rehmwa 2
Recommended Posts
GeorgiaDon 340
I agree with everything you have said here.Quotethe other interpretation is that quotas of any kind that artificially preference once gender (or race, or any cosmetic item other than talent) over another may discourage talent from those groups getting discriminated "against" (the group NOT preferred) and that's a loss to all
...
(I'm not a big fan of the OPs presentation that the boys club should band together, to fight it, etc type of feel ('gender traitor' is such a crappy term regardless of who uses it, but Arvoitus is not really the most elegant in communications historically). But I'm also just as outraged when women (or any group) does that. I find it completely counterproductive to ANY discussion on hiring equality. I think everybody should join together to fight unfair preferencing of ALL kinds. It helps no one)
Currently more women than men gain admission to STEM degree programs because they earn better grades/take tougher courses in high school, compared to the average male applicant. That's as it should be. These disciplines are not endangered because the proportion of male graduates is less than 50%. They would be threatened if considerations other than individual academic qualifications were to override admissions decisions.
Well, first the statement by Obama that women's participation in STEM programs has increased to the point where female graduates outnumber males is somehow twisted into "Obama hates men". Then somehow this morphs into "Obama will impose quotas to further exclude men". And finally, this will destroy the quality of science and engineering in the US. I think I am just taking the OP and the article he linked at face value. But if I have misunderstood the point being made the OP is free to chime in and clarify his position, if he so wishes.Quotebut you can read it in the way you like. fake outrage makes a lot of people feel good and it's a lot easier to just take up a strawman position rather than try to understand the point being made
My position is that Title IX required any educational institution that receives federal funds (such as research grants) to remove quotas and other barriers to participation by women; as a result, women are now participating and successfully competing against men; and that's a good thing overall.
Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
jcd11235 0
QuoteAt the University where I teach (which is the "flagship" State research university in my State), women constitute over 60% of the undergraduate students in the STEM majors, and a similar proportion of the graduate students. Similar numbers prevail at every public University that I know of.
I'm not so sure that those numbers are representative of STEM programs nationwide. Of all the schools I've attended (two in Florida, one in Missouri), males have vastly outnumbered females in all (Calc or higher) math and science classes I've taken, except Biology. (My observations are biased towards math classes.) At my current school, I would estimate the math department male:female ratio is at least 2:1 for undergrads, and higher for graduate students. As undergrads, the females seem more likely to study Math Education, so fewer female students continue on to graduate level mathematics classes.
Here's another school with primarily engineering students with a similarly high male:female ratio. "Missouri University of Science & Technology has a total undergraduate enrollment of 5,504, with a gender distribution of 77.2 percent male students and 22.8 percent female students."
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
pirana 0
He's a social engineer - like every politician out there. He just so happens (IMO) to be the least objectionable social engineer in the game right now. That's just my take since the flavor of his engineering is more likely to challenge corruption and abuse than encourage it.
" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley
rehmwa 2
Look, if you're going to be cogent, reasonable and courteous in your discussions, then you'll have to leave the forums.
There's just no place for that nonsense here.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
There's just no place for that nonsense here.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
QuoteQuoteAt the University where I teach (which is the "flagship" State research university in my State), women constitute over 60% of the undergraduate students in the STEM majors, and a similar proportion of the graduate students. Similar numbers prevail at every public University that I know of.
I'm not so sure that those numbers are representative of STEM programs nationwide. Of all the schools I've attended (two in Florida, one in Missouri), males have vastly outnumbered females in all (Calc or higher) math and science classes I've taken, except Biology. (My observations are biased towards math classes.) At my current school, I would estimate the math department male:female ratio is at least 2:1 for undergrads, and higher for graduate students. As undergrads, the females seem more likely to study Math Education, so fewer female students continue on to graduate level mathematics classes.
I don't believe Don's summary either*. I read the opening post as a rant that Obama was going to apply Title IX like policies to STEM degrees in some sort of quota system that would require universities to have equal representation in students and in graduation rates. Like with sports, this would make the false assumption that equal interest exists.
I don't believe this fear is real, but it would be problematic. You can't make girls want to do these degrees at the same level of interest without fixing some serious societal flaws. I'm all for selling it, but not for the other half where you discourage or filter out the boys.
*
Quote
A detailed UC Berkeley analysis by the Office of Academic Affairs and the Division of Equity & Inclusion of the fields of study of degree recipients by race, ethnicity, and gender demonstrates that there are disparities in undergraduate choice of major by these demographic factors. Women, African American, Hispanic, and Native American undergraduate students are generally more likely to complete degrees in the social sciences and professional fields than in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) disciplines. For example, from fall 2002 to spring 2007, there were no African American women among the 561 UC Berkeley bachelor’s degree recipients with a major in computer science, the 389 degree recipients with a major in mathematics, or the 381 degree recipients with a major in physics (UC Berkeley degree files, undergraduate degree recipients, fall 2002–spring 2007).
