Affirmative Action Poll

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
•••quote:•••Originally posted by owen_osh:
•One of the central issues in the affirmative action debate seems to be the question of why URM's have lower numbers than whites and asians. The usual explanation I hear on SDN is:
1) The overall URM pool is smaller.
I've never really understood how this explains anything.
2) URM's are disadvantaged, etc.
Maybe, I don't know if there are specific numbers on the economic situation of URM applicants compared to non-URM. In any case, URM's must be college students to be applying to med school, so they have an advantage that many Americans of all racial backgrounds lack.

The possibility I've never seen raised is the issue of racial differences. I think as doctors and student doctors we should all be aware that genetic racial differences exist, because those differences are relevent to the health of patients (eg glaucoma, sickle cell, etc.) If genetic racial differences exist in some areas, is it impossible that they also exist in the area of intelligence?

I have read about some studies that show that the mean score on IQ tests for African-Americans was one standard deviation below the mean for whites, and the mean for Mexican-Americans was one half sd below the mean for white. The mean for Asian-Americans is 2-3 points higher than that of whites.

If there are variations in intelligence distributions that correspond to genetic variation between racial groups, then should we ignore the fact or possibility or investigate it? I'm not really sure; maybe it's too dangerous and harmful to look into. But on the other hand, maybe a scientific understanding of intelligence would be helpful.

What if low intelligence were thought of as a disease that could be treated? Perhaps in the future genetic engineering could make us all truly equal.•••••"If we do not learn from history we are doomed to repeat it." That theory of lower intelligence based on race was used during the civil war to prove that slaves were not human but clever apes. And again 1857 to say that Dred Scott was property, like cattle to be help in captivity. Then again the argument was used during WWII to say that the Tuskeegee Airmen (an African American Flying unit with an unblemished record)did not have the IQ to comprehend the logistics or handle the manual dexterity of flying an aircraft in battle or in peace time.
Members don't see this ad.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by owen_osh:
•One of the central issues in the affirmative action debate seems to be the question of why URM's have lower numbers than whites and asians. The usual explanation I hear on SDN is:
1) The overall URM pool is smaller.
I've never really understood how this explains anything.
2) URM's are disadvantaged, etc.
Maybe, I don't know if there are specific numbers on the economic situation of URM applicants compared to non-URM. In any case, URM's must be college students to be applying to med school, so they have an advantage that many Americans of all racial backgrounds lack.

The possibility I've never seen raised is the issue of racial differences. I think as doctors and student doctors we should all be aware that genetic racial differences exist, because those differences are relevent to the health of patients (eg glaucoma, sickle cell, etc.) If genetic racial differences exist in some areas, is it impossible that they also exist in the area of intelligence?

I have read about some studies that show that the mean score on IQ tests for African-Americans was one standard deviation below the mean for whites, and the mean for Mexican-Americans was one half sd below the mean for white. The mean for Asian-Americans is 2-3 points higher than that of whites.

If there are variations in intelligence distributions that correspond to genetic variation between racial groups, then should we ignore the fact or possibility or investigate it? I'm not really sure; maybe it's too dangerous and harmful to look into. But on the other hand, maybe a scientific understanding of intelligence would be helpful.

What if low intelligence were thought of as a disease that could be treated? Perhaps in the future genetic engineering could make us all truly equal.•••••What? Are you serious??? So let me get this straight,you are saying that genetically speaking
the average non-White person is born with a lower intelligence than say a White person? That people of color are suffering from some disease that needs to be treated or cured? Oh please correct me if I am misinterpreting your "informative" veiw...
 
People... r:e:l:a:x... no one has said anything inappropriate yet, so let's just keep it up, ok?

I'm not saying here that I agree with owen_osh. However I think his logic is sound enough that he deserves our respect. He has a very solid arguement that is very unpopular and I think it was very brave of him to share his ideas... and very civil of him to do so in such a sophisticated manner.

owen_osh: Care to defend your point?

2badr: Just so you know... owen_osh believes Asians to be the smartest race, not whites. Read his post again :)
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I noticed that,just did not get a chance to comment with all the smoke coming out of my ears and all... :) :) :)
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by owen_osh:
•One of the central issues in the affirmative action debate seems to be the question of why URM's have lower numbers than whites and asians. The usual explanation I hear on SDN is:
1) The overall URM pool is smaller.
I've never really understood how this explains anything.
2) URM's are disadvantaged, etc.
Maybe, I don't know if there are specific numbers on the economic situation of URM applicants compared to non-URM. In any case, URM's must be college students to be applying to med school, so they have an advantage that many Americans of all racial backgrounds lack.

The possibility I've never seen raised is the issue of racial differences. I think as doctors and student doctors we should all be aware that genetic racial differences exist, because those differences are relevent to the health of patients (eg glaucoma, sickle cell, etc.) If genetic racial differences exist in some areas, is it impossible that they also exist in the area of intelligence?

I have read about some studies that show that the mean score on IQ tests for African-Americans was one standard deviation below the mean for whites, and the mean for Mexican-Americans was one half sd below the mean for white. The mean for Asian-Americans is 2-3 points higher than that of whites.

If there are variations in intelligence distributions that correspond to genetic variation between racial groups, then should we ignore the fact or possibility or investigate it? I'm not really sure; maybe it's too dangerous and harmful to look into. But on the other hand, maybe a scientific understanding of intelligence would be helpful.

