Is affirmative action in the admission process about to end?

[flaahless]

Did you take that from somewhere or should i quote YOU on it.

It's a quote from a poem I wrote. So yeah, it's 100% flawless.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BlackDr2b]

I personally want to say thank you all for not completely bashing minorities. Because this thread could have gone way south!

 

[surfstarj]

I personally want to say thank you all for not completely bashing minorities. Because this thread could have gone way south!

Dude will you change your sig now so infatuation isn't spelled wrong? 'specially since you're talking about Jesus.

 

[LittleRocker]

My dad is a black district attorney. He has been pulled over in the past for driving while black (no other reason). I just wish I could have been there to see the look on the cop's face when he pulls out his badge.

 

[BlackDr2b]

Dude will you change your sig now so infatuation isn't spelled wrong? 'specially since you're talking about Jesus.

Will you finally be my friend now Surfstar?

 

[surfstarj]

Will you finally be my friend now Surfstar?

Yes!

 

[What up doc]

Well, the article probably discusses it in more detail, but i dont have access to the article. But why would the journal of blacks in higher ed want to manipulate the language? They are very strong proponents of AA. If it was some article by a racist academic, I can see where the skepticism is coming from, but why would so many academics and professional organizations who support the cause be slanting their data?

http://www.jstor.org.proxy-um.resea...tem=8&ttl=66&returnArticleService=showArticle

theres the article...from what i surmised, they used 33 as the supposed cut-off...but nowhere does it say that only 7 blks would be in the top 10...it does say that around 80 blks scored over an 11 on, around 100 scored over an 11 on physical, and around 135 scored over an 11 on verbal...this leads me to believe that there would be more than 7, but it doesnt say how many scored the composite score of 33...this article is also from 1996 and i would think the numbers have improved quite a bit since then...also if the median mcat of accepted students is 35 its important to realize that this is a MEDIAN and that half of the accepted applicants scored BELOW THIS!!!!! and its not like they are all 34's and 33's bcuz we all know there are a bunch of 38,39,40ers floatin around that these top 10s...for which there must be 32,31,30 to have a median of 35...and they are not all black...most of them are probably white and asian....so

 

[JLofty]

Just take a minute, relax, and enjoy the the sweet sound of unity ...

[YOUTUBE]http://youtube.com/watch?v=TZtiJN6yiik[/YOUTUBE]

 

[LittleRocker]

Oh Paul... not dissing the message but seriously... what a lame song

 

[dienekes88]

Parto, G, forreal, please do research or take a logic course or do something where you have to critically analyze data.

Only 7, come on man. Something does NOT sound right. This leads me to ask how "strict" are the MCAT cutoffs? Are we talking 30s? because i'm sure that more than 7 African Americans scored higher than 30? Raise the number, 35s? I know more than 7 African americans scored higher than 35. Are we talking about a cutoffs in specific sections, like... an 11 in VR?

So another question is, why didn't they mention the MCAT cutoff they were talking about rather than vaguely saying strict MCAT cuttoffs. Probably because the raw numbers weren't as scary and they had to manipulate the language to get their publication? Maybe. Who knows.

I think you need to lighten up on Parto. I think he has a valid point: if MCAT/GPA are good enough for determining - in broad strokes - who among white and asians will be able to attend medical school, then why isn't it a good measure in comparing other races? The issue is that the yardstick for one is not the yardstick for another.

People talk about "the whole package," but invariably "the whole package" seems to favor URMs, because it doesn't seem to benefit ORMs. Are we to assume that URMs generally have a more impressive overall application? Why would that be the case?

At the end of the day, AA seems to be a band-aid solution for a deep wound. Addressing the underlying socioeconomic barriers and learned helplessness that continue the cycle of poverty would be a better way. However, I have no specific proposals for you. AA should only be a stepping stone. Right idea... maybe not the best mechanism.

Having said that, you are correct in questioning the reliability of this article. Here is the quote from the full text:

It is useful to make a rough calculation as to what would happen if race-neutral admissions policies were instituted at all of the nation's leading medical schools. There are approximately 1,500 places for first-year students at the nation's 10 highest-ranked medical schools.(**) The median MCAT score at these schools is more than 33. Less than 7 percent of all students who apply to these top 10 schools are accepted. The Association of American Medical Colleges was not able to provide us with the number of black students who scored 33 or above on the MCAT test. But if we are permitted to assume that the number of black students scoring on the MCAT test at the median of the elite medical schools is about the same percentage as the black students scoring on the Law School Admissions Test at the median of the top law schools, we would conclude that only about seven black students would meet the entrance requirements at the 10 highest-ranking medical schools. This is less than one black student per medical school. In contrast, we know that in 1996 there were 37 black first-year students combined at three of the highest-ranked medical schools -- Harvard, Yale, and Johns Hopkins. Blacks made up more than 10 percent of the first-year classes at both Harvard and Yale.

