Hi all,
If anyone could spare an opinion of what happened during my UB interview, I would be very appreciative.
I recently interviewed there and absolutely loved everything I saw (it's one of my top choices so I had gone on 3 tours before that)- even the other interviewees were some of the nicest and most incredible people I ever met (I got the chance to meet 3/4 of them since the day lasted 7 hrs). The first interview was very enjoyable but I had a rather interesting second interview discussion about my ethnicity.
I am a mix of mostly Northern African ("white") and some Southern ("black"). I always put "other" or "mixed" when asked about ethnicity (I don't really consider myself conventional black or conventional white), but the AMCAS had no such options and I could not write them in. At the time, I thought nothing of it- figured it was for statistical purposes only- so I guessed putting white and black would be the most accurate description for the statisticians at the AAMC (plus it felt like denying part of my heritage to just put white) and quickly moved on. I did NOT put down disadvantaged. I worked with disadvantaged children, have seen the very real hardship they go through (for example one of the happiest days of my life was when a few of the 8th graders I taught stopped hanging out with a group of teens that were going to ruin the kids' lives). I would never ever try to take advantage of that, as I was fortunate enough to grow up without such hardship and these kids really need all the help the can get to break the cycle of poverty. Hence, I figured what I put for ethnicity didn't really matter at all since I put no to disadvantaged and made no claims or insinuations to being a disadvantaged minority.
But my second interviewer seemed to think differently. After asking warm-up questions like how old my parents are, he promptly asked me why I put black on my application. At first I thought he might just be curious or conversational, but his body language coupled with his tone of voice and the fact that he was taking very careful notes on what I said quickly assured me of the gravity of the situation at hand. He spent a considerable part of the interview asking me what was the "black" part of me (ie what percentage, asked about tribe's history, asked about side of family, etc.). I tried to say it shouldn't matter since I didn't claim to be a minority, but he ignored me. It was truly one of the most degrading and humiliating experiences of my life having someone tearing into the identity at my very core (even worse than being held at the border for 9 hrs post-9/11 for being "one of them"). Of course I tried to act as composed as possible and responded politely and respectfully. But it did hurt, a lot, especially walking out of a school that I love in my city that I love. Furthermore, I felt the questioning was completely uncalled for. If I tried to use that small ethnic percentage to my advantage by claiming minority/disadvantaged status, then by all means I deserved a rejection for such a tasteless and unethical move (and even a letter to my home institution). But I did not, so ethnicity should have been absolutely no issue. I feel discriminated against just for being open about who I am, and can now understand how our homosexual army personnel feel under "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policies. I learned my lesson- always leave ethnicity blank (though its a sad day in America when you are afraid to be open about your ethnicity for fear of repercussions from admissions committees). But at the same time I feel very badly about how I may have made my interviewer feel.
Make no mistake, I am criticizing the mindset not the interviewer. My interviewer was a great stand-up kind of guy. His appointment to Clinical Service Director of a major pathology/lab department attests to his leadership and fantastic character qualities. He is very generous, and donated quite significant sums of money to causes like a physician advocacy group, the local zoo, art gallery, and philharmonic orchestra. He is a devoted father, having raised a son who attended UB Med and became an oral/maxillofacial surgeon. Inspiringly, even after facing the tragedy of loosing his wife 4 years ago, he continues to give back to the medical school by serving on such capacities as faculty council member and admissions committee member. I can completely understand the angle he came from. Before training at Walter Reed, he attended Howard Medical as an African American from the mid to late 1960s in the midst of such events as the assassination of MLK, the Selma/Montgomery marches, and the 1965 Voting Rights act. I have no doubt he faced significant challenges and turmoil to get to where he is now. Such experiences would give him a special sense of empathy toward those who are truly disadvantaged today. If I were in such a position and I believed a student was trying to take advantage of a system designed to help the disadvantaged, I would not only be angry, but hurt and saddened too. UB gave me a wait list spot which I am incredibly grateful for after expecting rejection, but i have no doubt that the incident was thoroughly discussed by the committee.
Sorry for the rant, so here are my three questions: 1)Is my thought process reasonable, or am I way off base? 2)I feel badly about what happened, what's the best way to apologize for any offense he may have felt ? 3)And how can we stop such a situation- where both the interviewer and interviewee can get hurt- from ever happening again?
I intend to contact the AAMC with a prepared argument supporting the creation of an "other" for ethnicity with an open-ended text box field. But as a longer term solution I hope discussion is had about possibly having a separate section for "disadvantaged/underrepresented" where the applicant can explain what makes him/her disadvantaged (ex. minority, socioeconomically, etc.). In such a situation, information in the ethnicity section would be unnecessary for schools supporting affirmative action to have (since it would be covered in the disadvantaged/ underrepresented section). Thus, I think schools should not have access to the ethnicity section until after the admissions cycle, for statistical purposes only. This would ensure that the data is not misused. But of course I am only a premed and am in no position to say what works and what won't.
What are your thoughts? Any other ideas?
I know this was a bit long, but if anybody does wind up responding, I really do appreciate it. I know that time is a very precious commodity.