INTERESTING STORY of acceptance to Med School

[geneman]

The Chavis story can be found @ <a href="http://www.bigeye.com/jj081497.htm." target="_blank">http://www.bigeye.com/jj081497.htm.</a>

The author concluded the story with the following:

By himself, Chavis isn't an argument against affirmative action. Single examples do not constitute data. He is, however, a reminder of something Kennedy and the others can't seem to grasp: Urban communities and poor families don't need black doctors, they need good doctors. And when universities admit medical students on grounds other than academic ability, they will turn out fewer doctors who are good.

In its 1978 Bakke decision, the Supreme Court approved the system that put Patrick Chavis in medical school: Lower academic standards for most black students in exchange for racial ``diversity.'' The result is that black students for 20 years have been failing the national medical boards -- the leading measure of medical-school achievement -- far more often than their peers. A study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that while 88 percent of white students pass the exam, only 49 percent of black students do. The disparity is caused almost entirely by lower admissions standards. Minority students admitted without regard to race rarely fail their boards.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[UCLA2000]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by geneman:
•The Chavis story can be found @ <a href="http://www.bigeye.com/jj081497.htm." target="_blank">http://www.bigeye.com/jj081497.htm.</a>

The author concluded the story with the following:

By himself, Chavis isn't an argument against affirmative action. Single examples do not constitute data. He is, however, a reminder of something Kennedy and the others can't seem to grasp: Urban communities and poor families don't need black doctors, they need good doctors. And when universities admit medical students on grounds other than academic ability, they will turn out fewer doctors who are good.
•••••There is ALOT more to being a good doctor than academic ability.

 

[geneman]

Yes, but I think the author's point was that you cannot have a good doctor without academic ability. It's probably one of the most fundamental characteristics of all good doctors. There are lots of people who are incredibly emphatic, compassionate, curious, good-natured, etc. But without being academically capable, you're not going to be a good doctor.

It's kind of like the walking/running analogy. There's a lot more to running than just walking, but you have to be able to walk in order to run.

•••quote:•••Originally posted by UCLA2000:
•There is ALOT more to being a good doctor than academic ability.•••••

 

[Dr. Don]

are we reading the same story? It seems to me that Dr. Chavis was a good doctor, the only problem was his poor judgement..what the fu-k? is an obgyn doctor doing liposuction? we have to take that into account people. If he made it as a obgyn doctor, that means that he was able to pass his boards with ok scores, therefore he probably was academically strong, but he just got caught up in the hype of "making money". because trust me, there is a lot of money in plastic surgery/liposuctions, etc. He messed up and I totally agree with the judge in taking away his license. anyways, that's just my opinion...like always no harm intended.

 

[Cambrian]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Dr. Don:
•It seems to me that Dr. Chavis was a good doctor, the only problem was his poor judgement..what the fu-k? is an obgyn doctor doing liposuction? we have to take that into account people. If he made it as a obgyn doctor, that means that he was able to pass his boards with ok scores, therefore he probably was academically strong, but he just got caught up in the hype of "making money". •••••How can you possibly say he was a good doctor? Even if he did get into plastic surgery for the money, that did not explain why he was negligent of his patients, completely abandoning his responsibilities in post-operative care. He let the woman bleed until she got herself to the hospital for crying out loud.

•••quote:•••From the Boston Globe:•
But rather than get her to a hospital, Chavis took her to his home. She lay there bleeding for 40 hours, yet Chavis provided virtually no supervision or medical care. She returned to his office on May 14, still bleeding and in pain. Chavis prescribed heat packs and a massage. Two days later, she was worse -- still bleeding, in extreme pain, and growing delirious. He didn't return her calls. Nor did he examine her when she returned once more on May 17.•••••And worst

•••quote:••••
But Tammaria Cotton wasn't as lucky. When Chavis performed her liposuction on June 22, her blood pressure plummeted and she complained of difficulty breathing. ``If you can talk, you can breathe,'' Chavis reportedly told her. As her frightened husband watched, ``reddish fluid'' leaked from her body for hours, pooling on the floor. Instead of administering emergency treatment, however, Chavis vanished. By early evening, Cotton was in cardiac arrest. She died en route to the hospital.•••••Letting a patient bleed to death is not "poor judgement" but outright negligence and incompetence in my opinion. If that does not make him a bad doctor, I don't know what does. The guy is a horrible doctor no matter what you say.

 

[Michelys]

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> Thanks Jonny-5 and Geneman for finding the links for us ! Especially for me--I'm quite internet-challenged these days <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> sigh...lemme go and read them. Geneman , I SUPER didn't like the last paragraph of the author's conclusion <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> . I feel like telling him to SHOVE IT...only 49% or whatever he said of blacks passing the boards the first time. Grr... ...

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Yeah, that 49% sounds wierd.

I have read that the fail/pass rate was 96% non-URM vs 88% URM. I think my data is only Step 1, however.

