An interesting article I came across, maybe these women are getting in more simply because of female affirmative action and just plain ol female favoritism from the bottom to the top of the modern Western education system?

http://www.sciencealert.com/for-the-firs...g-than-men

Quote:Quote:

For the first time, a US college had more female engineering graduates than men
It's happening!

FIONA MACDONALD 24 JUN 2016

Dartmouth College has just announced that it had more women than men graduate from its engineering course this year - an accomplishment they're claiming is a first for any research university in the US.

While more and more women have been enrolling in engineering courses over the past decade, this is reportedly the first time graduating females have outweighed males anywhere in the country - suggesting that we might finally be approaching the tipping point for the male domination of the field.

Although this is crazy exciting news, there are a couple of things to mention here. First, we're taking Dartmouth's word on the whole "first research college in the US" thing for now - it hasn't been independently verified as yet.

Secondly, while Dartmouth is an ivy league school, it's also relatively small, and it doesn't break its engineering courses into majors, such as civil or chemical engineering, like most other colleges do, so its degrees aren't entirely comparable.

But keeping that in mind, this is still a big deal - on average, only 19.9 percent of undergraduate engineering degrees in the US are awarded to women, and just 10 years ago, only a quarter of Dartmouth's engineering graduates were females.

This year, on the other hand, the college handed out 54 percent of its engineering degrees to females. Can someone give us a "Yasss"?

"We all recognise this as important," Joseph Helble, dean of the Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth, told David Brooks from the Concord Monitor. "This has been an issue in engineering education for decades. Diversity is something that we talk about frequently, part of the issue of national competitiveness."

Helble claims the gender shift is due to the college purposefully hiring female role models in engineering, and also changing the way it structures its course, so students aren't broken up into specialities.

He says this works because certain engineering majors, such as mechanical and electrical engineering, are heavily male-dominated, and that can put women off further study - research has shown that being an obvious minority group in something can discourage people from continuing to participate.

Also, by teaching engineering as one stream, they allow students to combine applied science with some of the more theoretical work, which shows them the potential of their research.

"We’ve been able to attract more students, and especially women, by letting them use engineering to solve real-world challenges," said Helble. "They quickly learn how their creativity and engineering skills can make a real difference."

According to Randy Atkins, director of communications at the US National Academy of Engineering, that perception is slowly shifting across the country.

"We're changing the image of engineering to a creative profession, a problem-solving profession ... That is resonating with more women, helping them see engineering in a new way," Atkins told Brooks.

Whatever they're doing, let's hope the progress continues, and a 50/50 split in engineering becomes the new normal.

After all, we've come a long way from the days of female computer programmers being confused with promotional models, but we've still got work to do before the ideas and research of both men and women get equal attention in the field.

"Now we’ve hit 50 percent, you’d better believe I’m going to talk about it with colleagues from other institutions," said Helble.

But what caught my eye was this picture:



I'm sure someone here could elaborate what's wrong with this picture....

But maybe you alt-righters really are right! Maybe there really is a cuck race-mixing-female favoritism-and-destructive-nepotism-and-civilization decline-through-the-manipulation-of-policies-at-the-government-level-to form-a-gynocentric-society thing; and mass importation of "non-whites" from "developing countries", to dilute and prevent-opposition-to-the-system as well as to lower the value of these mainstream degree programs, and to prevent native males to get access and power to challenge the system by both competition with foreigner w/ no ties to the land or culture or politics at large, that are imported wholesale; and w/ the other gender to destroy the prestige and accessibility of such educational programs, and to lower and mix out the native's educational power and potential and genepool, so they don't challenge the powers that be.

And you end up producing a fucking consumerist slave mindless obedient blob of a demographic population, to the country doing all this, incapable of rational independent thinking, free will, freedom from basic desires and temptations, completely subservient and fearful or afraid to dwell out of line; increased susceptibility to group think and herd behavior, more likely to indulge in idiotic and pointless endeavors, rules, and rituals and ways of life, always looking for approval and validation from people from higher up position and powers and unable to break free from that instinctive urge to and tendency to do so, and more likely to dwell on pure hedonism and hedonistic corrupt outlooks and ways of life, as well as succumbing to shallow-ness & vanity for the sake of being in such a pointless mindless blob condition in the first place.


Yes you Alt-righter's seem to be right......

That picture is not of Dartmouth Graduation. Dartmouth graduation gowns are classic black. That picture is of some other school.

Regardless, Dartmouth has been going downhill since atleast 2011/2012, and has been mired with SJW-ism.

An old bastion of conservatism, frat legends, and great thinkers is being ruined from the inside.

The saying goes at The College, "Lest the old traditions fail". Unfortunately, they have.


Having said all that, Thayer Engineering School at Dartmouth is quite top class, and quite difficult. The true problem there comes from the WGST/Arts/Pseudointellectual programs.

What the hell kind of gibberish is this article?

Some choice quotes and my comments:

Quote:Quote:

it doesn't break its engineering courses into majors

What does this mean? They are turning out some kind of generic 'jack of all trades' engineer? How does that work? Or are we to understand that this general engineering degree mean the person can do all kinds of engineering; electrical, chemical, mechanical, civil, etc

Quote:Quote:

to combine applied science with some of the more theoretical work

Didn't engineers always have to and need to understand the theoretical underpinnings of their field of study in order to design and make anything usable?

Quote:Quote:

letting them use engineering to solve real-world challenges

Isn't being an engineer something that always meant making or designing something useful, i.e. solve a real-world challenge?

Show me some of the companies any of these people start within the next decade and I will believe that this is some kind of great accomplishment.

Engineer of Female Studies
Engineer or Political Science
Engineer of Liberal Arts
Engineer of Fashion Design

Volia! More female "engineers."

Quote: (06-27-2016 12:37 AM)username Wrote:  

Engineer of Female Studies
Engineer or Political Science
Engineer of Liberal Arts
Engineer of Fashion Design

Volia! More female "engineers."

'Social' engineering.

And we've seen where this road takes us. The picture above is tame by comparison of what lies beyond.

Quote: (06-26-2016 11:21 PM)radiationsupernova Wrote:  

But maybe you alt-righters really are right! Maybe there really is a cuck race-mixing-female favoritism-and-destructive-nepotism-and-civilization decline-through-the-manipulation-of-policies-at-the-government-level-to form-a-gynocentric-society thing; and mass importation of "non-whites" from "developing countries", to dilute and prevent-opposition-to-the-system as well as to lower the value of these mainstream degree programs, and to prevent native males to get access and power to challenge the system by both competition with foreigner w/ no ties to the land or culture or politics at large, that are imported wholesale; and w/ the other gender to destroy the prestige and accessibility of such educational programs, and to lower and mix out the native's educational power and potential and genepool, so they don't challenge the powers that be.

And you end up producing a fucking consumerist slave mindless obedient blob of a demographic population, to the country doing all this, incapable of rational independent thinking, free will, freedom from basic desires and temptations, completely subservient and fearful or afraid to dwell out of line; increased susceptibility to group think and herd behavior, more likely to indulge in idiotic and pointless endeavors, rules, and rituals and ways of life, always looking for approval and validation from people from higher up position and powers and unable to break free from that instinctive urge to and tendency to do so, and more likely to dwell on pure hedonism and hedonistic corrupt outlooks and ways of life, as well as succumbing to shallow-ness & vanity for the sake of being in such a pointless mindless blob condition in the first place.

Quote:Quote:

Helble claims the gender shift is due to the college purposefully hiring female role models in engineering, and also changing the way it structures its course, so students aren't broken up into specialities.

They are admitting point blank that they altered the course criteria to arrive at this result. This sounds more like an engineering tech degree or some type of "Gen Ed" engineering program.

Maybe they're producing social engineers?

What are they going to invent? A new version of Spanx or a dildo design?

Meh, this means absolutely nothing. Dartmouth, like most Ivies, are so competitive to get into they can easily achieve gender parity in engineering. If your acceptance rate is below 10%, it's really easy to pick enough qualified female students.

Pulling this off at a big state university (e.g. U Illinois, U Mich) would be impossible to do.

And yet, none of these "engineers" would do all the dirty work (read: machine operation of construction vehicles). Yawn.

I guarantee you most of the Anglosphere female graduates I ran into in real life hamster their bachelors' degrees as "license to do what I want".

Heh, no major. WTF is that.

It somewhat defeats the purpose of being a specialised tertiary education, and looks to be a vocational prep course.

In other words, exactly what it sounds like, a watered down certificate of attendance. The litmus test will be how many hires aren't gender quota'd employees to make up numbers.

The again, B.Eng(Feelings) may prove to be revolutionary......

Reports like that always crack me up. I'm all about equality when it comes to intelligence, discipline, and potential. Meaning that I don't care if a person is female or male when it comes to solving problems - the only one thing that matters is the outcome, the solution.

HOWEVER, that's a typical example of what the Germans call a 'Milchmädchenrechnung' - a naive assessment of the situation. Because it only looks at the situation from a single perspective. Which is that for some reason society wants to produce an equal amount of male and female engineers. Let's assume for a moment that this is possible (snort) and that we arrive at a moment in time when the distribution of people among the STEM fields is equal.

With me so far? Now consider that attaining these degrees and being active in them (and to produce value for companies) requires a SIGNIFICANT amount of time, dedication, and resources. A woman with a very high IQ and natural abilities in fact is presented with a choice dictated by nature: Is she going to pursue her talents or is she going to pass her natural abilities on to her progeny? Because if she chooses the former then she will invariably be unable to produce sufficient offspring, and by sufficient I mean roughly 2.33 children per couple.

If she chooses the latter then she is unable to fulfill her dreams and ambitions but, at the same time, serves a crucial role, which is the propagation of her superior genes. It is that very conundrum that of course at least aided the progressive Left into refusing overwhelming evidence regarding genetic natural ability and hereditary intelligence. Because accepting it opens up a genetic conundrum, which is that funneling women into pursuing STEM sciences effectively reduces IQ scores on a long term basis. Which of course - it does.

Now I am not really happy or gleeful about this. As a matter of fact it is terribly unfair to about half of the contemporaries on this planet. But it is a genetic fact. Unless women can somehow figure out how to produce 2.33 plus children AND at the same time pursue a career in STEM sciences she is destined to curtail the genetic potential of her own race.

Ergo: Feminism and equal opportunity, as defined today (which is another topic altogether) reduces IQ scores over the long term.

P.S.: Of course there is a solution to this, but I reckon won't like it any better: Which is permit high IQ people preferred access to women. Meaning the higher your IQ and your accomplishments, the more women you should be allowed to mate with. Which would be an idea that runs exactly opposite to the choices women currently make and is being promoted in our popular culture. It is the bad boy loser who gets to bang and impregnate a ton of women. The boring reliable and talented engineer or scientist sits at home along whacking off to p0rn or playing video games.

Ergo 2: A world in which women deserve equal career opportunity requires them to make better dating/mating choices in order to offset the genetic drain caused by said equal opportunity.

Too much shade is being thrown at this article. Dartmouth is a really good school that can pick and choose qualified students as it sees fit. Both the guys and girls are smart and capable of being engineering grads, if they so choose to. Many girls, for whatever reason, choose not to. Many girls that choose engineering majors drop it, due to perceived incompetence, lonliness and so on. Most of this is in their head. Anyone that has experienced the horrendous ratios in Electrical Engineering will jump in joy to this news.

As far as the educational content, its not a dumbing down of anything. First this is Dartmouth. It is an Ivy League school. It has its choice of the best high schoolers across America. The group they were working with has been preselected for their ability to perform academically. Second, this is engineering. There is inherent rigorousness to the subject. Thermo will aleays be hard. More importantly, all they have done is add more female faculty to serve as role models and changed up how they organize the major tracks. I don't know what specifically they have done to the majors, but given that its Dartmouth, I doubt the students will be hurting for postcollegiate enployment or educational rigour.

That said, the article is garbage.

^^^. If NASA dumbs down its program for females. Pretty sure any college can also. If they make the courses easier what you expect? Seen in medical schools.

Bet you 50% of the females at Dartmouth Engineering are Asians.

Also, I'd bet you dartmouth has fluff programs to help dumb women skirt by.

A Bachelor's in "Engineering Science" just means you're probably going to grad school for a specialty (Mechanical, Electrical, Biomedical, etc.) if you're serious about engineering. Unless you took a lot of programming electives... Dartmouth is the kind of school where even History majors can get jobs in Investment Banking or Consulting. Most of these "Engineers" will just use the degree as resume padding to get into finance.

