Anyone see this article on the AAMC site? (Affirmative Action related)

[deleted74029]

---

Members do not see this ad.

http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/reporter/aug08/affaction.htm

Don't know if this has been posted but apparently these three states are going to soon decide whether to get rid of certain affirmative action policies in the admissions process (which I already thought were illegal, at least in the quota sense).

Being an African American I guess this policy would technically effect me moreso than others. But being a firm believer in choosing the best man for the job I honestly wouldn't mind them passing the thing.

 

[bcat85]

As it is, you're essentially saddling these communities with doctors who needed preferential treatment in order to be admitted to medical school.

I thought this was an interesting quote. I wonder if this contributes in any way to poorer health outcomes in impoverished areas.

 

[deleted74029]

I thought this was an interesting quote. I wonder if this contributes in any way to poorer health outcomes in impoverished areas.

I saw that as well, but I would like to think that the Step Exams are difficult enough where any truly incompetent test taker wouldn't pass. Not saying that anyone who passes won't make a mistake now and then. So even though someone may get help getting into med school, you're pretty much on your own trying to get out. But I also think everyone would agree that being a good test taker does not translate to being a good doctor.

 

[riceman04]

I thought this was an interesting quote. I wonder if this contributes in any way to poorer health outcomes in impoverished areas.

Ward Connerly has been on a tawdry war path for the longest. His policy reform is completely one-sided and pointless. His only solution to addressing disparities is to attack the issue from the apex rather than from base. Such a strategy is pointless if he is really interested creating a "level playing field."


In terms of this contributing to what you question above: I would have to say I highly doubt it, considering that EVERY medical student must prove competency by passing Steps. No preferential treatment is given. Furthermore, there are a myriad of more significant factors do play a role in such outcomes....lets be real here...I mean seriously...do you really think that is an issue?

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

I saw that as well, but I would like to think that the Step Exams are difficult enough where any truly incompetent test taker wouldn't pass. Not saying that anyone who passes won't make a mistake now and then. So even though someone may get help getting into med school, you're pretty much on your own trying to get out. But I also think everyone would agree that being a good test taker does not translate to being a good doctor.

I can see where you're coming from, but you also have to take into account that FP and several other primary care careers occupy the lower end of the score range. While this doesn't mean primary care docs are worse than specialists (I would really like to see many, many more primary care docs all over the country rather than specialists), I think it does indicate that sometimes people who do poorly are pigeon-holed into primary care. Couple that with these people having a harder time finding a position due to lower scores and possibly less-than-stellar reviews during rotations, and now you've got a mediocre doctor working in a needy area.

 

[deleted74029]

I can see where you're coming from, but you also have to take into account that FP and several other primary care careers occupy the lower end of the score range. While this doesn't mean primary care docs are worse than specialists (I would really like to see many, many more primary care docs all over the country rather than specialists), I think it does indicate that sometimes people who do poorly are pigeon-holed into primary care. Couple that with these people having a harder time finding a position due to lower scores and possibly less-than-stellar reviews during rotations, and now you've got a mediocre doctor working in a needy area.

True, but FP docs are in all areas of the country not just the poor ones. So unless theres is a correlation between where you end up practicing and how you did on the step exams, I just don't think this argument holds water.

 

[bcat85]

I can see where you're coming from, but you also have to take into account that FP and several other primary care careers occupy the lower end of the score range. While this doesn't mean primary care docs are worse than specialists (I would really like to see many, many more primary care docs all over the country rather than specialists), I think it does indicate that sometimes people who do poorly are pigeon-holed into primary care. Couple that with these people having a harder time finding a position due to lower scores and possibly less-than-stellar reviews during rotations, and now you've got a mediocre doctor working in a needy area.

This was what I was getting at. Obviously, things like: non-compliance, not going to the doctor at all, eating like the apocalypse is upon us, and not knowing a lot about preventative medicine are really strong contributors.

In sort of the same vein, I wonder if preventative medicine through FP is even worth the trouble, as noncompliance is high, obesity doesn't respond to clinical intervention, and cultural issues make people make poorer health choices.

 

[135892]

True, but FP docs are in all areas of the country not just the poor ones. So unless theres is a correlation between where you end up practicing and how you did on the step exams, I just don't think this argument holds water.

