I am so sick of people in this forum complaining about AA and URMs. Get over it. Stop playing the victim. Look around the racial profiles of most medical schools. They are still overwhelmingly white. Until the Supreme Court's decision in the summer, it still exists. Do you really think that any top medical school would admit a URM with subpar grades and MCAT scores? Every medical school has admissions standards. So unless one of you has served on an admissions committee for a medical school, please stop spreading rumors about the black or hispanic student who was admitted to Harvard with a 23 MCAT and 2.6 GPA. That person does not exist. I notice that no one ever complains about legacies. Usually legacies have low scores and grades. Check out those statistics. Seeing the racist viewpoints on this site really shows why minorities don't trust doctors. Let's be honest, how many people on this site are going to serve in a minority neighborhood, or are you going to flee back to the suburbs as soon as you complete your residency.
I am sick of people complaining about AA and URMs
- Thread starter learss
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2001
- Messages
- 5,527
- Reaction score
- 1,683
Yes.
rumors about the black or hispanic student who was admitted to Harvard with a 23 MCAT and 2.6 GPA
Fact. Two of my personal friends from UCLA. Both Black males.
(1) Was a decent student. Got a girlfriend sophomore year, stopped going to school and stopped studying. Recieved a 1.4 GPA for the year. Rest of the time had a 3.2 in Phy Sci. Took the MCAT. Got a 6 verbal, 10 Bio, 10 Phys. He got into University of Chicago and was one of the last people on the waitlist at UCLA (didn't get in)
(2) One of my friends applying right now. I helped him write his Personal statement. Had a 3.4 GPA and a 31 MCAT. Activities were decent, but not great. Thought he would get into a school about on my level (USC) Recieved a full ride to University of Michigan. They even flew him out there for the interview. Had an interview at Harvard 2-3 months ago (Don't know what happened on that)
Simple anough, there is a huge disparity between white and black applicants. While I do believe a great case could be made that URM clinicians serve more in underserved areas (A fact) I don't see why a research school should give that much of an advantage.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 0
What planet have you been living on? The simple fact of the matter is that race should never be an issue when it comes to admissions. Its unfair to non-URMs and I would imagine it to be insulting to URMs in insinuating that they are incapable of holding the same standards. In addition to that, it lowers the bar for URM students because they know that they will only have to work half as hard to get in. It bullshiit, plain and simple and the only people that support it are those who are looking for a free ride.
So now life it is unfair for non-URMs. Let me look around medical schools and see. They are still overewhelmingly white. Yes, life is unfair. Do you think that every minority admitted into medical school is a product of AA? All the URMs I know have worked their behinds off throughout college to get into medical school. What free ride are you speaking of, since obviously you know every URM in the country and can speak from experience. AA does not discriminate against non-URMs, but looks at other factors such as race and gender. Race and gender has been used in admissions in this country since the creation of Harvard, but then it was used to discriminate against minorities and women. I wonder maybe thats the reason why a majority of doctors today are white and male.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2003
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
Yup. I dont remember but someone posted an article a couple months back that gave an inside look at one of the Ad com meetings at one of UC med schools (UC Davis?). They bent over backwards to admit this one hispanic chick with a 2.5/5.0 from MIT and ~25 MCAT score just because she came from family of migrant workers. AA got her into MIT which is a pretty intense school even for the hardcore and she basically flubbed in an environment she wasnt prepared for. They were only considering a handful of URM applicants with scores like these but URMs do get in with subpar scores. But the numbers are pretty small.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2002
- Messages
- 644
- Reaction score
- 0
it was for USC...link Jalby?
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2003
- Messages
- 3,132
- Reaction score
- 0
Dude - if it is dead why is there blood flying out of it. I get so envious of these little graphics, but not the one where I got flicked off.....waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2001
- Messages
- 5,527
- Reaction score
- 1,683
lol I only keep the good links. I didn't really mind that person getting in because she really wanted to be a doctor in an underserved area, I just hated the fact she got a full ride.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2002
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 0
i'm sorry, a 2.5 average at MIT is a C-/D+ average. granted this is a hard school, but if you come out with that GPA you either a.) didn't work hard at all or b.) you didn't belong here in the first place and were in the bottom 15% in every class. good enough for a full ride to USC i think. glad to see the minimum admissions standards for URMs are high and are weeding out the least academically prepared applicants. long live AA!