Can you link to the 49% data? Thanks

 

[Dr. Don]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Cambrian:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by Dr. Don:
•It seems to me that Dr. Chavis was a good doctor, the only problem was his poor judgement..what the fu-k? is an obgyn doctor doing liposuction? we have to take that into account people. If he made it as a obgyn doctor, that means that he was able to pass his boards with ok scores, therefore he probably was academically strong, but he just got caught up in the hype of "making money". •••••How can you possibly say he was a good doctor? Even if he did get into plastic surgery for the money, that did not explain why he was negligent of his patients, completely abandoning his responsibilities in post-operative care. He let the woman bleed until she got herself to the hospital for crying out loud.

•••quote:•••From the Boston Globe:•
But rather than get her to a hospital, Chavis took her to his home. She lay there bleeding for 40 hours, yet Chavis provided virtually no supervision or medical care. She returned to his office on May 14, still bleeding and in pain. Chavis prescribed heat packs and a massage. Two days later, she was worse -- still bleeding, in extreme pain, and growing delirious. He didn't return her calls. Nor did he examine her when she returned once more on May 17.•••••And worst

•••quote:••••
But Tammaria Cotton wasn't as lucky. When Chavis performed her liposuction on June 22, her blood pressure plummeted and she complained of difficulty breathing. ``If you can talk, you can breathe,'' Chavis reportedly told her. As her frightened husband watched, ``reddish fluid'' leaked from her body for hours, pooling on the floor. Instead of administering emergency treatment, however, Chavis vanished. By early evening, Cotton was in cardiac arrest. She died en route to the hospital.•••••Letting a patient bleed to death is not "poor judgement" but outright negligence and incompetence in my opinion. If that does not make him a bad doctor, I don't know what does. The guy is a horrible doctor no matter what you say.•••••cambrian, the point that you are making is exactly what I am talking about. In the context of this conversation, by good doctor I meant, he had the "numbers", academically strong, but he lacked some maturity, his judgement was whack, so that was his fault! I agree with you!!!! so don't talk sh-t!

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Isn't the whole point that he DIDN'T have the numbers? That he WASN'T academically strong? That he was admitted on the basis of his race?

Anyway, a single example does not constitute a trend. It's ironic that this guy was the AA poster child.

 

[Hopkins2010]

I am somewhat torn on affirmative action, because I do believe that it is reverse discrimination.

However, I still support AA at this time in spite of this fact. I think all AA supporters need to be clear on this and admit up front that it is de facto racial discrimination to use race (to any degree) as a plus factor in admissions.

I just moved into a community on the west side of Baltimore that is predominately African-American. Although I cant prove this, I have the gut feeling that this neighborhood is the result of "white flight" from earlier years. My point is that whites and blacks still live in 2 separate worlds by and large. Of course there are rich blacks who have more advantages than some whites. I feel that financial background and racial background are both appropriate to admissions, but that neither should trump all the other criteria (i.e. GPA, MCAT, interviews, letters of rec). In the long run (at the expense of some people who were discriminated against unfortunately) its good for our profession to have diversity of ethnic groups.

Right now I see AA as inflicting some injustice to individuals while providing the greater good to our profession and society at large.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Ah, the highest level of AA arguments. You admit that AA is hurting innocent people, but you feel that it is necessary for the greater good of society. A compelling state interest in diversity... in other words.

Are we striving for equality or equity? I believe it should be equity. Is AA achieving the goal giving everyone the chance to succeed in this country?

Do you see how AA would puts an expectation on URMs? Does it translate into a self-fulfilling prophecy of inferior performance?

We see studies that show academic performance of blacks can not be filtered out by social economic status. This is a major piece of evidence that suggests the theory of black self-victimization is correct. Does AA contribute to this?

All in all, you have to ask yourself...is there a better way? I think the heart of the problem is the culture. We can give away all of the spots available in professional schools to URMs but will it get rid of the culture that equates academic performance to "being white"? Perhaps the best way to equity is to try eliminate this culture of self-victimization and low expectations.

 

[Cambrian]

•••quote:••••Originally posted by Dr. Don:
cambrian, the point that you are making is exactly what I am talking about. In the context of this conversation, by good doctor I meant, he had the "numbers", academically strong, but he lacked some maturity, his judgement was whack, so that was his fault! I agree with you!!!! so don't talk sh-t!•••••What the hell? I was no way hostile and you have to whip out the profanity? Can you have an intelligent and meaningful argument without using the "s" and "f" word? Of course, the argument that he was a bad doctor because of his low scores does not hold water at all. There are plenty doctors out there who didn't have stellar scores but are still great doctors. I don't think this had anything to do with his scores. When the admissions committee accepted him, they were blinded by his race and didn't look further into his character and personality, which would have allowed them to determine that he was unfit to be a doctor (and this would have nothing to do with his scores or race).

 

[UCLA2000]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
•

We see studies that show academic performance of blacks can not be filtered out by social economic status. This is a major piece of evidence that suggests the theory of black self-victimization is correct. Does AA contribute to this?

•••••Really show me those studies!

As I understand it ON AVERAGE minorities live in poorer areas and receive a lower quality education. This translates to a poorer educational foundation which leaves them at a disadvantage getting into college, and in college. This translates to poorer test scores and a lower GPA.

Affirmative action eliminates SOME of this socioeconomic and educational disparity and levels the playing field.

