applying as a fake minority

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
It's scary how true this is. I mean, if you have a class of students and the make up is like 112 caucasian, 21 asian, 6 hispanic, 5 african american, and 3 "other" (yeah go figure, there's such a thing as "other"), wouldn't it make more sense to put your money on that big group of 112?? I really don't get these people who lie about their ethnicity or think that it can help them in the admissions process :confused:

Um...oh never mind.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I heard a story about a girl who claimed she was Mexican. At the interview, they asked her if she spoke Spanish. She said no. They asked her if she participated in the Latino community at all. She said no. Finally they asked her why she claimed to be Mexican. It turns out her father went to med school at the University of Guadalajara so she was born in Mexico... hmm.. what makes it worse is that she actually had decent stats and probably would have gotten in if she hadn't lied.
You don't have to speak spanish in order to be hispanic though...or care about the latino community either.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Only a rich white person can write something so stupid with so much conviction

families in the ghettos don't usually adopt....

only crazy liberals do-to break it down in your terms.

only crazy liberals adopt?
 
I dont know about other backgrounds but I do that if you list that you are Native American that they want proof along with your tribe affliations and your tribal registration number.
 
Only a rich white person can write something so stupid with so much conviction

families in the ghettos don't usually adopt....

only crazy liberals do-to break it down in your terms.

Huh? We just adopted a baby girl from Guatemala. I may be crazy but I am so conservative and Republican that Canadians submissively urinate when I talk to them.
 
Huh? We just adopted a baby girl from Guatemala. I may be crazy but I am so conservative and Republican that I Canadians submissively urinate when I talk to them.


Huh?
 
I have heard of students who have applied as a minority when they really are not. What steps do medical schools take to insure that people who apply as minorities really are of their respective indicated ethnic background? Also what defines a minority, is there a certain percentage that you have to be of an ethnic background?

In other words..." I might be able to apply as a minority even though I am technically not, so will I get caught...what really defines minority, is a certain percentage like .000005% ok?"
 
Panda is very conservative. So much so that he makes liberals pee when he talks to them.

Thanks. I'm glad somebody gets me. I call liberals "Canadians" because it's hard to keep track of what they want to be called these days. It used to be "progressive" but even that word is getting the liberal taint.

Ironically, if you accuse a conservative of being a conservative they will usually say something like, "Damn straight." Suggest to a liberal that he is a liberal and he will wriggle and squirm like a nightcrawler on a hook.
 
Thanks. I'm glad somebody gets me. I call liberals "Canadians" because it's hard to keep track of what they want to be called these days. It used to be "progressive" but even that word is getting the liberal taint.

Ironically, if you accuse a conservative of being a conservative they will usually say something like, "Damn straight." Suggest to a liberal that he is a liberal and he will wriggle and squirm like a nightcrawler on a hook.

Forgive me for being naive but do people who say they are liberal or conservative feel that way for all issues...I mean, if you are "conservative" per se, will you vote that way on all issues...I feel very different about different issues...i might take a conservative approach to one and a liberal approach to another...is there no middle ground?
 
Forgive me for being naive but do people who say they are liberal or conservative feel that way for all issues...I mean, if you are "conservative" per se, will you vote that way on all issues...I feel very different about different issues...i might take a conservative approach to one and a liberal approach to another...is there no middle ground?

Not really. Voting different ways based on different issues just waters down your party's political clout. It's like voting for President Bush because you support the war but voting for Barbara Boxer because you support an increase in the minimum wage. Make up your mind what is more important and vote accordingly. People are afraid to commit nowadays and are too in love with being middle of the road.
 
Applying as an african american truly won't help your chances. If you look at most medical school classes, there are about 5 to 8 black, people per class. LLU has 4 black students out of 182, and in their dental class (1st year) they have none. The chance of you getting in the one of the 5 or so spots reserved for minorities is slim, so just be honest.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Applying as an african american truly won't help your chances. If you look at most medical school classes, there are about 5 to 8 black, people per class. LLU has 4 black students out of 182, and in their dental class (1st year) they have none. The chance of you getting in the one of the 5 or so spots reserved for minorities is slim, so just be honest.


Thanx for bringing that FACT to the floor.

Take howard, Meharry and Morehouse out of the equation or even leave them in to account for the schools that have ABSOLUTELY no Black students going there and the numbers STILL average out to be about 5-8 students and most of those will be Black Females.

To listen/read the gripes on this message board and to think that these people, narrow minded as they are, will be my colleagues one day is often times frightening.:scared: :eek: :thumbdown:

It is scary that folx wil say, do, conjure up ANYTHING to get into medical school.

In the end, it is terribly unfortunate, b/c it is the patients who ultimately suffer.
 
Ughh.. She's not lying. Say I'm White and was born in South Africa. My family was of Dutch descent and moved there 200 or so years ago. Clearly I'm African and my family has strong ties to Africa. Then I decide to go to college in America and become a citizen. Am I not African American? How about I'm white but orphaned as an infant and adopted by a black family in the ghetto? I grew up on the streets, in a black community, and thus have the inner city cultural diversity. What box do I check there?

The minority status is really asking about color/race and social upbringing and in all reality is a shame that some try to abuse it while others use it as a crutch.

It might be an urban myth, but I think I heard of a South African who tried to pull off "African-American" for law school at Notre Dame. He eventually got caught and his acceptance and scholarship were revoked.

Schools are looking to see if you were disadvantaged in some way and how you were able to overcome this disadvantage, not your box-checking skills.
 
Thanx for bringing that FACT to the floor.

Take howard, Meharry and Morehouse out of the equation or even leave them in to account for the schools that have ABSOLUTELY no Black students going there and the numbers STILL average out to be about 5-8 students and most of those will be Black Females.

To listen/read the gripes on this message board and to think that these people, narrow minded as they are, will be my colleagues one day is often times frightening.:scared: :eek: :thumbdown:

It is scary that folx wil say, do, conjure up ANYTHING to get into medical school.

In the end, it is terribly unfortunate, b/c it is the patients who ultimately suffer.
Well absolute numbers aren't as interesting. I would be interested in seeing accepted/applied ratios for african americans vs whites vs asians when you equalize GPA and MCATs.
 
I dont know about other backgrounds but I do that if you list that you are Native American that they want proof along with your tribe affliations and your tribal registration number.

No, they don't, always -- it depends on the place, but most places I know of don't ask for this and don't require that you have any of that.

There are a lot of people objecting to the general idea by saying you'd get busted for sure, etc., but it's probably more like one of those things that one can frequently get away with so it mostly comes down to one's morals and which doesn't even matter much. Probably most of the people who click the box saying they're X, they're X technically speaking just like how that one girl said she was Mexican (and was). Those are probably a large, large fraction of the "X" people the adcoms meet. And that kind of thing won't matter to an adcom as much as someone who actually lived in an underserved sort of way, like if someone either did grow up in the ghetto or did stuff with the X community or whatever else, even if they don't technically fit into the X box. Adcoms aren't dumb, and while the number of technical minorities matter to some schools, it doesn't seem in the end like much of a factor. Anyone who gets pissed off at these kinds of things and says it's impossible to lie etc. should just save themselves the fury and go and volunteer more in real underserved communities and whatnot and then they'll end up looking as good as the technically-X people, if not better. Anyone who lies and doesn't get caught? -- No, not fair, but not very frequent, unless you're talking about the technically-X people who get only a very dubious advantage (weighing numbers for the school versus adcoms feeling like the person is a manipulative jerk).

Edit: Re-reading, wow, I wrote about someone fitting into an XBox! Awesome! :p (Tight fit!)
 
Yeah. Misrepresenting yourself is a great idea. And while you're at it, why not cheat on your undergrad exams to get better grades, write fake LoR's, hide your three DUI's and make up your volunteer experiences??? *dripping sarcasm*

It's rather interesting that a lot of those who has the biggest problem with the promotion of diversity in education are people, who're unable to be accepted to medical schools. They might as well point their anger towards those applicants who, by virtue of their family and upbringing, has attended only the best schools, and received everything in terms of money, support and advice from family and/or connections. Fairness, it seems, is often in the eye of the beholder.

This subject has been flogged to death numerous times. NOBODY is accepted solely on the basis of their "numbers" (GPA, MCAT, whatever). If that was the case, you could just have a computer assigning student spots. Medical schools are interested in a diverse and complementary student body. So sometimes your 4.00 GPA/42 MCAT applicant is rejected, and sometimes your 3.2 GPA/28 MCAT is accepted.

So, if medical schools wants students from diverse backgrounds, would it make sense to include what social background an applicant comes from? Of course it does. As long as a specific background doesn't give entitlement to med school acceptance. But if anybody can prove that somebody was accepted solely on the basis of their URM status, I'd very much like to see this evidence.
 
Note: Do a search for the countless students who marked themselves as Hispanic and were tested by of casual Spanish conversation!

Be ready to prove it someway, somehow....

There are also countless kids with true Hispanic heritage who are born in the US that DON'T speak a lick of Spanish. But then they have names like Lopez, Martinez, etc...

I imagine that those white-looking Argentines and Chileans with German last names or the half-and halfs whose mothers happen to be Hispanic would be the ones worse off... They don't even have a Hispanic surname to fall-back on. Oh noes!
+pity+
I think people tend to focus too much on this stuff when really acceptance is determined by multiple factors TOGETHER. The best anyone can do is cover their available bases. No amount of colour, gender, religion, privilege or lack thereoff is going to guarantee anyone anything if they don't also have something else to show for it.
 
Huh? We just adopted a baby girl from Guatemala. I may be crazy but I am so conservative and Republican that Canadians submissively urinate when I talk to them.

That's better. Frankly you have been slipping lately Panda. Sarcasm needs humor. Otherwise you’re just a troll.
 
I'd be careful with some of the implications made in this thread. I understand the point that some might bend the rules of ethnicity to get a step ahead. Do not extrapolate this to mean that minorities in med school are there because they are minorities. I'm not one of these minorities, just to clarify.

Additionally I can bet that most of your applications aren't entirely pristine- exaggeration of an EC, amount of hours spent volunteering etc etc.

...but some minorities are in med school because the are minorities. It doesn't mean they're "lesser" people by any means and no one with a brain will imply that, BUT statistically it can't be argued that being a minority gives the individual an advantage when applying. Also, please notice I said individual; this should not turn into an AA thread i'm not even considering why or how this is the case i'm just reiterating a published fact.
 
My brother (white) had his entire ungrad paid for by a (black) scholarship. They never found out and never cared. Today if you try and take something away, like acceptance, you can be sued for discrimination no matter what race the person is. Just one more reason why everyone should be treated equal and I don't ever answer race questions.
 
http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2006/mcatgparaceeth.htm

well what they do have is average gpa/mcat by race/ethnicity for matriculants.

in the end, just do well enough so you dont have to resort to lying.

Ah so from the looks of it, the average Asian accepted into med school has a MCAT of 31.5 while the average African American has a 25.1 . Seems like it's easier to get accepted to med school with a 25 if you're african american than if you're asian. In terms of whether you're asian or black and have to reach your ethnicity's average MCAT, a difference of 6 points is pretty big... but i guess this doesn't factor in ECs

also it seems like the "over achieving asian" stereotype is not true. White people are still ahead in almost all the categories
 
Ah so from the looks of it, the average Asian accepted into med school has a MCAT of 31.5 while the average African American has a 25.1 . Seems like it's easier to get accepted to med school with a 25 if you're african american than if you're asian. In terms of whether you're asian or black and have to reach your ethnicity's average MCAT, a difference of 6 points is pretty big... but i guess this doesn't factor in ECs

also it seems like the "over achieving asian" stereotype is not true. White people are still ahead in almost all the categories

yea,

but the key is there are so so few minorities in medschool compared to the whole that they aren't truly stealing anyone's seat. You have to be super super borderline to not get in and be able to have some truth in blaming it on a minority. If you are that borderline just step up with some DAB (or DIB, they need help too) action and I personally will guarantee you an acceptance.
 
yea,

but the key is there are so so few minorities in medschool compared to the whole that they aren't truly stealing anyone's seat. You have to be super super borderline to not get in and blame it on a minority. If you are that borderline just step up with some DAB (or DIB, they need help too) action and I personally will guarantee you an acceptance.

Well i guess you wouldn't have to be borderline, just between the two averages, of course that's also assuming the acceptance rate at those averages are the same
 
yea,

but the key is there are so so few minorities in medschool compared to the whole that they aren't truly stealing anyone's seat. You have to be super super borderline to not get in and be able to have some truth in blaming it on a minority. If you are that borderline just step up with some DAB (or DIB, they need help too) action and I personally will guarantee you an acceptance.

Dr. Patrick Chavis stole his "seat" from Dr. Allan Bakke. That turned out well, didn't it?
 
