Is affirmative action in the admission process about to end?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
surfstarj said:
Well it was several schools, some ranked some unranked so fairly across the board but no top 10s. Saying a school I had "no business" applying to is a little silly in light of this conversation if we're talking about AA, is it not? We are talking about a process that allows schools to look past numbers in favor of whole applicants. I thought I'd give it a try with an 11/13/11 MCAT despite a somewhat low GPA, so I had some numbers going for me anyway.

Regardless, if a low stat non-URM is rejected pre-interview how would they know their life story and whether or not it would aid me in my medical career. That's just my point. IT IS jumping to conclusions without knowing me to assume that just because I'm not technically URM, that my life story isn't worth hearing and/or isn't worth overlooking my GPA for? Haha, come on. That's the other side of the coin. It is judging me by my skin color (which is olive, by the way).

People get hung up on the numbers side of AA but how are we deciding who gets to share their story and who doesn't? Look at Flaahless, he's controversial because he had a 3.3 and a 29 mcat with a 7 in VR. He had tremendous success in the cycle. Obviously he's got something going for him in personality/life experiences, but they definitely had to overlook his scores to give him interviews which allowed him to shine in the first place. Both sides of the argument for or against AA need to be sensitive to the other, that's all I'm saying. No need to beat points over each other's heads.
Click to expand...


In regards to the first highligted area there are schools as I did say who will not let you in if your numbers are not astronomical regardless of race. Can you present proof that the schools you were rejected from let in someone who was less competitive than yourself (dont get offended by this question because I already said you got a bad deal)? I am all about proof you have to have proof to make something believable. Second how do we know who's stories get read and who's dont unless you are an adcom you really dont know what goes on behind those doors so its just an assumption to say that urm's get interviews because their stories were read and your's wasn't. Tell me how you know that it is a fact that urm life stories are read but majority students aren't.
 
flaahless said:
I don't think anyone is denying. But you have to admit that doubting the qualifications of a neurosurgeon because of a perceived advantage in the admissions process is ridiculous. For instance, is it okay to doubt the qualifications of Dr. Ben Carson because he may or may not have benefitted from AA?

My point is that since you don't know who did or didn't benefit, it is wrong to assume that EVERYONE did. Especially when we know that A) Everyone did not benefit, B) Not all schools use AA. Why is that so complicated for people to grasp? 😕
Click to expand...

Well we can answer that by taking the extreme case for argument's sake.

Let's assume, again for argument's sake, that everyone who is considered URM somehow benefits from AA in their application. This gives them the golden ticket, i.e. they get to go to med school. This is where the main flaw of the "doubt minority doctors" argument comes into play. Once in med school, every student is subject to the same rigors academically, the same licensing exams, the same expectations of clinical competency more or less to graduate and pass the USMLE and become a physician. So getting in has virtually *nothing* to do with being a competent doctor, it is just the first post-college hurdle on the med school path. So would it even matter if every single URM received a benefit? No.

So let's stop trying to split hairs over who benefits. Even if someone wants to claim that all URMs benefit, it doesn't take away from those who go on to graduate and pass the USMLEs so it's irrelevant. Let it roll off your back, it's not worth your energy. We can all acknowledge that at least some URMs benefit. Accept that you were lucky enough to get to show schools who you are while, for whatever reason, many were denied of that privilege and let's move on.
 
gabem480 said:
In regards to the first highligted area there are schools as I did say who will not let you in if your numbers are not astronomical regardless of race. Can you present proof that the schools you were rejected from let in someone who was less competitive than yourself (dont get offended by this question because I already said you got a bad deal)? I am all about proof you have to have proof to make something believable. Second how do we know who's stories get read and who's dont unless you are an adcom you really dont know what goes on behind those doors so its just an assumption to say that urm's get interviews because their stories were read and your's wasn't. Tell me how you know that it is a fact that urm life stories are read but majority students aren't.
Click to expand...

hey pm me sometime, i don't want to make this thread about me!
 
.
 
Last edited:
surfstarj said:
hey pm me sometime, i don't want to make this thread about me!
Click to expand...

No doubt I'll do that but the point I am trying to get across is that it is bogus for people to bring AA up everytime a URM gets into medical school with average stats there has to be more to the story than that. My opinion on this is that it comes down to all other parts of the app dont get me wrong there are schools who dont consider the other parts of the app but for those that do there has to be something special about this urm that gets in with low stats besides the color of his skin maybe a strong essay or life story or maybe strong ec's or lor's how do we know we dont so lets not judge until we have the whole truth.
 
gabem480 said:
No doubt I'll do that but the point I am trying to get across is that it is bogus for people to bring AA up everytime a URM gets into medical school with average stats there has to be more to the story than that. My opinion on this is that it comes down to all other parts of the app dont get me wrong there are schools who dont consider the other parts of the app but for those that do there has to be something special about this urm that gets in with low stats besides the color of his skin maybe a strong essay or life story or maybe strong ec's or lor's how do we know we dont so lets not judge until we have the whole truth.
Click to expand...
That's all I'm trying to say. It's respect. I won't speculate before I informate, please don't do the same to others. Just common courtesy.
 