The assumption that a certain population will score similarly between standardized exams (especially if there are other confounding factors)... might be a bit of a reach.

 

[bcat85]

Boy, if someone wants to get rid of their good mood, this is the thread to do it.

 

[dienekes88]

Boy, if someone wants to get rid of their good mood, this is the thread to do it.

Yeah. I told myself I wouldn't post in this thread... or read it.

I don't know what I was thinking.

 

[JLofty]

Yeah. I told myself I wouldn't post in this thread... or read it.

I don't know what I was thinking.

Ha, me too. Hopefully we can just all agree to disagree. No one is gonna change anyones mind on this topic. Regardless of skin color, I think we can at least agree that diversity is good...different ideas spark debate, which stimulates progress.

As doctors, we are going to be leaders in society, and people will listen to you. As the case with any controversial topic, I would just say to try and be aware and empathize with both sides of the argument.

AA, racial profiling, favoritism, etc....they are all just byproducts of human nature. People have a natural tendency to put others in categories or boxes to simplify their own way of thinking. I do it, you do it, we all do. We just need to realize that everyone has had different experiences, and that we need to just accept others for who they are. Damn, I sound like Dr. Phil...

"Don't hate the black. Don't hate the white. If you get bitten, just hate the bite. Make sure your heart is beatin' right."

*major props to whoever can name who said this without googleing

 

[LittleRocker]

Sly Stone!

 

[surfstarj]

[YOUTUBE]http://youtube.com/watch?v=oI5EY5kqiBU&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

In light of his death yesterday, i thought this was an interesting clip about who we really need to be concerned about. Not race so much as class. don't agree 100% with his take on education because i believe it can be fixed eventually, but he's right in his analysis of the current political situation and it's social repercussions.

 

[gabem480]

So in light of what someone said about my post I am willing to accept that my post may have been wrong if it says caucasians were not persecuted but to my knowledge that isnt exactly what I said. I accept that many caucasians have been persecuted but what I was trying to point out and from what I understand it was never to the extent of what minorities have had to endure. Maybe I am wrong maybe not but even to this day if you open your eyes take a look around the words I speak seem to make sense they just seem to have some truth. Don't take it from me though.

 

[gabem480]

That is also the last post I am going to make on the persecution tug of war thats not what this forum was meant for so lets get back to the subject at hand AA.

 

[theTODD1001]

Well, the article probably discusses it in more detail, but i dont have access to the article. But why would the journal of blacks in higher ed want to manipulate the language? They are very strong proponents of AA. If it was some article by a racist academic, I can see where the skepticism is coming from, but why would so many academics and professional organizations who support the cause be slanting their data?

Here are the articles ...

http://www.mediafire.com/?zd4chc1tg1x

http://www.mediafire.com/?j0iuvl1s4x1

 

[JLofty]

Sly Stone!

You're the man! (or woman!)

 

[happytograduate]

So since AA exists, I should just get used to the prejudice and disrespectful views of my colleagues? Hahaha, right.

Please don't make such asinine assumptions. That's what happens when you ASSUME, you make an ass out of you and me.

I can only imagine how you did on the Verbal Reasoning section of the MCAT if you think that I said you should "get used" to the prejudice.

 

[happytograduate]

No one should be disrespectful or prejudiced towards you. That is obviously wrong. And happytograduate did not say that. What he said was that maybe you should understand that some, and only some, people possibly benefited from affirmative action and got accepted at a medical school where they might not have gotten into without the help of AA. How is someone wrong to just question that? You know how cut-throat most med school applicants are.

Thank you very much hopefuldoc87. I'm glad you were able to interpret my post correctly unlike flahless, who assumed that I was saying he should get over it. I really don't think he read my ENTIRE post.

 

[RunwayModel]

That's ridiculous. Why should I assume that an urm student got in becaue of AA just because some do? That's like me accusing random caucasian med students of benefitting from legacy status even though it may not apply to them. Both are wrong. I choose to informate before I speculate ~ Lil Wayne. Meaning, unless I have concrete evidence or proof, I won't assume anything of anyone. It's a respect thing. Some people have it, some don't.

First of all, I did not say you, specifically, are the one doing the assuming.

The ones usually doing the assuming are the ones who would not qualify under affirmative action. It would be stupid for someone who possibly benefited from affirmative action to criticize someone else for possibly benefiting from the same mechanism. The reason I use the word "possibly" is that unless you were with the admissions officers asking them directly, you would never know 100%. However, people WILL reach their conclusions regardless, whether it is based on academic statistics or what not. People list on the MDApplicants website their info, circumstances, GPA, MCAT, etc, thus people do conclude (right or wrong), whether someone benefited from AA.