It may not have anything to do with race, but I think it could be possible that "mediocre" doctors may be forced to work in needy areas. Obviously the hot-shot doctor from Harvard can successfully practice in any large market, but since the large markets are saturated with doctors, and most people don't want to practice in the undeserved areas, the "mediocre" doctors may have to practice in these undeserved areas against their first preference. Just throwing this out there, I have no idea if this is actually is the case.

 

[deleted74029]

This was what I was getting at. Obviously, things like: non-compliance, not going to the doctor at all, eating like the apocalypse is upon us, and not knowing a lot about preventative medicine are really strong contributors.

In sort of the same vein, I wonder if preventative medicine through FP is even worth the trouble, as noncompliance is high, obesity doesn't respond to clinical intervention, and cultural issues make people make poorer health choices.

But is there a correlation between where you practice and how you did on the Step Exams? I'm not being rhetorical I'm literally asking. I'm actually starting to think there would be, considering a better candidate would probably rather practice in a more affluent area, thus leaving the underprivileged areas to the applicants with lesser scores.

Edit: gators pretty much confirmed what I was suggesting.

 

[Raryn]

If the bills pass, it wont do anything. Its illegal to consider race in anything in CA ever since we passed proposition 209, and the universities promptly started ignoring it. They just say instead of affirmative action, they look for for diversity in the class. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

 

[flaahless]

As it is, you're essentially saddling these communities with doctors who needed preferential treatment in order to be admitted to medical school.

That's the most ignorant quote in the world. How many people on SDN entered college with a 3.0 and graduated with a 3.8? Very many.

College is irrelevant, med school is what matters.

The cause and effect do no correlate. To think or even insinuate the quality of a physician is determined by ridiculous "stats" is flat out dumb. There is MUCH, MUCH more to being a doc than MCAT/GPA and it's really just a way for Ward Connerly to keep his pockets fat by painting one-sided pictures. Admissions stats 10 years ago were lower than they are now, does that mean the doctors that graduated then are less qualified than the one's graduating now?

It's VERY funny, or better yet peculiar, that admission stats are always mentioned and overemphasized, yet graduation stats, residency matches, GME performance evaluations are conveniently ignored. Isn't it more important how a student graduates than how they are admitted? Unfortunately, people are sheep and susceptible to this ridiculous catharsis.

 

[flaahless]

If the bills pass, it wont do anything. Its illegal to consider race in anything in CA ever since we passed proposition 209, and the universities promptly started ignoring it. They just say instead of affirmative action, they look for for diversity in the class. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

BS. The UCs have the most abysmal urm stats in the country. 209 is not being ignored whatsoever. It's annoying when premeds say stuff like this when an actual UCSD adcom member explicitly said they take the law VERY seriously and do not practice AA.

 

[Raryn]

BS. The UCs have the most abysmal urm stats in the country. 209 is not being ignored whatsoever. It's annoying when premeds say stuff like this when an actual UCSD adcom member explicitly said they take the law VERY seriously and do not practice AA.

I'll have to admit I haven't done my research on this specifically for medical schools, since it won't help me either way. All of the various PRIME programs are pretty blatant recruitment of URMs though. UC Irvine even calls its PRIME program Program in Medical Education for the Latino Community. I've also read articles specifically about UCLAs definite drive for more "diversity" in its undergrad.

Not to mention there are many programs for hispanic recruitment at my own undergrad (CSUFresno)...

 

[flaahless]

I'll have to admit I haven't done my research on this specifically for medical schools, since it won't help me either way. All of the various PRIME programs are pretty blatant recruitment of URMs though. UC Irvine even calls its PRIME program Program in Medical Education for the Latino Community. I've also read articles specifically about UCLAs definite drive for more "diversity" in its undergrads.

Not to mention there are many programs for hispanic recruitment at my own undergrad (CSUFresno)...

It's Prime-LC because you SERVE the Latino Community, not because you're Latino. The PRIME programs are there to address particular needs of the state of CA, not to increase URM enrollment. That's what postbaccs, fellowships and workshops are for.

Also, UCLA has the worst urm stats of all the UCs. Wikipedia it.

And diversity does not equal AA.

 

[Raryn]

It's Prime-LC because you SERVE the Latino Community, not because you're Latino. The PRIME programs are there to address particular needs of the state of CA, not to increase URM enrollment. That's what postbaccs, fellowships and workshops are for.

Also, UCLA has the worst urm stats of all the UCs. Wikipedia it.