What if low intelligence were thought of as a disease that could be treated? Perhaps in the future genetic engineering could make us all truly equal.•••••"If we do not learn from history we are doomed to repeat it." That theory of lower intelligence based on race was used during the civil war to prove that slaves were not human but clever apes. And again in 1857 to say that Dred Scott was property, like cattle to be held in captivity. Then again the argument was used during WWII to say that the Tuskegee Airmen (an African American Flying unit with an unblemished record. April 26, 1945, the Tuskegee Airmen downed the last four enemy aircraft destroyed in combat in the Mediterranean theater,flew 200 bomber escort missions against some of the most heavily-defended targets in the Third Reich and never lost a bomber to enemy fighters. )did not have the IQ to comprehend the logistics or handle the manual dexterity of flying an aircraft in battle or in peace time. Don't get me wrong, social upbringing does affect how IQ's develop, but the standard of testing cannot be used due to the standard of education received by many URM's. "Murray and Herrnstein's claim that the lower social strata of society are in that position largely due to IQ differences is nearly as weak and nearly as destructive as their racial claim. It is true that IQ correlates strongly with social success and it is plausible that intelligence plays some causal role in social achievement. But it is equally plausible that many aspects of social success play a causal role in determining measured IQ. Moreover, many other factors, such as attractiveness, height, personality, energy level, and "character", to name a few, also play important roles in determining achievement. To go from a set of correlations between social factors to a model attempting to show which factors cause others, and how much they do so, always involves making a number of prescientific, often speculative, assumptions, and the interpretation of multivariate statistical techniques is as much an art as a science.
History is replete with elites who have taken their own cultural qualities as evidence that they are naturally superior to the unfortunate classes beneath them. Perhaps Murray should see how far his own personal IQ would get him in the "IQ tests" of some other culture, say the streets of Harlem or a third world country." --The Dishonest Claim of Genetic Racial IQ Differences by Douglas Metzler University of Pittsburgh.

The studies that are often used to state the differences in IQ among races are often published by extreme right wing activists who use science to justify a political agenda. These studies are often based on the assumption that there is only one type of intelligence (read The Natural History of Nonsense by Evan Bergen and The Fallacy of Race by Ashley Montagu.

Look as a URM I can say that there are advantages and diadvatages but I honestly believe that IQ has nothing to do with it. Hard work, dedication and morality should be the only measure. Which is why Affirmative Action is a flawed policy. It's flawed because of the nature of the human to want to be fair. It's flawed because of the competitive nature of our society. It's flawed because of the current definition of URM. (I believe there are white URM's also). But, thankfully, AA does not define a URM based on IQ.

As for genetically altering intelligence, I must say that we would be flirting with a very dangerous future. But that's another thread. Here's something to think about

"In the meantime, we should heed Peter Singer's words:

...the genetic hypothesis does not imply that we should reduce our efforts to overcome other causes of inequality between people.

...the fact that the average IQ of one racial group is a few points higher than that of another does not allow anyone to say that all members of the higher IQ group have higher IQs than all members of the lower IQ group....

And, having a higher IQ does not justify racism (Singer, 1993), or any other kind of -ism, for that matter."
 
I'd just like to ask this: why do you want to assume that owen doesn't believe in civil rights or that he's is favor of genocide or something like that?

I believe that someone can acknowledge differences between races without having any malice... and even without being a racist. Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another. But what defines "superiority?" I don't believe that "higher IQ" always means "more superior." You're assuming that if one believes that the average member of race A has a lower IQ than the average member of race B that this person must necessarily view race A as inferior to race B. But why must that be? Is intelligence really so important that it can be the primary basis for judgement?! I don't think so.

I think it's very possible that Qwen acknowledges that there are differences between races without believing that any race is ~over-all~ superior to another.

Of course... I don't know what he really thinks... because he's not posting any responses! Owen, where are you!?
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
•I'd just like to ask this: why do you want to assume that owen doesn't believe in civil rights or that he's is favor of genocide or something like that?

I believe that someone can acknowledge differences between races without having any malice... and even without being a racist. Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another. But what defines "superiority?" I don't believe that "higher IQ" always means "more superior." You're assuming that if one believes that the average member of race A has a lower IQ than the average member of race B that this person must necessarily view race A as inferior to race B. But why must that be? Is intelligence really so important that it can be the primary basis for judgement?! I don't think so.

I think it's very possible that Qwen acknowledges that there are differences between races without believing that any race is ~over-all~ superior to another.