 

[Darwin]

I remember reading this article 2 years ago...and there was discussion about it last year on SDN I believe.

 

[MD'05]

Good for Cristina! From the picture painted by the article, Cristina is no slacker. I'd like to see anyone on SDN get out there and pick grapes in 100+ temps.

What Cristina probably lacked at MIT was the "network" that exists for most advantaged students (read monied) regardless of race. You know, the "old" exams, group dinners over the prof's house, advice from upperclassmen, etc. If she would have padded her GPA with "easy" courses and taken an MCAT prep course, she would have most likely been accepted on the first try.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

UCLA2000, it is well known on both sides of the AA debate. Those who have researched the issue should know. I'm not surprised that you do not know. Mainstream media has not covered these sort of things.

Actually, I first heard about one of these studies at 2:00 am on ABC news. I thought it would be a big deal. Surprisingly, network news during the waking hours did not pick up on this story.

I have a link. But let me ask you this. How will you incorporate this in your worldview? Will you rethink your views on AA? Perhaps AA with its innate negatives is not the best way to bring about equity?
Or will you just dismiss the data by saying that standardized tests scores don't mean a thing?

 

[silver_eyes]

Salam Resident Alien,

Ok, as far i know u are muslim, so am i. I am a female, u are a male. ok. in high school, we had this buddy program. it is a program for those who are interested in health related fields, particulary medicine. you get paried up with a 1-4th year med student at stanford university. my buddy was a 4th yea studebt. i wa slucky b/c i got a pakistani med student so we had A LOT of things in common.

ok, she told me that when i apply to med school, to leave the Ethnicity portion blank. she told me not to check east indian/pakistani, b/c i wil have a low chance of getting accepted. also, she told me to leave the religion part blank, if there is one.

what did u do? how many schools did u apply to? ok, knowning pakistani famlies as soon as they know that their daughter or son is going to be a doctor, they tell teh whole world. so kow every SINGLE person from california to PAKISTAn knows that i want to become a doctor and am going in that direction right now. did u have any "connections?" Ok, being a Cali. resident for 18 years (i was born here) i really have no chance of getting accepted into any uc's. so, which schools are "easy" to get in that are out of state.

also, i got a c- in general bio. is that ok? also, i am going to take genetics, physics 1, history of medicine, and trig. (i am horrible in math) fall 2002. in spring 2003 i will take english, microbio, calc, physics 2. i will take organic chem during the summer. ok, i really have a bad cummulative gpa. it is 1.85 or something. but i made up A f that i got in g. chem (i got a C now) and i still have to make up this math class which i got an F in. so....do u think when i apply as a junior in the spring, my Gpa will be 3.5 or aboove, if i do well in college (meaning 3.0+)? i am REALLY worried. Our school has really SUCKY teachers.

Thanks.

PS i am asking u all of thsi b/c we have alot in common, being pakistani and all. THANKS!

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

People are questioning now whatever or not they should their declare race on their admissions forms...because it might hurt them?!

Is this the legacy of AA?

 

[mamie]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
•People are questioning now whatever or not they should their declare race on their admissions forms...because it might hurt them?!

Is this the legacy of AA?•••••No this is not a legacy of AA, but a result of how defined race is in this country. From its beginnings, race and its subsequent tensions has always been interwoven into the fabric of this counry and will continue to be for many more years to come. AA is just meant to provide an equal playing ground for those coming from unequal origins.

 

[Scooby Doo]

Damn... a full ride to USC? I am sorry...I mean, accepting is one thing..but a FULL RIDE!?!?!

Jeez...come on! That's ridiculous!

 

[Hero]

•••quote:••• "I'm sorry to inform you," the letter from UC Irvine's medical school began. UCLA's letter tried to cushion the pain, citing "the exceptionally competitive applicant pool." So did UC San Francisco: "This adverse decision does not mean we believe that you are unqualified to enter this medical school. . . . "
••••painful memories! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

 

[UCLA2000]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
•
I have a link. But let me ask you this. How will you incorporate this in your worldview? Will you rethink your views on AA? Perhaps AA with its innate negatives is not the best way to bring about equity?
Or will you just dismiss the data by saying that standardized tests scores don't mean a thing?•••••Let me explain to you how it works. You've made claims on here that, frankly, I don't think that you can substantiate. I've asked you to post your evidence and your response was basically

"I have the evidence, but I'm not posting it until I know how you will incorporate it into your world view"

I can't believe that you even went so far as to say that people on both sides of the argument that have researched it are familiar with the findings...and you're not surprised that I'm not familiar with them.

Are you implying that I did not bother to educate myself on the issue before forming my opinion on the matter? If so then frankly I resent the implication.

Quit patronizing me. My initial reaction is to tell you what you should go do with yourself.

However, after taking a few seconds to find a more politically correct way of responding I would answer:

Post the evidence and then I'll figure out how to incorportate it into my world view after I've seen it.

And after I've seen it I may choose to not incorporate it at all (as is my right), or it may have some great impact on my views.

As scientists we all know that statistics can easily be manipulated, and we know that and data can be skewed and faulty. Unless I am convinced that the data is valid, I will not accept the findings.

