Is being disadvantaged actually an advantage?

[ZedsDed]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I'm not impressed by the anecdotes. The admissions process in the United States is holistic. I see no evidence to support the notion that admissions committees view low SES status above other "unfortunate" life circumstances as uniquely compelling.

 

[ZedsDed]

Unlike being URM, which is immutable, and recognized by patients who are looking for a physician who can relate to their experience, poverty is invisible. Unless a doc who grew up poor goes back to serve in an area and with a population similar to their upbringing, there is no real benefit to training a physician who was low SES. And many times, the person who grew up in poverty is just looking to get out and not look back. And I say this as a small town girl who got out.

That's fine, and it's why I support the URM boost. But then we should stop with the intellectually lazy notion that physicians will then somehow "identify" with patients of color and therefore be able to provide better health outcomes cause, you know, reasons and "shared experience." It comes across as hand-wavy to just about everyone who has even the tiniest skepticism about the whole thing. It's not complicated. Patients like doctors who look like them. Therefore, patients are more likely to seek medical care when their doctors look like them. Additionally, URM physicians are more likely to live and practice in underserved areas. Hence, schools should actively recruit URMs so said schools can continue to work towards fulfilling their mission.

 

[Lucca]

That's what I thought. My impression from applying/interviewing was that some schools valued applicants with a disadvantaged background and some didn't give a ****. I have to disagree with @Lucca that having a low SES carries weight in admissions, as there were just too many schools that didn't care. Further, some of my interviewers seemed seemed at a loss for how to respond to hearing about my background, and honestly it just made for awkward moments that I think hurt me more than anything (there was a clear ''we'' vs ''they'' in the room when the subject of growing up poor came up). I also don't think the LCME cares about diversifying SES nearly as much as race, so there isn't much incentive for schools to give any weight to low SES applicants.

I was referring to this chart just btw. I have ni further evidence about how the info is used, only the assumption the adcoms were not lying when surveyed

 

[GrapesofRath]

That's fine, and it's why I support the URM boost. But then we should stop with the intellectually lazy notion that physicians will then somehow "identify" with patients of color and therefore be able to provide better health outcomes cause, you know, reasons and "shared experience." It comes across as hand-wavy to just about everyone who has even the tiniest skepticism about the whole thing. It's not complicated. Patients like doctors who look like them. Therefore, patients are more likely to seek medical care when their doctors look like them. Additionally, URM physicians are more likely to live and practice in underserved areas. Hence, schools should actively recruit URMs so said schools can continue to work towards fulfilling their mission.

While I dont agree with the bolded(I dont think the data for this is nearly as simple and clear cut as people make it out to be but I dont want to derail this into you know what kind of debate) I do agree entirely with the idea that we need to move beyond what is largely like you called an intellectually lazy argument that just naturally these physicians will "identify" with such patients in a way that is uniform, consistent and meaningful. It's one thing to argue that there is value for having them because they are more likely to serve undeserved populations(a separate discussion). But this idea of "identification"? We can do alot better than that.

Can we truly define what exactly this process of identification is and what benefits it precisely brings to medicine? Whenever I ask this question I get hit with responses such as links to something like a NY Times article that are based off powerful anecdotes and a writing form driven by emotion rather than objectivity or ideas grounded in something substantive. The NY Times article about the Case for more Black Doctors people love throwing around on here as "light reading" repeatedly(but wont provide much else) is a good example of this. What exactly does this "identifying" with patients to similar backgrounds as yours specifically bring to medicine that is worth the benefit of giving such applicants a boost? Can we go beyond anecdotes or powerful emotional essays centered largely around vague ideas of "patients could feel a connection with that doctor they couldnt elsewhere that helped their treatment and response" where the best we do is just throw that idea out there but nothing more?

The thing with these types of narratives is often Ive seen them being used by people as a "license" per se to allow them to say whatever they want. Want to argue "having a doctor with a similar uprising" was a major key to "saving that patients life"? Sure, go ahead, how exactly are you going to prove them wrong? Want to argue we are "nothing would be worse for such patients if we take away doctors that have a similar background as them"? Sure, why not, how exactly is someone going to go about really exposing you as wrong. There's just no real or defined limit to what extent you can use such a theory as support for whatever you believe. With narratives and theories like these so often I see people making them the explanation or driving force in someway or another behind all kinds of success even when the logic or evidence for such a thing is murky at best. When a doctor plays a major role in helping improve the life of a patient with a similar background the first instinct by many will be to try and tie their similarities in background as a key to such a success. But from what Ive seen, this is true even when the evidence for such a thing being a real reason is rather questionable.

Frankly, few want to be the guy who says "a doctor's similar rough upbringing as the patient isn't worth all that much". Many of us really want to believe that there is meaning behind having a doctor patient relationship where both came from similar(especially when they are rough) backgrounds and that this really helps medicine. And is this often the case or are there at least specific instances where this is the case? Just like I wont sit here and say with certainty yes, I wont sit here and say with any kind of certainty no. But the problem is the more we go down this road following such a narrative/theory the more often we go away from being objective. Instead we go more towards the direction of using such ideas or narratives as means to throw out whatever theory we want, whatever theory we want to believe or as reason behind many occasions of success that really arent directly linked to having a doctor with a similar uprising as a patient.