Of course... I don't know what he really thinks... because he's not posting any responses! Owen, where are you!?•••••Never said that he doesn't believe in civil rights. What I stated was based on what he has read. The first line of my statement was directed at the author of the books that he probably read. The other parts were to show how the books and that theory can cause harm. And if you noticed I also said that AA is ttthhhpppppttttt!!!!! And I also did not asssume that because a may have some better than b that means A is smarter than B. What I stated was that IQ has nothing to do with race. He wanted to know if race was ever looked at. well it has been and still is a hot (though nonsensical) topic. As for him being in favor of genocide well I think you are are assuming that I am assuming, so let's stop assuming that the other is assuming. hehehehe
 
silvercholla: lol! Ok, sorry... I'll stop assuming.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
•silvercholla: lol! Ok, sorry... I'll stop assuming.•••••Aaawwwwww Chucks! Ain't I a stinka. :wink: :D <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" />
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by silvercholla:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
•silvercholla: lol! Ok, sorry... I'll stop assuming.•••••Aaawwwwww Chucks! Ain't I a stinka. :wink: :D <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> •••••You see... you're assuming that I think that's funny. Why would you assume that?

j/k :D
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by silvercholla:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
•silvercholla: lol! Ok, sorry... I'll stop assuming.•••••Aaawwwwww Chucks! Ain't I a stinka. :wink: :D <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> •••••You see... you're assuming that I think that's funny. Why would you assume that?

j/k :D •••••But I wasn't assuming that you were assuming that I was assuming because you weren't assuming when you assumed it to be funny because you put "lol" in your message. So though I wasn't assuming your assumption I was correct in assuming that you assumed that it was funny. Whew! :D :p
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another.

Racism is not a belief, it's an action. (Racial)prejudice on the other hand has to do with believing that one race is superior than another. Racism is acting on that belief (e.g. beating someone up, denying opportunity, etc.). Prejudice is having the belief but not acting on it. Being prejudice can come in many ways (we all have various kinds of prejudices), but racism is specifically the belief and the act of imposing that view.
 
I was getting dizzy!!!!!!!!!! :p
 
Just for reference...

rac?ism Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

prej?u?dice Pronunciation Key (prj-ds)
n.

1. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

2. A preconceived preference or idea.
The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions. See Synonyms at predilection.

3. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.

4. Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.
 
I stand corrected. *Racial* prejudice is the belief or view,while racism is the belief and act of. The word prejudice alone is simply to pre-judge and does not (lexically speaking) have anythig to do with race.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by Mr.D:
•I stand corrected. *Racial* prejudice is the belief or view,while racism is the belief and act of. The word prejudice alone is simply to pre-judge and does not (lexically speaking) have anythig to do with race.•••••No, I think you were right the first time. Racial prejudice is the belief and act (look at #3 and #4 especially)... racism is just the belief.
 
RP,

I was looking at the definitions more closely and was wondering, is def. 2 for racism = def.3 and 4 for prejudice? Because if they are, then these are simply circular defintions! Oh well, I think in the end we all pretty much have an idea of what these words mean. :wink:
 
The first #1 and #2 are for racism. The following #1, #2,#3,#4 are all for prejudice.

Yeah I think we're trying to say the same thing :)
 
Thanks for keeping the thread alive relatively prime. I've been pretty busy today.

I'll try to post something more detailed later tonight. I think I can find links to some interesting articles to share. (I don't think they are from white rascist groups as has been alleged, but I'll double check.)

Regarding the Bell Curve, I did skim it once, probably six years ago, when I was in high school. As I recall, the book made a lot of good points about meritocracy and its effect on society. I could outline the thesis if anyone's interested. (As a note, only one small chapter had anything to do with race.)

I do think that there is something called intelligence. Don't most children, even from a very young age, recognize that some kids are "smart" and some aren't. I can't believe that people who have gone through school could claim that intelligence is a myth. We've all seen that some people can memorize words, work math problems, understand physics or Shakespeare almost effortlessly, while others must invest many hours to do this, and still others are not capable of it at all. What do you call this difference if not intelligence? (By the way, I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of multiple intelligences.)

So if intelligence is a trait (probably heritable) that can differ among individuals, and heritable traits can differ among groups, could intelligence differ among groups? Why should we assume that it does not?
 
I'm not going to read this whole thread, so I don't know if people have mentioned this:

Environment shapes us as much as genes, if not more.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by owen_osh:
•Thanks for keeping the thread alive relatively prime. I've been pretty busy today.

I'll try to post something more detailed later tonight. I think I can find links to some interesting articles to share. (I don't think they are from white rascist groups as has been alleged, but I'll double check.)

Regarding the Bell Curve, I did skim it once, probably six years ago, when I was in high school. As I recall, the book made a lot of good points about meritocracy and its effect on society. I could outline the thesis if anyone's interested. (As a note, only one small chapter had anything to do with race.)

I do think that there is something called intelligence. Don't most children, even from a very young age, recognize that some kids are "smart" and some aren't. I can't believe that people who have gone through school could claim that intelligence is a myth. We've all seen that some people can memorize words, work math problems, understand physics or Shakespeare almost effortlessly, while others must invest many hours to do this, and still others are not capable of it at all. What do you call this difference if not intelligence? (By the way, I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of multiple intelligences.)

So if intelligence is a trait (probably heritable) that can differ among individuals, and heritable traits can differ among groups, could intelligence differ among groups? Why should we assume that it does not?•••••Whoever claims that there is no such thing as "intelligence" has none of it. Granted, it's extraordinarily difficult to DEFINE intelligence (not only because it is a complex trait but also due to its sensitive political nature). That guy (or two guys I believe) who wrote The Bell Curve was absolutely BLASTED with criticism, some merited and some not, primarily because the critics had the political cover of being "fair", whatever that means.

Unfortunately, science and nature isn't always fair.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by Diogenes:
•I'm not going to read this whole thread, so I don't know if people have mentioned this:

Environment shapes us as much as genes, if not more.•••••What trait(s) are you referring to? Throwing out a blanket statement like that is not informative and highly misleading.