Dr. Patrick Chavis stole his "seat" from Dr. Allan Bakke. That turned out well, didn't it?

Are you seriously going to try and generalize all AA cases with this one example?

There are ****ty doctors everywhere.
 
Are you seriously going to try and generalize all AA cases with this one example?

There are ****ty doctors everywhere.

Very few ****ty doctors are profiled in the New York Times and lauded on the floors of Congress as the perfect example of an Affirmative Action success and role model.
 
Applying as an african american truly won't help your chances. If you look at most medical school classes, there are about 5 to 8 black, people per class. LLU has 4 black students out of 182, and in their dental class (1st year) they have none. The chance of you getting in the one of the 5 or so spots reserved for minorities is slim, so just be honest.

I seriously doubt that there is a quota for minorities. The fact that there are so few minorities in medical school reflect their, on average, lower MCAT/GPA's which is why affirmative action is needed in the first place. I think schools would absolute it love it if there is a spike in qualified minorities one year and they could accept more than just 5-6.

I think it is unethical and quite frankly disgusting to represent yourself as a minority simply for the sake of admissions but I agree with some of these aforementioned losers who say that minority status confers a significant advantage. The 6 pt. difference in avg. MCAT scores of URM and ORM matriculants would support this claim.
 
Very few ****ty doctors are profiled in the New York Times and lauded on the floors of Congress as the perfect example of an Affirmative Action success.

The logic is still wrong. You can't just take one example and extrapolate to your own ends.

There's no point in arguing since there isn't a compiled stat sheet of AA admitted doctors practicing today (a stat sheet could maybe include successful surgeries vs unsuccessful ones, etc........which would be of course impossible to find).

Regardless, the % of URMs in med school is around ~12% (~2000/~17000, per class). URMs cannot be used honestly as a scapegoat for the reason unsuccessful applicants do not get into med school. They may play a role for borderline applicants, but in all honesty, I think the finger should first point right back at the ''pointer''.
 
The logic is still wrong. You can't just take one example and extrapolate to your own ends.

There's no point in arguing since there isn't a compiled stat sheet of AA admitted doctors practicing today (a stat sheet could maybe include successful surgeries vs unsuccessful ones, etc........which would be of course impossible to find).

Regardless, the % of URMs in med school is around ~12% (~2000/~17000, per class). URMs cannot be used honestly as a scapegoat for the reason unsuccessful applicants do not get into med school. They may play a role for borderline applicants, but in all honesty, I think the finger should first point right back at the ''pointer''.

Allan Bakke is not a single example by any means. We know his name because of his Supreme Court case. But there are countless other nameless applicants who did not get in because of AA. For instance, just in the 2001 admissions cycle, the AAMC estimates 794 applicants did not get in because of AA.

I did not introduce Patrick Chavis has an example. Those who supported Affirmative Action were the ones who brought him into the limelight as the perfect Affirmative Action physician.
 
Allan Bakke is not a single example by any means. We know his name because of his Supreme Court case. But there are countless other nameless applicants who did not get in because of AA. For instance, just in the 2001 admissions cycle, the AAMC estimates 794 applicants did not get in because of AA.

I did not introduce Patrick Chavis has an example. Those who supported Affirmative Action were the ones who brought him into the limelight as the perfect Affirmative Action physician.

But could the converse be true? A doctor with good grades but poor ethics got in over a minority with lower grades. The doctor then went on to become a horrible physician with dubious ethics. who knows.
 
But could the converse be true? A doctor with good grades but poor ethics got in over a minority with lower grades. The doctor then went on to become a horrible physician with dubious ethics. who knows.

Yes, we wouldn't hear the end of it if Dr. Bakke or some other doctor we presented as the anti-AA champion turned out to be a horrible physician.
 
Good thread, good discussion going.

One interesting thing I haven't seen though (briefly read each comment) is that no one's arguing race has no bearing on your application to med school.

Diversity is so much more than the amount of people that fit into certain skin pigment groups. Race is a factor completely out of the control of the applicant. An applicant can always improve their MCAT score, GPA, community service, medical exposure, but they can never change their race.
 
Good thread, good discussion going.

One interesting thing I haven't seen though (briefly read each comment) is that no one's arguing race has no bearing on your application to med school.