My boy Flaahless is the man why can't we all congratulate instead of hate he mastered the application process and let his personality represent who he will be as a doctor.
 
surfstarj said:
I really doubt you'd become a neurosurgeon without being at the near-top of your med school class and acing the USMLE first...but anyway.
Click to expand...

he said it from the perspective of a patient...i really doubt most patients know the process of getting into certain competitive residencies and about the USMLE as much as pre-meds do.
 
hopefuldoc87 said:
he said it from the perspective of a patient...i really doubt most patients know the process of getting into certain competitive residencies and about the USMLE as much as pre-meds do.
Click to expand...

I also really doubt that most patients really know about AA in med school admissions all in all the comment that was made is ignorant and sounds like a cover up to judge somebody by the color of their skin.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
gabem480 said:
I also really doubt that most patients really know about AA in med school admissions all in all the comment that was made is ignorant and sounds like a cover up to judge somebody by the color of their skin.
Click to expand...

while i do agree the comment was ignorant, the fact that people may wonder that before surgery possibly is true in certain cases, and does deserve to be questioned and discussed. it does so even more in a discussion about AA and whether or not it will remain in the future.

side note: just curious, i myself don't use proper punctuation, but do you speak in run-on sentences too? It's really hard to understand what you're saying when you have two distinct, separate sentences linked without some sort of comma, period, etc.
 
hopefuldoc87 said:
while i do agree the comment was ignorant, the fact that people may wonder that before surgery possibly is true in certain cases, and does deserve to be questioned and discussed. it does so even more in a discussion about AA and whether or not it will remain in the future.

side note: just curious, i myself don't use proper punctuation, but do you speak in run-on sentences too? It's really hard to understand what you're saying when you have two distinct, separate sentences linked without some sort of comma, period, etc.
Click to expand...


Just on forums I am not so carful with my punctuation I get kind of lazy when typing. I am also at work so I try to just get my point in and let it be.
 
gabem480 said:
[/b]

Just on forums I am not so carful with my punctuation I get kind of lazy when typing. I am also at work so I try to just get my point in and let it be.
Click to expand...

fair enough..i was just wondering 🙂
 
flaahless said:
What about the urm students that had 4.0/38+? Did they benefit?

Anyways, for the UCs and many other admissions committees, the primary application is reviewed in two parts. The first part is a numbers screen, those that pass get a secondary. Those that don't are put in a pile for further consideration. A fraction of individuals are selected from the 2nd pile based on properties of their application that suggest they will be successful. So, everyone is considered. Some people are fortunate/unique/lucky enough to make it out of the second pile and really shine. But to say that AA was used by the UCs is ludicrous.

I'm sensitive to the other side of the argument, however, it is not right or fair to blanketly assume that every urm benefitted from AA. That is a stereotype, that is racial profiling or whatever you wanna call it. Some did, some didn't. Some a little, some a lot. Some were ethnic minorities, some weren't. Judge people by their performance in med school, their interactions with people and how well they can dance, not on prejudiced assumptions drawn from misleading data.
Click to expand...

It's also not fair to assume that you have some awesomely awesome life story that pulled you out of auto-reject. Maybe you did, maybe you didn't. But you don't know whether you were helped by AA and nobody else does so, as it is unfair for others to assume you did, it's unfair for you to assume you have not. I would like to think that that's the point people are trying to make instead of some mean-spirited point but i could be wrong.

Also, if you read the language, UC schools can consider URM status as long as it's not in the intent of racial balancing (i.e. filling quotas of white/black/hispanic/asian/other students) but with the intent to create and reap the benefits of a richer, more diverse educational environment.
 
Last edited:
Also, just be thankful you are not interested in a career in law. Law schools have harsher admissions policies involving making a numerical index out of your LSAT score and GPA. You do write a personal statement but there is not an interview process like in med school. You are who you are on paper and that's it....
 
.
 
Last edited:
.
 
Last edited:
flaahless....just let it be

Me, you, para, the rest of the crew, and UCSF know your awesome, isnt that enough?
 
flaahless said:
What about the urm students that had 4.0/38+? Did they benefit?
Click to expand...

If there were more minority students with those stats we probably wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place. But, to be fair, since you advocate that stats aren't important, it doesn't make sense to use them here. MANY applicants have an interesting story, compelling reasons to enter medicine...don't assume that what you wrote was necessarily better because you got into top schools with a 29 and someone who had better stats did not.

I won't assume you were helped by AA if you don't assume your story/personality is automatically better than all the other applicants (urm or not) who were rejected from the same schools pre-interview. assumptions are wrong, right?
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Yeah whatever I'm done.

I'm for affirmative action and against denial.
 
Big picture:

Black, white, yellow, green... doesn't matter, do what you have to do to get in, don't make excuses for yourself, and get over it. You will be fine in life. And in this case, your opinion really doesn't matter.
 
It is a known fact that White women have benefited the most from Affirmative Action. I wonder how this played itself out in medical school admissions when the student population was predominately White males...
 
Look I wish just as much luck to caucasians as I do to minority students in the application process. I am not going to hate on a majority student if they get in somewhere I dont. If we all had this mindframe this thread on AA or any of these types of threads wouldn't exist on this website. We are all here to do the same thing and that is better ourselves, make a future for ourselves, and we are looking to make the difference that is needed in this country. Truth be when you go to med school diversity will probably only enhance your eductional experience. In my opinion a minority is going to bring experience to the class that others don't just the same for majority they will bring experiences minorities dont have that is why they are chosen to bring something to the table.
 