We know that many some genetic diseases (e.g., Huntington's Disease) are 100% expressed if inherented. We also know that some genes "predispose" a person to a disease (e.g., cancer) but only if that person is exposed to a particular environment.

As for intelligence, which is what I assume you are referring to, the jury is still out. For methodological and societal reasons, I doubt it'll be determined anytime soon.

PS - The IQ test is an extremely crude measurement of intelligence.
 
First off my apologies if someone has asked this same question earlier up in this thread (I just don't have the energy to read the same old argument about AA).

I pose this question to the group: If AA were opened up to poor whites (which can be easily identifiable by zip code or lack thereof or income or by a new checkbox on the AMCAS) would the anti-AA supporters be finally satisfied? Would AA be finally acceptable?

Poor whites are in the same situation as poor Americans of color and also receive substandard health care due to stereotypes held by the healthcare provider. I know I don't provide any evidence to support my argument, but I have seen this first hand on several occasions. If poor whites were represented equally in medicine, poor white patients might receive better medical care.

What'da'yall say to this?
 
IMHO, we are all just different shades of tan. . . I think the entire concept of race is outdated and leads to harmful stereotypes.

I was attacked on SDN for asking the question if it was necessary to fill out the ethnicity bubble on the AMCAS application. Some people assumed that I was not proud of "who I am," or that I was trying to gain an admission advantage in some way because supposedly "unknown" is closer to being a URM that if one just marks "white." I responded that the color of my skin makes no difference. Had I been born a different shade a tan with the same heart, I have no doubt that my intentions and my intelligence would be the same.

I was then "educated" on the fact that my interviewers would see me and then know the "truth." The horrible horrible truth of my race. :mad: Does my appearence denote a single race? Does my color really give anyone a clue about how I was raised, how I feel, how intuitive I may be? I choose to let my numbers and my words work to my advantage in this crazy process. And I will certainly not fill in the race bubble. If they want to put my application in the "appropriate" pile after I interview, so be it. As an idealist though, I would like to think that my color does not matter.

To those who can speak candidly about the topic without bashing others' opinions, I commend you. :p
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by MD'05:
•First off my apologies if someone has asked this same question earlier up in this thread (I just don't have the energy to read the same old argument about AA).

I pose this question to the group: If AA were opened up to poor whites (which can be easily identifiable by zip code or lack thereof or income or by a new checkbox on the AMCAS) would the anti-AA supporters be finally satisfied? Would AA be finally acceptable?

Poor whites are in the same situation as poor Americans of color and also receive substandard health care due to stereotypes held by the healthcare provider. I know I don't provide any evidence to support my argument, but I have seen this first hand on several occasions. If poor whites were represented equally in medicine, poor white patients might receive better medical care.

What'da'yall say to this?•••••Well... sorta, but you'd also have to take A.A. away from rich URMs. Our society has generally accepted that there is no genetic academic disadvantage to being a URM... the only disadvantage comes from environment. So then why should rich URMs benefit from A.A.? In the USA, green is the color that matters most. Seriously... it's true. If you put Will Smith's kid in an all white public school... chances are that that kid is going to get a lot more special treatment than the white kids. That's just the way it is.

If there truely is no genetic academic disadvantage to being a URM, then A.A. based on race is (at this point in history) unfair and useless. Sure, due to circumstances 50 years ago, A.A. based on race was needed... but now I think the people who really need A.A. are the poor or every race.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by MD'05:
•The previous post made me think of another question: How do you know that a URM was admitted to medical school solely due to race? I know some very sharp URMs in my class and I bet their numbers (MCAT, GPA) were pretty good. I know they are doing quite well in medical school.•••••i had 2 very good friends(URM) who applied a few years ago.

friend 1:
came from a privileged/advantaged background. applied with sub-par scores in every category and strong, though not stellar, EC's. accepted at nearly every top-10 school. at a top-3 school nowadays.

friend 2:
came from a disadvantaged background. worked full-time all through ugrad to support family. applied with 3.9 GPA (double sci/non-sci major & minor), stellar mcat scores, and strong EC's. let me remind you...FULL-TIME work along the way. accepted at nearly every top-10 school. at a top-3 school nowadays.

i think you can draw your own conclusions about why each were likely to have been accepted.

i'm all for AA btw. just wanted to pose my own observations...
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by MD'05:
•The previous post made me think of another question: How do you know that a URM was admitted to medical school solely due to race? I know some very sharp URMs in my class and I bet their numbers (MCAT, GPA) were pretty good. I know they are doing quite well in medical school.•••••MD,

There really is no way of knowing which URMs have formally benefitted and which have not. Precisely because of this ambiguity, many people seeing URM doctors may not give them the benefit of the doubt. If this doesn't make sense to you, you can probably understand what I'm saying better by thinking of Arab Americans and racial profiling.

If I were a URM and got to where I was without any assistance, that would tick me off and make me want to change the system.
 
MD'05, we have concrete data. Many URMS are NOT getting into medical school because of GPA/MCAT. This leaves only race, LORs, volunteering experience, and research experience as factors.

When you look at this chart: <a href="http://www.sandiego.edu/~e_cook/vault/medical/losangeles/ucla-med-99.html" target="_blank">http://www.sandiego.edu/~e_cook/vault/medical/losangeles/ucla-med-99.html</a>

which one of those factors do you think was used?
 
to the above poster...princeton does not have a med school. shows how valid those stats are

and i think all of you need to shut the fekk up. get off your computer and get to know one URM med school applicant and decide whether he/she deserves to be a doctor or not.
 
WOW!!! I had no idea how racist this place was. It's rather shocking.

Somehow I'm guessing that at least some of you URM bashers have stolen culture from the Black community. It's just so dang trendy for rich kids who can afford time on the computer to be down and roll ethnic. Yet behind the privacy of your keyboards, the real thoughts come out. This is absolutely scary.

Someone please explain to me the rationale that URMs have some collective thought that they don't need to work as hard. That's a new one. Ever think that they have to work twice as hard to continually prove themselves to people like you who can't get past their melanin levels?

If anyone, independent of color and religion, had to survive a school like Crenshaw High, ride public buses to get from home to UCLA and back for all but one year of undergraduate, and hold down a part time job to help at home on top of getting through school with decent grades, the bottom line is that they will make one incredible doctor. I want that person as my doctor, because they appreciate life and understand humanity. No matter what numbers they have in their entrance file, when that person comes out of medical school, they will have a passion that few could match.

For all of you so quick to use MCAT numbers and GPAs to support your accusations of improprieties, there is far more to an applicant than the numbers. And for those of you who feel like blaming someone else because YOU didn't get in, eventually you're going to run out of scapegoats and all that will remain is a mirror.

Every situation is unique, and not every URM fits the description above. But my former roommate fits that to a tee, and when he finishes medical school in a few years, you can bet your trust fund I'll be lined up to be his first patient (hope he doesn't choose psych).
 
Mudd and Ibrahim05: We're only debating things here. It's not fair of you to march in here and call everyone racists. We're only discussing! Please try to be polite. There will be no progress if people can't feel free to say what they think and how they feel.

No one doubts that URMs have contributed enormously to society... or that society would suffer greatly without them. That's not what this is about. We're talking about A.A. here.

The topic at hand right now is should A.A. be based on race or economic position? If you don't want to discuss that topic or anything else about A.A.... please don't comment.

Thank you

Mudd, ironically, your description of the "average life of a URM" is very stereotypical. I have a lot of URM friends who've had it no rougher than I have... who've gone to the same schools and who have had the same oppertunities. Now, the question is, should student like these benefit from A.A. aswell? just because they happen to me URMs?
 
This is what I was talking about. There is a fundamental problem with the definition of URM and the policy of Affirmative Action. To date URM is only defined through ethnicity and gender. But there are more URM's than that. What about homosexuals or the physically challenged (yes I read the MSAR and I know that there are physical limitaions to the handicapped becoming physicians) What about poor whites, (appalachia, etc). The problem comes in when people who have had it more diffucult than the current definition of the present URM's feel cheated and they have every right to be. Which is why the AAMC should scrap the URM policy and start over. As for the "traditional" applicants who have had every opportunity and still haven't gotten in, I really don't think that the URM policy or affirmative action had anything to do with it. If it did then I think there would be a lot more "URM's" who didn't "work as hard" in medical school and a lot less "hard working traditionals". But then again that's just my honest opinion.
 
silvercholla: How do you explain the fact the URMs are more likely to drop out of medical school or take 5-6 years to get the degree instead of 4? I'm not trying to be bitchy here... I'm just really curious as to what you have to say about that. Do you think it's because they are more likely to feel alienated, because med school profs are biased, or what?

I agree that the "traditional" students who blame URMs for having been rejected are lame and immature. If you're a really strong applicant and you apply wisely, you'll get in. It's only if you're an average or weak applicant that you might have to worry about the URM seat-stealers :rolleyes:
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
•silvercholla: How do you explain the fact the URMs are more likely to drop out of medical school or take 5-6 years to get the degree instead of 4? I'm not trying to be bitchy here... I'm just really curious as to what you have to say about that. Do you think it's because they are more likely to feel alienated, because med school profs are biased, or what?

I agree that the "traditional" students who blame URMs for having been rejected are lame and immature. If you're a really strong applicant and you apply wisely, you'll get in. It's only if you're an average or weak applicant that you might have to worry about the URM seat-stealers :rolleyes: •••••I think maybe alienation is part of it (I sure did when I first wnet away to undergrad) But the other part, something i see in a lot of urban public schools, is a lack of strong study skills. and also a lack of a strong foundation. But that just brings me back to the same point I had before, the definition of URM is incomplete. There are a lot of other " unrecognized URM's" with the same problems that end up applying three four five times to get into medical school because ther is no one to guide them or give them a foot up. The URM policy and AA need to be scrapped and revamped because what happens is that some URM's (and I said some not all don't get on me :p ) get in and have no idea how to go forward in order to succeed, and they are either to proud or too intimidated to ask. When you see other students who for them studying is second nature it can be a daunting experience. But I'm not a med student yet, so I can only guess (yes I said guess) at what the experience can be like. But as a non-tradidtional student I know what it's like to be afraid to ask for help due to pride or intimidation. But that's just my opinion.

As for prof's being biased, I've never come across that but it happens, though not as often as people think it does.
 
