Are There People Who Rely too Heavily on Being in a URM?

[Essene]

What effect will this have or, rather, has this had on the healthcare community?

I don't want to come off as classist/racist, but does having a lower gpa or non-stellar ec's lead to an under educated healthcare professional? I've seen the equation, but I couldn't articulate how vast or minuscule the difference is if I tried to.

Also, what about bridge programs like the ones they have in Mexico? What about grade inflation? I have a friend who is soon to graduate from a Mexican medical school. She has failed classes, some of them ad nauseam. She is still graduating and, from what I hear, is a shoe in for an internship with a Texas hospital. What gives?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Roshan]

Honestly, I don't think high grades in undergrad correlate to someone being a good doctor. Anyone can be a good doctor as long as they put in the effort during medical school.

 

[Theafoni]

If you fail a class as a med student, I'm pretty sure you have to repeat them.

 

[LizzyM]

More than half of the URM who apply do not get in anywhere.

The vast majority of URM who do matriculate go on to graduate in 4 years. The vast majority of URM who are admitted to US medical school go on to pass the board exams, complete residency and become licensed physicians.

Those who are "good enough" get admitted and thrive. Those who don't make the cut are left behind.

 

[swolebrah]

More than half of the URM who apply do not get in anywhere.

The vast majority of URM who do matriculate go on to graduate in 4 years. The vast majority of URM who are admitted to US medical school go on to pass the board exams, complete residency and become licensed physicians.

Those who are "good enough" get admitted and thrive. Those who don't make the cut are left behind.

How can we ignore the fact though that the statistics of URM for the cut off of "good enough" are obviously lower then a Caucasian or Asian applicant. I don't understand how we continue to look the other way in terms of knowingly setting the standard for URM lower then let say a average white american applicant. Why is race even considered on the application? An ADCOM should have no idea what the race of the applicant is. Being a certain race does not always mean you had more or less hardship then some other race.

Source:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321498/data/2012factstable19.pdf

 

[terp720]

another week has gone by, so makes sense another one of these threads started..

All applicants that get into medical school still need to pass medical school, pass the boards, go through residency and get licensed as LizzyM said. IMO URMs who do that are as considered as qualified as ORMs who do that. If they are an undereducated health care professional, then they wouldn't make it to that point.
Admissions committees determine who they think will succeed in medical school. As far as I understand, it's not in their interest either to admit people who they don't think could make good physicians.

 

[Aerus]

How can we ignore the fact though that the statistics of URM for the cut off of "good enough" are obviously lower then a Caucasian or Asian applicant. I don't understand how we continue to look the other way in terms of knowingly setting the standard for URM lower then let say a average white american applicant. Why is race even considered on the application? An ADCOM should have no idea what the race of the applicant is. Being a certain race does not always mean you had more or less hardship then some other race.

Source:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321498/data/2012factstable19.pdf

You are misinformed. The cut off for what's "good enough" is much lower than you think. I believe it's like a 25 MCAT universally, regardless of race? The reason why the ACCEPTED averages are higher for certain races is because race itself is a component that affects the quality of healthcare a physician can provide.

The caliber of the student pool applying also raises the average a whole lot.

 

[Mad Jack]

 

[Essene]

If you fail a class as a med student, I'm pretty sure you have to repeat them.

Well yeah. Of course she had to repeat them. I'm just baffled about the amount of times.. 0_o

 

[Narmerguy]

How can we ignore the fact though that the statistics of URM for the cut off of "good enough" are obviously lower then a Caucasian or Asian applicant. I don't understand how we continue to look the other way in terms of knowingly setting the standard for URM lower then let say a average white american applicant. Why is race even considered on the application? An ADCOM should have no idea what the race of the applicant is. Being a certain race does not always mean you had more or less hardship then some other race.

Source:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321498/data/2012factstable19.pdf

another week has gone by, so makes sense another one of these threads started..

All applicants that get into medical school still need to pass medical school, pass the boards, go through residency and get licensed as LizzyM said. IMO URMs who do that are as considered as qualified as ORMs who do that. If they are an undereducated health care professional, then they wouldn't make it to that point.
Admissions committees determine who they think will succeed in medical school. As far as I understand, it's not in their interest either to admit people who they don't think could make good physicians.

Exactly. Whatever the barrier to entry, the barrier to get through medical school is the same for everyone. If you can pass your boards and licensing exams, then you are fit to be a doctor.

Ah, I really should get to work on that mega cut-and-paste response for all URM threads.

 

[Essene]

The purpose of this thread: if people rely too much on that facet? That hasn't been answered.

