Are nontrads really "diversity"

[STLINC]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I was nominated by student leadership for a committee that is being formed to evaluate/make recommendations to improve a part of the school that I am passionate about. During the same meeting where I was nominated, I was immediately shot down by administration because they were looking for a "diverse" committee, and apparently I don't bring the type of diversity that they want.

I am a married, white male, 10+ years older than the average student, and come from a blue collar background. I have no illusions that outside of med school I am not what you would call"diverse." However, inside med school, I think that my background gives me a VERY different perspective on things than that of the average student.

I honestly value diversity and understand that people with different experiences growing up see, solve, and even acknowledge problems differently than others. And, I appreciate the irony of a 30-something white man writing this post. However, if the school is committed to fostering diversity because it leads to a better outcome for all, I think the administration made a bad decision. If the school is committed to diversity for aesthetics, shame on them. I worry that it's the latter, and I don't think anybody wins if pursuing this ends in me pointing out to the administration that they are disingenuous in their commitment to diversity.

Is this something that I should pursue, or is the fact that I'm upset because I don't get to try to help make something that I care very much about better clouding my judgment?

 

[Mad Jack]

https://www.aamc.org/download/363478/data/msq2013report.pdf

Honestly I think you're in the right, but I may be biased. Medical schools suffer from a lack of socioeconomic and age diversity. Only 27.6% of medical students grew up in families making less than $75,000 a year. Only 6% are over the age of 28. Only 8.6% are married. A mere 20.6% are more than two years out of college (with just over 8% more than four years out).

Sounds like they want something that looks like diversity at a glance, not real diversity. Statistically, you're actually very, very different than your peers, but that won't show in a photo or in any racial diversity questionnaire, so I guess it doesn't count.

 

[DrMidlife]

student committees are 99% waste of time. administration sees time flow in decade scale. you'll be long gone, really soon. administration knows you won't be around to keep up the effort or to carry any of the work load. prioritize accordingly.

 

[Goro]

Absolutely! They bring maturity and a broader world view, plus more responsibility and a much lesser sense of entitlement than the classic pre-med straight out of college! They have better work ethics as well.

Let this go. Your administration's view of diversity is narrow, to say the least.

I was nominated by student leadership for a committee that is being formed to evaluate/make recommendations to improve a part of the school that I am passionate about. During the same meeting where I was nominated, I was immediately shot down by administration because they were looking for a "diverse" committee, and apparently I don't bring the type of diversity that they want.

I am a married, white male, 10+ years older than the average student, and come from a blue collar background. I have no illusions that outside of med school I am not what you would call"diverse." However, inside med school, I think that my background gives me a VERY different perspective on things than that of the average student.

I honestly value diversity and understand that people with different experiences growing up see, solve, and even acknowledge problems differently than others. And, I appreciate the irony of a 30-something white man writing this post. However, if the school is committed to fostering diversity because it leads to a better outcome for all, I think the administration made a bad decision. If the school is committed to diversity for aesthetics, shame on them. I worry that it's the latter, and I don't think anybody wins if pursuing this ends in me pointing out to the administration that they are disingenuous in their commitment to diversity.

Is this something that I should pursue, or is the fact that I'm upset because I don't get to try to help make something that I care very much about better clouding my judgment?

 

[22031 Alum]

I clicked on this thread ready to tell you just how wrong you were, and that nontrads make a HUGE contribution to diversity. 🙄

Sounds like what they want is superficial diversity. I wouldn't worry too much about it, since that type of committee probably wouldn't be very effective at making real change anyway. You may be able to contribute to the area that means a lot to you, without an official position.

 

[QofQuimica]

Find another venue for pursuing your passion. If your administration's mind is so closed that they can't see the value in having your perspective and dedication on board, then your entire committee experience is bound to be an exercise in frustration.

 

[Nasrudin]

Diversity is a clunky idea. Everyone loves it but it's hard to know what it is. And therefore something easily lost in the search for it.

Like modern university systems as cultivated by baby boomer hippies turned institutional. They're pictures of perfect diversity, at least according to their PR campaigns. And yet, clearly functioning as ideological seives. Collecting all the right thought postures of the canonical Left. Deviation from which can be quite costly. Or absurd as in the case of Ayan Hirsi Ali having her invitation to speak at Brandeis University revoked due her worldy and therefore unrecognizable thought posture after perceived threats to mythological diversity by vocal professionally offended types.

To name but one example that fits my interests.

If your not a brochure centerpiece of diversity you're not likely to benefit from marketing yourself as such. And should therefore do what the rest of the world who actually do things, do...and just say the hell with that nonsense.

 

[Goro]

So true. Harvard and UC Berkeley are for diversity in everything, except points of view.

Diversity is a clunky idea. Everyone loves it but it's hard to know what it is. And therefore something easily lost in the search for it.

Like modern university systems as cultivated by baby boomer hippies turned institutional. They're pictures of perfect diversity, at least according to their PR campaigns. And yet, clearly functioning as ideological seives. Collecting all the right thought postures of the canonical Left. Deviation from which can be quite costly. Or absurd as in the case of Ayan Hirsi Ali having her invitation to speak at Brandeis University revoked due her worldy and therefore unrecognizable thought posture after perceived threats to mythological diversity by vocal professionally offended types.

To name but one example that fits my interests.

If your not a brochure centerpiece of diversity you're not likely to benefit from marketing yourself as such. And should therefore do what the rest of the world who actually do things, do...and just say the hell with that nonsense.

 

[QofQuimica]

So true. Harvard and UC Berkeley are for diversity in everything, except points of view.

I'd argue that instead of having a political spectrum, what we really have is a political wheel. The specifics of their viewpoints may be different, but those on the far left and far right are of the same bent regarding their mutual and complete intolerance of any ideas different than their own.

 

[Nasrudin]

I don't know. Those extreme moderates seem to have bilateral intolerance for both extremes. So we might actually have a 4 or 5 dementional model. Like human consciousness itself.

 

[Snivellus]

Diversity usually only means racial diversity, not of perspective and experience.

 

[deleted480308]

The diversity most places want is the kind that looks diverse in a cover photo. It's not cool but it's not changing this year so don't sweat it.

 

[jl lin]

Hmmm. Well, no one knows for sure if the 20 something is going to tire or move into a remotely needed area of work--like consultant/sales for pharm company, etc.
OTOH, the 40 or so person may give 20 to 30 or mores years in clinical medicine, and that may include research.

Diverse is whatever the typical medical student is not--not that each student is not an individual, b/c we can't neglect that point.

Diversity generally applies to groups covered under the EEOC guidelines. So, yea. That includes age, and it should.

Diversity no longer means JUST racial diversity. See: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/

No one knows when anyone is going to die or necessarily leave the field. The rationale about age being an acceptable bias against older students, which is covered by pretext is foolish--although I completely get that it probably happens.

Those within the diverse group for acceptance will be a small number as compared with the typical students. So, the rationale to not give a qualified "diverse" person or nontrad a seat because of presumed years of practice is silly IMHO. And in reality, no one is taking away anything much from all the youngsters that adcom members HOPE will stay in medicine for a lifetime. Those non-diverse people already make up the majority.
The reason for EEOC is so that such a relatively small group of diverse folks--those outside the norm--are not marginalized.

I find the notion that everyone just calls it a day at 65-70 is ridiculous, especially when you see how long many scientist and clinicians have stayed active in the fields well past those ages.

 

[trev5150]

Diversity is a clunky idea. Everyone loves it but it's hard to know what it is. And therefore something easily lost in the search for it.

Like modern university systems as cultivated by baby boomer hippies turned institutional. They're pictures of perfect diversity, at least according to their PR campaigns. And yet, clearly functioning as ideological seives. Collecting all the right thought postures of the canonical Left. Deviation from which can be quite costly. Or absurd as in the case of Ayan Hirsi Ali having her invitation to speak at Brandeis University revoked due her worldy and therefore unrecognizable thought posture after perceived threats to mythological diversity by vocal professionally offended types.

To name but one example that fits my interests.

If your not a brochure centerpiece of diversity you're not likely to benefit from marketing yourself as such. And should therefore do what the rest of the world who actually do things, do...and just say the hell with that nonsense.

 

[Nasrudin]

Age diversity isn't as sexy of marketing scheme for diversity as a rainbow of smiley beautiful beige, brown, yellow (I don't actually see the yellowness of Asian people but for the purposes of color scheme...), black and perhaps pink, (I really think redheads are not respected for the trials and tribulations of low melanin and just the pain of being gingers), faces.

I know, you're not supposed to fire the old guy right before he checks out to get his pension but it happens...and nobody cries. But... I suppose it's because of these diversity notions that we're here talking about medical school as a bunch of old people, which would've been ridiculous in the not so distant past. So yay us!

But I still think diversity as a hiring or admissions rubric is not without its perversions, ironies, and basic irrationalities. Whether as Old Person, I have benefitted from it or not.

 

[Nasrudin]

Anyway. I think this is right platform for one of my ACTUAL gripes against people who need diversity training, university people have too much of of it not too little. Porn curators. On the otherhand. Ok...right?! I mean, I like brown ladies. But I don't want to feel quilty about my porn consumption. Guilty erections are problematic. Wtf do these people have to be absolute mouth-breathing *****s when it comes to not involving sexual tastes with horrible racial stereotypes?! Right?

What's wrong with micro niche porn marketing that's people positive.

Get it together Internet.

 

[jl lin]

OHKAY??? Anyway. I stand by my previous post. People getting consideration d/t diversity reasons is relatively small compared with the bigger mix, so, it is really nothing for any adcom member to sweat over. Unfair discrimination is wrong, and no rationalizing in any way justifies it--marginalizing people can't be honestly justified, and that's part of why the EEOC criteria exists.

 

[Nasrudin]

But old people are not being discriminated against in medicine. We're having this conversation. Despite rational arguments against us being considered. This is one of the progressive accomplishments of the university system. In addition to lowering admissions standards to make sure there is an element of racial and age diversity. I'm fine with these compromises. I benefit from this cultural movement.

But I think the multi-cultural impulse of universities now needs to be curtailed not pushed into absurdity.

And that's not because the world is fixed, it's because you can only accomplish so much in these venues. The criminal justice system needs to be reengineered to stamp out its racial bias. The way the Drug War gets prosecuted needs to be dismantled to prevent racial atrocities. These are realms where the progressive project has its work to do. Making sure a tiny group of upper middle class minority students have full scholarships and enrichment opportunities once they get to medical school or that old people are accepted...eh...not really that pivotal where notions of accepting all people equally really matter.

How about protecting old people by throwing corrupt Wall Street people, who decimate pension structures in federal prisons. The prison system definitely needs more socioeconomic diversity.

I used the above example as well because I think sex and money is where diversity, as a concept and an agenda really pulls its weight.

Whereas in the universities wherein Jlin presumes diversity is still unearthing crimes against humanity, what you really have is the development of multi-cultural fascism now to contend with.

 

[jl lin]

Whereas in the universities wherein Jlin presumes diversity is still unearthing crimes against humanity, what you really have is the development of multi-cultural fascism now to contend with.

^ Definitely extreme. Most extremist thinking ends up helping no one.

 

[Nasrudin]

^ Definitely extreme. Most extremist thinking ends up helping no one.

Neither does inexperience and boredom. If it isn't interesting to me and I can't make it so then I just end up contributing to the vast expanse of boredom that premeds to medical students must traverse. God save their souls. This is my mortal enemy. And I'm an extremist. Take it as you like it. You have only interested me in this regard. If it was just the facts of older ICU nurses having the keenest purvey of teamwork, and the virtues of being a proper physician, and just older monogamous vaguely Christian ethics, I would rather punch myself in the nuts rather than deign to take absurd and quixotic stances against it.

 

[jl lin]

Neither does inexperience and boredom. If it isn't interesting to me and I can't make it so then I just end up contributing to the vast expanse of boredom that premeds to medical students must traverse. God save their souls. This is my mortal enemy. And I'm an extremist. Take it as you like it. You have only interested me in this regard. If it was just the facts of older ICU nurses having the keenest purvey of teamwork, and the virtues of being a proper physician, and just older monogamous vaguely Christian ethics, I would rather punch myself in the nuts rather than deign to take absurd and quixotic stances against it.

🙂 Again, biased and extreme. I am not sure why you think you know me or why you choose to hate on me under the radar with your comments; but there's little I can do about that.

You neither have to punch yourself in the nuts or take any stances. That neg hyperbole is also extreme and unnecessary.

I am probably more conservative than you are on a number of things. Just know that EEOC violations are serious business, and conservative or not, there is a place for EEOC protection. So....

 

[Nasrudin]

Name one useful reference to federal discrimination suits in the admissions process to medical school. I would be intrigued. Are you preparing to file suit if not accepted?

If so, this would be actually interesting. But otherwise there's no smoke and no fire with this issue in admissions practices.

 

[jl lin]

Shoot, law suits are a HUGE pain in the butt and stressor. A person would be within their rights to file a suit if they can demonstrate certain things. The burden is on them though, so, it's not as easy as people think to file lawsuits, even EEOC-protected ones in federal court.
It's very expensive, very stressful, very time-consuming, and a major sucker of energy. So yield is usually low unless you have some media advantage or if you can show a strong case.

But it is something that should be in people's minds. Look at the whole individual, and don't cherry pick or single out EEOC-type factors. That's the wisest thing that a person on an adcom can do.

IOW adcom members should strive to be blind to anything that falls under EEOC--sexual orientation, age, race, etc. Saying it and doing it are two different things. What's a bugaboo is that people rationalize the bias/unfair discrimination, believing that their arguments are so strong and set in stone, when in reality they may not be. It would depend upon the individual, and that is what they should be looking at anyway--the whole individual.

 

[Nasrudin]

I think they do a good job in this regard. Maybe less so with age and sexual orientation but still pretty good. It seems like half the males in my class were gay. And also black. But that's because of where I went. Still they go after racial minorities hard in the recruitment game, so that's not an issue. We're all here talking about this. We got our own sub forum for gods sake. So age isn't an issue.

What do you want? You got tons of experience that a younger person could never have. Is that fair?

Relax. You'll get the shot you earn. And so will every other older premed. Within reason.

 

[jl lin]

I think they do a good job in this regard. Maybe less so with age and sexual orientation but still pretty good. It seems like half the males in my class were gay. And also black. But that's because of where I went. Still they go after racial minorities hard in the recruitment game, so that's not an issue. We're all here talking about this. We got our own sub forum for gods sake. So age isn't an issue.

What do you want? You got tons of experience that a younger person could never have. Is that fair?

Relax. You'll get the shot you earn. And so will every other older premed. Within reason.

Well whether I get "the shot" I earn isn't ultimately the issue. If that happens it happens. See, I am more or less a principle based person. So if we are truly about fairness and equality, then we need to show it and uphold it. That's really the thing.

Also, genuine question here: What do you mean when you add, "within reason?" Thanks.

 

[Nasrudin]

Well. There are well worn ethical arguments about the utilization of a scarce resource--in this case medical school seats--from both the utilitarian and individualist perspectives that I don't need to rehash, but I think it's as good for older applicants to a professional school as it is for US premeds anywhere in the world at anytime in history that I can conceive of so...this the pinnacle of opportunity.