I was referring to this chart just btw. I have ni further evidence about how the info is used, only the assumption the adcoms were not lying when surveyed

I think like with many things, rather than ADCOMs blatantly lying, it's more an issue of how something in theory should ideally be utilized in admission differs from how it is utilized in reality in a number of cases.

 

[XxThaDoggxX]

Hey! Don't mean to hijack the thread...but since we are on the subject of disadvantaged..

Would anyone mind taking a look over my disadvantaged statement? I would really appreciate it!!! If so PM me.

 

[7331poas]

I think the danger here is that if law schools, med schools, and even just undergrad institutions dont make an active effort to bring in african american students then it will only further widen the barrier between their community and the rest of the united states. The issue is that being born in an urban ghetto is already a knock against your chances of making it in this life (a ghetto that was instituted by the ruling class but I wont get into that). Now what happens is that even if you manage to make it out of there, you have to compete against much better off peers.

I dont know if this is a compelling argument, but the supreme court has already ruled in the favor of the thought process above.

 

[ZedsDed]

I think the danger here is that if law schools, med schools, and even just undergrad institutions dont make an active effort to bring in african american students then it will only further widen the barrier between their community and the rest of the united states. The issue is that being born in an urban ghetto is already a knock against your chances of making it in this life (a ghetto that was instituted by the ruling class but I wont get into that). Now what happens is that even if you manage to make it out of there, you have to compete against much better off peers.

I dont know if this is a compelling argument, but the supreme court has already ruled in the favor of the thought process above.

That is Affirmative Action -- a separate issue. We can't discuss it here, but I will say that a betting man wouldn't rely too heavily on the supreme court. If anything, the rhetoric from most of their judges suggests that whatever sympathy the court had for AA once upon a time has waned significantly over the years.

 

[ZedsDed]

While I dont agree with the bolded(I dont think the data for this is nearly as simple and clear cut as people make it out to be but I dont want to derail this into you know what kind of debate) I do agree entirely with the idea that we need to move beyond what is largely like you called an intellectually lazy argument that just naturally these physicians will "identify" with such patients in a way that is uniform, consistent and meaningful. It's one thing to argue that there is value for having them because they are more likely to serve undeserved populations(a separate discussion). But this idea of "identification"? We can do alot better than that.

Can we truly define what exactly this process of identification is and what benefits it precisely brings to medicine? Whenever I ask this question I get hit with responses such as links to something like a NY Times article that are based off powerful anecdotes and a writing form driven by emotion rather than objectivity or ideas grounded in something substantive. The NY Times article about the Case for more Black Doctors people love throwing around on here as "light reading" repeatedly(but wont provide much else) is a good example of this. What exactly does this "identifying" with patients to similar backgrounds as yours specifically bring to medicine that is worth the benefit of giving such applicants a boost? Can we go beyond anecdotes or powerful emotional essays centered largely around vague ideas of "patients could feel a connection with that doctor they couldnt elsewhere that helped their treatment and response" where the best we do is just throw that idea out there but nothing more?

The thing with these types of narratives is often Ive seen them being used by people as a "license" per se to allow them to say whatever they want. Want to argue "having a doctor with a similar uprising" was a major key to "saving that patients life"? Sure, go ahead, how exactly are you going to prove them wrong? Want to argue we are "nothing would be worse for such patients if we take away doctors that have a similar background as them"? Sure, why not, how exactly is someone going to go about really exposing you as wrong. There's just no real or defined limit to what extent you can use such a theory as support for whatever you believe. With narratives and theories like these so often I see people making them the explanation or driving force in someway or another behind all kinds of success even when the logic or evidence for such a thing is murky at best. When a doctor plays a major role in helping improve the life of a patient with a similar background the first instinct by many will be to try and tie their similarities in background as a key to such a success. But from what Ive seen, this is true even when the evidence for such a thing being a real reason is rather questionable.

Frankly, few want to be the guy who says "a doctor's similar rough upbringing as the patient isn't worth all that much". Many of us really want to believe that there is meaning behind having a doctor patient relationship where both came from similar(especially when they are rough) backgrounds and that this really helps medicine. And is this often the case or are there at least specific instances where this is the case? Just like I wont sit here and say with certainty yes, I wont sit here and say with any kind of certainty no. But the problem is the more we go down this road following such a narrative/theory the more often we go away from being objective. Instead we go more towards the direction of using such ideas or narratives as means to throw out whatever theory we want, whatever theory we want to believe or as reason behind many occasions of success that really arent directly linked to having a doctor with a similar uprising as a patient.



I think like with many things, rather than ADCOMs blatantly lying, it's more an issue of how something in theory should ideally be utilized in admission differs from how it is utilized in reality in a number of cases.

I think there is a need to justify policy and craft a narrative. This is speculation, but if I'd wager it has something to do with the inherently conservative nature of medicine.

 

[BlackDynamite]

Affirmative action was developed during a time of extreme racism when African Americans were being killed mostly by whites people in the streets. Now they're mostly killing each other.