The world would be a better place if everyone were green, religion did not exist, and if drinking beer heavily were considered healthy. Oh! And for the potheads... If you could legally frollick in fields of marijuana.

Too bad that utopia doesn't exist...:banana:-->:diebanana:-->:boom:
 
flaahless said:
gabem480 said:
Regardless, assuming that urm students all benefitted from AA is a form of academic racial profiling.
Click to expand...

Pointing out how affirmative action is used is not racial profiling.

So if a person who is a URM that did not benefit from AA, and I guess wrong by saying he/she benefited --> then I am racial profiling.

If a person is a URM and did benefit from AA, and I guess correctly then I am not racially profiling in that case, then I'm just correctly identifying someone who benefited? Give me a break.

That would be just as stupid as me saying that I am not racist if I say, "All Asians are smart", because it is a "compliment", but if I say that "All Asians are dumb", then I'm being racist, because it happens to be negative in connotation.

Flahless, you are dancing around semantics. With that logic, one should say that the abbreviation "URM" is a word of racial profiling then as according to the definition it "profiles" certain races and ethnicities to be underrepresented. You can't have a mechanism in place if you don't clearly state who is benefiting from the mechanism. That doesn't mean every other aspect of the application is dropped (MCAT, GPA, etc.) but it does mean that one of the factors considered happens to be race or ethnicity.

The links I gave you from the AAMC itself say that race and ethnicity are are looked at in order to diversify a class (which I don't disagree with). I also agree that when it comes to medical school classes, when looking at race and ethnicity in comparing percentages from a class vs. the general population, certain races and ethnicities are highly represented vs. other are not represented in the same percentage as the general population, hence the term URM.

But let's not be delusional and say that affirmative action has nothing to do with race or ethnicity because it does, and for us to point out that it does, is racial profiling.
Click to expand...
 
gabem480 said:
[/B]


You are either blind or cant read if you really believe what you said about nobody saying a urm got in because they are urm it's a constant on this site. There is no need for me to practice proper punctuation on a forum if you have an issue with that don't read my posts. If anybody is being ignorant I would really suggest a reality check because instead of coming into this forum to be productive and add to the debate you come her to trash on punctuation what a joke.
Click to expand...

No that is your ASSUMPTION. No one here said that their skin color was THE reason they got in. That would be stupid. That is the assumption you are making when people are bringing up valid criticisms of affirmative action. No program is perfect, and for you to assume that affirmative action is the the panacea to solve this problem, is very naive.

The reason I am saying to at least use periods, is that it's hard to tell where one thought begins and one thought ends in your posts. I'm not trying to be the punctuation police, it's just easier to understand your post that way. For example your sentence, "You are either blind or cant read if you really believe what you said about nobody saying a urm got in because they are urm it's a constant on this site."
 
flaahless said:
Technically, there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian since schools were segregated 50 years ago.
Click to expand...

I thought you said you don't "speculate you informate". What do you think this is by saying that "Technically there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian." You're making a speculation without knowing for sure?
Not to mention, since public schools were desegregated there are people of color who have attended schools

flaahless said:
Ie: It's highly unlikely for any minority student to have a grandfather that graduated from Yale School of Med since the school was 98% caucasian at the time.
Click to expand...

Once again, you can't speculate, that saying based on that. You're still doing that by saying pretty much, "it's highly unlikely as 98% were caucasian at the time."

flaahless said:
Juries speculate based on a mountain of evidence pertaining to that particular individual and their crime or infraction.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me, juries have convicted people based on very little evidence largely circumstantial. "Mountain of evidence" -- LOL. Tell that to those wrongly convicted on death row, freed later by DNA evidence.[/QUOTE]

flaahless said:
Premeds judge urm students based on misleading data rather than each student's particular case. Do you see the difference? Juries judge me based on what I do, not based on what the published numbers for my particular ethnicity are.
Click to expand...

No, you're wrong there to. If the data was that misleading, as to how AA is of some benefit to URM students, then why did John Edwards and others fill out amicus curiae briefs in support of maintaining affirmative action?

flaahless said:
Premeds judge me without even knowing me, or anything about me. They see my ethnicity and think "urm that benefitted from AA."
Click to expand...

Then Flahless, if the premeds were to see your MDapplicants page, where on the site people DO list their GPA, MCAT scores, cirumstances, extracurriculars, etc. and make that same determination, then are they prejudging you or are they making a judgement based on preponderance of the facts? At what point is a person allowed to have an opinion whether someone benefited from AA? With your logic, people should not say anyone benefits from AA (as they are not 100% sure) and thus by definition the program doesn't benefit anyone and thus it would be cut by most universities.

If they say in a more positive way, "Wow! You're a URM! You'll definitely make it into med school!" - Do you consider that the same or different, than "URM that benefitted from AA". To me, they aren't any different, eventhough the intentions behind them are different.

Even without affirmative action, I would not expect even the dumbest premed to be disingenuous as to think the entire class would be nothing but white and asian. There are smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" URMs as there are smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" whites and asians. It's the smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" URMs that suffer from the institution of AA, as Clarence Thomas admits, implies that one race is inferior and thus should have a different yardstick to be measured by. People then WILL talk bc they will say that person was held to a different standard.

flaahless said:
I'm glad juries don't judge that way. That would be like a jury giving me a guilty verdict just because I'm African American and African Americans are the predominant ethnic population in the prison system.
Click to expand...

Then you obviously have not lived in the South or been to West Virginia.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
flaahless said:
Technically, there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian since schools were segregated 50 years ago.
Click to expand...

I thought you said you don't "speculate you informate". What do you think this is by saying that "Technically there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian." You're making a speculation without knowing for sure. Not to mention, since public schools were desegregated there are people of color who have attended colleges and their son or daughter has ended up applying later.

flaahless said:
Ie: It's highly unlikely for any minority student to have a grandfather that graduated from Yale School of Med since the school was 98% caucasian at the time.
Click to expand...

Once again, you can't speculate, that saying based on that. You're still doing that by saying pretty much, "it's highly unlikely as 98% were caucasian at the time." People can be biracial too - Look at Barack Obama.

flaahless said:
Juries speculate based on a mountain of evidence pertaining to that particular individual and their crime or infraction.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me, juries have convicted people based on very little evidence, if not largely circumstantial. "Mountain of evidence" -- LOL. Tell that to those wrongly convicted on death row, freed 10 years later by DNA evidence.

flaahless said:
Premeds judge urm students based on misleading data rather than each student's particular case. Do you see the difference? Juries judge me based on what I do, not based on what the published numbers for my particular ethnicity are.
Click to expand...

No, you're wrong there to. If the data was that misleading, as to how AA is of some benefit to URM students, then why did John Edwards and others fill out amicus curiae briefs in support of maintaining affirmative action?

flaahless said:
Premeds judge me without even knowing me, or anything about me. They see my ethnicity and think "urm that benefitted from AA."
Click to expand...

Then Flahless, if the premeds were to see your MDapplicants page, where on the site people DO list their GPA, MCAT scores, circumstances, extracurriculars, etc. and make that same determination, then are they still prejudging you or are they making a judgement based on preponderance of the facts? At what point is a person allowed to have an opinion whether someone benefited from AA? With your logic, a person should not say anyone benefits from AA (as they are not 100% sure) and assume that they are just floating among us somewhere, but we can't say anyone has benefited, bc that is "speculation." When programs don't have anyone benefit, guess what, they are cut. But AA is still here, so obviously enough people do benefit to justify keeping it.

If they say in a more positive way, "Wow! You're a URM! You'll definitely make it into med school!" - Do you consider that the same or different, than "URM that benefitted from AA". To me, they aren't any different, eventhough the intentions behind them are different.

Even without affirmative action, I would not expect even the dumbest premed to be disingenuous as to think the entire class would be nothing but white and asian. There are smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" URMs as there are smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" whites and asians. It's the smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" URMs that suffer from the institution of AA, as Clarence Thomas admits, implies that one race is inferior and thus should have a different yardstick to be measured by. People will say you were judged by a different yardstick when affirmative action is clear about saying that race/ethnicity is also taken into consideration. What I am saying is, you are ok with people benefitting from AA, without AA saying who it wants to benefit. Hence why you get defensive when you say AA uses race and ethnicity as factors in the admissions process, and say that the person is racially profiling.

flaahless said:
I'm glad juries don't judge that way. That would be like a jury giving me a guilty verdict just because I'm African American and African Americans are the predominant ethnic population in the prison system.
Click to expand...

Then you obviously have never lived in the South or been to West Virginia.
 
Last edited:
I am going to put my stamp of approval on this discussion.

thread-fail-stamp.gif
 
RunwayModel said:
I thought you said you don't "speculate you informate". What do you think this is by saying that "Technically there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian." You're making a speculation without knowing for sure. Not to mention, since public schools were desegregated there are people of color who have attended colleges and their son or daughter has ended up applying later.



Once again, you can't speculate, that saying based on that. You're still doing that by saying pretty much, "it's highly unlikely as 98% were caucasian at the time." People can be biracial too - Look at Barack Obama.



Are you kidding me, juries have convicted people based on very little evidence, largely circumstantial. "Mountain of evidence" -- LOL. Tell that to those wrongly convicted on death row, freed later by DNA evidence.
Click to expand...



No, you're wrong there to. If the data was that misleading, as to how AA is of some benefit to URM students, then why did John Edwards and others fill out amicus curiae briefs in support of maintaining affirmative action?



Then Flahless, if the premeds were to see your MDapplicants page, where on the site people DO list their GPA, MCAT scores, circumstances, extracurriculars, etc. and make that same determination, then are they still prejudging you or are they making a judgement based on preponderance of the facts? At what point is a person allowed to have an opinion whether someone benefited from AA? With your logic, people should not say anyone benefits from AA (as they are not 100% sure) and thus by definition the program doesn't benefit anyone and thus it would be cut by most universities.

If they say in a more positive way, "Wow! You're a URM! You'll definitely make it into med school!" - Do you consider that the same or different, than "URM that benefitted from AA". To me, they aren't any different, eventhough the intentions behind them are different.

Even without affirmative action, I would not expect even the dumbest premed to be disingenuous as to think the entire class would be nothing but white and asian. There are smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" URMs as there are smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" whites and asians. It's the smart, intelligent, hardworking, "look good on paper" URMs that suffer from the institution of AA, as Clarence Thomas admits, implies that one race is inferior and thus should have a different yardstick to be measured by. People then WILL talk bc they will say that person was held to a different standard.



Then you obviously have never lived in the South or been to West Virginia.[/quote]
post-108813-1136869006.jpg
 
This is an email that I received from an adcom member who frequently posts on SDN... I asked her specifically about AA and how the admission process really works...

1. it is a long email, i will try to edit it, but i don't want to seem like i am trying to manipulate her words

2. i don't use punctuation either on internet forums, text messaging, IM, or informal emails...so if u don't like it...tough🙂


1. i have been posting all year and i have been accepted into a number of schools...and there are always plenty of affirmative action debates on sdn...but i actually am curious how adcoms look at the urm status... is it really that important?...

There are a number of reasons why medical schools want to encourage and nurture URM applicants, students, and physicians. You and I know that so I won't belabor the point.


2. i know my mcat score and gpa isn't that great.... i know i will do great in school and i am not doubting myself or anything...but when i am explaining to other minority pre-meds who don't have perfect grades...that they should apply to more than just the hbcu's...how do i really explain how we can still be accepted into schools like sinai/wake forest...even if our grades are below their averages...

...are we in the same pool as everyone else...or is extra time taken to evaluate minority applicants to...to see if we demonstrate potential in other areas??
At my school, every applicant's stats get looked at quickly by the Dean, and then ~95% of the applications are sent out for review by 2 adcom members (in sequence, so the second is privy to the first's review). The written recommendations of the adcom members goes back to the Dean who issues interview invitations. (The other 5% are considered to have stats too low for consideration-- most likely gpa < 3.0 and MCAT < 22 or something like that.) Adcom members can see that an applicant is URM and they tend to be a little more generous in recommending interviews -- because there is this desire to have URM in our school, and among our alumni, and in the practice of medicine.




3. if i applied to your school what would the conversation have been like during the adcom meetings before i was granted an interview?
We don't discuss applications at meetings but the written comments might have focused on your MCAT which is considered at our school to be a predictor of performance in the first year. Generally, we expect >9 in each science area and an overall minimum of 28. Some adcom members might find something that strikes them in the essays or LOR and will recommend interview despite stats. Then it is up to the Dean to decide.


4. how do u decide who gets an interview...and how do you choose someone like me...or someone with a lower gpa/mcat over a person with a higher one...what is the logic?
We have some information about the characteristics of students who can survive and thrive at our school. the minimum is less (far less) than our average. For all kinds of reasons, schools are chasing the top students (i.e. applicants with highest stats). Nonetheless, there is room for a small number of students with less stellar academic records who have succeeded to a degree that they are expected to do well as med students.


5. is it a crap shoot?? or is every single application read and scrutinized???
As I said, just about every application is read. It can still be a bit of a crap shoot in that one person may interpret the application a bit differently than another or may be struck by something that stirs them to recommend interview despite a less than stellar academic record. (In your case, your clinical leadership and your academic performance in the nursing program.) Some committee members are very generous in recommending interviews and some are stingy. In the end, the Dean of Admissions decides to grant interviews.

If an applicant gets an interview, then the remarks of the interviewers, and the application, will be scrutinized by 8 or more adcom members who will give the applicant a numeric score (each member scores the application independently and instances where there is a great discrepancy get discussed by the group). Some URMs and certain legacies and "special" applicants can generate some vigorous discussion as some people will score them generously and others will express serious reservations about admission. ("Special" applicants can include those who are have some special connection to the institution but aren't legacies-- e.g. the child or friend of a trustee, faculty member, or elected official.)

Most offers go by the numbers... top scores get offers, very low scorers get discussed and declined admission (most often on the basis of very horrible interviews) and the middle gets waitlisted. The place where URM get special consideration is when one goes down the list and reaches the point where there can be only, let's say, 5 more offers. Now there may be 20 people with the same score and only 5 offers. Often, those 5 offers will go URM or special applicants over applicants who were judged "equal". Still and all, the yield (proportion who matriculate out of all who are offered admission) for URM is really poor because everyone is chasing the same small pool of talented students (you can see this yourself in the number of offers you had to turn down). The same goes for the 4.0/40 students. So, some schools sweeten the pot by offering generous scholarships so that they don't walk away from the admission cycle with 1% URM in their class. (It becomes a vicious cycle if you have no URM so then no URM apply, or those who do interview are turned off by the prospect of being the only URM in their class so schools will go to great lengths once they identify a URM whom they feel can succeed at their school.)

Long story short, schools do have room for some students who have stats lower than "average" and the students most likely to catch a break are URM and those with special connections.

Congrats on the numerous offers of admission and the very generous scholarship offers.
 
So this is a summary on the above posts along with my view points...

1. No AA in medical schools dmissions isn't going to end any time soon because it's purpose is much bigger than any of us individually...many people have presented facts regarding the disparities in healthcare, the lack of minority physicians, and the fact that minority physicians are more willing to work in under served areas

2. Yes some URMs are given special consideration and so are other special applicants...there aren't any numbers out there regarding those applicants...how many get in because of legacy/connections?...i may not benefit from these circumstances but i under stand why schools have to do this as well...and once again this purpose is greater than us individually..schools need money/donations to survive and provide us with the best educations...so they guarantee a spot for that family's son/daughter/ grandson...

3. schools want their averages high... so those with the highest stats are always given first priority...they will not choose someone with below average scores over someone with higher ones..regardless of skin color... med schools want prestige...that is not measured by diversity but by the number of research dollars and average mcat/gpa score...you and i all know that we are most likely going to go to our reach school over our "safety schools" if we are offered the same amount of money from both....