Excuse the lack of punctuations... it's a old habit. :D
 
Yeah I can see that... I can see a URM being worried that if he/she walks into an advisor's office that people will be like "Look! the URM needs extra help!" or something like that... it's too bad.

Maybe they should just make advising mandatory for everyone... I'm sure even a lot of the non-URMs who don't think they need any help would benefit from it.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
Mudd and Ibrahim05: We're only debating things here. It's not fair of you to march in here and call everyone racists. We're only discussing! Please try to be polite. There will be no progress if people can't feel free to say what they think and how they feel.••••Perhaps the greatest irony in that part of your reply is that you are telling me what I shouldn't say (by saying it isn't fair) yet then saying we should all be free to speak our mind. Why is the freedom to speak my mind limited in this case? I see some comments here as overt racism and others as subtle racism that the writer probably doesn't even realize. Yet you're telling me I shouldn't be able to comment. If progress is your goal, it starts with the admission that we are all prejudiced and racist; it's part of our culture. From that point, change is an option for those who want it. But we will never solve racism, only reduce its negative impact.

A part of debate is analyzing the perspective of other debaters. So as much as you ask me to be polite, I ask those who make outlandish, unsubstantiated statements like "Just think an Asian male student knows he needs to get at least a 30 MCAT to have a good chance at medical school, because competition is tight within his ethnic group. Whereas, an African American student looks at the averages for URMs and draws the conclusion that he/she only needs a 27 to have a great chance. Now who do you think is going to study harder for the MCAT? Basically what I'm saying is that an Asian student is going to bust his butt to get a 30, no matter what it takes... if he has to take Kaplan or retake 3 times... or whatever. However, the African American student isn't going to be as worried about it because, within his ethnic group, the competition isn't as tight, simply because there aren't as many African Americans applying. I retook the MCAT with a 31 because I wanted a better chance at a top 20 school. However, if I were a URM, I wouldn't have retaken, because with a 31 I'd have a decent chance at any top 20 school.
Do you see what I'm saying? When the competition isn't rough, no person in his/her right mind is going to put themselves through hell when they don't need too"

Although the author doesn't want the term racist to pop up, any concept of pride has just be taken out of the picture for URMs. Pride is a pretty strong motivator as well as competition. That comment is so demeaning, that it has earned the label as racist in my opinion. If the author doesn't want to hear comments of racism, perhaps they shouldn't post things at allude to certain members of the pre-medical community having less pride.

•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
No one doubts that URMs have contributed enormously to society... or that society would suffer greatly without them. That's not what this is about. We're talking about A.A. here.••••Who doubted that? I haven't read that until you mentioned it. And racism and AA go hand-in-hand, so you might want to get used to it.

•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
The topic at hand right now is should A.A. be based on race or economic position? If you don't want to discuss that topic or anything else about A.A.... please don't comment.••••So am I to assume your original comment "There will be no progress if people can't feel free to say what they think and how they feel" does not apply to me?

•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
Mudd, ironically, your description of the "average life of a URM" is very stereotypical. I have a lot of URM friends who've had it no rougher than I have... who've gone to the same schools and who have had the same oppertunities. Now, the question is, should student like these benefit from A.A. aswell? just because they happen to me URMs?••••That was not a description of an average life. It was the life of one very specific person who happens to be both a friend and someone I admire. Whether AA is abolished, modified, or ignored, the fact is that he will make a great doctor and the medical community might have missed out had it not been for some insightful Ad Com people. A person's ethnicity is a part of their being, and as such, should be as much a part of the application process as anything else. Numbers are not the whole story, although they seem to be for people not getting in that need a scapegoat.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
•Yeah I can see that... I can see a URM being worried that if he/she walks into an advisor's office that people will be like "Look! the URM needs extra help!" or something like that... it's too bad.

Maybe they should just make advising mandatory for everyone... I'm sure even a lot of the non-URMs who don't think they need any help would benefit from it.•••••That would probably be the best thing. I think that I would be in med school by now if I had went in and said that hey I need help. Even if it's not for just academic help..Sometimes just stress can cause someone to think I can't take this anymore.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by Mudd:
•
A part of debate is analyzing the perspective of other debaters. So as much as you ask me to be polite, I ask those who make outlandish, unsubstantiated statements like "Just think an Asian male student knows he needs to get at least a 30 MCAT to have a good chance at medical school, because competition is tight within his ethnic group. Whereas, an African American student looks at the averages for URMs and draws the conclusion that he/she only needs a 27 to have a great chance. Now who do you think is going to study harder for the MCAT? Basically what I'm saying is that an Asian student is going to bust his butt to get a 30, no matter what it takes... if he has to take Kaplan or retake 3 times... or whatever. However, the African American student isn't going to be as worried about it because, within his ethnic group, the competition isn't as tight, simply because there aren't as many African Americans applying. I retook the MCAT with a 31 because I wanted a better chance at a top 20 school. However, if I were a URM, I wouldn't have retaken, because with a 31 I'd have a decent chance at any top 20 school.
Do you see what I'm saying? When the competition isn't rough, no person in his/her right mind is going to put themselves through hell when they don't need too"

Although the author doesn't want the term racist to pop up, any concept of pride has just be taken out of the picture for URMs. Pride is a pretty strong motivator as well as competition. That comment is so demeaning, that it has earned the label as racist in my opinion. If the author doesn't want to hear comments of racism, perhaps they shouldn't post things at allude to certain members of the pre-medical community having less pride.

