I came across this interesting LA Times article (by way of the Volokh Conspiracy). I’m no fan of affirmative action, but this is an interesting take on the issue.

“We make a special pitch to them to talk about the benefits of Santa Clara, as we do for other underrepresented groups,” Charles Nolan, Santa Clara’s vice provost for admissions, said of the school’s efforts to boost male applicants.

And here’s our school! Go Bears!

The stronger credentials of the female applicant pool are apparent at California public universities, which are all barred by law from considering sex or race in admissions. Even at the highly sought UC Berkeley, 26% of female freshman applicants were admitted in 2003, compared with 22% of males.

Apparently, Berkeley is split 54/46, female to male. I wouldn’t be able to tell judging from my EECS classes, but I’ll take their word for it. I can’t give any reasons as to why this is, but I can make a few charts, which you can see by expanding this post. I gathered the data from the Office of Student Research site. They had data going back to 1983, so I was able to chart a 20 year period.

I don’t think affirmative action is the solution to whatever it is that we’re seeing here. For almost every year, female acceptance rates have been higher than males. Only during the 90’s was the difference insignificant. The gap now is about what it was during the early 80’s. The only thing that’s changed is that more females are applying in relation to males, as opposed to the other way around in the 80’s and early 90’s.

I leave you with this:

Santa Clara’s female majority “definitely wasn’t discouraging. This is an attractive place,” Semansky said mischievously, glancing at women milling about.

“This is definitely an attractive place,” Bersamina agreed, smiling.

How does this apply to Berkeley? No comment.