I'm confused. Shouldn't those stats add up to 100%?
my thoughts exactly...
but also, let's say a school has 53% F, 47% M. Then are we saying you'd (possibly) get a boost as a male for being underrepresented? Or rather, might you get a sort of de facto boost as a female, since that school tends to take more female applicants anyway?
On second thought, though, I doubt that the latter is very likely. My guess is that gender imbalances have more to do with which schools males and females choose to attend -- or if they seek to go at all -- rather than with any deliberate admissions policy. But still, I suppose it is possible that some admissions committees might inadvertently lean towards certain qualities that could considered characteristically masculine or feminine -- so in that sense I guess the "de facto boost" is still a possibility.
(Or perhaps all these factors just cancel one another out and gender doesn't really matter.)
The are three sets of factors. Race vs. other race, gender vs. other gender, and gender vs. gender in a particular race. They are independent and can't be easily combined. So an Asian male is not under presented say at 8.8% of all male population, but Asian female is extremely over represented at 17.1%. So unless the ration of male:female applicants is exactly at 8.8:17.1, there will be a difference between Asian male selectivity to that of an Asian female.
So as it turns out, I don't think there is a 1:2 ratio at play for Michigan Asian applicants (correct me with data if anyone has it). So let's say if Michigan receive 1:1 M:F Asian applicants (Big if, but this is for illustration purpose). Make will get in at a rate of 8.8% while female at 17.1%. So if the school wants to be more gender neutral, it must try to balance the selectivity rate, then it will increase the rate of male while decreasing the rate of female (otherwise the over all Asian rate will increase which we know won't since overall they are over represented). Then if that happens, Asian male will receive a slight boost while females receive a slight penalty, not because of applicantion quality, but due to a internal ratio quota.
This all depends on the actual applicant ratio, which I don't know, so I am only using this as an example to display the dynamics of maintaining equality in selectivity - otherwise know as giving/taking away boost.