•••••Well, just speaking about myself for a moment, I knew what score I needed to be competitive. I took a few practices tests, and when I saw I could get that score without studying anymore, I quit studying. I guess it would have been nice to get a perfect score, and maybe I could have if I had studied really seriously or spent money on a prep course, but the pride and satisfaction of getting a much higher score than I needed didn't really outweigh the time and money it would take to score that highly.

It seems to be common knowledge that URM's can get in with lower scores, I assume URM's are aware of this, so it seems resonable that many URM's may do the same kind of trade-off that I did. I doubt their is any real evidence one way or the other, so I'll stay agnostic on this point, but it's still a reasonable idea.

Mudd, what's your theory of why URM's get lower scores? How do you think the pride of URM's, who are accepted through AA, is affected by having below average MCAT's?
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by owen_osh:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by Mudd:
•
A part of debate is analyzing the perspective of other debaters. So as much as you ask me to be polite, I ask those who make outlandish, unsubstantiated statements like "Just think an Asian male student knows he needs to get at least a 30 MCAT to have a good chance at medical school, because competition is tight within his ethnic group. Whereas, an African American student looks at the averages for URMs and draws the conclusion that he/she only needs a 27 to have a great chance. Now who do you think is going to study harder for the MCAT? Basically what I'm saying is that an Asian student is going to bust his butt to get a 30, no matter what it takes... if he has to take Kaplan or retake 3 times... or whatever. However, the African American student isn't going to be as worried about it because, within his ethnic group, the competition isn't as tight, simply because there aren't as many African Americans applying. I retook the MCAT with a 31 because I wanted a better chance at a top 20 school. However, if I were a URM, I wouldn't have retaken, because with a 31 I'd have a decent chance at any top 20 school.
Do you see what I'm saying? When the competition isn't rough, no person in his/her right mind is going to put themselves through hell when they don't need too"

Although the author doesn't want the term racist to pop up, any concept of pride has just be taken out of the picture for URMs. Pride is a pretty strong motivator as well as competition. That comment is so demeaning, that it has earned the label as racist in my opinion. If the author doesn't want to hear comments of racism, perhaps they shouldn't post things at allude to certain members of the pre-medical community having less pride.

•••••Well, just speaking about myself for a moment, I knew what score I needed to be competitive. I took a few practices tests, and when I saw I could get that score without studying anymore, I quit studying. I guess it would have been nice to get a perfect score, and maybe I could have if I had studied really seriously or spent money on a prep course, but the pride and satisfaction of getting a much higher score than I needed didn't really outweigh the time and money it would take to score that highly.

It seems to be common knowledge that URM's can get in with lower scores, I assume URM's are aware of this, so it seems resonable that many URM's may do the same kind of trade-off that I did. I doubt their is any real evidence one way or the other, so I'll stay agnostic on this point, but it's still a reasonable idea.

Mudd, what's your theory of why URM's get lower scores? How do you think the pride of URM's, who are accepted through AA, is affected by having below average MCAT's?•••••I thik that trading off and pride are two different things. You traded off because based on your practice tests you felt that you were already above par and didn't need to spend additional money and time on improving on something that was already pretty good. It may be common knowledge that URM's can get in with a lower score but I think typically those URM's don't get in compared to the one's that performed above the "standard" of the typical URM. In other words I think that an adcom is going to use AA in perference for the URM who scored a 32 compared to the URM that scored a 27.

As for the seemingly thinly vailed "racist" comment, well I'm a URM and even though I knew that I could get in with a 24, I still busted my butt and got a 38Q. (Now, that was back in 97) I didn't get in because of crappy grades but I still wanted to "bust my butt" because I wanted to prove that I could do it. So, who do I think is going to work for the score? The student that wants the score and despite the obstacles worked for the score. So the implied statement that African Americans would just sit back and take the free ride is insulting. But it's the opinion your entitled to.
 
I hate talking about A.A in forums-because alot of people fail to see the big picture - instead they focus on what they want to see.
'with such counter-comments like "I have an URM friend or classmates who come from decent homes." '

I will give a crude list of what should be considered to make a balanced decision in accepting applicants. This list should be considered as a whole not in units.
-decending prioties are listed
1. potential to be success as a physician should not be based on numbers alone.(this is why on the average, applicants with a range of numbers are called for interviews) etc
2. As mentioned, class composition should be considered. (this brings the theory of ethnic competition - unfortunate but a reality)etc
3. Background upbringing and motivation should be considered - In regards to educative history and socio-economic. etc

Racial discrimination in the U.S. are unfortunately working wonders in the shadows. Racial discrimination is systemically integrated in our society. (and please dont try to deny this)
I'm not a pessimist - because I hope that one day - it can be equality for all.

meaning, someday, the problems and success of ethinic groups will be problems and success for all mankind.

<img border="0" alt="[Pity]" title="" src="graemlins/pity.gif" />
 
Mudd: I stand by my original theory, and I don't think it's racist. Yes, I'm sure pride motivates a lot of URMs... however I'm certain common sense also kicks at some point. Why bust your but to get a 34 when you don't need one? Pride or no pride, that just doesn't makes sense. That time coudld be better spent volunteering or getting clinical experience...