This isn't a URM bash thread, a woe is me thread, a this-is-unfair thread. There are standards. That leads into the NCFMEA. How does the accreditation process work for foreign schools? Are standards overlooked? Are they merely reviewed? If step tests are passed, or similar tests, is that all that needs to be done?

Why is there stigmatization with making a thread like this? How much more of an edge does it create?

 

[Essene]

Exactly. Whatever the barrier to entry, the barrier to get through medical school is the same for everyone. If you can pass your boards and licensing exams, then you are fit to be a doctor.

Ah, I really should get to work on that mega cut-and-paste response for all URM threads.

Because things like nepotism, bias, and other unfair advantages/disadvantages don't exist any longer. Getting in is still getting in and many don't.

 

[kyamh]

Because things like nepotism, bias, and other unfair advantages/disadvantages don't exist any longer. Getting in is still getting in and many don't.

Here's another thought.

Let's say we can judge physician potential accurately by candidate applications. Even if a sub-par candidate gets in (via nepotism, or whatever) and this candidate ends up being a competent doctor (based on the fact that they get into a residency and licensed), why does it matter is a "better" candidate never gets into medical school. Who really cares if the system missed a few "better" candidates and take a few "worse" ones? Everything is a distribution, including goodness of being a physician. Some physicians will be better and some worse, the vast majority will be average. As long as the worse ones are relatively few and still good enough (in other words, competent), then healthcare is doing fine.

I would argue that the "awesome" candidates will get in no matter what - lets say the top 75% of future physicians. Whether the tail 25% of physicians can be a tiny bit better or a tiny bit worse isn't really a huge concern.

 

[terp720]

The purpose of this thread: if people rely too much on that facet? That hasn't been answered.

This isn't a URM bash thread, a woe is me thread, a this-is-unfair thread. There are standards. That leads into the NCFMEA. How does the accreditation process work for foreign schools? Are standards overlooked? Are they merely reviewed? If step tests are passed, or similar tests, is that all that needs to be done?

Why is there stigmatization with making a thread like this? How much more of an edge does it create?

foreign medical school accreditation and students as a topic has nothing to do with URM admittance to US medical schools.. so your title and original post was rather misleading if this is the topic you wanted to talk about.

 

[Mornhavon]

.

 

[Essene]

Here's another thought.

Let's say we can judge physician potential accurately by candidate applications. Even if a sub-par candidate gets in (via nepotism, or whatever) and this candidate ends up being a competent doctor (based on the fact that they get into a residency and licensed), why does it matter is a "better" candidate never gets into medical school. Who really cares if the system missed a few "better" candidates and take a few "worse" ones? Everything is a distribution, including goodness of being a physician. Some physicians will be better and some worse, the vast majority will be average. As long as the worse ones are relatively few and still good enough (in other words, competent), then healthcare is doing fine.

I would argue that the "awesome" candidates will get in no matter what - lets say the top 75% of future physicians. Whether the tail 25% of physicians can be a tiny bit better or a tiny bit worse isn't really a huge concern.

Of course there's a distribution. And there are outliers.

I'm sure someone can tell me which fallacy this is: there are some people who don't deserve to be in jail. There are many who do. There are some people who shouldn't be in law/med/etc school. There are many who do. The the gravity of the scenarios aren't equal. I know that. However, like either scenario, there are still people who would be a better fit.

 

[kyamh]

However, like either scenario, there are still people who would be a better fit.

Meh, life's not fair. I think I would be a good fit for President, but immigrants aren't allowed

 

[Mornhavon]

.
.

 

[Essene]

foreign medical school accreditation and students as a topic has nothing to do with URM admittance to US medical schools.. so your title and original post was rather misleading if this is the topic you wanted to talk about.

It was about both. They both tied into the competency of healthcare professionals. Maybe my friend will be a great doctor. Maybe. But that's a gamble. Sure, people make mistakes. I have. It'd be awful if there weren't other methods to show that, in the future, I'll be a strong candidate. It would be demoralizing without the other facets that make a student more competitive should they be lacking in certain areas. This isn't that. I'm not sure how her school does it but she had to take microbio thrice. To my understanding, unless there's a class that I'm unaware of in med school that has the same title, that's an undergraduate course. I don't get it. I asked her about the subject material. She was studying and doing poorly on material I covered a year ago. Just why?

 

[Essene]

Meh, life's not fair. I think I would be a good fit for President, but immigrants aren't allowed

That'll probably get changed eventually. I'm not a fan of that bit either.