I grew up in a home with drugs, alcohol, violence, etc and I only had access to a lowly public education. However, I was able to work, hire a tutor in high school, get a scholarship to college, take out federal loans, etc.... Opportunities every American citizen has. So you guys will have to excuse me if I don't emphasize with someone who can't succeed unless everything is handed to them.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[elf_earedMD]

So what is this thread REALLY about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GrapesofRath]

I think there is a need to justify policy and craft a narrative. This is speculation, but if I were a betting man I'd say it has something to do with the inherently conservative nature of medicine.

Yeah the conservative nature aspect is one part of it. Although I hardly think this occurrence of having pre-determined ideas and using narrative based themes(with logic not really being a driving force behind them) to support those ideas to whatever end is hardly unique to medicine. It's readily apparent in almost every walk of life. Really at the end of day it comes down to a) The idea of many feeling compelled to make success due to certain narratives they really want to believe like we've mentioned b) Institutional change in approach and policy is really really hard to actually achieve no matter how apparent it might be the current way of doing things is flawed. And Im talking about more extreme examples than this issue with med school admission and how certain applicants are valued/viewed.

 

[Affiche]

Affirmative action was developed during a time of extreme racism when African Americans were being killed mostly by whites people in the streets. Now they're mostly killing each other.

I grew up in a home with drugs, alcohol, violence, etc and I only had access to a lowly public education. However, I was able to work, hire a tutor in high school, get a scholarship to college, take out federal loans, etc.... Opportunities every American citizen has. So you guys will have to excuse me if I don't emphasize with someone who can't succeed unless everything is handed to them.

And what about those who have everything taken from them? Your post is pretentious, at best.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "everything is handed to them". We're talking about a population who has had essentially nothing handed to them and lacks the opportunities afforded to their middle-class counterparts. You seem to have the idea that since you've made it, anyone can, but you take for granted that others have it much, much worse than you did, and I say this as someone who lived on the streets in high school and into college. I worked with disadvantaged students in college and was quickly humbled by the adversity of my peers. You need to open your eyes, dude.

 

[Affiche]

So what is this thread REALLY about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disadvantaged status primarily refers to applicants who come from a low SES background, including (but not limited to) poor childhood education, impoverished upbringing, etc.

 

[elf_earedMD]

Disadvantaged status primarily refers to applicants who come from a low SES background, including (but not limited to) poor childhood education, impoverished upbringing, etc.

I thought as much. Some of these posts just seem like targeted attacks at certain ethnic groups moreso than discussions on impoverished upbringing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mistafab]

Thread topic: Is being disadvantaged an advantage?

Discussion: A bunch of SDN bickering about tangential, inflammatory topics.

Answer: In a side-by-side, identical applicant comparison with disadvantaged status being the only difference, the disadvantaged person will be at an advantage for getting the spot. However, when looking at the effects of a lifetime of disadvantage preceding that moment, disadvantaged applicants are still at a clear disadvantage overall - this effect is not made up for by the advantage described previously.

 

[ZedsDed]

In a side-by-side, identical applicant comparison with disadvantaged status being the only difference, the disadvantaged person will be at an advantage for getting the spot.

I just want to point out that we have a severe dearth of data on any presumed disadvantaged "boost." The above is speculation, at best.

 

[BlackDynamite]

And what about those who have everything taken from them? Your post is pretentious, at best.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "everything is handed to them". We're talking about a population who has had essentially nothing handed to them and lacks the opportunities afforded to their middle-class counterparts. You seem to have the idea that since you've made it, anyone can, but you take for granted that others have it much, much worse than you did, and I say this as someone who lived on the streets in high school and into college. I worked with disadvantaged students in college and was quickly humbled by the adversity of my peers. You need to open your eyes, dude.

I must have misspoken. I didn't mean "everything." I just meant a public education, college admission/tuition, and medical school admission/tuition. The perceived difficulty otherwise is irrelevant. Those are the barriers to "success."

Student A: 19 MCAT, lost sleep some nights because dad yelled at mom, never studied.

Student B: 35 MCAT, grew up privileged with used books from Amazon, studied every day all day.

Student A outcompeted student B. Real life, happens every year. Let that sink in while you figure out how to reapply to medical school. Oh and by the way that student didn't work hard in medical school either, failed step, and wasted your seat.

This kind of stuff happens unfortunately, and it's not solving the problem. Lowering the bar is not what made America great.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Affiche]

I must have misspoken. I didn't mean "everything." I just meant a public education, college admission/tuition, and medical school admission/tuition. The perceived difficulty otherwise is irrelevant. Those are the barriers to "success."

Student A: 19 MCAT, lost sleep some nights because dad yelled at mom, never studied.

Student B: 35 MCAT, grew up privileged with used books from Amazon, studied every day all day.

Student A outcompeted student B. Real life, happens every year. Let that sink in while you figure out how to reapply to medical school. Oh and by the way that student didn't work hard in medical school either, failed step, and wasted your seat.

This kind of stuff happens unfortunately, and it's not solving the problem. Lowering the bar is not what made America great.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Do you really believe that drivel?

 

[7331poas]

I must have misspoken. I didn't mean "everything." I just meant a public education, college admission/tuition, and medical school admission/tuition. The perceived difficulty otherwise is irrelevant. Those are the barriers to "success."