Mechanical Engineering is a very broad field so I'd guess the curriculum overlaps with that quite a bit.

Here are the course requirements. http://engineering.dartmouth.edu/academi...uirements/

The core requirements are standard and what one would expect for undergrads. There are 14 core engineering courses, so roughly the first two to three years. Two major specific gateway courses, three upper level electives and a capstone. Couple that with some general electives and that is the degree.

Samseau, I do not see how you can suggest that this is a fluff program.

Quote: (06-27-2016 10:21 AM)Secrenis Wrote:  

Here are the course requirements. http://engineering.dartmouth.edu/academi...uirements/

The core requirements are standard and what one would expect for undergrads. There are 14 core engineering courses, so roughly the first two to three years. Two major specific gateway courses, three upper level electives and a capstone. Couple that with some general electives and that is the degree.

Samseau, I do not see how you can suggest that this is a fluff program.

Don't be fooled by titles.

First of all, students ROUTINELY cheat the system by finding the "easy" professors who grade easy and give easy tests. There are professors who give easier times to females, as well as provide more teaching assistants and office time to females.

Second, here's a pic of the graduating class of 2016:



I'm telling you, the question should be asked how many White females graduated?

http://now.dartmouth.edu/2016/06/commenc...class-2016

The number of total Engineering degrees handed out:

Quote:Quote:

Thayer School of Engineering: 83 Bachelor of Engineering, 37 Master of Engineering Management, 1 Master of Engineering, 8 Master of Science (Engineering Sciences), 14 Doctor of Philosophy (Engineering Sciences)

Barely over 120 degrees. So Dartmouth managed to get somewhere between 30-50 very intelligent East Asian women to do their program, out of a world population of 1 billion+ East Asians. This isn't as big of an accomplishment because East Asians have a much higher capacity for math than any other race.

I bet you UCLA, which has a high Asian population, graduates more females from their engineering program than Dartmouth has. The only difference is that Dartmouth is much smaller and has more aggressive affirmative action, so they can claim a higher percentage of their graduates as females.

But only stupid people are fooled by percentages.

Even though Affirmative Action has been around for decades, the only way they can get women into Engineering is to select a totally different race of people than who Affirmative Action programs were built for. The fact that this hasn't happened for any other race of women shows it's never gonna happen for White or Black women.

Dartmouth is attempting to smoke and mirrors this. It will probably work with the dumb leftist masses.

I've presented at Dartmouth before... the quality of the students, professors, and thought, did not impress me at all. They do have nice marble floors though. This forum is a much smarter place, compared to their humanities programs at least. There isn't much math here on the forum but there are plenty of engineers/mathematicians as members here, unfortunately they rarely are able to display their prowess. I'm pretty sure Polymath is one member here who is a mathematical wizard if not genius.

I believe I am fairly qualified to speak on this manner. I am a black male at a top tier engineering school. I am performing well going into my senior year (3.8+ GPA, four internships) and have many friends that are also performing well. Many of these friends are black and hispanic women majoring in chemical, aerospace, mechanical , industrial and biomedical engineering. In addition, i have served as a head course assistant for an upper level engineering course, so I am intimately familiar with the game.

I don't understand what sort of intellectual prowess you are expecting from an undergrad beyond coming to class, learning the material, and doing one's assignments. Most engineering jobs are not that intellectually difficult anyways.

As far as your race comment, there are plenty of Iranian, Greek, Eastern European, Nigerian, Ethiopian, Ghanian and Jewish women that study engineering. Why are you introducing race into this discussion?

In short, I don't understand what is bad about what Dartmouth has done. Sure, there marketing machines are working in full force, but how is this negatively impacting anyone? The cream will still rise

The first two years of a standard engineering program are not that hard, really. Kind of boring and regimented, yes, but I don't know why so many quit.

The worst things about it? 1) Your curriculum is so structured you miss out on some more interesting/stimulating classes. 2) In bigger schools you may have a substandard teacher or quite often a TA who does not speak English as their first language. I remember learning differential equations from a Chinese guy with the thickest accent and was thinking "WTF is he saying?" for a good portion of the lectures.