Diversity is so much more than the amount of people that fit into certain skin pigment groups. Race is a factor completely out of the control of the applicant. An applicant can always improve their MCAT score, GPA, community service, medical exposure, but they can never change their race.

well that's one reason why people feel URM status is an unfair advantage since it's something you can't change. Students should apply under their own merits, things they've done. Minorities have different experiences? Absolutley, put those experiences down on your EC list and have your app compete with the rest.

But hasn't there been a survey done where URMs are more likely to practice in underserved areas? If that's the case the maybe it's better to lower acceptance standards as long as we are still producing capable physicians, especially if they are willing to go to the places other docs aren't
 
Good thread, good discussion going.

One interesting thing I haven't seen though (briefly read each comment) is that no one's arguing race has no bearing on your application to med school.

Diversity is so much more than the amount of people that fit into certain skin pigment groups. Race is a factor completely out of the control of the applicant. An applicant can always improve their MCAT score, GPA, community service, medical exposure, but they can never change their race.

Yes, people do not like being judged on things they have had absolutely no control over. I suppose this is the very reason why Proposal 2 passed in such a convincing and overwhelming fashion despite the juggernaut of political, corporate and academic leaders that came out against it. Heck, even the Michigan GOP came out against Prop 2.
 
If that's the case the maybe it's better to lower acceptance standards as long as we are still producing capable physicians, especially if they are willing to go to the places other docs aren't

I think this is the question. Someone resurrected a 3-year old thread yesterday with evidence that suggests Howards and Meharry produce a greater proportion of incompetent doctors than other medical schools. The problem with affirmative action is that it propagates incompetence. There is no doubt that, on average, minorities receive poorer elementary and intermediate education. So we accept them into colleges with substandard HS GPA/SAT scores. Not surprisingly, they struggle more in college (as evidenced by their lower graduation rates, college GPA, and MCAT scores). So again, for the sake of med school admissions, we cut them another break and accept URM's with lower GPA and MCAT scores who otherwise wouldn't get into med school.

The obvious solution to all this would be to improve education at the lower levels so that minorities can gain a solid foundation on which they can build their later academic endeavors. But of course this is a long and expensive route so instead we rely on affirmative action and we'll continue to see all of the bickering, the lower graduation rates, the accusations by ORM's of reverse discrimination, the greater percent of incompetence, the debates over who qualifies as a minority, etc. etc. etc. all so that a couple of extra minorities can gain entry into med school. The question would be, is affirmative action worth it?
 
I think this is the question. Someone resurrected a 3-year old thread yesterday with evidence that suggests Howards and Meharry produce a greater proportion of incompetent doctors than other medical schools. The problem with affirmative action is that it propagates incompetence. There is no doubt that, on average, minorities receive poorer elementary and intermediate education. So we accept them into colleges with substandard HS GPA/SAT scores. Not surprisingly, they struggle more in college (as evidenced by their lower graduation rates, GPA, and MCAT scores). So again, for the sake of med school admissions, we cut them another break and accept URM's with lower GPA and MCAT scores who otherwise wouldn't get into med school.

The obvious solution to all this would be to improve education at the lower levels so that minorities can gain a solid foundation on which they can build their later academic endeavors. But of course this is a long and expensive route so instead we rely on affirmative action and we'll continue to see all of the bickering, the lower graduation rates, the accusations by ORM's of reverse discrimination, the greater percent of incompetence, the debates over who qualifies as a minority, etc. etc. etc. all so that a couple of extra minorities can gain entry into med school. The question would be, is affirmative action worth it?
it's quite teh big question since by letting URMs into college then med school you could be establishing a tradition of higher education that wasn't present within the family. By rejecting them based on their low numbers could mean propagating something even worse than mediocrity as you would say.
 
I think it's interesting to note that the ratios of matriculants to applicants are pretty similar across the board.

Hispanic: (1,283/2,771) 46%

Black: (1,155/2,906) 40%

Asian: (3,242/7,532) 43%

Native American: (68/146) 47%

Native Hawaiin/OPI: (33/111) 30%

White: (10,541/22,669) 46%

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2006/mcatgparaceeth.htm
 
I think it's interesting to note that the ratios of matriculants to applicants are pretty similar across the board.

Hispanic: (1,283/2,771) 46%

Black: (1,155/2,906) 40%

Asian: (3,242/7,532) 43%

Native American: (68/146) 47%

Native Hawaiin/OPI: (33/111) 30%

White: (10,541/22,669) 46%

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2006/mcatgparaceeth.htm


It's interesting that Hispanics have a higher acceptance rate than Blacks, given that their history here is shorter and they tend to be on the same level socio-economically.

Maybe educationally there is a social/cultural problem.

What another poster said is very right, the problem is social, and we need to make sure that people on the low end of the socioeconomic spectrum (whites included) get a better education so that we don't have to resort to measures like AA. The reason of AA existing is that there is a demand for minority physicians NOW, and fixing the root of the problem would take longer.
 
I'm sure it happens... Who cares though. If you're a good applicant you'll get in regardless, and if you're a weak one the fact that your grandmothers great aunt was a Swahili from Alaska isn't really gonna do a whole lot of good. The object of these programs is to recruit and train good physicians from ethnically diverse backgrounds, not just have diversity for the sake of diversity. You need the grades too.

It is ALOT easier to get into programs if you are a "minority" or a "race that is underrepresented in the medical field." We're talkin ALOT easier...but why should a kid whose parents were part of a NAtive American Tribe becomea doctor over me?
 
I think it's interesting to note that the ratios of matriculants to applicants are pretty similar across the board.

Hispanic: (1,283/2,771) 46%

Black: (1,155/2,906) 40%

Asian: (3,242/7,532) 43%

Native American: (68/146) 47%

Native Hawaiin/OPI: (33/111) 30%

White: (10,541/22,669) 46%

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2006/mcatgparaceeth.htm
Ah... similar matriculation rates but the average MCATS are drastically different. Blacks are 25.1 while Asians are 31.5. 6 point rise in MCATS, 3% acceptance difference
 
it's quite teh big question since by letting URMs into college then med school you could be establishing a tradition of higher education that wasn't present within the family. By rejecting them based on their low numbers could mean propagating something even worse than mediocrity as you would say.

Right. There are benefits to affirmative action. But as pro-AAers love to say, "Affirmative action only helps a few minorities get in each year." I agree with this statement 100%. I think it is ludicrous for Asian/White applicants to complain that minorities are "stealing their spots" when affirmative action only helps so few minorities. But, man, it does cause quite a few problems despite the fact it helps so few minorities. So do the benefits of AA really outweigh all of the controversy, accusations of racism and reverse racism, lying, bickering, lawsuits, etc.?
 
Ah... similar matriculation rates but the average MCATS are drastically different. Blacks are 25.1 while Asians are 31.5. 6 point rise in MCATS, 3% acceptance difference

its even more rough at top schools. ive heard from some friends at top 10 schools that asians have to really really rail the crap out of the mcat (37+) just because the competition amongst asians is so high (still only around 40% get in even though the mean mcat is 92%ile). It sucks to be an asian with a 32 mcat dreaming for a top school. it sucks to be an asian with a 32 mcat period.
 
it's quite teh big question since by letting URMs into college then med school you could be establishing a tradition of higher education that wasn't present within the family. By rejecting them based on their low numbers could mean propagating something even worse than mediocrity as you would say.

Yes, this is the idea of AA, but, unfortunately, this is not what happens. After having gone to a private college and a private med school, I can tell you that I have come across many URMs who's parents are doctors, lawyers, etc, and make far more money than mine. I'd say for every URM you accept that is from a truly disadvantaged background, you accept at least one more who is not at all. Likewise, I know white kids who had to work multiple jobs to put themselves through college, and therefore maybe their grades suffered and they couldn't get involved in lots of activities because they had to work all the time. And yes, you can check the little "disadvantaged" box on the AMCAS application, but I doubt that comes into play during admissions nearly as much as the URM box, because med schools often proudly display the percentages of URMs they have, but not the number of disadvantaged applicants. Therefore, I do not think that it's fair to lower your standards based on a preconceived notion that one racial group is more disadvantaged than another, because often the applicants getting the spots are not disadvantaged, regardless of what color their skin is. And yes, I think we do need diversity in schools, and I don't have anything against the administration holding seats for people of different racial backgrounds, regardless of whether or not they are disadvantaged. How else are we supposed to learn how people different from ourselves have experienced life, and how they view things? BUT, I think the idea of AA is flawed, and does not promote what it is supposed to promote, which is to give advantages to those who would not otherwise have them.
 
Top