Student A: 19 MCAT, lost sleep some nights because dad yelled at mom, never studied.

Student B: 35 MCAT, grew up privileged with used books from Amazon, studied every day all day.

Student A outcompeted student B. Real life, happens every year. Let that sink in while you figure out how to reapply to medical school. Oh and by the way that student didn't work hard in medical school either, failed step, and wasted your seat.

This kind of stuff happens unfortunately, and it's not solving the problem. Lowering the bar is not what made America great.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

you cannot be serious right.

More like student A:

crappy schools, crappy peers, lives in a urban ghetto, crappy parents, crappy healthcare, crappy everything

The crappy peers being the biggest factor imo.

 

[Citygirl44]

Student A (race irrelevant )-
Single parent home
4 siblings
Takes siblings to school on public bus everyday, then proceeds to go to school
Studies from 12 year old textbooks at school
Gets an A in every class
After school- no time for volunteering or extracurriculars
Picks up siblings from school/ prepares dinner then ( at 10pm starts homework/ studying(.
No heat at home but puts on 2 sweaters and stays warm.
Follow this routine 5 days a week for 6 years.
Weekend job- has to use that money to help out with bills and food.
Takes the one AP exam offered at his school ,but only scores a 2 ( how could this be if he gets A's on every exam?, maybe the material is outdated?) scores 1100 on SAT, very good for his school. Prepares to write college essay, no one to proof read it or " bounce ideas off of". Your school has a 14% graduation rate and a 5% going to college rate( not uncommon for some schools in The Bronx).

Student B ( race irrelevant)-
2 parent home
One sibling.
Gets on the school bus or drives their car to school each day.
School provides students with the newest textbooks and materials ( may even provide tablets for students to do their work on).
Good student overall, gets B+ and A's mostly , but when physics came along mom was able to pay a private tutor to make sure student was " good".
After school and weekends, maybe a part time job ( for clothing , handbags etc),
Plenty of extracurriculars / chess/ football/track etc
No home responsibilities
When he gets home, dinner is ready, takes a shower, does his homework, studies.
Takes the SAT: scores 1450 ( after the Princeton review) and scores 4's and 5's in AP physics, history, algebra, Spanish, bio, and chem. Your school has a 94% high school graduation rate and an 88% college acceptance rate ( including CC).

These are not exaggerated examples. At least 50 percent of us are student A or B.


Do you really expect student A and B to perform the same in college or get the same grades in college and the MCAT. Magically student A is just supposed to be on par with student B after just 4 short years of an equal education in college? That doesn't even sound right.

Student B is not doing anything extra special or extraordinary, seems a pretty normal life to a lot of people but do you see how different it is from student A?

 

[Citygirl44]

you cannot be serious right.

More like student A:

crappy schools, crappy peers, lives in a urban ghetto, crappy parents, crappy healthcare, crappy everything

The crappy peers being the biggest factor imo.

Sorry , I must have been writing mine when you were writing yours. Same concept

 

[LizzyM]

This starts to play out in elementary school. Look up the documentary Spellbound (2002 or 2004 -- not the Hitchcock film by the same name) You'll see 8 kids from dramatically different background and ethnicites with dramatically different home environments. Think of how classmates from those schools and neighborhoods funnel into high school, whether they get to college, and what happens next. Expand your mind and think about which of them you'd consider "disadvantaged".

 

[brochacho123]

you cannot be serious right.

More like student A:

crappy schools, crappy peers, lives in a urban ghetto, crappy parents, crappy healthcare, crappy everything

The crappy peers being the biggest factor imo.

I normally don't post on these type of threads, but I believe there isn't enough emphasis on this aspect. You're often bullied/ridiculed by your peers for displaying any intellectuall curiosity at school. I myself hid this from my "friends" in high school out of fear of being bullied or constantly harrassed, as I saw them do to other students.

 

[BlackDynamite]

Student A (race irrelevant )-
Single parent home
4 siblings
Takes siblings to school on public bus everyday, then proceeds to go to school
Studies from 12 year old textbooks at school
Gets an A in every class
After school- no time for volunteering or extracurriculars
Picks up siblings from school/ prepares dinner then ( at 10pm starts homework/ studying(.
No heat at home but puts on 2 sweaters and stays warm.
Follow this routine 5 days a week for 6 years.
Weekend job- has to use that money to help out with bills and food.
Takes the one AP exam offered at his school ,but only scores a 2 ( how could this be if he gets A's on every exam?, maybe the material is outdated?) scores 1100 on SAT, very good for his school. Prepares to write college essay, no one to proof read it or " bounce ideas off of". Your school has a 14% graduation rate and a 5% going to college rate( not uncommon for some schools in The Bronx).

Student B ( race irrelevant)-
2 parent home
One sibling.
Gets on the school bus or drives their car to school each day.
School provides students with the newest textbooks and materials ( may even provide tablets for students to do their work on).
Good student overall, gets B+ and A's mostly , but when physics came along mom was able to pay a private tutor to make sure student was " good".
After school and weekends, maybe a part time job ( for clothing , handbags etc),
Plenty of extracurriculars / chess/ football/track etc
No home responsibilities
When he gets home, dinner is ready, takes a shower, does his homework, studies.
Takes the SAT: scores 1450 ( after the Princeton review) and scores 4's and 5's in AP physics, history, algebra, Spanish, bio, and chem. Your school has a 94% high school graduation rate and an 88% college acceptance rate ( including CC).