Your faulty linkage of "caucasian" to "legacy" is ridiculous to anyone, as whether someone's parents are an alumni is not reflected in the person's skin color or ethnicity. If someone's parents went to Harvard, their offspring's skin color doesn't turn crimson (Harvard's school color).

I don't think informate is a word.

People speculate all the time, and equating that to whether the person has respect or not is ludicrous, just because it may be negative or you may not agree with it. Juries speculate all the time across this country in reaching a verdict on circumstantial evidence that is not "concrete evidence or proof".

Just so it is clear to everyone how URM and affirmative action fit together, the AAMC (American Association of Medical Colleges) has defined URM:

http://www.aamc.org/meded/urm/start.htm
http://www.aamc.org/meded/urm/statusofnewdefinition.pdf

The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) definition of underrepresented in medicine is:

"Underrepresented in medicine means those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population."

Adopted by the AAMC's Executive Council on June 26, 2003, the definition helps medical schools accomplish three important objectives:

* a shift in focus from a fixed aggregation of four racial and ethnic groups to a continually evolving underlying reality. The definition accommodates including and removing underrepresented groups on the basis of changing demographics of society and the profession,
* a shift in focus from a national perspective to a regional or local perspective on underrepresentation, and
* stimulate data collection and reporting on the broad range of racial and ethnic self-descriptions.

Before June 26, 2003, the AAMC used the term "underrepresented minority (URM)," which consisted of Blacks, Mexican-Americans, Native Americans (that is, American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians), and mainland Puerto Ricans. The AAMC remains committed to ensuring access to medical education and medicine-related careers for individuals from these four historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups.

 

[RunwayModel]

Caucasians have had many advantages because of race so why is it one time that a urm has this advantage it's a problem? When it comes to the question of race on an amcas app what am I supposed to do leave it blank because other pre-meds might look at me different? I am proud of my race regardless what damage this country inflicts on it. It wouldn't make a difference anyway how is anybody going to know if I applied urm or not they will always assume which is judgemental anyways so what have I got to lose.

Gabem480, to say that someone is automatically "advantaged" for being Caucasian is pushing the envelope quite a bit, because there are manyh economically disadvantaged white people as well. Try telling them that they are advantaged, and tell me what they tell you.

The reason that affirmative action is a problem for those who are not URMs, is that the people affected now, were not the ones CAUSING the discrimination years ago. Barack Obama (who I think is right on the money), has said the same thing in his speech in Philadelphia and he should know. I think by being biracial, he has the advantage of seeing both sides of the coin by seeing his experience and his mother's experience of having to go on food stamps.

Asians are nowhere the majority in population and are NOT considered a URM as well. Once again the term URM is comparing the population to the percentage in the field. So let's not assume that affirmative action benefits non-whites as a rule.

 

[RunwayModel]

D**N Texas so close to the Mexican border they are some what obligated to practice AA to diversify a class of physicians to care for the Mexicans that enter the country shame on them. NO. O.K. I will open my eyes and see that there are few who do utilize AA to diversify but as I previously stated are you telling me that urm med students only get into med school because of race? Do they not work as hard as the majority? If so what was I wasting my time in class for I could have been home posted up in front of the TV with a cold one. Obviously this is not the case yeah some urm's get in with lower stats but who's to say they will not make as good a physician as the next which points to what I said about just being minority will not get you into school. It's about the whole package if you dont fight for it it won't happen same for me as it is for you.

The idiocy of the above post is amazing. Texas is "obligated" to practice AA to care for Mexicans that enter the country? I'm assuming you are talking about legal immigrants, bc if you are talking about Texas being obligated to practice AA to care for illegal Mexican immigrants then your post is even more stupid.

And no one has said, "urm med students only get into med school because of race". Also, please use complete sentences with periods as your thoughts tend to ramble.

 

[gabem480]

The above post about Texas was meant as a joke I have no feelings towards Texas I don't live there and I am not going to comment on the illegal alien drama because that is not what this forum is meant for this is not the place for it. As for my other post the majority of minorities are disadvantaged if you recall my other posts if you even read them you will see that I did acknowledge there are those disadvantaged from every race but can you honestly sit there and compare the two? I also am bi-racial so if that automatically means you know well then this is the truth this is how it is. I am not blind to the fact that there is injustice in this world for those of all races but if you came to where I live and if you wore the skin I wear if you were harrassed because the color of your skin I am certain you and I would share the same point of view.

 

[gabem480]

The idiocy of the above post is amazing. Texas is "obligated" to practice AA to care for Mexicans that enter the country? I'm assuming you are talking about legal immigrants, bc if you are talking about Texas being obligated to practice AA to care for illegal Mexican immigrants then your post is even more stupid.

And no one has said, "urm med students only get into med school because of race". Also, please use complete sentences with periods as your thoughts tend to ramble.

You are either blind or cant read if you really believe what you said about nobody saying a urm got in because they are urm it's a constant on this site. There is no need for me to practice proper punctuation on a forum if you have an issue with that don't read my posts. If anybody is being ignorant I would really suggest a reality check because instead of coming into this forum to be productive and add to the debate you come her to trash on punctuation what a joke.

 

[OrthoJock]

One of many problems with affirmative action is that if I have a brain tumor and a black neurosurgeon walks into the room, I am forced to wonder if this guy is standing in front of me b/c he really was one of the best, or if some residency director thought that blacks were underrepresented and took him even though he was less qualified than a white or asian guy. There's no politically correct way for me to get an answer to this question, so if I had a tumor I'd go to a surgeon whose qualifications I didn't have any doubts about.

 

[gabem480]

One of many problems with affirmative action is that if I have a brain tumor and a black neurosurgeon walks into the room, I am forced to wonder if this guy is standing in front of me b/c he really was one of the best, or if some residency director thought that blacks were underrepresented and took him even though he was less qualified than a white or asian guy. There's no politically correct way for me to get an answer to this question, so if I had a tumor I'd go to a surgeon whose qualifications I didn't have any doubts about.

Are you serious? URM's are taking over the residency world as well? This is starting to remind me of a movie I once seen called "American History X." This just goes back to what I said in an earlier post "what does it matter if I select Mexican/American people are going to automatically assume anyways."

 

[flaahless]

First of all, I did not say you, specifically, are the one doing the assuming.

The ones usually doing the assuming are the ones who would not qualify under affirmative action. It would be stupid for someone who possibly benefited from affirmative action to criticize someone else for possibly benefiting from the same mechanism. The reason I use the word "possibly" is that unless you were with the admissions officers asking them directly, you would never know 100%. However, people WILL reach their conclusions regardless, whether it is based on academic statistics or what not. People list on the MDApplicants website their info, circumstances, GPA, MCAT, etc, thus people do conclude (right or wrong), whether someone benefited from AA.

We all know what happens when people assume. And yes, it is disrespectful.

Your faulty linkage of "caucasian" to "legacy" is ridiculous to anyone, as whether someone's parents are an alumni is not reflected in the person's skin color or ethnicity.

Technically, there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian since schools were segregated 50 years ago. Ie: It's highly unlikely for any minority student to have a grandfather that graduated from Yale School of Med since the school was 98% caucasian at the time. But like I said, it's difficult to "speculate" on that because people don't wear their legacy status on their skin.

I don't think informate is a word.

Oh really, thanks for letting me know.

People speculate all the time, and equating that to whether the person has respect or not is ludicrous, just because it may be negative or you may not agree with it. Juries speculate all the time across this country in reaching a verdict on circumstantial evidence that is not "concrete evidence or proof".

Juries speculate based on a mountain of evidence pertaining to that particular individual and their crime or infraction.

Premeds judge urm students based on misleading data rather than each student's particular case. Do you see the difference? Juries judge me based on what I do, not based on what the published numbers for my particular ethnicity are. Premeds judge me without even knowing me, or anything about me. They see my ethnicity and think "urm that benefitted from AA." I'm glad juries don't judge that way. That would be like a jury giving me a guilty verdict just because I'm African American and African Americans are the predominant ethnic population in the prison system.

 

[flaahless]

One of many problems with affirmative action is that if I have a brain tumor and a black neurosurgeon walks into the room, I am forced to wonder if this guy is standing in front of me b/c he really was one of the best, or if some residency director thought that blacks were underrepresented and took him even though he was less qualified than a white or asian guy. There's no politically correct way for me to get an answer to this question, so if I had a tumor I'd go to a surgeon whose qualifications I didn't have any doubts about.

That's not a problem with affirmative action, that is a problem with your personal perceptions and prejudices toward African American physicians. Look, people are stupid. People are ignorant. AA doesn't cause it, it merely exploits it by giving people a vector to release their prejudices. It's cathartic. Ie: If AA didn't exist, you would most likely still doubt the qualifications of urm doctors. But since AA does exist, you now have an excuse, and a pretty shoddy one at that, to blanketly assume that random african american physicians are less qualified than their pigment impaired peers.

 

[gabem480]

We all know what happens when people assume. And yes, it is disrespectful.



Technically, there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian since schools were segregated 50 years ago. Ie: It's highly unlikely for any minority student to have a grandfather that graduated from Yale School of Med since the school was 98% caucasian at the time. But like I said, it's difficult to "speculate" on that because people don't wear their legacy status on their skin.


Oh really, thanks for letting me know.


Juries speculate based on a mountain of evidence pertaining to that particular individual and their crime or infraction.

Premeds judge urm students based on misleading data rather than each student's particular case. Do you see the difference? Juries judge me based on what I do, not based on what the published numbers for my particular ethnicity are. Premeds judge me without even knowing me, or anything about me. They see my ethnicity and think "urm that benefitted from AA." I'm glad juries don't judge that way. That would be like a jury giving me a guilty verdict just because I'm African American and African Americans are the predominant ethnic population in the prison system.[/quote]

Next to hispanic/latinos.

 

[flaahless]

We all know what happens when people assume. And yes, it is disrespectful.



Technically, there is a greater chance that a legacy student is caucasian since schools were segregated 50 years ago. Ie: It's highly unlikely for any minority student to have a grandfather that graduated from Yale School of Med since the school was 98% caucasian at the time. But like I said, it's difficult to "speculate" on that because people don't wear their legacy status on their skin.


Oh really, thanks for letting me know.


Juries speculate based on a mountain of evidence pertaining to that particular individual and their crime or infraction.

Premeds judge urm students based on misleading data rather than each student's particular case. Do you see the difference? Juries judge me based on what I do, not based on what the published numbers for my particular ethnicity are. Premeds judge me without even knowing me, or anything about me. They see my ethnicity and think "urm that benefitted from AA." I'm glad juries don't judge that way. That would be like a jury giving me a guilty verdict just because I'm African American and African Americans are the predominant ethnic population in the prison system.[/quote]


Next to hispanic/latinos.

Regardless, assuming that urm students all benefitted from AA is a form of academic racial profiling.

 

[gabem480]

Regardless, assuming that urm students all benefitted from AA is a form of academic racial profiling.

It just goes to show that this country still has a long way to go. Sometimes I woder if we are even on the right track it would seem that with each generation that passes things would get better but what I see on sdn and in my city it's as if things will always be the same.

 

[surfstarj]

Regardless, assuming that urm students all benefitted from AA is a form of academic racial profiling.

No need to be melodramatic. Let's keep in mind that this thread was started to discuss whether AA will continue to exist in the admissions process. There is no reason to assume that a process INVENTED for the purpose of helping minority students gain consideration in the admissions process does not, in fact, help them gain consideration in the admission process with the expressed purpose of diversifying the medical profession. It's not racial profiling to state this, it's defining a feature of AA.

That said, the quote you highlighted about African Americans being the major racial population in prisons has NO PLACE IN THIS THREAD, has nothing to do with medical admissions whatsoever and frankly, undermines any productive discussion going on between groups on this thread.

ay dios mio. seriously.

 

[gabem480]

No need to be melodramatic. Let's keep in mind that this thread was started to discuss whether AA will continue to exist in the admissions process. There is no reason to assume that a process INVENTED for the purpose of helping minority students gain consideration in the admissions process does not, in fact, help them gain consideration in the admission process with the expressed purpose of diversifying the medical profession. It's not racial profiling to state this, it's defining a feature of AA.

That said, the quote you highlighted about African Americans being the major racial population in prisons has NO PLACE IN THIS THREAD, has nothing to do with medical admissions whatsoever and frankly, undermines any productive discussion going on between groups on this thread.

ay dios mio. seriously.

Whoa surfstarj is there something your not telling us? Just joking look let me ask you a question do you judge every URM that get accetped into med school? Do you feel like URM's have to prove themselves to you to accept them as equal and in order for you to rule out AA as a factor?

 

[surfstarj]

One of many problems with affirmative action is that if I have a brain tumor and a black neurosurgeon walks into the room, I am forced to wonder if this guy is standing in front of me b/c he really was one of the best, or if some residency director thought that blacks were underrepresented and took him even though he was less qualified than a white or asian guy. There's no politically correct way for me to get an answer to this question, so if I had a tumor I'd go to a surgeon whose qualifications I didn't have any doubts about.

I really doubt you'd become a neurosurgeon without being at the near-top of your med school class and acing the USMLE first...but anyway.

 

[nVictus]

Ie: If AA didn't exist, you would most likely still doubt the qualifications of urm doctors. But since AA does exist, you now have an excuse, and a pretty shoddy one at that, to blanketly assume that random african american physicians are less qualified than their pigment impaired peers.

Can you really assume that if AA didnt exist, ppl would still wonder about how qualified a black/hispanic/etc physician is?

Stats of blacks/hispanics are considerably lower than that of whites/asians, according to AAMC. AA is in place to allow URMs in. URMs = blacks/hispanics. AA allows some blacks/hispanics, aka URMs, to be admitted into medical school with lower stats.

So while there are URMs that are admitted based on their own merits, there is a small portion that don't. Why is it so wrong to wonder about those? Like orthojock said, I would wonder about that same thing if a URM surgeon was going to operate on my brain tumor. How can I not? This is not to say that the URM that is about to operate on me isnt qualified, it just begs the question "is there a more qualified doctor?" AA is not in place to help whites/asians so my mind would not ask "Did AA lets this guy/girl through?"

 

[surfstarj]

Whoa surfstarj is there something your not telling us? Just joking look let me ask you a question do you judge every URM that get accetped into med school? Do you feel like URM's have to prove themselves to you to accept them as equal and in order for you to rule out AA as a factor?

Absolutely not. I'm not as hung up on my numerical qualifications as some other non-urms seem to be. I know, just like some of you urms here, that numbers aren't all I have to offer in medical school. Once admissions is gained to med school, everyone has to work the same to get OUT OF med school to become a physician so I'd never doubt the qualification of a minority doctor anymore than I'd doubt the qualification of any doctor. Non-URM students, and for that matter patients, who have this idea are just simply misinformed about what it takes to get through medical school in the first place and their opinions don't concern me.

However, what both sides need to get over on this thread: AA is here to increase odds for URMs so that their populations are no longer U (that is, underrepresented). Let's not pretend like it doesn't matter at all. What I think a lot of people get worked up on this thread about is the most measurable feature of this: stats.

Do I think AA helps people undeserving of admission gain admission? Not at all. What I think it does is allow admissions committees to look beyond some possible weak numbers to consider a broader package that, had AA not been a factor would potentially be overlooked because of a lower GPA or MCAT. This doesn't guarantee anything because there has to be something great about these students just like everyone else who gets accepted to get past this initial stage.

Now let me ask you a question, I was pre-interview rejected at many schools and given the reason that my gpa was too low. I had a 3.4 from a great school, 35R mcat, standard pre-med ec's with the addition of working full time through college and having 4 year varsity- and now olympic-level sports participation for my country (I'm dual citizen, flaco). Unfortunately, for whatever reason, they could not look beyond my GPA in favor of my total package and what I had to offer to schools. Was it because of my skin color? Who knows but a lot of people would suggest that.

All I'm saying to you is that you have to consider both sides of the argument. While it's ridiculous to doubt the qualifications of a minority doctor, it's also ridiculous to assert that somehow "none" of the URM students who have been successful in getting into med school have benefited from AA (even if it was only to pass the initial stats screening to get an interview). I want very badly for everyone to calm down and accept that whoever is in school deserves to be there and get over the numbers as well as stop denying the numbers differences. Thanks.

 

[surfstarj]

OH and as far as you highlighting "ay dios mio"...what's the problem?

I speak a couple languages. Va bene?

 

[gabem480]

Absolutely not. I'm not as hung up on my numerical qualifications as some other non-urms seem to be. I know, just like some of you urms here, that numbers aren't all I have to offer in medical school. Once admissions is gained to med school, everyone has to work the same to get OUT OF med school to become a physician so I'd never doubt the qualification of a minority doctor anymore than I'd doubt the qualification of any doctor. Non-URM students, and for that matter patients, who have this idea are just simply misinformed about what it takes to get through medical school in the first place and their opinions don't concern me.

However, what both sides need to get over on this thread: AA is here to increase odds for URMs so that their populations are no longer U (that is, underrepresented). Let's not pretend like it doesn't matter at all. What I think a lot of people get worked up on this thread about is the most measurable feature of this: stats.

Do I think AA helps people undeserving of admission gain admission? Not at all. What I think it does is allow admissions committees to look beyond some possible weak numbers to consider a broader package that, had AA not been a factor would potentially be overlooked because of a lower GPA or MCAT. This doesn't guarantee anything because there has to be something great about these students just like everyone else who gets accepted to get past this initial stage.

Now let me ask you a question, I was pre-interview rejected at many schools and given the reason that my gpa was too low. I had a 3.4 from a great school, 35R mcat, standard pre-med ec's with the addition of working full time through college and having 4 year varsity- and now olympic-level sports participation for my country (I'm dual citizen, flaco). Unfortunately, for whatever reason, they could not look beyond my GPA in favor of my total package and what I had to offer to schools. Was it because of my skin color? Who knows but a lot of people would suggest that.

All I'm saying to you is that you have to consider both sides of the argument. While it's ridiculous to doubt the qualifications of a minority doctor, it's also ridiculous to assert that somehow "none" of the URM students who have been successful in getting into med school have benefited from AA (even if it was only to pass the initial stats screening to get an interview). I want very badly for everyone to calm down and accept that whoever is in school deserves to be there and get over the numbers as well as stop denying the numbers differences. Thanks.

As far as your situation goes no doubt I would say you got a bad deal but what school was this from? Was it a school you had any business applying to because there are always schools that are all about the numbers. Second I myself will not give in and say that there are URM's that get in for the sole fact they are URM why would I iv'e never witnessed it. You know those numbers that may be lower as you said may have a life story that better prepares them for a career as a physician and if you jump to conclusions without even knowing that is low it is pretty much judging someone for the color of their skin. lets be honest if it's a caucasian who gets in with shotty numbers your not going to hear me say it's because they are white or because the school is racist it's not in my character to judge based on skin color.

 

[atalkinghead]

Like orthojock said, I would wonder about that same thing if a URM surgeon was going to operate on my brain tumor. How can I not? This is not to say that the URM that is about to operate on me isnt qualified, it just begs the question "is there a more qualified doctor?"

But you know the process. AA isn't going to give a URM minority with a low USMLE score and/or proformance in med school a chance at a surgery residency.

There is always a more qualified doctor.

 

[gabem480]

OH and as far as you highlighting "ay dios mio"...what's the problem?

I speak a couple languages. Va bene?

No theres nothing wrong with it I think it's great and will only make you a better doctor I was just joking with you.

 

[atalkinghead]

Now let me ask you a question, I was pre-interview rejected at many schools and given the reason that my gpa was too low. I had a 3.4 from a great school, 35R mcat, standard pre-med ec's with the addition of working full time through college and having 4 year varsity- and now olympic-level sports participation for my country (I'm dual citizen, flaco). Unfortunately, for whatever reason, they could not look beyond my GPA in favor of my total package and what I had to offer to schools. Was it because of my skin color? Who knows but a lot of people would suggest that.

A lot of people would suggest that because they want to make excuses.

 

[gabem480]

Can you really assume that if AA didnt exist, ppl would still wonder about how qualified a black/hispanic/etc physician is?

Stats of blacks/hispanics are considerably lower than that of whites/asians, according to AAMC. AA is in place to allow URMs in. URMs = blacks/hispanics. AA allows some blacks/hispanics, aka URMs, to be admitted into medical school with lower stats.

So while there are URMs that are admitted based on their own merits, there is a small portion that don't. Why is it so wrong to wonder about those? Like orthojock said, I would wonder about that same thing if a URM surgeon was going to operate on my brain tumor. How can I not? This is not to say that the URM that is about to operate on me isnt qualified, it just begs the question "is there a more qualified doctor?" AA is not in place to help whites/asians so my mind would not ask "Did AA lets this guy/girl through?"

I tried to refrain but this is just ignorant. As surfstarj said there is no way your going to be a neurosurgeon without being a very intelligent capable doctor. What this is basically insinuating is that you would judge by the color of skin making you racist is this what you are saying? I dont doubt people are going to wonder if theres is a more qualified doctor for the operation but don't come to a conclusion based on skin color.

 

[flaahless]

No need to be melodramatic. Let's keep in mind that this thread was started to discuss whether AA will continue to exist in the admissions process. There is no reason to assume that a process INVENTED for the purpose of helping minority students gain consideration in the admissions process does not, in fact, help them gain consideration in the admission process with the expressed purpose of diversifying the medical profession. It's not racial profiling to state this, it's defining a feature of AA.

Stop. That's not why AA was established. Also, NOT ALL SCHOOLS CONSIDER IT! Therefore, you cannot assume that everyone benefitted. What don't you get?

That said, the quote you highlighted about African Americans being the major racial population in prisons has NO PLACE IN THIS THREAD, has nothing to do with medical admissions whatsoever and frankly, undermines any productive discussion going on between groups on this thread.

ay dios mio. seriously.

Yo fall back cuz. My analogy was appropriate to counter orthojock post about doubting the qualifications of African American physicians. My analogy does belong in this thread because it address the fundamental flaw in assuming that urm students all benefitted from AA. That flaw is taking the data of the masses and stereotyping EACH individual in that particular demographic to draw conclusions that may NOT be true. Ie: Racial profiling. Some people believe that AA fosters that type of thinking, I disagree. I think personal prejudices foster that thinking and AA is just an avenue through which those prejudices are displayed.

 

[surfstarj]

As far as your situation goes no doubt I would say you got a bad deal but what school was this from? Was it a school you had any business applying to because there are always schools that are all about the numbers. Second I myself will not give in and say that there are URM's that get in for the sole fact they are URM why would I iv'e never witnessed it. You know those numbers that may be lower as you said may have a life story that better prepares them for a career as a physician and if you jump to conclusions without even knowing that is low it is pretty much judging someone for the color of their skin. lets be honest if it's a caucasian who gets in with shotty numbers your not going to hear me say it's because they are white or because the school is racist it's not in my character to judge based on skin color.

Well it was several schools, some ranked some unranked so fairly across the board but no top 10s. Saying a school I had "no business" applying to is a little silly in light of this conversation if we're talking about AA, is it not? We are talking about a process that allows schools to look past numbers in favor of whole applicants. I thought I'd give it a try with an 11/13/11 MCAT despite a somewhat low GPA, so I had some numbers going for me anyway.