It's interesting that you bring up the issue about standardized test scores. Is there a flaw that you think that I'll point out?

My opinion: Without standardized education there can be no fair standardized testing. Unless minorities are inherently dumber than caucasians then there is a problem with the system that is holding them back.

If you agree that caucasians and minorities are ON AVERAGE equally intelligent, then you have to wonder why minorities ON AVERAGE do poorer on testing. IF you take into account the fact that they are poorer and they recieve a lower quality education, then in my opinion you have a DAMN GOOD explanation for the discrepency.

If you DO have some sort of evidence then post it. Otherwise quit making baseless claims.

 

[owen_osh]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by UCLA2000:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
• We can give away all of the spots available in professional schools to URMs but will it get rid of the culture that equates academic performance to "being white"? Perhaps the best way to equity is to try eliminate this culture of self-victimization and low expectations.•••••Yeah those damn URMs taking up ALL the spots! What is it like 10% at most of the total med students in the US are URMs or something? And they make up..what like 40% of the population?

They're taking up all the room! Whites only!•••••Um, I think Ryo is giving a hypothetical, as in "even if we gave away..."

 

[UCLA2000]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by owen_osh:

• •••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
• We can give away all of the spots available in professional schools to URMs but will it get rid of the culture that equates academic performance to "being white"? Perhaps the best way to equity is to try eliminate this culture of self-victimization and low expectations.•[/QUOTEqb]••••Um, I think Ryo is giving a hypothetical, as in "even if we gave away..."•••••You're right I misread it. I've edited and deleted my post.

 

[silver_eyes]

nobody responded to the respond i wrote <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

 

[Resident Alien]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by silver_eyes:
•Salam Resident Alien,

also, i got a c- in general bio. is that ok? also, i am going to take genetics, physics 1, history of medicine, and trig. (i am horrible in math) fall 2002. in spring 2003 i will take english, microbio, calc, physics 2. i will take organic chem during the summer. ok, i really have a bad cummulative gpa. it is 1.85 or something. but i made up A f that i got in g. chem (i got a C now) and i still have to make up this math class which i got an F in. so....do u think when i apply as a junior in the spring, my Gpa will be 3.5 or aboove, if i do well in college (meaning 3.0+)? i am REALLY worried. Our school has really SUCKY teachers.

THANKS!•••••Hey silver eyes,
Nice to hear from a fellow pakistani. Wow, that med student sure took the paranoia to a new level. Im not sure I'd recommend you to avoid the race/ethnicity and religion line. Its difficult to say whether it makes a difference. But i can tell you its against the law to discriminate on that basis. I felt no religious bias in the cycle, and my interviewers were curious about Pakistani society viz a viz America, so they werent grilling me as a potential radical .
So the answer to your first question is, I filled the blanks. (Ask your Med4 buddy whether she refers to heresay instances to make you skip those blanks).

I applied to 10 schools. Being a California resident, you would probably apply to around 25 schools (thats the cali average), of different "tiers".

And im well aware of the connections problem in our society <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> . I begged my parents not to make a big deal out of medical school, but thats like talking to the walls . Anyway, you shouldnt pay much heed to what you cannot change .

About the issue of "easy" schools, its a matter of perspective, mainly from an accepted student point of view and that of a rejeccted one. And both will give you a different answer . Getting into med school is not easy in the first place, and you should realize that. However, as many cali SDNers will tell you, there are some schools that take in a lot of californians, so make an effort to contact them.

You have the determination in you to get to medical school, so dont let your first year gpa bog you down. There are plenty of people who had a stumbly start to their careers, so dont be worried. Work hard, get good grades, and keep pressing your luck . A good MCAT score will remove doubts on your academic avilities.

If you have any other questions, feel free to PM me or email me. Good luck with everything

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by UCLA2000:
•
Let me explain to you how it works. You've made claims on here that, frankly, I don't think that you can substantiate.
Are you implying that I did not bother to educate myself on the issue before forming my opinion on the matter? If so then frankly I resent the implication.

If you DO have some sort of evidence then post it. Otherwise quit making baseless claims.•••••No, let me tell YOU how it works. Before you call someone a liar, you better be damn sure you know what the hell you are talking about. I am sick and tired of explaining basic facts on this issue. I am sick and tired of defending the most basic premises. I am not your gopher. If you feel strongly about this issue I suggest you educate yourself a little more. Yes, there is a huge gap between blacks and whites that even social economic status cannot account for. Like I said, it is well known on both educated sides of the AA debate.

Incorporate this data however you want. I cannot convince people who do not want to see. And if you're going to use the ACT/SAT argument, read the entire website before you comment.
<a href="http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/#income" target="_blank">http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/#income</a>

another ref if you do not believe in websites
(Thernstrom, S & Thernstrom, A, America in Black and White : One Nation, Indivisible, 1999)

 

[Kimya]

Oh come on, she had a chemical engineering degree from MIT, one of the top science universities in the country. I was a chemistry major, and believe me, chemical engineering majors work their butts off -the classes and the load are overwhelming. That is a fine GPA for a chemical engineering major, and from a background like that, nothing short of amazing.