GeorgiaDon 340
I'm more familiar with the biology and chemistry programs, as that is where I'm involved in undergraduate and graduate teaching, and in those disciplines there are a preponderance of women students. I don't doubt that different ratios might apply in math or engineering or physics. The point is, students are free to apply to whatever majors they want, and they can't be excluded based solely on their gender. I don't know why some fields tend to attract more women, and others attract more men, but I'm sure that people tend to do better if they can enroll in majors they have an interest in. For that reason, any attempt to put quotas on participation based on gender would be destructive, on several levels. The disparities that do exist are based on people's choices, not on some imaginary "ideal" balance. There may be a perception by some that particular fields are hostile to this or that gender, and people may choose to avoid those fields for that reason. For example, anyone reading/listening to Shah's posts would perceive hostility to women as engineers. But those sorts of barriers are coming down too as women move into, and succeed at, those disciplines.
Incidentally, the program in veterinary medicine (DVM) has admitted over 90% female students for many years now, and there is no "quota". It's simply that more women than men apply, and on average the female students are better qualified. This is a graduate/professional degree, so the students have already earned an undergraduate degree, and women seem to gravitate to, and be more competitive for the program. I believe most medical schools also have over 50% female students. If the men are "losing ground" in these traditionally male-dominated fields, it isn't because of Title IX, it's because they are being out-competed.
Don
Incidentally, the program in veterinary medicine (DVM) has admitted over 90% female students for many years now, and there is no "quota". It's simply that more women than men apply, and on average the female students are better qualified. This is a graduate/professional degree, so the students have already earned an undergraduate degree, and women seem to gravitate to, and be more competitive for the program. I believe most medical schools also have over 50% female students. If the men are "losing ground" in these traditionally male-dominated fields, it isn't because of Title IX, it's because they are being out-competed.
Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
GeorgiaDon 340
Sorry!QuoteLook, if you're going to be cogent, reasonable and courteous in your discussions, then you'll have to leave the forums.
There's just no place for that nonsense here.
Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)
davjohns 1
QuoteOne factor in many hirings or promotions is how well someone fits into the team, and can work with other members. Being like the other members can help with this. Paying attention to that particular item can lead to discrimination.
Dissimilar teams generally produce better results in the long run, but with more discord. They don't feel better, because there isn't that comfortable feeling of everyone being on the same page.
But if everyone automaticallyl goes to that page, it's not always the best one -- it's just the one that similar people gravitate towards.
There isn't a single right answer. I do know that where I used to work, my department had more minorities than the whole rest of the second line. And the other second line was consistent with that. It wasn't that those people were prejudiced (I knew most of them well); they just could see the problems with dissimilar candidates more easily than with similar ones. I can too -- it's something you have to actively fight, because we're tribal by nature.
But the end result is that until power is shared, human nature means it's unlikely to be spread around.
Wendy P.
I don't know if there are any studies to show disparate groups do better work, but I agree.
I was talking to another caucasian conservative male about going into law practice together once. During the converstation, we both agreed that we needed to find a female minority with a liberal slant to be a partner with us. LTG Patton is attributed with saying, 'If we're all thinking alike, we're not all thinking'.
I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
rehmwa 2
QuoteYou can't make girls want to do these degrees at the same level of interest without fixing some serious societal flaws.
I wonder what 'flaws' you think exist.
And whatever you 'fix', even then, 'making' someone do something they don't want to do is still wrong.
I think the mentality that forcing certain subjective parities just based on a handful of people's opinions is goofy. I'd just say let the kids pick the majors they want and let the government only have one purpose - to not allow institutions to establish bias. This is much preferable to the alternative where the government just replaces one set of biases with their own biases (or yours, or mine).
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
rehmwa 2
QuoteIf the men are "losing ground" in these traditionally male-dominated fields, it isn't because of Title IX, it's because they are being out-competed.
this is the right answer
if a group is out because of quotas - that's simply wrong, despite whatever results happen
if a group is out because the other groups qualifies at a higher level - then that is just fine
frankly, splitting up the metrics based on groups in any way is an insult to each of those INDIVIDUALS that worked their butts off to get in
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
QuoteI'm more familiar with the biology and chemistry programs, as that is where I'm involved in undergraduate and graduate teaching, and in those disciplines there are a preponderance of women students. I don't doubt that different ratios might apply in math or engineering or physics.
Bio,Chem,and biochem are classic premed programs, particularly the two with the bio in them. It's not surprising that you see the same 60% of women that universities see in general. At least half of students at the University are premed or prelaw.
The other half of sciences- math, physics, computer science, engineering in general - they're still bastions of testosterone thanks in large part to the numbers of Shahs in them.
In the bigger picture of let people elect their major and pick the best, yes, that is the way to go. But the original posting articulated a Title IX policy might be implemented, which is an entirely different beast than the current one.
but you can read it in the way you like. fake outrage makes a lot of people feel good and it's a lot easier to just take up a strawman position rather than try to understand the point being made
(I'm not a big fan of the OPs presentation that the boys club should band together, to fight it, etc type of feel ('gender traitor' is such a crappy term regardless of who uses it, but Arvoitus is not really the most elegant in communications historically). But I'm also just as outraged when women (or any group) does that. I find it completely counterproductive to ANY discussion on hiring equality. I think everybody should join together to fight unfair preferencing of ALL kinds. It helps no one)
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites