Justification to admit URMs

Started by soy sauce
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
interesting info. Do you know whether other medical schools share the same type of info regarding how many undergrads from each school matriculated into the aforementioned medical schools?

For example 33 UCLA undergrads made up the class of 2008, and 12 UCB undergrads, etc... Thanks...🙂
 
so according to these statistics, biology majors tend to comprise the greatest number of spots while psychbio majors rarely ever get in to UCLA med? 😕
 
zbruinz, I saw a list of majors accepted but where did you get the breakdown by percentage?
thanks
*Edit* sorry, I found it. This info is really useful thanks soy sauce
 
zbruinz said:
interesting info. Do you know whether other medical schools share the same type of info regarding how many undergrads from each school matriculated into the aforementioned medical schools?

For example 33 UCLA undergrads made up the class of 2008, and 12 UCB undergrads, etc... Thanks...🙂
Click to expand...


Jeez...I really hope SC accepts the same number of their own students, cuz otherwise we're getting screwed by the UCs. Another reason to hate being from Cali. 😡

I found the "Unequal Treatment" section to be a weak argument. A lot of that evidence is circumstantial and could certainly be more of a sociological/economic issue than a racial one. Correlation is not causation! Apparently the author realized this, because the following "Beyond Income and Insurance" section was very compelling. The publication sited from slides 24 to 26 was also very good. Conclusion: While only 7 of the 39 slides make any sort of real argument, the argument was a strong one 👍
 
soy sauce said:
No. It uses statistics to explain how URMs are more likely than others to improve certain aspects of public health in California.
Click to expand...

i was tricked! its two presentations in one!

very interesting stuff, much needed to might I add with all the debates going on and everything
 
I have a question~The slide in which the average GPAs/MCAT scores for the class of 2008 are listed and the slide in which the average GPAs/MCAT scores for disadvantaged matriculants are listed have data in parenthesis. Are the number in parenthesis national averages for the first slide and the class average for the second slide?
thanks
 
Zoom-Zoom said:
Jeez...I really hope SC accepts the same number of their own students, cuz otherwise we're getting screwed by the UCs. Another reason to hate being from Cali. 😡

I found the "Unequal Treatment" section to be a weak argument. A lot of that evidence is circumstantial and could certainly be more of a sociological/economic issue than a racial one. Correlation is not causation! Apparently the author realized this, because the following "Beyond Income and Insurance" section was very compelling. The publication sited from slides 24 to 26 was also very good. Conclusion: While only 7 of the 39 slides make any sort of real argument, the argument was a strong one 👍
Click to expand...

I agree--no evidence is given that admitting URMs will improve racist practices in clinical settings. However, to improve health care in underserved areas, graduating more URMs seems to be the most effective solution.
 
soy sauce said:
I agree--no evidence is given that admitting URMs will improve racist practices in clinical settings. However, to improve health care in underserved areas, graduating more URMs seems to be the most effective solution.
Click to expand...

I think there is some evidence. Minority doctors were shown to work with minority populations. I didn't know there was any concrete evidence to support this, but it looks true. And, minority populations are indeed given worse care than their white counterparts even when adjusted for socio/economic factors...that's something else I didn't know. It seems pretty conclusive that more minority doctors are needed. I just don't like the 30 slides of filler and misinterpreted stats that seem to only perpetuate the deabte further. I guess there just needs to be more research on the topic.


But yeah, 25% good slides is a pretty good ratio considering some of the classes I've had :laugh:
 
zbruinz said:
so according to these statistics, biology majors tend to comprise the greatest number of spots while psychbio majors rarely ever get in to UCLA med? 😕
Click to expand...

What you don't have is the denominator. How many psychbio majors applied? Without that number you don't know if psychbio majors are more or less likely to be admitted to medical school in comparison to bio majors.
 
soy sauce said:
This lecture explains why it is in the State of California's best interest to admit URMs. There is no arguing with the facts it presents. The only question I see is in quantifying how many URM students should be admitted.

Please peruse this lecture before commenting.

http://career.ucla.edu/GraduateSchool&PreProfessionalServices/TheodoreHall.asp

Also, there are detailed admission statistics for UCLA.
Click to expand...

Please excuse my ignorance on this matter, but didn't California outlaw AA with Proposition 209? Although the slideshow doesn't explicity support AA, it does seem to come precariously close.
 
dr_zippo said:
Please excuse my ignorance on this matter, but didn't California outlaw AA with Proposition 209? Although the slideshow doesn't explicity support AA, it does seem to come precariously close.
Click to expand...
Oh its the UC system's AA in disguise for sure. If UC want to count race as a factor for admissions then it should go campaign and get the law changed. What it's doing now is a blatant violation of state law and ILLEGAL.
 
LizzyM said:
What you don't have is the denominator. How many psychbio majors applied? Without that number you don't know if psychbio majors are more or less likely to be admitted to medical school in comparison to bio majors.
Click to expand...

Since there are many premeds in psychobio, I assume that many applied to medical school, defninitely not as many as the regular bio people, but to see only 2 or 3 get in is rather discouraging. Makes me wonder whether one's major really does matter.

On another note, anyone find statistics like this for other medical schools?
 
I promised I would stay away from these threads, but the curiosity is stronger once again...

I don't like the sound of the title....just poor choice of words.

That's my comment. I'm leaving. Keep the insults and rants to yourselves please. 😍
 
I find this presentation to be very interesting. I may even present it at our premed club. I glad that it finally shows that minority doctors do practice and cater to minority populations. I found it interesting though (but not surprising) that there was data showing that blacks and hispanics received less quality of care at non-teaching hospitals. Overall, the second powerpoint presentation shows that on more than one level, minority applicants have some serious obstacles, and should be sought after to improve the quality of healthcare for all Americans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.