And diversity does not equal AA.

Yeah, and wiki also says UCLA is trying desperately to raise those minority numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Los_Angeles#Undergraduate

This is the lowest number of blacks to enter into a class at UCLA in more than 30 years, and it comes at a time when the other schools in the UC system are seeing an increase. In response to this issue, UCLA decided to shift to a more "holistic" admissions process, similar to that of UC Berkeley, starting Fall 2007.[69] Preliminary data show that the overall number of underrepresented student applicants at UCLA — Native Americans, African Americans and Chicanos/Latinos — increased from 10,097 in fall 2006 (22.2% of 2006 applicants) to 11,414 for fall 2007 (23.6%).

And who exactly do you think is applying to the spots reserved for PRIME-LC students and the other PRIME programs? Chinese Americans? Like I said, its a thinly disguised way to get more hispanic students.

And "diversity" is a buzzword that they use as a reason for AA. Doesn't mean anything, even if I have written a dozen different secondary essays about how I would contribute to the diversity of viewpoints at <insert school here>.

 

[flaahless]

Yeah, and wiki also says UCLA is trying desperately to raise those minority numbers.

That's cool and all, but where's the AA?

And who exactly do you think is applying to the spots reserved for PRIME-LC students and the other PRIME programs? Chinese Americans? Like I said, its a thinly disguised way to get more hispanic students.

Premed ignorance. You should really meet some prime students before you make idiotic conjectures about them. Prime is a way for student's interested in those communities to gain experience and education serving with those communities.

Are all people that study abroad in Africa, African? That's the same shoddy logic you're using.

EDIT:

That's UCSF prime. Pretty diverse huh? Not just uniformly urm.

 

[TupacalipseT96]

"[Ward Connerly] said that society has now essentially rendered practices like affirmative action obsolete."

Now I can recognize the shortcomings of AA, and I'm all for changes aimed to better resolve the issues AA attempts to resolve... but when the anti-AA proponents make such short-sighted comments like that above, I have to laugh. I don't understand why those so upset by AA don't propose a more effective resolution to the issues rather than discounting the presence of the issues at all, like Ward Connerly and nearly every other anti-AA proponent foolishly has done. It would seemingly be in their best interest to do so...

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

I don't understand why those so upset by AA don't propose a more effective resolution to the issues rather than discounting the presence of the issues at all

They have: get rid of AA completely. Don't you think it's a bit racist to assume all hispanics and african-americans need extra help?

 

[deleted74029]

They have: get rid of AA completely. Don't you think it's a bit racist to assume all hispanics and african-americans need extra help?

Those who make those assumptions will still do so even if there is no AA being practiced.

 

[Lokhtar]

It's funny that people harp on GPA/MCAT. I want you to tell your professor that he is a worse physician than you'll be because you have a higher MCAT than he does.

As Flaahless said, it's about what comes out, not what goes in. I don't give a crap if medical schools throw darts as a way to pick applicants. As long as they are competent by the time they are done (e.g, pass the licensing exams, do a residency, etc), it doesn't matter at all what stats they use or don't use - especially a couple points of MCAT or GPA.

 

[scarletgirl777]

But is there a correlation between where you practice and how you did on the Step Exams? I'm not being rhetorical I'm literally asking. I'm actually starting to think there would be, considering a better candidate would probably rather practice in a more affluent area, thus leaving the underprivileged areas to the applicants with lesser scores.

Edit: gators pretty much confirmed what I was suggesting.

I don't have any hard stats on this, but I think this is true. I think that these areas also may have an overrepresentation of FMGs and of nurse practitioners as primary care providers as well. The more competitive the residency, the higher the step scores they are going to demand, and then where you did residency and how well you did in it will help determine your first real job, and so on and so forth. And since many types of undeserved practices have less money because they have to do more charity care, it makes sense that they would be less able to attract high performers.

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

Those who make those assumptions will still do so even if there is no AA being practiced.

Right, but I guess what I'm getting at is that it's a little hypocritical when people cry racism if a school isn't "diverse" enough, but don't see the blatant racism when a school feels it needs to give entire groups extra attention, as if those groups aren't good enough to get in on their own.

 

[deleted74029]

Right, but I guess what I'm getting at is that it's a little hypocritical when people cry racism if a school isn't "diverse" enough, but don't see the blatant racism when a school feels it needs to give entire groups extra attention, as if those groups aren't good enough to get in on their own.

I agree, its a two-sided coin. I've been told by many blacks that since I'm black, I probably won't do well on the MCAT cause the test is "culturally biased." My g/f, who is also pre-med, attended a minority recruitment program at a nearby medical school and was told by the diversity committee that she should aim for about a 25 on the MCAT. I thought it was kind of offensive for them to do such a thing, since the average matriculant score at the school is about 3 or 4 points higher than that. Its a self-fullfilling prophecy type of thing, if you are told that you don't have to do as well, why in the hell would you?

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

I agree, its a two-sided coin. I've been told by many blacks that since I'm black, I probably won't do well on the MCAT cause the test is "culturally biased." My g/f, who is also pre-med, attended a minority recruitment program at a nearby medical school and was told by the diversity committee that she should aim for about a 25 on the MCAT. I thought it was kind of offensive for them to do such a thing, since the average matriculant score at the school is about 3 or 4 points higher than that. Its a self-fullfilling prophecy type of thing, if you are told that you don't have to do as well, why in the hell would you?

That's exactly what I'm talking about. How ridiculous is it for a program to exist solely to advance a group, only to have it coddle and demean that same group?

I've always thought it would be better to provide extra assistance purely on a basis of financial disadvantage, rather than skin color.

 

[Blesbok]

True, but FP docs are in all areas of the country not just the poor ones. So unless theres is a correlation between where you end up practicing and how you did on the step exams, I just don't think this argument holds water.

I would bet there is although I have no proof of this.

 

[flaahless]

Right, but I guess what I'm getting at is that it's a little hypocritical when people cry racism if a school isn't "diverse" enough, but don't see the blatant racism when a school feels it needs to give entire groups extra attention, as if those groups aren't good enough to get in on their own.

Define good enough. You see, the fundamental problem here is that premeds and anti-aa proponents like to believe that stats definitively predict the success of a particular applicant. "Good enough" should never be MCAT/GPA IMO, but rather the personal qualities, experiences, leadership etc. that defines a good doctor.

Ask a patient why they like their doctor. They'll probably say something like, "s/he's warm, friendly, amiable and works hard to see that I am taken care of..." I guarantee they will never mention their undergrad gpa and mcat.

 

[deleted74029]

Define good enough. You see, the fundamental problem here is that premeds and anti-aa proponents like to believe that stats definitively predict the success of a particular applicant. "Good enough" should never be MCAT/GPA IMO, but rather the personal qualities, experiences, leadership etc. that defines a good doctor.

Ask a patient why they like their doctor. They'll probably say something like, "s/he's warm, friendly, amiable and works hard to see that I am taken care of..." I guarantee they will never mention their undergrad gpa and mcat.

I don't think anyone on here thinks a good MCAT/GPA translate to being a good doctor. But one part of being a good doctor is being competent enough to learn the ins and outs of the human body, which I'm sure any medical student would tell you isn't a piece of cake. MCAT scores and GPAs are really the only way a school could gauge this. Take consideration of MCAT and GPA out of medical school admissions and I'd be willing to bet that the dropout rate would significantly increase for the M1 and M2 years. Sure we'd have alot of "great personalities" in med school then but that doesn't mean one has the ability to take on the amount of information that is needed to be successful in medical school.

Make Barack Obama a doctor tomorrow and he would probably have excellent bedside manner and his patients would love him and say he's a "good doctor", but that doesn't automatically give him the knowledge and know-how to accurately treat and diagnose illnesses.

 

[flaahless]

I don't think anyone on here thinks a good MCAT/GPA translate to being a good doctor. But one part of being a good doctor is being competent enough to learn the ins and outs of the human body, which I'm sure any medical student would tell you isn't a piece of cake. MCAT scores and GPAs are really the only way a school could gauge this. Take consideration of MCAT and GPA out of medical school admissions and I'd be willing to bet that the dropout rate would significantly increase for the M1 and M2 years. Sure we'd have alot of "great personalities" in med school then but that doesn't mean one has the ability to take on the amount of information that is needed to be successful in medical school.

Make Barack Obama a doctor tomorrow and he would probably have excellent bedside manner and his patients would love him and say he's a "good doctor", but that doesn't automatically give him the knowledge and knowhow to accurately treat and diagnose illnesses.

Neither does an MCAT and a few general science courses.

The reason stats are so inflated and overemphasized is because there aren't enough seats for qualified students because they AMA restricted enrollment to maintain job security. NOT because students with sub 30/3.5 struggle so much they fail out.

Seriously, ask your adcom member what their GPA and MCAT were. You may be surprised.

 

[MsKrispyKreme]

Seriously, ask your adcom member what their GPA and MCAT were. You may be surprised.

I'm shadowing the chair of a prestigious residency program. His stats -- gpa ~3.25/25 MCAT.

He's White and a great physician. 👍

 

[TupacalipseT96]

They have: get rid of AA completely. Don't you think it's a bit racist to assume all hispanics and african-americans need extra help?

I'm going to step out of this conversation because it always just goes in circles, but you did exactly what I just said anti-AA proponents foolishly do: dismissed the existence of bigger social, economic, and educational disparities that AA attempts to address (not just med school AA). Abolishing AA does not approach these issues from a more effective, less-threatening way at all... it ignores them, exactly as I had said before.

That is not a solution, that is ignorance.

I'm sure when I'm a doctor, some people will look at me funny and assume I must've had a 3.0/25 in college, and that if it weren't for AA I'd be nothing but a carpenter like my father and my father's father... but honestly, there are bigger things in life, and that's a sacrifice I'll make if it's for the good of societal progress. One day AA will no longer have any benefit and its bad will outweigh its good...but that day is not today.

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

Hmm, I don't think anyone in here has insinuated that GPA and MCAT alone determine who will be a good doctor, so I'm not sure what all the aggression is about.

What I *do* think a lot of people are saying is that GPA and MCAT are decent predictors of medical school performance, which has been shown time and again by comparing MCAT scores with Step 1 scores. Granted, Step 1 scores don't determine the quality of doctor a person will be, either, but I would rather have a doctor with less refined bedside manner who knows his/her Harrison's and Netter's backwards and forwards.

 

[deleted74029]

Neither does an MCAT and a few general science courses.

The reason stats are so inflated and overemphasized is because there aren't enough seats for qualified students because they AMA restricted enrollment to maintain job security. NOT because students with sub 30/3.5 struggle so much they fail out.

Seriously, ask your adcom member what their GPA and MCAT were. You may be surprised.

Yeah I've always known that stats have generally been on a steady increase for med school acceptance. And don't take what I said as saying that you need a 3.5/30 to get into med school. I surely don't have a 3.5. But not considering the stats at all would be pretty absurd to me. To put it bluntly, some people just aren't cut out for medical school and there has to be some way to weed those people out. Heck I may be one of those thats gets weeded. Now whether our current method is the most efficient way or not I truly don't know, but unless someone comes up with a better avenue for selecting future doctors we'll just have to trust the current process.

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

I'm going to step out of this conversation because it always just goes in circles, but you did exactly what I just said anti-AA proponents foolishly do: dismissed the existence of bigger social, economic, and educational disparities that AA attempts to address (not just med school AA). Abolishing AA does not approach these issues from a more effective, less-threatening way at all... it ignores them, exactly as I had said before.

Hmm, well, then explain this to me, if all I'm doing is 'ignoring' the issues. I grew up incredibly middle class (actually, borderline lower/middle for a good part of my life). For a few years I was the only white person in my class (the rest were Inuit). I'm a product of an underfunded public secondary school system.

Extra application points, please.

See now why I suggested AA should be used from a financial standpoint rather than race? I certainly don't think I should qualify for it, as I've never financially struggled, but I know plenty of people who have but because of the color of their skin, they are at a slight disadvantage against applicants who never struggled financially, socially, or educationally. Given, these are all anecdotal evidence, so it's not worth much.

 

[suwaifo]

I'm going to step out of this conversation because it always just goes in circles, but you did exactly what I just said anti-AA proponents foolishly do: dismissed the existence of bigger social, economic, and educational disparities that AA attempts to address (not just med school AA). Abolishing AA does not approach these issues from a more effective, less-threatening way at all... it ignores them, exactly as I had said before.

That is not a solution, that is ignorance.

I'm sure when I'm a doctor, some people will look at me funny and assume I must've had a 3.0/25 in college, and that if it weren't for AA I'd be nothing but a carpenter like my father and my father's father... but honestly, there are bigger things in life, and that's a sacrifice I'll make if it's for the good of societal progress. One day AA will no longer have any benefit and its bad will outweigh its good...but that day is not today.