4. if you and i are equal on paper...and i get that spot over you..it is because i could offer them something you couldn't...my point of view/ my prospective/my life experiences, and yes that black guy who sat next to you all through highschool...in the same economic bracket as you...still has a different prospective on this world than you...his mother will respond to breast cancer differently, his body will absorb salt differently resulting in a high chance of hypertension, his kidney's function slightly differently then yours...(ever wonder why there is a multiplier when determining GFR for AA versus other groups)...and odds are there is a better chance he will care more a bout those issues than you (so he will research it, spend a little extra time with those patients, help develop different drugs)...this isn't guaranteed by any means ...but they know what they have been doing isn't working...

4. but u can't assume that a URM was accepted because of AA...but if they were...it doesn't matter...we all have to take the same boards, exams, clinicals in schools...med schools have this figured out... the average mcat/gpa doesn't represent the lowest possible number one can achieve and be successful in med school...it is just the average...schools know what the mins are for likely success versus likely failure and they have cut offs for that reason

5. why are our averages lower? too big of an answer for this forum... and i can't answer it 100% anyway

i guess this "summary" was just as long as the first post🙂
 
Last edited:
dancinRN1022 said:
1. i have been posting all year and i have been accepted into a number of schools...and there are always plenty of affirmative action debates on sdn...but i actually am curious how adcoms look at the urm status... is it really that important?...

There are a number of reasons why medical schools want to encourage and nurture URM applicants, students, and physicians. You and I know that so I won't belabor the point.
Click to expand...

Funny, how he evaded your question, as to how adcoms look at urm status with respect to the application process, and instead goes off on a tangent about how he won't go into why we encourage diversity. Totally off the mark.

dancinRN1022 said:
1. No AA in medical schools dmissions isn't going to end any time soon because it's purpose is much bigger than any of us individually...many people have presented facts regarding the disparities in healthcare, the lack of minority physicians, and the fact that minority physicians are more willing to work in under served areas
Click to expand...

Yes, we understand the ultimate premise of affirmative action, it isn't a shock to us. To sum it up in a word: Duh.

dancinRN1022 said:
2. Yes some URMs are given special consideration and so are other special applicants...there aren't any numbers out there regarding those applicants...how many get in because of legacy/connections?...i may not benefit from these circumstances but i under stand why schools have to do this as well...and once again this purpose is greater than us individually..schools need money/donations to survive and provide us with the best educations...so they guarantee a spot for that family's son/daughter/ grandson...
Click to expand...

What do you consider a "special" applicant? People who are URMs, are not kids with Down's syndrome or cerebral palsy, where they are different in some respect or "special" or those who have something additional to offer like you being a nurse, thus offering a special experience different from most applicants. I am willing to bet that the number of people who get in because of legacy is not equivalent to the number of people who get in because of affirmative action (not that this number is high either). This may work at the undergraduate level, but certainly not at the medical school level. The ramifications would be too high as you have people who later will be taking care of the health of patients thus affecting malpractice rates. Now yes, many medical students have family members who were doctors, and legacy at a particular institution may get you an interview, but certainly not an automatic admission without other academic statistics. Just being the son of a doctor who went to a particular medical school does not guarantee you a medical school admissions by any means unlike maybe an undergraduate school or business school.

dancinRN1022 said:
3. schools want their averages high... so those with the highest stats are always given first priority...they will not choose someone with below average scores over someone with higher ones..regardless of skin color... med schools want prestige...that is not measured by diversity but by the number of research dollars and average mcat/gpa score...you and i all know that we are most likely going to go to our reach school over our "safety schools" if we are offered the same amount of money from both....
Click to expand...

That is just not true. First off, while the person with lower stats, may not be chosen in direct comparison to someone with higher ones, as even admitted in your post, "The other 5% are considered to have stats too low for consideration-- most likely gpa < 3.0 and MCAT < 22 or something like that.) Adcom members can see that an applicant is URM and they tend to be a little more generous in recommending interviews --". You know very well that someone who is not an URM (which includes Asians as well, not just caucasians), could never get an interview with a gpa < 3.0 and MCAT < 22, yet based on race/ethnicity (as by the definition of a URM by the AAMC), is measured by a different yardstick and the Adcom member is "more generous in recommending interviews". Please see the MANY mdapps applications on http://www.mdapplicants.com as proof.

dancinRN1022 said:
4. if you and i are equal on paper...and i get that spot over you..it is because i could offer them something you couldn't...my point of view/ my prospective/my life experiences, and yes that black guy who sat next to you all through highschool...in the same economic bracket as you...still has a different prospective on this world than you...his mother will respond to breast cancer differently, his body will absorb salt differently resulting in a high chance of hypertension, his kidney's function slightly differently then yours...(ever wonder why there is a multiplier when determining GFR for AA versus other groups)...and odds are there is a better chance he will care more a bout those issues than you (so he will research it, spend a little extra time with those patients, help develop different drugs)...this isn't guaranteed by any means ...but they know what they have been doing isn't working...
Click to expand...