Quote: (06-27-2016 11:23 AM)Secrenis Wrote:  

In short, I don't understand what is bad about what Dartmouth has done. Sure, there marketing machines are working in full force, but how is this negatively impacting anyone? The cream will still rise

What's wrong is this. While I don't dispute that there are talented female scientists and engineers, on average males have more aptitude in these areas than females. It follows that if you have more female engineers in a program than male, this is either the result of a low probability fluctuation or the result of different admission criteria being applied to males and females. If it's a low probability fluctuation, fair enough, but it's not anything to boast about. If it's the result of different admission criteria which favour women, that means that on average they will have rejected some male candidates which were better than some of the female candidates which they accepted. So the cream didn't rise to the top. Admissions criteria should be purely based on the aptitude of candidates rather than on any sort of social engineering. 'Positive' discrimination is still discrimination.

Quote: (06-27-2016 12:24 PM)Diogenes Wrote:  

Quote: (06-27-2016 11:23 AM)Secrenis Wrote:  

In short, I don't understand what is bad about what Dartmouth has done. Sure, there marketing machines are working in full force, but how is this negatively impacting anyone? The cream will still rise

What's wrong is this. While I don't dispute that there are talented female scientists and engineers, on average males have more aptitude in these areas than females. It follows that if you have more female engineers in a program than male, this is either the result of a low probability fluctuation or the result of different admission criteria being applied to males and females. If it's a low probability fluctuation, fair enough, but it's not anything to boast about. If it's the result of different admission criteria which favour women, that means that on average they will have rejected some male candidates which were better than some of the female candidates which they accepted. So the cream didn't rise to the top. Admissions criteria should be purely based on the aptitude of candidates rather than on any sort of social engineering. 'Positive' discrimination is still discrimination.

Exactly - it is crystal clear that far fewer women are a) qualified and b) interested in studying STEM fields. That in turn means that the percentage of women pursuing an engineering or science curriculum is NOT REPRESENTATIVE of the population as a whole. Back in the days the percentage of women pursuing these fields used to range between 3% - 5% at almost every respectable university. Since feminism has sunk its claws into universities across the Western hemisphere those percentages have jumped significantly, especially in the past 10 years. Of course it's not feminism or women's rights that is enabling women in STEM fields. Every engineer knows (or should know) that correlation does not equal causation.

Most people's assumption is that women used to be deterred from STEM fields or were actively refused for no reason. That is a ridiculous notion, which may have held true 50 years ago, but has not been an issue in the past 20 years. What in fact has been happening since is a shift from selection by merit to selection by gender ratios.

FYI - I am the first one to recognize talented women in STEM fields. No bias there whatsoever. A great example is Rhonda Patrick which clearly has a brilliant mind and is on the forefront of gerontology and fitness:

On average, sure. But this is not an average group. Dartmouth has an 11% admission rate. 94% of the incoming freshman were in the top ten percent of their high school. Nearly half the incoming freshman were either valedictorian or salutatorian. Median SAT is 2178 with each section averaging about a 730.

The students, regardless of gender, are sufficiently capable and diligent enough to complete an undergraduate degree in engineering.

As for your suggestion of social engineering, admission to Dartmouth is independent of major. These girls are choosing to major in the subject, after they have been accepted. So unless you are claiming that general admission to Dartmouth is rigged, there is no evidence that future engineers are being discriminated against.

I don't think there is a conspiracy at hand. Dartmouth has a low student faculty ratio and.places considerable attention to.their undergrads. It should not be a surprise that they removed some of the painpoints females faced. Finally, most males at Dartmouth are trying to go the street. If engineering was your primary passion coming out of hs, you were male, AND you had Dartmouth credentials, you would go.to MIT, Stanford, Caltech, and the like.

Edit: I want to reinforce that last point. Dartmouth has fantastic pipelines to finance and consulting. Obscenely good pipelines. They have a very diminished presence in Tech and engineering at large. If going into the latter fields, after graduation, were a priority to you and you were male, you would go to another school that was more engineering focused. Dartmouth wouldn't hold you back, but it wouldn't propel you in the way MIT, Stanford, or even Penn might.