Why don't people get irritated by all the legacies that are getting into medical school instead? I'd much have an applicant like her get in than some pampered rich kid that's just going to specialize in dermatology and work in Beverly Hills...

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

You think people don't get pissed off by nepotism?!

 

[UCLA2000]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
• •••quote:•••Originally posted by UCLA2000:
•
Let me explain to you how it works. You've made claims on here that, frankly, I don't think that you can substantiate. I've asked you to post your evidence and your response was basically

"I have the evidence, but I'm not posting it until I know how you will incorporate it into your world view"

I can't believe that you even went so far as to say that people on both sides of the argument that have researched it are familiar with the findings...and you're not surprised that I'm not familiar with them.

Are you implying that I did not bother to educate myself on the issue before forming my opinion on the matter? If so then frankly I resent the implication.

Quit patronizing me. My initial reaction is to tell you what you should go do with yourself.

However, after taking a few seconds to find a more politically correct way of responding I would answer:

Post the evidence and then I'll figure out how to incorportate it into my world view after I've seen it.

And after I've seen it I may choose to not incorporate it at all (as is my right), or it may have some great impact on my views.

As scientists we all know that statistics can easily be manipulated, and we know that data can be skewed and faulty. Unless I am convinced that the data is valid, I will not accept the findings.

It's interesting that you bring up the issue about standardized test scores. Is there a flaw that you think that I'll point out?

My opinion: Without standardized education there can be no fair standardized testing. Unless minorities are inherently dumber than caucasians then there is a problem with the system that is holding them back.

If you agree that caucasians and minorities are ON AVERAGE equally intelligent, then you have to wonder why minorities ON AVERAGE do poorer on testing. IF you take into account the fact that they are poorer and they recieve a lower quality education, then in my opinion you have a DAMN GOOD explanation for the discrepency.

If you DO have some sort of evidence then post it. Otherwise quit making baseless claims. •••••No, let me tell YOU how it works. Before you call someone a liar, you better be damn sure you know what the hell you are talking about. I am sick and tired of explaining basic facts on this issue. I am sick and tired of defending the most basic premises. I am not your gopher. If you feel strongly about this issue I suggest you educate yourself a little more. Yes, there is a huge gap between blacks and whites that even social economic status cannot account for. Like I said, it is well known on both educated sides of the AA debate.

Incorporate this data however you want. I cannot convince people who do not want to see. And if you're going to use the ACT/SAT argument, read the entire website before you comment.
<a href="http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/#income" target="_blank">http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/#income</a>

another ref if you do not believe in websites
(Thernstrom, S & Thernstrom, A, America in Black and White : One Nation, Indivisible, 1999)•••••You've got to be kidding me! Is a regurgitation of the statistics of students in North Carolina the best evidence for your claims that you could dig up! Give me a break! Isn't that the same state that recently eliminated their bussing programs, thus effectively resegregating their school system (or was that South Carolina)? Either way, that part of the US is racially and economically segregated. This has caused educational segregation as well. Poorer areas get poorer schooling.

Your original statement which I felt was unsubstantiated was

"We see studies that show academic performance of blacks can not be filtered out by social economic status. This is a major piece of evidence that suggests the theory of black self-victimization is correct. Does AA contribute to this?"

I see no study here! All I see are statistics on the performance of students in North Carolina! Where are the controls? What are the variables? Show me how they've tried to put african american children in a high quality education environment, and show me where its failed!

It has long been known by people on BOTH sides of the issue that the ACT/SAT tests are biased against minorities. If you were nearly as educated on this argument as you claim to be, then you would know that and quit wasting my time.

I looked at the data that was accumulated on your site, and I feel that not enough information is provided. There is a complete breakdown of SAT scores by county and it shows that some counties have much lower average scores than others (avg of around 700-1070) was the range I believe.

It does not give the reason for this large range. Are those schools primary in poorer areas where there Is a lack of funding? Do those schools also "happen" to have more minority students?

I also found an interesting section which claimed that even the poorest caucasians performed better than the richest african americans. Well tell me something, do you think that even a rich african american can move into a 'white' neighborhood in the south? District lines are drawn up by neighborhoods that people live in.

As I said before "As scientists we all know that statistics can easily be manipulated, and we know that and data can be skewed and faulty.

Without standardized education there can be no fair standardized testing. Unless minorities are inherently dumber than caucasians then there is a problem with the system that is holding them back.

If you agree that caucasians and minorities are ON AVERAGE equally intelligent, then you have to wonder why minorities ON AVERAGE do poorer on testing. IF you take into account the fact that they are poorer and they recieve a lower quality education, then in my opinion you have a DAMN GOOD explanation for the discrepency."

Have a nice day!

 

[DW]

ahh, these issues will never go away:

First off, regardless of her going through what she went to, her getting into a cali school on a full ride reeks of pure male bovine excrement. I'm sorry, a sub 3.0 GPA and a low 20s MCAT, if she's going to be working in poorer communities then I feel bad for her patients. If she was a chemical engineering major at MIT, wouldn't that translate into at least a 10 on the physical sciences? Just speculating.

I'm not going to repeat myself again on AA so geneman and I won't be arguing for another ten posts, but to work towards equality, we have to start at a much earlier stage for those that are truly "disadvantaged" than just lowering the standards at med school admissions. And part of that has to alleviating the cultural barriers created in lower socioeconomic levels that predispose some to academic inadequacy (but for mr ryo, i fell using the term "self" victimization does not enitirely do justice to the real obstacles, sometimes government sponsored, placed in front of minority students for the past 50 years and more).

This story is a failure of medical school admissions process that shortchanges deserving applicants to that school, URM applicants trying to gain legitimate acceptance, and potentially the patients she might serve. There is a lot more to being a doctor than just academic ability, but this might be pushing it juuuuuust a tad.

 

[Scooby Doo]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by DW:
•If she was a chemical engineering major at MIT, wouldn't that translate into at least a 10 on the physical sciences? Just speculating.
•••••That thought is RIGHT on the mark!

She should have scored AT LEAST a 10 on that section!

Come on people...

 

[Noeljan]

I agree with Scooby and GW on the last statement

 

[ItsGavinC]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by DW:
•
If she was a chemical engineering major at MIT, wouldn't that translate into at least a 10 on the physical sciences? •••••Yeah, unless she gained entrance to MIT in the same manner she gained entrance to med school (namely, one person on the adcom felt sorry for her). Flash forward to what might be overheard in 10 years... "If she is a physician, shouldn't she be able to diagnose common ailments?".
Oh what a vicious cycle.

-G

 

[Papa Smurf]

Just curious, but isn't MIT on a 5.0 scale? So that's really a 2.6 out of 5.0, right? Sorry, I'm not impressed. I wonder what would happen if med school admissions was a meritocracy for just one year.

 

[Samoa]

You know, I actually think they were right to give her a full ride. Loan debt is a well-known factor in specialty selection and practice location. They were giving her the means to fulfill her goal of practicing ina rural, underserved area, which she could likely not do if she were to pay her own way through USC.

Having made the decision to admit her, and expecting that she will go back to practice in her hometown, I think the full scholarship was the right thing to do.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

<a href="http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/SAT2WMF5.JPG" target="_blank">http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/SAT2WMF5.JPG</a>

Data: The figure also shows that White students whose families were below the poverty line (earned less than $20,000 per annum) scored higher than Black students whose families earned over $70,000 per annum

Conclusion: Black students with household incomes of $70,000 must go to school systems that are inferior to those that teach white students who are below the poverty line.

Like I said, someone who does not want to see, will not see.

 

[Resident Alien]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Samoa:
•You know, I actually think they were right to give her a full ride. Loan debt is a well-known factor in specialty selection and practice location. They were giving her the means to fulfill her goal of practicing ina rural, underserved area, which she could likely not do if she were to pay her own way through USC.

Having made the decision to admit her, and expecting that she will go back to practice in her hometown, I think the full scholarship was the right thing to do.•••••Have you heard of the National Health Corp Services Scholarships? Its in place to do exactly what you think she received the full ride for.

 

[UCLA2000]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki:
•<a href="http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/SAT2WMF5.JPG" target="_blank">http://www.ncpublicschools.org/Accountability/reporting/sat/2001/SAT2WMF5.JPG</a>

Data: The figure also shows that White students whose families were below the poverty line (earned less than $20,000 per annum) scored higher than Black students whose families earned over $70,000 per annum

Conclusion: Black students with household incomes of $70,000 must go to school systems that are inferior to those that teach white students who are below the poverty line.

Like I said, someone who does not want to see, will not see.•••••I saw that data. However data without interpretation is meaningless. I went a step further and asked myself Why?

Follow me on this.

Do you agree that black and latino students are ON AVERAGE born with the same intellectual ability as caucasians? If your answer is no, then you are a racist. If your response is yes, then you must ask this question.

If minority students are inherently as intelligent as non minorities, then why do even the richest african americans in North Carlolina perform more poorly on the SAT's than the poorest caucasians?

Possible explanations:
1. The SAT is culturally biased against minorities (this has LONG been argued).

2. In North Carlolina minorities ON AVERAGE are poorer, and therefore receive a poorer education and therefore perform worse on the SAT.

3. Minorities which are NOT poor in North Carolina still live in areas inhabited by other minorities (in order to avoid hate crimes) and because of that they receive a poorer education. (It's freaking North Carolina. Blatant racism is much more rampant there than it is in California).

4. North Carolina is NOT representative of the rest of the United States (with regards to diversity, economics, and racial tolerance).

Show me similar statistics for California proving that even the richest minorities perform worse than the poorest caucasians. Have you given that idea much thought? It's ridiculous!

 

[deva]

I would just like to say that UCLA2000 is making a much better argument. Thank you, UCLA2000.

Ryo-Ohki: I'm wondering when you are going to state specifically what you are implying - that blacks are inherently dumber than whites - instead of making cryptic remarks like, "Someone who does not want to see, will not see." Also, I do not think this line applies to UCLA2000. UCLA2000 has proven that he/she is able to analyze scientific studies. It seems, though, that you have difficulty with understanding or accepting possible explanations for the study's results that go against your biased opinions. Ryo-Ohki, please provide us with better evidence for your opinions, if you can. Your current evidence is weak.

 

[Samoa]

•••quote:•••Have you heard of the National Health Corp Services Scholarships? Its in place to do exactly what you think she received the full ride for.[/QB]••••But do they give you a choice where they send you?

Even if they do, I still don't have a problem with it.

 

[Thewonderer]

Back to the original argument...

Chavis' case of killing one patient and hurting a few is not a matter of competency. Anyone with 2.0 college GPA, 15 MCAT and pass medical board on his or her 3rd try can tell whether a patient is in trouble (in this case, severe bleeding leading to shock) or not. Instead, for Chavis to majorly screw-up, it was a matter of morality (being irreponsible, total lack of compassion, etc.).

Therefore, instead of arguing over whether URM's should be admitted or not with low academic numbers, we should instead ask "By being blinded by the race factor, are we overlooking the other essential characteristics of a good physician? Are these URM's really going to serve their population well? Are they actually compassionate people in the first place and are not admitted solely to fit the quota?"

This comes from some observation of several URM's in my class who want to go into derm, radiology, etc. to go for the big $$$. There is nothing terribly wrong with it because many white, asian classmates of mine are thinking about the same thing. But what is point of vigorously "recruiting" these URM's in the first place and throw lots of scholarships and $$$ into their face? Simply to fill the quota? I think so.

And it seems that Chavis in the end is not immune to the lure of $$$.

I don't doubt that the fact that you come from a certain place, you are more likely to go back there afterwards. But I would like to see more in depth of the studies of minorities from the underserved areas. Do they stay there after 5 years? Do they in the end take down their practice and move into middle-class or even upper-class neighborhoods to raise their kids there? Obviously, Chavis seemed to deviate from his original goal.

 

[UCLA2000]

I think that we should put this back into perspective.

Nobody is making the argument that Chavis made mistakes as a physician that physicians who had better scores wouldn't have made.

Nobody is saying if he had a 33 MCAT maybe that patient wouldn't have died.

What Chavis did was reprehensible. In my opinion it was murder. No different than if he had taken a knife and killed them with his own hand.

Is Chavis really representative of the entire minority physician population?

What about caucasian doctors who have committed horrible crimes (for instance those in natzi Germany who experimented on the Jews). Should all caucasian physicians be held accountable?

I know, I know that was a different country. Fine! How about the Tuskegee studies here in the US where caucasian doctors knowingly let patients with syphillis remain untreated.

The point is that a negligent physician is a negligent physician in spite of race, and not because of it.

 

[DW]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by UCLA2000:
•I think that we should put this back into perspective.

Nobody is making the argument that Chavis made mistakes as a physician that physicians who had better scores wouldn't have made.

Nobody is saying if he had a 33 MCAT maybe that patient wouldn't have died.

What Chavis did was reprehensible. In my opinion it was murder. No different than if he had taken a knife and killed them with his own hand.

Is Chavis really representative of the entire minority physician population?

What about caucasian doctors who have committed horrible crimes (for instance those in natzi Germany who experimented on the Jews). Should all caucasian physicians be held accountable?

I know, I know that was a different country. Fine! How about the Tuskegee studies here in the US where caucasian doctors knowingly let patients with syphillis remain untreated.

The point is that a negligent physician is a negligent physician in spite of race, and not because of it.•••••touche, UCLA2000!!! Good show!!!!

 

[DW]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Thewonderer:
•Back to the original argument...

Chavis' case of killing one patient and hurting a few is not a matter of competency. Anyone with 2.0 college GPA, 15 MCAT and pass medical board on his or her 3rd try can tell whether a patient is in trouble (in this case, severe bleeding leading to shock) or not. Instead, for Chavis to majorly screw-up, it was a matter of morality (being irreponsible, total lack of compassion, etc.).

Therefore, instead of arguing over whether URM's should be admitted or not with low academic numbers, we should instead ask "By being blinded by the race factor, are we overlooking the other essential characteristics of a good physician? Are these URM's really going to serve their population well? Are they actually compassionate people in the first place and are not admitted solely to fit the quota?"

This comes from some observation of several URM's in my class who want to go into derm, radiology, etc. to go for the big $$$. There is nothing terribly wrong with it because many white, asian classmates of mine are thinking about the same thing. But what is point of vigorously "recruiting" these URM's in the first place and throw lots of scholarships and $$$ into their face? Simply to fill the quota? I think so.

And it seems that Chavis in the end is not immune to the lure of $$$.

I don't doubt that the fact that you come from a certain place, you are more likely to go back there afterwards. But I would like to see more in depth of the studies of minorities from the underserved areas. Do they stay there after 5 years? Do they in the end take down their practice and move into middle-class or even upper-class neighborhoods to raise their kids there? Obviously, Chavis seemed to deviate from his original goal.•••••Those are all very valid concerns. AAMC does not do a good job of explaining the impact of minority docs in poor neighborhoods, there is just one small blurb that says minority students are more likely to work in poorer neighborhoods. I think if medicine truly wants to address the concerns of disadvantaged neighborhoods, they should expand programs such as national health service corps. Using the veil of helping those in need to get into med school and pulling a 180 at going into radio/derm in a rich neighborhood will not get the job done. Maybe if states and schools created more grant/low interest loan programs for minority/disadvantaged (including whites from appalachia) students that contractually agree to work in inner city/rural areas for substantial periods of time, that sort out who of these candidates will truly address the health concerns of the disadvantaged.