This has to be the stupidest part of your argument. You are saying that people should assume that as someone is of a different race and ethnicity thus being a marker of different prospective??? There are many things that result in a different perspective with race only being one of a myriad of factors. How about being raised by a single-parent, highest education level of parents, going to public vs. private school, the list will go on an on. Implying that being of URM status automatically imples a different perspective is downright insulting. i.e. "if you and i are equal on paper...and i get that spot over you..it is because i could offer them something you couldn't...my point of view/ my prospective/my life experiences," --- I think you are exhibiting the defense mechanism of rationalization. You'll learn it in Behavioral Science. You say, "this isn't guaranteed by any means ...but they know what they have been doing isn't working..." - so the solution with a flawed system is to replace it with ANOTHER flawed system. Affirmative action has been there for a while now, and still we are nowhere close to get the projected percentages of minorities in the medical field to be similar to the general population. If we continue with affirmative action, with the rate now, and including population decrease and increase, we STILL won't reach that goal decades from now or even a century. As said by previous posters, affirmative action is not the panacea, as it was once thought, to solve the problem. What's worse is that URMs who do have excellent academic stats, are being unfairly labeled as having benefited from AA, when they worked their hardest and earned it with stellar stats. Look at Barack Obama. He went to Harvard Law School was president of Harvard Law Review and did academically very well, and he is considered by many to be an affirmative action case for the presidency capitalizing on supposed white guilt. To bring up an example here, look at TupacalipseT96's post and click on his MDApps page. Sorry Tupacalipse, but you're a very good example here. He has STELLAR MCATs and a STELLAR GPA as well as a very impressive list of extracurricular activities. Then look at the comments. One comment says, "haha bro, you are a ****ing genius. without AA, you'd probably get into 1/2 the schools." and the other says, "Awesome stats and applying as URM...you're going to do great!" Now, I know he doesn't give a **** probably (Kudos to you Thugalicious). But if AA did not exist, he wouldn't get any of those bs comments. It would be, "Hey you're smart, you'll definitely get into med school", not "Hey you're smart, (with emphasis on) AND you're a URM, you'll definitely get into med school."

Now your case is different, you were a nurse beforehand so you have something different and additional to offer that makes you different than another applicant. That is completely justified and so that experience unequivocally gives you different perspective. How? You know what the medical field is like, you know about treating patients, etc.

Comparing your experience of being a nurse to an affirmative action criteria of race and ethnicity, is comparing apples to oranges and doesn't make sense. You have something extra offered by your CV based on what you did. Your actual experiences are being judged here. You wouldn't feel the same way if everyone was a nurse and then went for medical school, and then applied affirmative action. To say that someone automatically has a more "wanted" perspective by just looking at the color of their skin is insulting. You don't know what their experience is until you interview them.

So since we are different physiologically with respect to renal function and response to breast cancer, is that your idea of the "special applicant"?? So because he/she may be slightly physiologically varied based off of race/ethnicity, that implies that "there is a better chance he will care more a bout those issues than you (so he will research it, spend a little extra time with those patients, help develop different drugs)?????

Wow, throughout my entire medical school education, I never knew that empathy and career aspirations could be tracked through physiology? And the other applicant who is equal in every other respect, wouldn't care to research it at all, wouldn't give a crap for his patients, and won't go into research to develop new drugs. And to think that we had the MD/PhD program for that purpose of people doing research and developing drugs. We can use DancinRN's improved method of "perspective" instead.

dancinRN1022 said:
4. but u can't assume that a URM was accepted because of AA...but if they were...it doesn't matter...we all have to take the same boards, exams, clinicals in schools...med schools have this figured out... the average mcat/gpa doesn't represent the lowest possible number one can achieve and be successful in med school...it is just the average...schools know what the mins are for likely success versus likely failure and they have cut offs for that reason

5. why are our averages lower? too big of an answer for this forum... and i can't answer it 100% anyway
Click to expand...

Of course, you can't be 100% sure, but guess what? If it is known that there is a mechanism in place to give even a slight advantage to people based on something they can't control (i.e. their race or ethnicity), people will assume the people with those criteria will have benefited whether that is right or wrong, people will do it.

Yet Flahless is shocked when people have the "nerve" to say if someone benefited or not. If AA is not a huge deal, why be embarassed to say if someone benefited from it? He wants it both ways, let people benefit and no one can criticize or point it out. God forbid, I quote Ann Coulter (I'm a Democrat by the way; yeah I know lol), but it it's in the same vein as her self-titled "doctrine of infallibility". Meaning in this case, ok let people benefit, but we won't acknowledge that people benefit and you can't point out who might have benefited, even if you're correct. Let's face it sometimes, you'll be correct and sometimes you'll be wrong.

I do agree with your statement which is what I have been saying all along.
"schools do have room for some students who have stats lower than "average" and the students most likely to catch a break are URM and those with special connections." I do disagree however to say that the rate of people who catch a break of URMS vs. special connections is not the same, as the connection factor only really works strongly at the undergraduate level not at the medical school level when it comes to acceptance. Now with respect to getting the interview, yes a legacy can definitely help.
 
Last edited:
surfstarj said:
Well it was several schools, some ranked some unranked so fairly across the board but no top 10s. Saying a school I had "no business" applying to is a little silly in light of this conversation if we're talking about AA, is it not? We are talking about a process that allows schools to look past numbers in favor of whole applicants. I thought I'd give it a try with an 11/13/11 MCAT despite a somewhat low GPA, so I had some numbers going for me anyway.