 

[jm192]

More than half of the URM who apply do not get in anywhere.

The vast majority of URM who do matriculate go on to graduate in 4 years. The vast majority of URM who are admitted to US medical school go on to pass the board exams, complete residency and become licensed physicians.

Those who are "good enough" get admitted and thrive. Those who don't make the cut are left behind.

Not that Lizzy needs confirmation, but this.

We have a system in place for a reason. If you're smart enough to pass boards and become licensed--you're a capable physician.
If we started lowering the minimums to pass boards, licensing exams, etc, then that would probably negatively affect health care.
But your college grades are no part of the picture.

Furthering it: How many non-traditional students are there per year? Many of them did post-bac work and often acquired other degrees.
They clearly dedicated themselves to becoming a physician. They demonstrated before they got in that they were willing to continue to work for it. And they clearly continue to work for it once they get accepted.

Anecdotal, I know: Many of the AOA students in my class were non-traditional students that had done post bac work.

College grades don't matter once you're in.

 

[Espadaleader]

https://www.aamc.org/students/download/267622/data/mcatstudentselectionguide.pdf

What effect will this have or, rather, has this had on the healthcare community?

I don't want to come off as classist/racist, but does having a lower gpa or non-stellar ec's lead to an under educated healthcare professional? I've seen the equation, but I couldn't articulate how vast or minuscule the difference is if I tried to.

Also, what about bridge programs like the ones they have in Mexico? What about grade inflation? I have a friend who is soon to graduate from a Mexican medical school. She has failed classes, some of them ad nauseam. She is still graduating and, from what I hear, is a shoe in for an internship with a Texas hospital. What gives?

What effect will this have or, rather, has this had on the healthcare community?
https://www.aamc.org/students/download/267622/data/mcatstudentselectionguide.pdf

I've posted this before. Even an applicant with a 3.4 and 27 has a 98.3% chance of completing medical school as far as academic difficultly is concerned. Grades for URMs are lower, but they're still qualified. Medical schools don't let in under qualified students. Also, when a person gets in with a lower stats they usually have something outstanding in their app.

 

[EMDO2018]

Maybe its a good thing the MCAT is requiring college kids to take sociology classes. Maybe they will learn something.

 

[NSLDX]

I think you may be equating getting into medical school, with completing medical school. The numbers show that URM's can get acceptances with lower stats. But they are held to the same rigor as their peers within medical school.

 

[mrh125]

I like the whole URM business honestly because it's a way to take into account one's background and put their achievements in context. It's not perfect by any means, but it gives applications an added layer of subjectivity and I really like that.

 

[NickNaylor]

The purpose of this thread: if people rely too much on that facet? That hasn't been answered.

Because it's a stupid question, frankly. The distinctions between URMs and ORMs are irrelevant if they both ultimately become physicians in the end. Who cares how they got in - by whatever imagined advantage you prefer - if, at the end of the day, they end up a licensed physician? There is no URM advantage for the step exams, which allow one to become a licensed physician. There is no URM advantage for passing board exams, which allow you to become board certified.

As has already been mentioned a million times, it is ultimately irrelevant because they are held to the same standard and surpass the same hurdles. The only people butthurt by this stuff are the people who delusionally think "their spot" in a medical school class is "stolen" by a URM who has lower stats than them - as if higher stats somehow means you're more deserving.

 

[Essene]

Because it's a stupid question, frankly. The distinctions between URMs and ORMs are irrelevant if they both ultimately become physicians in the end. Who cares how they got in - by whatever imagined advantage you prefer - if, at the end of the day, they end up a licensed physician? There is no URM advantage for the step exams, which allow one to become a licensed physician. There is no URM advantage for passing board exams, which allow you to become board certified.

As has already been mentioned a million times, it is ultimately irrelevant because they are held to the same standard and surpass the same hurdles. The only people butthurt by this stuff are the people who delusionally think "their spot" in a medical school class is "stolen" by a URM who has lower stats than them - as if higher stats somehow means you're more deserving.

Who cares how they got in? I do or else I wouldn't have made the thread. That is obvious, and your question is superfluous. At least I hope it is.

When the manner/standards are based on doing well in multiple facets of life and are completely criterial- yeah- I'd say better stats should yield a more deserving candidate. Stats, mind you, that aren't inflated via some equation a panel decided leveled the playing field or whatever other seemingly unfair reason.

And then there're the other questions I asked. My post encompassed more than just tho bit about URMs.

 

[NickNaylor]

Who cares how they got in? I do or else I wouldn't have made the thread. That is obvious, and your question is superfluous. At least I hope it is.

When the manner/standards are based on doing well in multiple facets of life and are completely criterial- yeah- I'd say better stats should yield a more deserving candidate. Stats, mind you, that aren't inflated via some equation a panel decided leveled the playing field or whatever other seemingly unfair reason.

And then there're the other questions I asked. My post encompassed more than just tho bit about URMs.

The goal of the admissions process is to find suitable students that will successfully complete the medical school curriculum and become excellent physicians. Unfortunately for you and premeds across the universe, the highest GPA or MCAT are not prerequisites to that nor do they make you any more or less qualified beyond a very minimal threshold. This is a concept which is for some reason impossible for the lot of you to understand but which will become evident to you once you yourself get into medical school. Hopefully you succeed after those URMs are through stealing your spots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Essene]

The goal of the admissions process is to find suitable students that will successfully complete the medical school curriculum and become excellent physicians. Unfortunately for you and premeds across the universe, the highest GPA or MCAT are not prerequisites to that nor do they make you any more or less qualified beyond a very minimal threshold. This is a concept which is for some reason impossible for the lot of you to understand but which will become evident to you once you yourself get into medical school. Hopefully you succeed after those URMs are through stealing your spots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. It is.

Thank you for your reply. It helped a lot. But it's quite understandable.

Also- I'm a URM.

 

[NickNaylor]

Yes. It is.

Thank you for your reply. It helped a lot. But it's quite understandable.

Also- I'm a URM.

I'm glad I could be of assistance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

The goal of the admissions process is to find suitable students that will successfully complete the medical school curriculum and become excellent physicians. Unfortunately for you and premeds across the universe, the highest GPA or MCAT are not prerequisites to that nor do they make you any more or less qualified beyond a very minimal threshold. This is a concept which is for some reason impossible for the lot of you to understand but which will become evident to you once you yourself get into medical school. Hopefully you succeed after those URMs are through stealing your spots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then why do the "most selective" schools have the highest GPA/MCAT averages?

I feel like adcoms talk out both sides of their mouths on this topic. On the one hand, they stress the importance of GPA and MCAT scores. On the other hand, they claim that only a "minimal threshold" is needed to succeed, and beyond that, personal qualities are much more important. These two statements are directly contradictory. I wish they would pick a side and stick to it.

 

[La Presse]

Yes. It is.

Thank you for your reply. It helped a lot. But it's quite understandable.

Also- I'm a URM.

I rolled my eyes at this. That hardly makes you objective.

 

[Essene]

I rolled my eyes at this. That hardly makes you objective.

I am, however, looking at this objectively. So there's that.

 

[Mr Interesting]

Also- I'm a URM.

....

 

[NickNaylor]

Then why do the "most selective" schools have the highest GPA/MCAT averages?

I feel like adcoms talk out both sides of their mouths on this topic. On the one hand, they stress the importance of GPA and MCAT scores. On the other hand, they claim that only a "minimal threshold" is needed to succeed, and beyond that, personal qualities are much more important. These two statements are directly contradictory. I wish they would pick a side and stick to it.

Because they can. When you have 5000 people applying to your school, likely more than half of whom could very likely complete your curriculum and maybe 500 of whom are more than qualified, you have the ability to be picky. If, from my perspective as an adcom, applicant A and applicant B are effectively equivalent with the exception of their numbers, why wouldn't I pick the applicant with better numbers?

It's strictly a function of "why the hell not." Don't worry, you will get to experience the same thing when you apply to residency. The step exams were never designed to be used in a comparative way as they are, and yet they are, because if I'm a PD and have an applicant:resident ratio of 10:1 or 50:1, why wouldn't I go for the high numbers? When it comes to the things that are actually meaningful there are more than enough applicants, so schools have the ability to discriminate on less important factors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

Because they can. When you have 5000 people applying to your school, likely more than half of whom could very likely complete your curriculum and maybe 500 of whom are more than qualified, you have the ability to be picky. If, from my perspective as an adcom, applicant A and applicant B are effectively equivalent with the exception of their numbers, why wouldn't I pick the applicant with better numbers?

It's strictly a function of "why the hell not." Don't worry, you will get to experience the same thing when you apply to residency. The step exams were never designed to be used in a comparative way as they are, and yet they are, because if I'm a PD and have an applicant:resident ratio of 10:1 or 50:1, why wouldn't I go for the high numbers? When it comes to the things that are actually meaningful there are more than enough applicants, so schools have the ability to discriminate on less important factors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because you said before that numbers don't matter beyond a certain threshold. So, which is it?

 

[La Presse]

I am, however, looking at this objectively. So there's that.

I would admit that you have at least some bias, seeing as you'll be contending for a medical school spot in the near future.

 

[Essene]

....

I wasn't trolling if that's what that gif is for.

I've thought about this for a while and reading both opinions and what I presume to be factual is interesting. I didn't poison the well- not did I attempt to.

 

[La Presse]

Because you said before that numbers don't matter beyond a certain threshold. So, which is it?

When it comes to the things that are actually meaningful there are more than enough applicants, so schools have the ability to discriminate on less important factors.

 

[Essene]

I would admit that you have at least some bias, seeing as you'll be contending for a medical school spot in the near future.

It's hard not to have some bias. But you're right. I dislike that portion of the current system. I also don't understand how someone is just now taking micro when they're about two terms away from bridging.

 

[NickNaylor]

Because you said before that numbers don't matter beyond a certain threshold. So, which is it?

Well, this is where good ol human psychology and the desire to be "the best" come into play. Wouldn't it be great if I could tell the president of my university, as the dean of a medical school, that we have the highest mean MCAT score in the nation? Of course it would!

Show me a single study demonstrating that undergrad GPA or MCAT score has any bearing on your quality as a physician and I will buy you a gold subscription.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

White People Support Academic Meritocracy When It Benefits Them, Study Suggests
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3750312/
I realize OP is a URM, but I feel that most ppl would take advantage of anything that would help them get in.

 

[The Buff OP]

White People Support Academic Meritocracy When It Benefits Them, Study Suggests
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3750312/
I realize OP is a URM, but I feel that most ppl would take advantage of anything that would help them get in.

I'm a URM and I do rely on my life experiences, ethnicity, Ec's, grades, and MCAT score to get me into medical school. I feel like we need more minorities in medicine. My two idols are minorities and they are now one of the top neurosurgeons in the country.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I'm a URM and I do rely on my life experiences, ethnicity, Ec's, grades, and MCAT score to get me into medical school. I feel like we need more minorities in medicine. My two idols are minorities and they are now one of the top neurosurgeons in the country.

I'm a URM as well. And I agree that we need more minorities in medicine (btw, Dr Q is one of my heroes as well-I'm assuming he's one of the neurosurgeons you're referring to). I guess I didn't word my comment well. It pertained to ppl complaining when they "feel" that someone has an advantage over them for whatever reason.

 

[Mad Jack]

My two idols are minorities and they are now one of the top neurosurgeons in the country.

I didn't realize saiyans were URM

 

[The Buff OP]

I'm a URM as well. And I agree that we need more minorities in medicine (btw, Dr Q is one of my heroes as well-I'm assuming he's one of the neurosurgeons you're referring to). I guess I didn't word my comment well. It pertained to ppl complaining when they "feel" that someone has an advantage over them for whatever reason.

Fudge Yeah! Dr. Q and Dr. Carson FTW! I come from a disadvantaged background growing up in the gang communities of Los Angeles. I feel like I have had it more tough than other people who apply to medical school with stellar GPA's and MCAT scores that are from other ethnic backgrounds (ORM).

 

[The Buff OP]

I didn't realize saiyans were URM

I never liked Dragon Ball Z. I watched about 5 episodes and didn't like it.

 

[Mad Jack]

I never liked Dragon Ball Z. I watched about 5 episodes and didn't like it.

First two seasons were alright when I was a kid. Looking back as an adult though, it was a pretty awful show.

 

[Mr Interesting]

Fudge Yeah! Dr. Q and Dr. Carson FTW!

I'm a URM as well. And I agree that we need more minorities in medicine (btw, Dr Q is one of my heroes as well-I'm assuming he's one of the neurosurgeons you're referring to).

You guys should check out Augustus A. White, III, that guy is pretty awesome. His book gets @LizzyM stamp of approval.

http://med.stanford.edu/121/2011/white.html

https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/repor...t_lies_beneath_pioneering_surgeon_talks_.html

 

[DermViser]

Fudge Yeah! Dr. Q and Dr. Carson FTW! I come from a disadvantaged background growing up in the gang communities of Los Angeles. I feel like I have had it more tough than other people who apply to medical school with stellar GPA's and MCAT scores that are from other ethnic backgrounds (ORM).

Funny, bc Dr. Carson in a recent interview said that what makes people who they are, are their brains, not their skin color. You might want to research his actual positions on things. Guess what: EVERYONE feels like they've had it tougher than everyone else.