 

[charleb11]

I will agree with UCLA 2000, that in order for the study to be posted there has to be more evidence than one state. I know that I am a North Carolina resident and these statistics do not represent me. North Carolina has two of the top Universities in the nation, who take minorities from their own states, so they are not all dumber than disadvantaged whites. Just as background, the reason I said it the stats do not represent me is because I scored above avg. 1260, and I am a URM.

 

[geneman]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by DW:
•I'm not going to repeat myself again on AA so geneman and I won't be arguing for another ten posts•••••<img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> ...the funny thing is, we actually agree on more points about AA than we disagree.

 

[geneman]

UCLA is not making any argument at all. The data he is disputing with Ryo-Ohki is WIDELY ACCEPTED, among white and black scholars, as true. In fact, the first time I heard about that SAT study (African American students w/ parents making &gt; $70k score worse than white students w/ parents making &lt; 20k) was from an African American professor. By basing your argument against premises that are most likely true, you're shooting yourself in the foot.

The real question should not be "Is it true" but rather "Why is it true". Ryo-Ohki proposed a self-victimization theory, which is one of the most popular explanations among all theorists in this area. Here is quote from Booklist's review of an African American scholar:

McWhorter makes compelling arguments for the failure of African Americans to achieve academic success. He posits three causes of this failure, which he characterizes as victimology, separatism, and anti-intellectualism. McWhorter's "cult of victimology" is the "transformation of victimhood from a problem to be solved into an identity in itself." Such action keeps the victims and others from acknowledging that progress has been made. The "cult of separatism" is the attempt to self-protect by only engaging in activities that are for blacks. The "cult of anti-intellectualism" is the attitude that any authentic black person would not desire intellectual pursuits but rather consider such efforts alien and suspicious.

•••quote:•••Originally posted by deva:
•I would just like to say that UCLA2000 is making a much better argument. Thank you, UCLA2000.

Ryo-Ohki: I'm wondering when you are going to state specifically what you are implying - that blacks are inherently dumber than whites - instead of making cryptic remarks like, "Someone who does not want to see, will not see." Also, I do not think this line applies to UCLA2000. UCLA2000 has proven that he/she is able to analyze scientific studies. It seems, though, that you have difficulty with understanding or accepting possible explanations for the study's results that go against your biased opinions. Ryo-Ohki, please provide us with better evidence for your opinions, if you can. Your current evidence is weak.•••••

 

[geneman]

•••quote:•••Originally posted by Kimya:
•Oh come on, she had a chemical engineering degree from MIT, one of the top science universities in the country. I was a chemistry major, and believe me, chemical engineering majors work their butts off -the classes and the load are overwhelming. That is a fine GPA for a chemical engineering major, and from a background like that, nothing short of amazing.

Why don't people get irritated by all the legacies that are getting into medical school instead? I'd much have an applicant like her get in than some pampered rich kid that's just going to specialize in dermatology and work in Beverly Hills...•••••Are you being sarcastic?! Her background makes her 2.6 GPA (or whatever stellar number it was) "nothing short of amazing"?! And I guess my 3.9 GPA from a privileged background is merely "expected". <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" />

 

[DW]

•••quote:••• ••••Originally posted by geneman:

McWhorter makes compelling arguments for the failure of African Americans to achieve academic success. He posits three causes of this failure, which he characterizes as victimology, separatism, and anti-intellectualism. McWhorter's "cult of victimology" is the "transformation of victimhood from a problem to be solved into an identity in itself." Such action keeps the victims and others from acknowledging that progress has been made. The "cult of separatism" is the attempt to self-protect by only engaging in activities that are for blacks. The "cult of anti-intellectualism" is the attitude that any authentic black person would not desire intellectual pursuits but rather consider such efforts alien and suspicious. •••quote:••• ••••So I've been doing some reading on your McWhorter friend, geneman, (the two of us should be on CNN Talk Back Live or something ), and these issues of "self victimization" and anti intellectualism culture are concerns to be explored. But, as I alluded to before, to call it "self" victimization does NOT do appropriate justice to the real obstacles faced by minority students in this country. I'm not going to jump on a soapbox here, but anyone here with any vague recollection of American history knows that up until 35 years ago some groups in this country were by legal doctrine explicitly denied the basic rights and privileges of U.S. citizenship that we assume today. I think its extremely shortsighted to say that within one generation we are entirely separated from the past, and while some of the sense of victimization is unjustly self afflicted, i think its important for considering approaches such as McWhorter's with a sound recent historical context.

And, I will concede the weakness of that counterpoint is, "what of the rich URMs getting in by AA?" I'm not going to say I can entirely explain that one, but do be aware that percentage of "well to do" URMs is exceedingly small relative to other groups, and even at that economic level are not necessarily removed from the social barriers to academic success.

As usual though, your points are well taken.