I'm sure my theory doesn't account for all of the problem... but I think there might be some truth to it.

Look, it was just a theory... I wasn't in anyway trying to imply that African Americans in particular would just sit back and take the free ride. I believe the same thing would happen to WHITES or ASIANS or ANYBODY who knew they didn't need to work that hard to get what they wanted. Why pay $40 for a $20 shirt? if you know what I mean...

If my comment were to be truely RACIST then I would have to insist that only URMs would not try hard to get a higher score than they needed... but that's NOT what I SAID! I'm insisting that ANY RACE would not bust their butts to get 36s and 37s if they didn't need to.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by SicVic:
•
Racial discrimination in the U.S. are unfortunately working wonders in the shadows. Racial discrimination is systemically integrated in our society. (and please dont try to deny this)
I'm not a pessimist - because I hope that one day - it can be equality for all.

<img border="0" alt="[Pity]" title="" src="graemlins/pity.gif" /> •••••I suppose some people call affirmative action systemically integrated racial discrimination, but I can't really think of other examples right now. Can you please give some examples.

Thanks
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ibrahim05:
•to the above poster...princeton does not have a med school. shows how valid those stats are
•••••Considering those stats are from UCLA med school...yeah, you're completely right. What in god's name are you talking about?

I wonder how long it will take to reverse the damage done to this country, to all americans, both URM and non-URM, by AA.
 
Relatively prime, it's called a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's a well documented idea.

People who want to believe you (or the ideological group which you belong to) are racist will find a way to convince themselves you are racist...no matter what you say.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
•Relatively prime, it's called a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's a well documented idea.

People who want to believe you (or the ideological group which you belong to) are racist will find a way to convince themselves you are racist...no matter what you say.•••••But nothing about my theory is ~racist~! I would bet 50 grand that the same exact thing would happen to white people. If somehow the roles were reversed and white people saw that their group had lower stats and that they needed no more than a 27 to get into medical school... the scores of white students would plummit... I'm certain of it. Like you said... it's a psychological phenomenon that can't be denied.
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by relatively prime:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
•Relatively prime, it's called a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's a well documented idea.

People who want to believe you (or the ideological group which you belong to) are racist will find a way to convince themselves you are racist...no matter what you say.•••••But nothing about my theory is ~racist~! I would bet 50 grand that the same exact thing would happen to white people. If somehow the roles were reversed and white people saw that their group had lower stats and that they needed no more than a 27 to get into medical school... the scores of white students would plummit... I'm certain of it. Like you said... it's a psychological phenomenon that can't be denied.•••••You know what I think it is my dear, It's that you used African Americans as the example. (oops now it's my turn to get bashed :rolleyes: )
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by Mudd:
•WOW!!! I had no idea how racist this place was. It's rather shocking.

Somehow I'm guessing that at least some of you URM bashers have stolen culture from the Black community. It's just so dang trendy for rich kids who can afford time on the computer to be down and roll ethnic. Yet behind the privacy of your keyboards, the real thoughts come out. This is absolutely scary.

Someone please explain to me the rationale that URMs have some collective thought that they don't need to work as hard. That's a new one. Ever think that they have to work twice as hard to continually prove themselves to people like you who can't get past their melanin levels?

If anyone, independent of color and religion, had to survive a school like Crenshaw High, ride public buses to get from home to UCLA and back for all but one year of undergraduate, and hold down a part time job to help at home on top of getting through school with decent grades, the bottom line is that they will make one incredible doctor. I want that person as my doctor, because they appreciate life and understand humanity. No matter what numbers they have in their entrance file, when that person comes out of medical school, they will have a passion that few could match.

For all of you so quick to use MCAT numbers and GPAs to support your accusations of improprieties, there is far more to an applicant than the numbers. And for those of you who feel like blaming someone else because YOU didn't get in, eventually you're going to run out of scapegoats and all that will remain is a mirror.

Every situation is unique, and not every URM fits the description above. But my former roommate fits that to a tee, and when he finishes medical school in a few years, you can bet your trust fund I'll be lined up to be his first patient (hope he doesn't choose psych).•••••Mudd,

I want you to go back in this thread, read my post with the specific suggestions to improve Affirmative Action, and let me know what you think of them.

I say this because you seem to be the stereotypical defender of AA as it exists now -- the type of person it is IMPOSSIBLE to discuss and come to a consensus with. You play the "racism" card early and often, you use the "exception to the rule" example of the URM you know who gets 4.0 GPA 38 MCAT, you try the "numbers aren't everything" argument (which is a poor argument), and finally you offer no solutions that will help appease the legitimate concerns that non-URMs have over this program.

If you want to be constructive, you will take this criticism in stride and work with SDN members, URM or not, to come to some sort of compromise amenable to all of us. If we can do that, then this thread will have been a success. Again, please go read my prior post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
The Supreme Court struck down affirmative action
Replies
2
Views
2K
gyngyn
gyngyn
P
Please be honest... Am I doomed? (Academic Institutional Action)
Replies
12
Views
1K
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
I
  • Locked
What’s the right course of action
Replies
2
Views
597
wysdoc
wysdoc
S
Neglected to Disclose Institutional Action
Replies
6
Views
1K
Stoasty
S
U
Insitutional Action Question
Replies
3
Views
633
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo
Top