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2002
- Messages
- 692
- Reaction score
- 0
Keep in mind that this is the exception, not the norm. There are other factors that might influence GPA, none of which were mentioned. A 2.5 average isn't indicative of her entire college career. Perhaps she had a bad year/semester, or worked full-time. I'm sure she didn't have a 2.5 all four years: med schools look at positive improvement over the four years, so if she can pull off a 3.5+ during the last year, and is TRULY passionate about becoming a doctor, then she's as deserving of a med school spot as any of us, if not moreso.
What is up with this "bending over backwards" BS anyway? An admissions committee has the right to admit whoever they feel is deserving of a spot. It just isn't profitable for med schools to actively recruit and admit people who will ultimately drop out/fail. And if they make a mistake, oh well, humans are fallible. AA has no beneficiaries during med school, after all.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2003
- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 0
You claim that the majority of med school classes are white but that's not an important claim. I'm surprised people haven't mentioned this.
Of course the majority of a med school class is white because the majority of the country is white. The % of black/hispanic/asian med students is very close to the % of each represented in the country. The discrepency comes when you consider how many want to go into medicine.
A lot more white people wnat to go into medicine so their % acceptance is much lower
A lot more Asian Americans want to go into medicine, so their individual acceptance % is lower
Fewer blacks and hispanics want to go into medicine, but their % still represents the % of the country which means that their acceptance % is much higher
Of course the majority of a med school class is white because the majority of the country is white. The % of black/hispanic/asian med students is very close to the % of each represented in the country. The discrepency comes when you consider how many want to go into medicine.
A lot more white people wnat to go into medicine so their % acceptance is much lower
A lot more Asian Americans want to go into medicine, so their individual acceptance % is lower
Fewer blacks and hispanics want to go into medicine, but their % still represents the % of the country which means that their acceptance % is much higher
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2002
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 0
vixenell, i would hope thats the exception, and im pretty sure it is. however, the fact there is such an exception (full ride no less; can you justfity that?) sort of makes me sick when i think of friends that can't even get one acceptance.
let's beat a dead horse. MIT is p/f the first year. so really, she had three years to improve, not four (two if she applied the summer between junior and senior year). assuming she got a 3.5 her senior year (which is a B-/C+ average), that means she got a 1.5 soph year and 2.5 junior year (or 2.0 and 2.0, you get the point). sure, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 is an upward trend, but c'mon. going from a D- to a C+/B- average is not exactly the kind of improvement that should get you into medical school.
and finally, this has been discussed before, but i'll say it again. yes, it is critically important to have a passion for medicine. but desire should be a requisite for applying to med school. simply having shouldn't give anyone any extra brownie points.
let's beat a dead horse. MIT is p/f the first year. so really, she had three years to improve, not four (two if she applied the summer between junior and senior year). assuming she got a 3.5 her senior year (which is a B-/C+ average), that means she got a 1.5 soph year and 2.5 junior year (or 2.0 and 2.0, you get the point). sure, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 is an upward trend, but c'mon. going from a D- to a C+/B- average is not exactly the kind of improvement that should get you into medical school.
and finally, this has been discussed before, but i'll say it again. yes, it is critically important to have a passion for medicine. but desire should be a requisite for applying to med school. simply having shouldn't give anyone any extra brownie points.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2003
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
You're forgetting that MIT has a 5.0 scale so her average was closer to a D. If what you say is true about her having a 3.5+ toward the end, that means her record was littered with Fs which is the kiss of death for any other applicant . I think it was more the case that profs let her off with the lowest passing grade because its hard to fail a class at MIT unless you dont show up or take exams. Her MCAT scores also was no real gold star for her either but perhaps youve got some theories to rationalize them too. Low achievement is low achivement no mater what excuses people come up for it.
As for "bending over backwards", they have special comittees of minority professors to evaluate URM applicants with low stats when their applications would normally end up in the trash pile. They also are judged on a standard of wheter they can pass the boards and not end up quiting and embrassing the school.
I agree with you that schools can admit whoever they want on any standard they choose but the motive isnt profit but more about retaining or enhancing reputation. I mean most of the Carribean schools luv it when their students fail so they can milk more tuition money from them but it would be embarassing for any med school here in the states to have a high failure rate on the boards.
I support race AA but i wouldnt condone anyone with these kind of numbers getting into med school regardless of what her motivation is or who she is. Seems to me AA gave her a shot at a phenomenal undergrad but she botched it up and shes being rewarded with full tuition to boot. I only brought this up to dispute the fact that URMs dont get in with subpar scores.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 239
- Reaction score
- 0
what i don't undertsand is why no one addressed the legacy issue that learss discussed. why it is wrong to get in because of your race but it is not wrong to get in because daddy or daddy's daddy went to a certain school? the president is an example of legacy affirmative action. he was a self-proclaimed c student in high school but yet still got into yale and then harvard becuase he was a legacy.
when someone knows soemone or is a legacy they have advantages over others. but thta is better than getting an advantage becuase of your race, right? we never hear any complaint about this becuase it is usually white people that benefit from legacy and nepotism. many minorities don't have this advantage so just think of it as a minority's legacy.
when someone knows soemone or is a legacy they have advantages over others. but thta is better than getting an advantage becuase of your race, right? we never hear any complaint about this becuase it is usually white people that benefit from legacy and nepotism. many minorities don't have this advantage so just think of it as a minority's legacy.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2001
- Messages
- 853
- Reaction score
- 22
Ok, let's talk about legacy.
1) At least the president is a C student and not a D student
2) Say, applying to med schools. How many applicants really have their daddies or oncles on the admissions committee or faculty of each med school? Maybe 10 to 20 applicants at most. How many applicants to that same med school are minorities? Maybe 300-400. In other word, the effects of AA are more influential for the rest of the applicants than the legacy kids.
3) Legacy kids would probably still need 3.3 and 28 MCAT (instead of 3.5 and 30-31), but minorities can get in with sub-3.0 GPA and sub-24 MCAT. It is a matter of pushing academic standard to a lower level with AA than with legacy.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 0
People who get all tied up in knots about URMs/AA remind me of geldrop complaining that rolling admissions is unfair, basically because he didn't get in.
The point about legacies/connections advantages should not be taken lightly. AA was started because several decades ago, folks looked around and realized that the white majority in this country does tend to have a huge amount of advantage in procuring education and jobs, and that this did not seem right. Some would even say it is 'un-American'. While it is improtant to note that class does not equal race, at that time, being black or hispanic went largely hand-in-hand with being fed a lot of disagvantages pretty early in life. I am NOT saying that there weren't poor white folk - just that anyone with darker skin was facing a much bigger struggle than a whitey.
Fast forward to today - some people think that the time for such a leg up for some folks is over, that we have acheived a society in which such problems need no longer be adressed. I would say that's wrong. Take a look around the NYC school system, for example, and you see that the racial make-up of the schools with the worst records, lowest funding, and most overcrowding tend to be clustered in 'minority' neighborhoods and full of 'minority' students. SAT prep classes, and, later, MCAT prep classes are full of the people who can afford to take them. Its a lot harder to make yourself a competitive applicant, with a 3.9 GPA and thousands of hours of volunteering if you are working your way through school.
Not all of this correlates with race, of course. For me the equation is more of an economic one, and I would be more comfortable with a system that could take into account economic and cultural factors in someones background as well as their skin color. But my point is this: we live in a society that is inherently unfair. Some of us are born with advantages that others will never have; some of us start out with the deck stacked against us from the first smack on the bottom in the delivery room. The AA system was designed to try to correct for that. Is it perfect? NO. It has problems that still need to be fixed. But a complete scrapping of it would only be a huge leap backwards, in which legacies and 'buy-ins' (which are much more common than you think - I personally know three people whose med admissions may have been legacy admits, and one girl who 'bought' her diploma from my undergrad with a donation from daddy and made no bones about it) would remain o.k, while any consideration of a disadvataged background would not.
In a process as subjective as medical school admissions, there will always be questionable decisions made by adcoms. And there will always be those left out in the cold looking for a scapegoat for their failures. We freak out when we are on the bad end of an unfair process, and excel at turning a blind eye to all the unfairness that surrounds us that works to our advantage.
Anyone interested, there was an interesting little piece in the Nation a few weeks back about how race figures into SAT test question selection - sorry, no link, but it might be on their website if you look it up.
The point about legacies/connections advantages should not be taken lightly. AA was started because several decades ago, folks looked around and realized that the white majority in this country does tend to have a huge amount of advantage in procuring education and jobs, and that this did not seem right. Some would even say it is 'un-American'. While it is improtant to note that class does not equal race, at that time, being black or hispanic went largely hand-in-hand with being fed a lot of disagvantages pretty early in life. I am NOT saying that there weren't poor white folk - just that anyone with darker skin was facing a much bigger struggle than a whitey.
Fast forward to today - some people think that the time for such a leg up for some folks is over, that we have acheived a society in which such problems need no longer be adressed. I would say that's wrong. Take a look around the NYC school system, for example, and you see that the racial make-up of the schools with the worst records, lowest funding, and most overcrowding tend to be clustered in 'minority' neighborhoods and full of 'minority' students. SAT prep classes, and, later, MCAT prep classes are full of the people who can afford to take them. Its a lot harder to make yourself a competitive applicant, with a 3.9 GPA and thousands of hours of volunteering if you are working your way through school.
Not all of this correlates with race, of course. For me the equation is more of an economic one, and I would be more comfortable with a system that could take into account economic and cultural factors in someones background as well as their skin color. But my point is this: we live in a society that is inherently unfair. Some of us are born with advantages that others will never have; some of us start out with the deck stacked against us from the first smack on the bottom in the delivery room. The AA system was designed to try to correct for that. Is it perfect? NO. It has problems that still need to be fixed. But a complete scrapping of it would only be a huge leap backwards, in which legacies and 'buy-ins' (which are much more common than you think - I personally know three people whose med admissions may have been legacy admits, and one girl who 'bought' her diploma from my undergrad with a donation from daddy and made no bones about it) would remain o.k, while any consideration of a disadvataged background would not.
In a process as subjective as medical school admissions, there will always be questionable decisions made by adcoms. And there will always be those left out in the cold looking for a scapegoat for their failures. We freak out when we are on the bad end of an unfair process, and excel at turning a blind eye to all the unfairness that surrounds us that works to our advantage.
Anyone interested, there was an interesting little piece in the Nation a few weeks back about how race figures into SAT test question selection - sorry, no link, but it might be on their website if you look it up.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2003
- Messages
- 6,781
- Reaction score
- 1,209
Well if it makes you guys fell any better, I am an Indian Male broke as a Joke, Paid my own way thru college working 2 jobs, managed to graduate with a 3.9, taking the MCAT in aug (hope to get a good score) and after all that I will be guaranteed a spot at:
the bottom of the totem pole.
the bottom of the totem pole.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
- Messages
- 256
- Reaction score
- 0
Actually this isn't factually true: I did some calculations for another thread on this awhile back: "Nationally, only less than 7% of medical school students admitted are black. If they wanted it to match the national percentage it would have to be about twice that amount and there wouldn't have a 39.8% acceptance rate (according to the MSAR 2002-2003....updated data would be great if someone has the newer one). Comparatively non-URM applicants have a 44% acceptance rate (calculated by myself from subtracting out the URM stats on p43 in that MSAR....anyone is free to check my math)." So I didn't do any calculations for specifically Asian-Americans or hispanics, but I don't really feel like looking it up either. The point is that it's a myth that black acceptance rates are higher.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2001
- Messages
- 661
- Reaction score
- 1
Another thing to keep in mind are population projections. So-called minorities are rapidly gaining in percentage of the overall population in years ahead - yet another reason it is important to have considerations of matriculating students which represent the population as a whole.
One point about Jalby first comment... and this isn't necessarily towards you, but in general (i.e. don't take offense) I absolutely *HATE* the ridiculous arguments of people that get on here with their anecedotal evidence of my "one friend with a 39 mcat and 4.0 who is awesome and started a hospital network in Uganda by herself and didn't get into medical school but didn't get into medical school." Or like wise.. the story of some "friend" that is black with a 3 on the mcat and a 0.5 GPA from a community college that got into harvard with a full ride.
*HERE* is the reason basing your views on topics like AA from INDIVIDUAL experiences is flawed.... YOU ARE BIASED. In short, you are noticing the *EXCEPTIONS* and only from the standpoint of the socio-economic status of YOURSELF. To put it another way, I assure you that or every supposed Affirmative Action story you have where someone who you felt was underqualified... there are three stories of non-minorities who were ALSO exceptions... thus ruling out.
kreno
One point about Jalby first comment... and this isn't necessarily towards you, but in general (i.e. don't take offense) I absolutely *HATE* the ridiculous arguments of people that get on here with their anecedotal evidence of my "one friend with a 39 mcat and 4.0 who is awesome and started a hospital network in Uganda by herself and didn't get into medical school but didn't get into medical school." Or like wise.. the story of some "friend" that is black with a 3 on the mcat and a 0.5 GPA from a community college that got into harvard with a full ride.
*HERE* is the reason basing your views on topics like AA from INDIVIDUAL experiences is flawed.... YOU ARE BIASED. In short, you are noticing the *EXCEPTIONS* and only from the standpoint of the socio-economic status of YOURSELF. To put it another way, I assure you that or every supposed Affirmative Action story you have where someone who you felt was underqualified... there are three stories of non-minorities who were ALSO exceptions... thus ruling out.
kreno
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2002
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
I think that AA should be removed. It is racist and it only punishes white people. I am an immigrant, and I had to start a new life here in the us. I had to learn a new language, I had to pay for my adjucation and I did not have a dady on the adcom. All I had was hard work to do. There will always be descrimination because this is how people naturally are. Just like white descriminate against black, so do black descriminate against white. And in my opinion, blacks are even worse because they can get away with more thinks as far as descrimination goes. There is also descrimination withing one race based on religion, eye color, hair, although maybe not as big. The point is we will never get rid of this. If everyone wants the same opportunity then there should be not exceptions for anyone specificly. I think it is contradictory to give more points on the adcom for a black to make them equall. Finally on my medschool application I had no place to put what country I am from although I had it much harder then backs who were born here because I had to start a new life from a begining, and I was descriminated against as well(I was still white). This is why I believe AA is unfair and should be removed, period. I don't care about getting few extra points on my application because I supposedly worked extra hard since I am an immigrant, I just want the committie to look at my application and see that I worked hard because what I did. This is just a little insight that I wanted to share.
apparently your money was very well spent!
you seem to have received quite an ADJUCATION.... but hey you shouldn't your time here in the forum, there could be a BLACK taking your medical school spot this very moment.... i mean i would imagine so, seeing as how they get away with more THINKSapparently your money was very well spent!
you seem to have received quite an ADJUCATION.... but hey you shouldn't your time here in the forum, there could be a BLACK taking your medical school spot this very moment.... i mean i would imagine so, seeing as how they get away with more THINKS- Joined
- Sep 25, 2002
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
I am sorry for the mistakes. I was in a hurry so I didn't check my spelling. At least I made my point.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2001
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 0
Is it me or did the AMCAS application get reduced to just GPA and MCAT scores? ADCOMS should have it easier now... First, 16,000 applications are accepted! That how it should be? Right ?
AA this AA that...
AA this AA that...
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2002
- Messages
- 3,575
- Reaction score
- 1
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2003
- Messages
- 120
- Reaction score
- 0
It's always refreshing to hear a foreigner's perspective on the black-American experience in the US--no matter how short-sighted it is.
"Blacks are even worse . . ." Really? Nobody can dispute the fact that discrimination comes from all angles. However, you're missing something. Coupled with blacks' so-called discrimination against whites is not the oppression that is inherent in the discrimination of blacks by whites. When black people act in a discriminatory manner, there is no weight behind it, b/c this is, politically, a white man's country. Retribution against those blacks who act in such a defiant manner is swift and severe. See Malcolm X, the entire Black Panther Party, and many civil rights activists--Medgar Evers, Emmit Till, and others.
"I had it much harder than b[l]acks who were born here because I had to start a new life from [the] begi[n]ning"
I seriously doubt that. Many, not all black-Americans start off even worse than that. Imagine being in a foot race where you have to start 35 yards behind the starting line, where You claim to have been upon arriving here. Furthermore, imagine the the deepening feelings of despair when you look 15 yards ahead of the starting line, where some, not all, whites begin. Such is the black-American experience in most areas of life.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2001
- Messages
- 661
- Reaction score
- 1
uofchopeful, you make some interesting points, but i disagree with your comment about how many black-americans start out worse than he did if you're referring to black-medical school matriculants/applicants.
The fact of the matter is that blacks that matriculate by and large come from much more affluent families than the average-black person. That is to say, Affirmative Action does not effectively target those "kids in the hood" and turn them into holders of college bachelors and professional degrees.
With that in mind... is affirmative action a policy for which the benefits outweigh the drawbacks (i.e. basically everyone's points who are against AA that listed them on this thread)? I think so... because I believe that having doctors and other educated people that represent the populous as a whole is well-worth it.
Not to mention... without programs like AA *AND* others... how will the cycles ever change? Indeed, this is still a white-man's country
kreno
The fact of the matter is that blacks that matriculate by and large come from much more affluent families than the average-black person. That is to say, Affirmative Action does not effectively target those "kids in the hood" and turn them into holders of college bachelors and professional degrees.
With that in mind... is affirmative action a policy for which the benefits outweigh the drawbacks (i.e. basically everyone's points who are against AA that listed them on this thread)? I think so... because I believe that having doctors and other educated people that represent the populous as a whole is well-worth it.
Not to mention... without programs like AA *AND* others... how will the cycles ever change? Indeed, this is still a white-man's country
kreno
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2002
- Messages
- 727
- Reaction score
- 2
some nachos for thought:
http://www.utoronto.ca/acc/events/peggy1.htm
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99aug/9908stereotype.htm
Sometimes I feel like I'm beatin' a dead horse
An I don't know why you'd be bringin' me down
I'd like to think that our love's worth a tad more
It may sound funny but you'd think by now
I'd be smilin'
I guess some things never change
Never change
http://www.utoronto.ca/acc/events/peggy1.htm
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99aug/9908stereotype.htm
Sometimes I feel like I'm beatin' a dead horse
An I don't know why you'd be bringin' me down
I'd like to think that our love's worth a tad more
It may sound funny but you'd think by now
I'd be smilin'
I guess some things never change
Never change
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2003
- Messages
- 120
- Reaction score
- 0
Kreno, I have to agree with you on your description of black-American matriculants being better off, financially, than the average black-American, but I was talking about the entire black-American population. However, no matter how well off one may be, it can still be demoralizing to look around a classroom and see very few with whom that black student feels he or she can relate.
There is strength in numbers, and in order for blacks to draw any advantage from this phenomenon, AA must remain in place to keep the numbers of black students at sufficient levels.
There is strength in numbers, and in order for blacks to draw any advantage from this phenomenon, AA must remain in place to keep the numbers of black students at sufficient levels.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2003
- Messages
- 120
- Reaction score
- 0
What exactly are you referring to here?
- Joined
- May 6, 2002
- Messages
- 227
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi SistaK. It's been many a day since I had anything to say, so now I'm throwing myself back into the fray... hip hip hooray...
Comparing that statistic (40% acceptance rate for African-Americans [A-A's], 44% for non-URM) and concluding that "it's a myth that black acceptance rates are higher" is incorrect.
Why? Because the average numerical scores of A-A's are lower than those of non-URM's. If you more realistically compare A-A's to non-URM's *of the same numerical scores*, then you will find that the acceptance rates are indeed higher for A-A's. (e.g., 25 MCAT, 3.4 GPA A-A vs. 25 MCAT, 3.4 GPA Indian-American).
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
- Messages
- 256
- Reaction score
- 0
What's up, Geneman....how's it going?
That's a valid point you bring up. But I think it's extraneous to my point. The OP that I quoted said that "Fewer blacks and hispanics want to go into medicine, but their % still represents the % of the country which means that their acceptance % is much higher ". All I was refuting is the notion that this is true. It's false first on the account that the percentage of blacks in med school is equivalent to our representation in the general pop and then on the account that their acceptance rates are much higher.
To refute that, I don't think it needs to be true that the acceptance rates for same numerical scores or whatever are equilavent. And even then, I wonder how much information we could get out of that anyway, since we know how much med school admissions aren't necessarily dependent on numbers....
But like I said....I only popped in to make that minor point...I really do want to stay out of this one, I think I've said my peace on numerous other threads
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2003
- Messages
- 41
- Reaction score
- 0
