Title IX, the federal gender-equity law best known for opening up opportunities for women in sports, prohibits public educational institutions from discriminating against applicants based on gender.

So, why are some private schools on the list?

Probably because they receive federal funds.

The University of Maryland Eastern Shore is well over a 100 miles from Washington as well as the University of Delaware. But I guess that doesn't matter when you have a subpoena.

Why only eastern schools?

Title IX prevents institutions who are receipents of federal financial assistance (which includes student participation in federal financial aid programs) from engaging in discrimination on the basis of sex. For that reason, Title IX applies to public and almost all private colleges.

Thanks for your good comments, 11294136, rcagfr03, and jlowery. The original phrasing in the article defining Title IX was in error, a result of changes I made in editing. That's now been corrected. Thanks again for pointing out the error.

Andrew Mytelka
Deputy Managing Editor, The Chronicle

keisha1922

According to Google Maps, both the University of Delaware and University of Marylard Eastern Shore are less than 90 miles from Washington, DC and that is driving distance and I wouldn't be surprised if the 100 mile limit isn't a straight line path.

Does admission bias mean discrimination based on applicant pool or should the ratio of men vs. women in society in general or at least among region be used?

Forest Davenport
davenport@unca.edu

This non-lawyer's reading of Title IX suggests that regarding admissions, it doesn't apply to private undergraduate institutions:

(a) Prohibition against discrimination; exceptions
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that:

(1) in regard to admissions to educational institutions, this section shall apply only to institutions of vocational education, professional education, and graduate higher education, and to public institutions of undergraduate higher education;

You can read the whole law here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/20/1681.html

It's awesome how affirmative action never applies to men.

It is awesome that they are investigating this. I have heard a lot about how this happens -- males do worse in high school, females excel, but universities and colleges need to keep their student body close to 50/50, so they have to lower the admission standards for males. It isn't fair, but they have all been doing it.

Admissions folks say that this is the only way they can keep attracting top female students who want to go somewhere where the proportions are 50/50 so they have an easier time dating. The solution I see here is to get males to excel at the same level as females in high schools (volunteer, write for the paper, join clubs, get stellar grades, etc, etc). Or get females to chill out and stop overachieving so much in high schools; but it seems better for the world's future for both sexes to excel equally.

The problem may be motivating the males, who know that if they maintain the status quo in this situation they benefit. I think they know that they don't have to work as hard to get into the same level schools. I would be interested in whether students who have recently gone through this process have noticed the bias. It depends on how much they compare their grades, activities, admissions results with their friends & across genders. If overachieving females notice that their male classmates are average & their female classmates are all overachieving in high school, that would have to be bad for them.

It makes me feel like I have to achieve at a much higher rate than the equal male in order to be successful. It is demoralizing and unfair. But it is good they are investigating!

Sciencedir writes "but universities and colleges need to keep their student body close to 50/50, so they have to lower the admission standards for males. It isn't fair, but they have all been doing it."

Replace the word "male" with "African American" or "disabled students" or "Underepresented minority" in this sentence and then see how it sounds. Given that universities have been doing this for decades for other groups, and it is accepted, why is there a problem with this? Isn't this called affirmative action?

I don't know that's what's going on with the schools being investigated, I am only responding to your comment.

The logic of this commission does not make sense. They are investigating (or studying) a hypothetical: If there is a large gender imbalance, maybe the college is trying to address this by letting in more males. The reality is, if said schools were actually engaged in this practice, they would not have such a large gender imbalance. I am more curious how some schools are able to achieve 50/50 balance, my suspicion is there is more inequality in the application review at these schools than at schools where the imbalance does exist.

From sciencedir:

"The problem may be motivating the males, who know that if they maintain the status quo in this situation they benefit. I think they know that they don't have to work as hard to get into the same level schools."

- I work in college admissions. 90% of high school males don't think deeply enough to make this (perceived) connection. They do as well as they feel like and go to college where ever they happened to get accepted. The 10% that do think that deeply, they are the good students who are more than capable of holding there own against "over-achieving females". (and why do we say "over" achieving? as if their success is above what they are capable of)

Additionally, you write:

"It makes me feel like I have to achieve at a much higher rate than the equal male in order to be successful."

Considering our society, I believe this is entirely possible when addressing life in general, women do have to work harder unfortunately. Does this general life experience relate to a high school senior's college search, I doubt it highly.

"A representative of one of the subpoenaed colleges could not immediately be reached for comment."

Ok - which one and why only one contacted? The above sentence doesn't make sense. Are there no editors to approve content?

So let me get this straight: Society demands that women work harder than men to achieve the same degree of success. High school female students, not (usually) living under a rock or being deaf, dumb and blind, realize that they need to work harder to get ahead and start doing so. As a result, they are penalized by college admission officers, who want to keep a 50/50 ratio, ostensibly so that the women will have someone to date (really? because having someone to date is what women want most out of college? that's belittling). So now, women will have to work even harder than men to get the same results, since colleges are now actively selecting against them even if they perform, as they are now, consistently better than men. Does this sound crazy to anyone besides me?

The article says some things very clearly that many people have responded with personal bias not reflected in the article. First off the petetioned bodies are not selected due admission practices. So women over achieving and men under achieving is a moot issue when it comes down to the basis of the article. This is about poltics and nothing more. If anyone can't see that then they have spent to much time talking with fellow faculity.

I spent some time working getting kids into college and many of you have to many assumptions of what the sexes think that is more based out of personal philosphy then reality. Most young adults are not thinking about their gender advantage or disadvantage. Most of them have many different reasons for picking an institution or even trying to get into college. Money is another issue. For most young men, when money for college doesn't seem possible, other avenues such as employment get turned to. Some people pass the min requirment for a great school and get in and go through the program because they have money. I've known many a public and private institution that has whored out their young men in atheltics to turn the buck while not caring about the atheletes actual education level. Many times there is this expectation that atheletic men are dumb men. That is a strong gender bias. So why admit higher amount of smart men who drain money with their activties, science/engeneering/antropology, when you can invest men who have bring in resources and have little drain on resources.

Most young women and men do think about the gender ratio when picking a college. It does matter. Even collges that are all women or all men express with their recruiters that there is easy access to the opposite sex if so desired. The issues is that college is seen in the modern young adult eye as a place to be social and a place to possibly find a spouse. The latter is becoming less common. The main issue that most of them are interested in having freedom to take part in whatever romatic or sexual activites they wish without parental supervision. So yes sex ratio does matter because it appeals to the fantasy of youth. When picking between two schools and everything is realtively close social envoirment is many times the tie breaker. I've seen lots of students pick universities on social envoirment alone.

Does a woman have to work harder in society? It can be argued. I will say it is not as hard as it was before and I would also say that the level of difficulity still varies by race. White, African, Asian decent females have a variety of different challenges but the white female on average has a higher level of resources to pull from then her peers. Class and income matters. A woman with a lot of connections and money is going to go farther then a white male with little money and few connections. Those who grew up in the "multicultural" era like myself know how to manipulate poltics and make connections. It would be stupid for one not to do otherwise. I'm male and I've helped more females then I can count. At the same time I kept in contact with them so that I could foward to them the right people or get x information to do what I do. If a person is all book smart and has no social graces then they are just as much a failure as one who dropped out of school. A lot of people, both male and female, are in poor situations not because of sexism or even racism but because they failed to network and maintience their network.