Regardless, if a low stat non-URM is rejected pre-interview how would they know their life story and whether or not it would aid me in my medical career. That's just my point. IT IS jumping to conclusions without knowing me to assume that just because I'm not technically URM, that my life story isn't worth hearing and/or isn't worth overlooking my GPA for? Haha, come on. That's the other side of the coin. It is judging me by my skin color (which is olive, by the way).

People get hung up on the numbers side of AA but how are we deciding who gets to share their story and who doesn't? Look at Flaahless, he's controversial because he had a 3.3 and a 29 mcat with a 7 in VR. He had tremendous success in the cycle. Obviously he's got something going for him in personality/life experiences, but they definitely had to overlook his scores to give him interviews which allowed him to shine in the first place. Both sides of the argument for or against AA need to be sensitive to the other, that's all I'm saying. No need to beat points over each other's heads.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and that's what Flahless doesn't get. If someone else had his same stats of a 3.3 and 39 MCAT with a 7 in verbal (or as quoted from Wake Forest "a verbal score that low is unacceptable from a native english speaker.", same extracurriculars, same personal story, same personal statement etc. with the ONLY difference being, that Flahless was a non-URM, he would not have a prayer of getting an interview, no matter how great his smile and personality may be, bc guess what? He wouldn't be given the interview to get his foot in the door to show that smile and personality. AA allows URMs to share their story, that non-URMs would not get to do, even with everything else being equal.

As mentioned by DancinRN at one particular med school:

"95% of the applications are sent out for review by 2 adcom members (in sequence, so the second is privy to the first's review). The written recommendations of the adcom members goes back to the Dean who issues interview invitations. (The other 5% are considered to have stats too low for consideration-- most likely gpa < 3.0 and MCAT < 22 or something like that.) Adcom members can see that an applicant is URM and they tend to be a little more generous in recommending interviews.

AA measures people on a different standard. Does it mean they take someone who is completely unqualified? Of course not. Does that mean all the URMs are in the other 5%. Of course not. But there is a slight edge given to URMs, and medical schools do not deny that they use AA in this way.
 
okay i have to admit that i skimmed through your debate with me because i really am busy packing to go to medical school but this is a great distraction....and i have been up all night...

this is in no particular order

1. i did not define special applicants...read the letter...the adcom member did...

2. yes! i do think that my prospective as an african american female in this country differs than yours... i think that just based on race alone our prospectives are different... including race doesn't exclude any of the things you listed... of course socioeconomic status, family life, parent's education level also influence different prospectives...i never judged whose was better/ worse or more wanted... i didn't say that a urm was automatically more desired than you over all...what i said and/or meant was...if all things being equal we were the same on paper and IF i a urm was chosen over you...you should understand that atleast in terms of med school admissions...this isn't because they have a thing for black faces...they are recruiting more minority students because of our possible/ impact and different prospective we can provide...

no physiology alone doesn't make your more empathetic i never said that... but i do think it is the personal nature of that physiology that makes us more conerned with one issue over another...and of course we can care about things/ppl that we have no real connection to this is just a different approach...there is only so much we can do...there are different reasons we take on the specialties and the research that we do...this isn't all or none...but the way that we have been doing things isn't working for the minority population in this country in terms of healthcare...and not for a lack of effort for the most part...

who said affirmative action was a panacea??? i don't think most people who are arguing in defense of it feel that way at all.... if it was the great answer then we wouldn't need it now... and i can't iamgine that anyone didn't wish that we didn't need it anymore...but u can't get rid of it..until u find what that answer is... the op question wasn't...is affirmative action going to single-handedly end health care disparities and racial tension in this country?? no he asked ...is it going to end any time soon... and until they can think of a way to fix all of the problems with our educational system, family values, family structure...then nope... it won't...for the reasons i said earlier...

and it is a very naive response to think that once we get rid if affirmative action everyone will think we are equal intellectually and that we deserve our spots...most people aren't that bad...most people judge the individual not their race... most people are too sick to care... but for those that do care about race... they will always care about it... this just gives them a different outlet to express those prejudices... AA isn't going to force someone to judge me... and ending it won't stop someone from judging me...

oh... and i did take behavioral sciences...and i disagree with you there as well... go figure!

and oh... i included that letter... to give a real life view on how it is looked upon in admissions... i think people put too much weight into it...

u can tear apart the letter all u want... but the adcoms point appeared to be... yes we use AA...not all the time...when we do we feel the aplicants can succeed...this just ensures we include them in our class and don't over look them...but we also make these special considerations... for other types of applicants as well...

this means... don't assume that urm who was accepted got in because of affirmative action... and don't assume that those who got in because of it... "stole your spot" because they were chosen because they fit into the class in a way that the people who were rejected couldn't...

runway model...when i say "you"... i am not always referring to you personally....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
SDN Article: Practical Perspectives for Navigating the Admissions Process
Replies
0
Views
523
Heidi Fuchs
H
B
Is there a reason that interviews with a lot of compliments end in rejection/waitlist?
Replies
15
Views
2K
beptune
B
kingkong6712
Is demonstrated interest factored into admission decision?
Replies
7
Views
2K
AsclepiusAdvisingLLC
AsclepiusAdvisingLLC
D
  • Question Question
Did the repeal of affirmative action change diversity secondary prompts?
Replies
6
Views
1K
bananaboatt
bananaboatt
E
SDN Article: How to Make a (More) Transparent Holistic Admissions Process
Replies
0
Views
890
Emil Chuck, PhD
E
Top Bottom