These are not exaggerated examples. At least 50 percent of us are student A or B.


Do you really expect student A and B to perform the same in college or get the same grades in college and the MCAT. Magically student A is just supposed to be on par with student B after just 4 short years of an equal education in college? That doesn't even sound right.

Student B is not doing anything extra special or extraordinary, seems a pretty normal life to a lot of people but do you see how different it is from student A?

I don't expect student A to perform the same as student B. I'm saying student A will get admitted with lower scores whereas student B will get rejected with great scores because the last seat was just taken by student A.

And I don't "believe" this. I've seen it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[BlackDynamite]

This starts to play out in elementary school. Look up the documentary Spellbound (2002 or 2004 -- not the Hitchcock film by the same name) You'll see 8 kids from dramatically different background and ethnicites with dramatically different home environments. Think of how classmates from those schools and neighborhoods funnel into high school, whether they get to college, and what happens next. Expand your mind and think about which of them you'd consider "disadvantaged".

Whether they get to college? You should see some of the essays written by students from my alma mater. These kids are getting into college just fine thanks to the government generously allowing anyone to borrow , for all intents and purposes, basically unlimited money.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[ZedsDed]

Aaand here's where this thread goes downhill 🙁

 

[Affiche]

Whether they get to college? You should see some of the essays written by students from my alma mater. These kids are getting into college just fine thanks to the government generously allowing anyone to borrow , for all intents and purposes, basically unlimited money.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

What does borrowing federal loans have to do with getting into college? Ffs what are you even saying lol

 

[7331poas]

I normally don't post on these type of threads, but I believe there isn't enough emphasis on this aspect. You're often bullied/ridiculed by your peers for displaying any intellectuall curiosity at school. I myself hid this from my "friends" in high school out of fear of being bullied or constantly harrassed, as I saw them do to other students.

Its not even the bullying. Its also about what you consider normal. Normal in the ghetto is NOT studying.

 

[7331poas]

I don't expect student A to perform the same as student B. I'm saying student A will get admitted with lower scores whereas student B will get rejected with great scores because the last seat was just taken by student A.

And I don't "believe" this. I've seen it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Whats your point? How in the world is Student A supposed to get into med school? That is the question here.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

What does borrowing federal loans have to do with getting into college? Ffs what are you even saying lol

There's a pretty good basketball game on ESPN btw*
*actually it's pretty one sided and the Cavs will most likely sweep the Raptors but it's nevertheless better than engaging in this soon-to-be-locked thread.

 

[GrapesofRath]

There's a pretty good basketball game on ESPN btw*
*actually it's pretty one sided and the Cavs will most likely sweep the Raptors but it's nevertheless better than engaging in this soon-to-be-locked thread.

NBA lottery was where all the real entertainment was at

 

[elf_earedMD]

I'm just gonna say, people like this "student A vs student B" person holding one's disadvantaged status against them are part of the reason disadvantaged students even need assistance.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

NBA lottery was where all the real entertainment was at

I mean the draft lottery actually fits into the disadvantaged = advantaged narrative, right?!

 

[7331poas]

There's a pretty good basketball game on ESPN btw*
*actually it's pretty one sided and the Cavs will most likely sweep the Raptors but it's nevertheless better than engaging in this soon-to-be-locked thread.

Lebron looks amazing right now. My money is on CLE to take it this year. Frye is probably the best FA move by any team this year.

GS needs to really lock down before they lose this series to OKC. Really troubling sign losing that game even after Westbrook and Durant played like trash.

 

[LizzyM]

Whether they get to college? You should see some of the essays written by students from my alma mater. These kids are getting into college just fine thanks to the government generously allowing anyone to borrow , for all intents and purposes, basically unlimited money.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Getting into college is not the solution or the end of the journey. Kids borrowing to attend schools they are set up to flunk out of and coming back with big debts to neighborhoods where they can't get a legitimate job is heartbreaking.

I've met kids graduating from neighborhood public schools, SAT 880 or ACT 16, parents don't speak English, cant' make heads or tails out of the award letter. One mom thought the daughter had to pay only $750 to attend a private university (not my school). Some people asked a group I belong to if we could help with this small sum that was standing between this girl and her dream. In actuality she had a $750 merit scholarship and was being asked to borrow $32K/yr -- yet based on test scores, completely ill prepared for college. In another case, dad deported, mom trying to keep 4 kids out of gangs, daughter admitted to schools out of state but with no financial aid except loans. How does she get to this school? how do you afford the things you are expected to have (graphing calculator, laptop) when mom, who doesn't speak English is making $500/wk doing in home child care or cleaning apartments and familiy's rent is $900/mo plus utilities.

 

[Affiche]

Getting into college is not the solution or the end of the journey. Kids borrowing to attend schools they are set up to flunk out of and coming back with big debts to neighborhoods where they can't get a legitimate job is heartbreaking.