Regardless, if a low stat non-URM is rejected pre-interview how would they know their life story and whether or not it would aid me in my medical career. That's just my point. IT IS jumping to conclusions without knowing me to assume that just because I'm not technically URM, that my life story isn't worth hearing and/or isn't worth overlooking my GPA for? Haha, come on. That's the other side of the coin. It is judging me by my skin color (which is olive, by the way).

People get hung up on the numbers side of AA but how are we deciding who gets to share their story and who doesn't? Look at Flaahless, he's controversial because he had a 3.3 and a 29 mcat with a 7 in VR. He had tremendous success in the cycle. Obviously he's got something going for him in personality/life experiences, but they definitely had to overlook his scores to give him interviews which allowed him to shine in the first place. Both sides of the argument for or against AA need to be sensitive to the other, that's all I'm saying. No need to beat points over each other's heads.

 

[flaahless]

Can you really assume that if AA didnt exist, ppl would still wonder about how qualified a black/hispanic/etc physician is?

Stats of blacks/hispanics are considerably lower than that of whites/asians, according to AAMC. AA is in place to allow URMs in. URMs = blacks/hispanics. AA allows some blacks/hispanics, aka URMs, to be admitted into medical school with lower stats.

So while there are URMs that are admitted based on their own merits, there is a small portion that don't. Why is it so wrong to wonder about those? Like orthojock said, I would wonder about that same thing if a URM surgeon was going to operate on my brain tumor. How can I not? This is not to say that the URM that is about to operate on me isnt qualified, it just begs the question "is there a more qualified doctor?" AA is not in place to help whites/asians so my mind would not ask "Did AA lets this guy/girl through?"

First fallacy - Entrance stats do not represent the qualifications of a physician. Individuals know that urms are admitted with lower GPA and MCAT scores, but does this translate into lower qualifications as a physician or a decreased quality of their performance? No.

Again, that's stereotyping a particular individual to be like a population that you really don't know much about. And making assumptions about individuals within that population without knowing a damn thing about them is racial profiling. Point blank.

 

[surfstarj]

Stop. That's not why AA was established. Also, NOT ALL SCHOOLS CONSIDER IT! Therefore, you cannot assume that everyone benefitted. What don't you get?


Yo fall back cuz. My analogy was appropriate to counter orthojock post about doubting the qualifications of African American physicians. My analogy does belong in this thread because it address the fundamental flaw in assuming that urm students all benefitted from AA. That flaw is taking the data of the masses and stereotyping EACH individual in that particular demographic to draw conclusions that may NOT be true. Ie: Racial profiling. Some people believe that AA fosters that type of thinking, I disagree. I think personal prejudices foster that thinking and AA is just an avenue through which those prejudices are displayed.

1) What don't you get? If they didn't want to augment the number of URM medical students and thus augment the number of URM physicians, they wouldn't have the URM designation. What don't you get?
2) I'm a woman, address me as such, please.

 

[surfstarj]

First fallacy - Entrance stats do not represent the qualifications of a physician. Individuals know that urms are admitted with lower GPA and MCAT scores, but does this translate into lower qualifications as a physician or a decreased quality of their performance? No.

Again, that's stereotyping a particular individual to be like a population that you really don't know much about. And making assumptions about individuals within that population without knowing a damn thing about them is racial profiling. Point blank.

Exactly, like I said before, pre-medical school stats don't translate into how successful of a physician one can become. You don't make it out of medical school if you're not capable so that argument is ridiculous. Plus, if we really want to get only the highest stat applicants, med schools would be like 99% asian since they have the highest stats. Only half joking here, obviously. Post admission, the stats don't mean anything so any arguments about AA post admission are also pointless and fruitless.

 

[flaahless]

All I'm saying to you is that you have to consider both sides of the argument. While it's ridiculous to doubt the qualifications of a minority doctor, it's also ridiculous to assert that somehow "none" of the URM students who have been successful in getting into med school have benefited from AA (even if it was only to pass the initial stats screening to get an interview). I want very badly for everyone to calm down and accept that whoever is in school deserves to be there and get over the numbers as well as stop denying the numbers differences. Thanks.

I don't think anyone is denying. But you have to admit that doubting the qualifications of a neurosurgeon because of a perceived advantage in the admissions process is ridiculous. For instance, is it okay to doubt the qualifications of Dr. Ben Carson because he may or may not have benefitted from AA?

My point is that since you don't know who did or didn't benefit, it is wrong to assume that EVERYONE did. Especially when we know that A) Everyone did not benefit, B) Not all schools use AA. Why is that so complicated for people to grasp?