenyon.edu/x31612.xml)</p>
<p>and </p>
<p>[Frank</a> Answers to Questions about Gender and Kenyon Admissions - Kenyon College](<a href=“http://www.kenyon.edu/x31609.xml]Frank”>http://www.kenyon.edu/x31609.xml)</p>
<p>I’m a little surprised at their statistics on critical reading, and surprised that the math differential isnt larger.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I’m not sure that’s backing away from her earlier article; I read it as just spinning it. However, the difference in admissions rate by gender (31.7% female applicants, 33% male applicants) isn’t that dramatic at Kenyon. I think it was more dramatic at some other lacs. </p>
<p>And I’m not surprised that the math SAT scores aren’t higher for males because a lot of males prefer big universities and technical/engineering schools. I would the males more likely to apply to a LAC are young men who are stronger, on average, in verbal skills.</p>
<p>Small point: women and African-Americans are NOT protected classes under the Federal laws that cover nondiscrimination in programs or activities at educational institutions receiving Federal financial assistance although they may be under certain grant programs. Title VI and Title IX, respectively, protect people on the basis of their race, (and color and national origin) and sex. Everyone has a race and everyone has a sex (mostly) so the Federal laws protect both blacks and whites and males and females against discrimination at educational institutions. Section 504 and the ADA are different. They only protect individuals with disabilities (or regarded as having disabilities) from discrimination. Individuals with disabilities that interfere with a major life function are a protected class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not sure how you get that out of that article. Here is the money statement:</p>
<p>"Rather than entering the fray of gender politics, my goal with the article was simply to tell the truth: men are a growing minority in the ranks of college-going students, and this fact has an impact on women. Those who say we’re unfair to female applicants must recognize this reality.'</p>
<p>For colleges who strive to have a balanced mix of genders, women applicants indeed are at a disadvantage to males</p>