I've met kids graduating from neighborhood public schools, SAT 880 or ACT 16, parents don't speak English, cant' make heads or tails out of the award letter. One mom thought the daughter had to pay only $750 to attend a private university (not my school). Some people asked a group I belong to if we could help with this small sum that was standing between this girl and her dream. In actuality she had a $750 merit scholarship and was being asked to borrow $32K/yr -- yet based on test scores, completely ill prepared for college. In another case, dad deported, mom trying to keep 4 kids out of gangs, daughter admitted to schools out of state but with no financial aid except loans. How does she get to this school? how do you afford the things you are expected to have (graphing calculator, laptop) when mom, who doesn't speak English is making $500/wk doing in home child care or cleaning apartments and familiy's rent is $900/mo plus utilities.

He hasn't thought that through because it's never applied to him.

 

[BlackDynamite]

I'm just gonna say, people like this "student A vs student B" person holding one's disadvantaged status against them are part of the reason disadvantaged students even need assistance.

No one is holding their disadvantaged status against them. They're holding their terrible grades, scores, lack of qualifications, and lack of probability of success against them.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[BlackDynamite]

Getting into college is not the solution or the end of the journey. Kids borrowing to attend schools they are set up to flunk out of and coming back with big debts to neighborhoods where they can't get a legitimate job is heartbreaking.

I've met kids graduating from neighborhood public schools, SAT 880 or ACT 16, parents don't speak English, cant' make heads or tails out of the award letter. One mom thought the daughter had to pay only $750 to attend a private university (not my school). Some people asked a group I belong to if we could help with this small sum that was standing between this girl and her dream. In actuality she had a $750 merit scholarship and was being asked to borrow $32K/yr -- yet based on test scores, completely ill prepared for college. In another case, dad deported, mom trying to keep 4 kids out of gangs, daughter admitted to schools out of state but with no financial aid except loans. How does she get to this school? how do you afford the things you are expected to have (graphing calculator, laptop) when mom, who doesn't speak English is making $500/wk doing in home child care or cleaning apartments and familiy's rent is $900/mo plus utilities.

I don't know how respond to this. This student is going to take out student loans, get an apartment, and do college like every other kid.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[LizzyM]

I don't know how respond to this. This student is going to take out student loans, get an apartment, and do college like every other kid.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You are really sheltered if you think that "every kid" goes to college. It is the exception to the rule in inner-city neighborhood high schools.

educate yourself: http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/research_alliance/publications/nyc_goes_to_college_first_look

How do you get there? Where does the money for gas or a bus ticket come from before your loans are dispersed? Does your mom drive both ways over a weekend and get back to her job on Monday? How do you get an apartment if you don't have the money for a deposit? Maybe a dorm would work out but how would you know if no one you know personally has ever been to college? When something breaks or gets stolen, is there someone who can lend this student $50 until the end of the week? Is the student academically prepared? If one is borrowing $10K for tuition and $4K for room & board for a semester the student is gambling $14K that they will do well and be able to pay that back with interest. Sometimes it is hard to have faith in oneself to that degree and these loans are unforgiving, they must be paid back even if you don't get a good paying job after graduation.

Campus work is one option but I've seen it beat down students. I had an applicant who worked an overnight shift in the campus library several nights per week, attended morning classes and slept the rest of the day. Eventually, that kind of stuff along with worry about having enough cash to make it to the end of the month and messages from home about the household's financial issues take a toll.

 

[Affiche]

No one is holding their disadvantaged status against them. They're holding their terrible grades, scores, lack of qualifications, and lack of probability of success against them.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Holding their lack of probability of success against them is the same as holding their disadvantaged status against them. Poor kids are in a system that's designed to fail them at every step of the way, so it's no surprise when they have lower scores, grades, qualifications and chances of success when compared with their wealthier counterparts.

 

[Affiche]

I don't know how respond to this. This student is going to take out student loans, get an apartment, and do college like every other kid.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

When I started college I didn't have the money to move out of state to even get to school, much less the money to pay an apartment deposit. Loans weren't dispersed until after classes started, so I didn't have required books or course packs for the first two weeks of every. single. semester. Falling behind had a domino effect because I was working so many hours that catching up was near impossible. The path that poor kids take to get through education is far from what every other college kid does.

 

[Affiche]

You are really sheltered if you think that "every kid" goes to college. It is the exception to the rule in inner-city neighborhood high schools.

educate yourself: http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/research_alliance/publications/nyc_goes_to_college_first_look

How do you get there? Where does the money for gas or a bus ticket come from before your loans are dispersed? Does your mom drive both ways over a weekend and get back to her job on Monday? How do you get an apartment if you don't have the money for a deposit? Maybe a dorm would work out but how would you know if no one you know personally has ever been to college? When something breaks or gets stolen, is there someone who can lend this student $50 until the end of the week? Is the student academically prepared? If one is borrowing $10K for tuition and $4K for room & board for a semester the student is gambling $14K that they will do well and be able to pay that back with interest. Sometimes it is hard to have faith in oneself to that degree and these loans are unforgiving, they must be paid back even if you don't get a good paying job after graduation.

Campus work is one option but I've seen it beat down students. I had an applicant who worked an overnight shift in the campus library several nights per week, attended morning classes and slept the rest of the day. Eventually, that kind of stuff along with worry about having enough cash to make it to the end of the month and messages from home about the household's financial issues take a toll.