What, are you serious? I would love it if people thought about me like that. Then you could give them the old switcheroo, prove them wrong, and change their lives forever.

 

[TupacalipseT96]

Hmm, well, then explain this to me, if all I'm doing is 'ignoring' the issues. I grew up incredibly middle class (actually, borderline lower/middle for a good part of my life). For a few years I was the only white person in my class (the rest were Inuit). I'm a product of an underfunded public secondary school system.

Extra application points, please.

See now why I suggested AA should be used from a financial standpoint rather than race? I certainly don't think I should qualify for it, as I've never financially struggled, but I know plenty of people who have but because of the color of their skin, they are at a slight disadvantage against applicants who never struggled financially, socially, or educationally. Given, these are all anecdotal evidence, so it's not worth much.

I agree, on an individual level, if you came from a disadvantaged background, you deserve an extra look too... and I'd like to think the diversity essays, hardship essays, and disadvantaged background options incorporate this some into the process. But again, you are right, there are groups thats are left out that should be considered in a similar light as others and I'd consider this a problem with AA as it stands. I think there's lots to improve on, perhaps even a better way to approach these issues... but abolishing it completely is not the answer. That's all I'm saying.

 

[TupacalipseT96]

What, are you serious? I would love it if people thought about me like that. Then you could give them the old switcheroo, prove them wrong, and change their lives forever.

haha yea that's actually the way I look at it in truth. The glass is always half full, too 👍

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

I agree, on an individual level, if you came from a disadvantaged background, you deserve an extra look too... and I'd like to think the diversity essays, hardship essays, and disadvantaged background options incorporate this some into the process. But again, you are right, there are group thats are left out that deserve it just as much as others and I'd consider this a problem with AA as it stands. I think there's lots to improve on, perhaps even a better way to approach these issues... but abolishing it completely is not the answer. That's all I'm saying.

Why not abolish it and use the administrative costs from the related offices/positions to fund pre-medical grants and scholarships for those who are disadvantaged financially?

Or hey, we could put a $30 cap on every secondary application so that NONE of us feel like we got punched in the gut when we turn in $75 and $100 secondaries, on top of the $30 we spent just to send our primary to that school.

 

[MilkmanAl]

BS. The UCs have the most abysmal urm stats in the country. 209 is not being ignored whatsoever. It's annoying when premeds say stuff like this when an actual UCSD adcom member explicitly said they take the law VERY seriously and do not practice AA.

I'm going to stay out of the whole AA debate, but I thought I'd comment on this. What exactly do you expect the administration to say? Do you think they're going to publically say they're breaking laws? Seriously? Regardless of how well or poorly they're following the laws, they're going to say they're following them. They'd have to be amazingly stupid to do otherwise.

 

[flaahless]

I'm going to stay out of the whole AA debate, but I thought I'd comment on this. What exactly do you expect the administration to say? Do you think they're going to publically say they're breaking laws? Seriously? Regardless of how well or poorly they're following the laws, they're going to say they're following them. They'd have to be amazingly stupid to do otherwise.

That's an easy cop-out.

Anyways, the premed conjecture of the UCs practicing AA is largely invalid since the abysmal urm enrollment statistics actually substantiate the effectiveness of 209.

When 209 was passed urm enrollment plummeted. This mere FACT is used by many other public school systems to show a necessity for AA policies.

It's just annoying when uninformed or misinformed premeds spout ridiculous drivel and perpetuate these prejudiced misconceptions when the facts for the UCs clearly show otherwise.

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

When 209 was passed urm enrollment plummeted. This mere FACT is used by many other public school systems to show a necessity for AA policies.

No, the drop in URM admissions threatened their federal funding, which is why many schools institute AA policies. I can promise you that without financial reward, school administrators wouldn't worry about the ethnic makeup of classes.

 

[MilkmanAl]

That's not a cop-out, man. That's how administrations everywhere the world work. I don't know jack about minority enrollment in CA, but I'm just saying that the fact some adcom claims UCSD follows the law doesn't mean that they do. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but either way, they have to say they do or the state will royally cornhole them.

 

[suwaifo]

It's just annoying when uninformed or misinformed premeds spout ridiculous drivel and perpetuate these prejudiced misconceptions when the facts for the UCs clearly show otherwise.

Would you like some scones with your tea, sir? Haha you could have just said," Premeds are annoying."

 

[flaahless]

Yeah I've always known that stats have generally been on a steady increase for med school acceptance. And don't take what I said as saying that you need a 3.5/30 to get into med school. I surely don't have a 3.5. But not considering the stats at all would be pretty absurd to me. To put it bluntly, some people just aren't cut out for medical school and there has to be some way to weed those people out. Heck I may be one of those thats gets weeded. Now whether our current method is the most efficient way or not I truly don't know, but unless someone comes up with a better avenue for selecting future doctors we'll just have to trust the current process.

Of course MCAT/GPA shouldn't be waived. But they are definitely overemphasized, and it is this overemphasis that Ward Connerly and other anti-AA proponents manipulate to achieve their anti-AA goals.

 

[flaahless]

That's not a cop-out, man. That's how administrations everywhere the world work. I don't know jack about minority enrollment in CA, but I'm just saying that the fact some adcom claims UCSD follows the law doesn't mean that they do. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but either way, they have to say they do or the state will royally cornhole them.

Yeah you're definitely correct. I'm just saying the numbers also substantiate the effectiveness of 209.

No, the drop in URM admissions threatened their federal funding, which is why many schools institute AA policies. I can promise you that without financial reward, school administrators wouldn't worry about the ethnic makeup of classes.

Umm... how is this relevant to what I wrote?

My point was... Prop 209 was effective, hence the abysmal urm enrollment stats. I then substantiated that by mentioning how other states reference this this fact when they argue pro-AA.

Your point was... ?

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

Of course MCAT/GPA shouldn't be waived. But they are definitely overemphasized, and it is this overemphasis that Ward Connerly and other anti-AA proponents manipulate to achieve their anti-AA goals.

How is it overemphasized? Schools rely on their reputation/test scores for grants (private and corporate), free advertising, more applications ($$), and to attract partnerships. They also like having alumni in well-respected positions as brochure-filler.

The best indicator of how a student will do on the two USMLE steps is GPA/MCAT. Several studies (I believe there is one one the AAMC site) have shown a direct correlation between MCAT and USMLE 1.

Schools are businesses, not charities. If they want the best test scores so they can pander to private organisations, they will look for students with the highest potential to score well.

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

Yeah you're definitely correct. I'm just saying the numbers also substantiate the effectiveness of 209.


Umm... how is this relevant to what I wrote?

My point was... Prop 209 was effective, hence the abysmal urm enrollment stats. I then substantiated that by mentioning how other states reference this this fact when they argue pro-AA.

Your point was... ?

No need for the biting sarcasm or rudeness. You said that the drop in URM admissions were what spurred schools to institute AA programs. I disagreed and said it was the threat of losing federal grants DUE to fewer URM admissions, not the admissions themselves. See?

 

[flaahless]

Hmm, well, then explain this to me, if all I'm doing is 'ignoring' the issues. I grew up incredibly middle class (actually, borderline lower/middle for a good part of my life). For a few years I was the only white person in my class (the rest were Inuit). I'm a product of an underfunded public secondary school system.

Extra application points, please.

See now why I suggested AA should be used from a financial standpoint rather than race? I certainly don't think I should qualify for it, as I've never financially struggled, but I know plenty of people who have but because of the color of their skin, they are at a slight disadvantage against applicants who never struggled financially, socially, or educationally. Given, these are all anecdotal evidence, so it's not worth much.

Dude, AA is not just a race-based measure. It's an oppression-based measure.

The disadvantaged section on the AMCAS is AA. However, we don't know what effect it is having since there is no published data on it.

 

[VneZonyDostupa]

Dude, AA is not just a race-based measure. It's an oppression-based measure.

The disadvantaged section on the AMCAS is AA. However, we don't know what effect it is having since there is no published data on it.

Oppression-based measure?

Please, explain.

 

[Feynmann]

AA or not, what will be will eventually be.BTW, AA is not race based;It is however largely dependent on socio-economic factors.Race is unfairly associated with AA because Blacks are disproportionately poorer than their white counterparts.

 

[flaahless]

Oppression-based measure?

Please, explain.

Haha wikipedia it man. Women, homosexuals, minorities, disabled individiduals, veterans, econonomically disadvantaged etc. all benefit. There is just more data on its racial applications as America has a fixation on race. Anyways, if you would like continue talking PM me. I just got a new 42 inch plasma and I'm about to go MIA for a while! I'll holla.