QFT. I never know what to say when people ask me if being pre-med was difficult, because the truth is that classes were an afterthought and the hard part of college was financial stress. I had stress-induced shingles, insomnia, bouts of depression and a short battle with disordered eating when I felt like everything was out of my control. I got it together my third year of college but those first 2.5 years were easily the worst of my life and I wouldn't wish them on anyone. The most frustrating thing for me, in retrospect, is that I was still a kid who was so burdened by poverty that I could only view my education as a barrier to working more hours and getting myself financially stable. It's a completely messed up system that most pre-meds are fortunate enough not to think about until they see the option to check the disadvantaged box on their AMCAS.

ETA: I never experienced depression, insomnia, eating issues etc before poverty hit. Actually, I was a really happy and healthy teenager. It wasn't until I became financially unstable that everything fell apart and I struggled with all these related issues. I hardly even grieved over losing a parent because I was so stressed about my own situation. So yeah, I think a lot of kids underestimate the toll that poverty can take on someone.

 

[BlackDynamite]

You are really sheltered if you think that "every kid" goes to college. It is the exception to the rule in inner-city neighborhood high schools.

educate yourself: http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/research_alliance/publications/nyc_goes_to_college_first_look

How do you get there? Where does the money for gas or a bus ticket come from before your loans are dispersed? Does your mom drive both ways over a weekend and get back to her job on Monday? How do you get an apartment if you don't have the money for a deposit? Maybe a dorm would work out but how would you know if no one you know personally has ever been to college? When something breaks or gets stolen, is there someone who can lend this student $50 until the end of the week? Is the student academically prepared? If one is borrowing $10K for tuition and $4K for room & board for a semester the student is gambling $14K that they will do well and be able to pay that back with interest. Sometimes it is hard to have faith in oneself to that degree and these loans are unforgiving, they must be paid back even if you don't get a good paying job after graduation.

Campus work is one option but I've seen it beat down students. I had an applicant who worked an overnight shift in the campus library several nights per week, attended morning classes and slept the rest of the day. Eventually, that kind of stuff along with worry about having enough cash to make it to the end of the month and messages from home about the household's financial issues take a toll.

I educated myself. I can't speak for NYC, only for my state and what I've seen. A study was done. That's great. I tend to disagree with their subjective conclusions. As for loans....They're dispersed before school starts and again, in my state, you're allowed to borrow much more than needed.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[mistafab]

Thank you for sharing your story. It speaks volumes about how "disadvantaged status" isn't an advantage - You're contribution to the thread will hopefully educate folk who live their life taking things for granted, and without reflection.

Holding their lack of probability of success against them is the same as holding their disadvantaged status against them. Poor kids are in a system that's designed to fail them at every step of the way, so it's no surprise when they have lower scores, grades, qualifications and chances of success when compared with their wealthier counterparts.

When I started college I didn't have the money to move out of state to even get to school, much less the money to pay an apartment deposit. Loans weren't dispersed until after classes started, so I didn't have required books or course packs for the first two weeks of every. single. semester. Falling behind had a domino effect because I was working so many hours that catching up was near impossible. The path that poor kids take to get through education is far from what every other college kid does.

QFT. I never know what to say when people ask me if being pre-med was difficult, because the truth is that classes were an afterthought and the hard part of college was financial stress. I had stress-induced shingles, insomnia, bouts of depression and a short battle with disordered eating when I felt like everything was out of my control. I got it together my third year of college but those first 2.5 years were easily the worst of my life and I wouldn't wish them on anyone. The most frustrating thing for me, in retrospect, is that I was still a kid who was so burdened by poverty that I could only view my education as a barrier to working more hours and getting myself financially stable. It's a completely messed up system that most pre-meds are fortunate enough not to think about until they see the option to check the disadvantaged box on their AMCAS.

ETA: I never experienced depression, insomnia, eating issues etc before poverty hit. Actually, I was a really happy and healthy teenager. It wasn't until I became financially unstable that everything fell apart and I struggled with all these related issues. I hardly even grieved over losing a parent because I was so stressed about my own situation. So yeah, I think a lot of kids underestimate the toll that poverty can take on someone.

 

[LizzyM]

I educated myself. I can't speak for NYC, only for my state and what I've seen. A study was done. That's great. I tend to disagree with their subjective conclusions. As for loans....They're dispersed before school starts and again, in my state, you're allowed to borrow much more than needed.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

What is subjective about data that shows that less than half of all HS graduates in NYC attend college (even community college)? What is subjective about 20% of students who earn Regent diploma (meaning that they had high scores in 5 exams: English, math, social studies, science and one more) not attending college? What is subjective about less than 40% of NYC HS graduates earning a college degree (and not just a bachelors, even an associate degree would count as "earned a degree") within 4 years and 1/3 drop out without a degree?

Your narrow viewpoint is your viewpoint but to make generalizations about America based on that narrow life experience is not useful to this discussion.

Discounting the evidence that is contrary to your personal experience is not the way to go through life as a rational adult.

 

[BlackDynamite]

What is subjective about data that shows that less than half of all HS graduates in NYC attend college (even community college)? What is subjective about 20% of students who earn Regent diploma (meaning that they had high scores in 5 exams: English, math, social studies, science and one more) not attending college? What is subjective about less than 40% of NYC HS graduates earning a college degree (and not just a bachelors, even an associate degree would count as "earned a degree") within 4 years and 1/3 drop out without a degree?

Your narrow viewpoint is your viewpoint but to make generalizations about America based on that narrow life experience is not useful to this discussion.

Discounting the evidence that is contrary to your personal experience is not the way to go through life as a rational adult.

I said "subjective conclusions," not "subjective data." Data is objective. Conclusions are subjective.

Why are you attacking me? Let's try to keep this discussion mature. Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

QFT. I never know what to say when people ask me if being pre-med was difficult, because the truth is that classes were an afterthought and the hard part of college was financial stress. I had stress-induced shingles, insomnia, bouts of depression and a short battle with disordered eating when I felt like everything was out of my control. I got it together my third year of college but those first 2.5 years were easily the worst of my life and I wouldn't wish them on anyone. The most frustrating thing for me, in retrospect, is that I was still a kid who was so burdened by poverty that I could only view my education as a barrier to working more hours and getting myself financially stable. It's a completely messed up system that most pre-meds are fortunate enough not to think about until they see the option to check the disadvantaged box on their AMCAS.

ETA: I never experienced depression, insomnia, eating issues etc before poverty hit. Actually, I was a really happy and healthy teenager. It wasn't until I became financially unstable that everything fell apart and I struggled with all these related issues. I hardly even grieved over losing a parent because I was so stressed about my own situation. So yeah, I think a lot of kids underestimate the toll that poverty can take on someone.

 

[ZedsDed]

I said "subjective conclusions," not "subjective data." Data is objective. Conclusions are subjective.

Why are you attacking me? Let's try to keep this discussion mature. Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Oh God, please don't whine about "attacks." She could not have been more civil.

 

[LizzyM]

I said "subjective conclusions," not "subjective data." Data is objective. Conclusions are subjective.

Why are you attacking me? Let's try to keep this discussion mature. Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I'll admit I only read the brief but to me it was all data and very little "subjective conclusions". That's perhaps why I focused on your pejorative "subjective" and ignored "conclusions". When I look back at the brief, all I can see in terms of conclusions is boiled down in this paragraph, that is backed up with facts laid out in the report.
"While much is still unknown, our analysis strongly suggests that both high school
preparation and supports offered in college make a difference for students’
outcomes. We found that students who left high school with strong academic
credentials were much more likely to stay enrolled in college and obtain a degree. [fact]
Likewise, students who attended a four-year college, particularly those who
attended a more selective institution, had higher persistence and completion rates. [fact]
How is it possible that similarly qualified students could have such disparate
outcomes based on the selectivity of their college? Is this finding a reflection of the
students who seek out and are accepted to these more selective institutions, or of
the favorable conditions at these schools, or both?"

Can you tell me what you see here that is "subjective" and not based on population-based outcomes that are observable and measurable?

 

[BlackDynamite]

I'll admit I only read the brief but to me it was all data and very little "subjective conclusions". That's perhaps why I focused on your pejorative "subjective" and ignored "conclusions". When I look back at the brief, all I can see in terms of conclusions is boiled down in this paragraph, that is backed up with facts laid out in the report.
"While much is still unknown, our analysis strongly suggests that both high school
preparation and supports offered in college make a difference for students’
outcomes. We found that students who left high school with strong academic
credentials were much more likely to stay enrolled in college and obtain a degree. [fact]
Likewise, students who attended a four-year college, particularly those who
attended a more selective institution, had higher persistence and completion rates. [fact]
How is it possible that similarly qualified students could have such disparate
outcomes based on the selectivity of their college? Is this finding a reflection of the
students who seek out and are accepted to these more selective institutions, or of
the favorable conditions at these schools, or both?"

Can you tell me what you see here that is "subjective" and not based on population-based outcomes that are observable and measurable?

No one is arguing that their study didn't have "findings." Again, we disagree on what you are inferring from those findings. Here are the key findings mentioned in the article:

---------


Among the key findings:

High school graduation and college enrollment rates have both gone up.

The growth in college enrollment has been driven by students attending two-year colleges, particularly CUNY community colleges.

While academically prepared students (i.e., those who earned the Advanced Regents diploma) were significantly more likely to enroll in college, one in five still didn’t pursue post-secondary education right after graduation.

This suggests that barriers other than academics, such as cost and trouble navigating the application and financial aid process, may interfere with college enrollment, even for the strongest students.

There was slow and steady attrition from college across eight semesters, suggesting that students need support throughout their college career, not just early on.

Students with stronger high school credentials and those at four-year colleges (particularly selective colleges) were more likely to stay enrolled and complete college on time.

Relatively high levels of early persistence in college did not translate into similarly high rates of college completion. For students who entered college in 2006, just 36 percent earned a two- or four-year degree within four years.


---------

None of these statements are proof of any causal relationship. They are just interesting (potentially) findings to explore further. While the average casual follower is going to think "OMG sources, she wins!" I'm just saying I read the link and I'm underwhelmed.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile