Ivy League

[LizzyM]

I really don't understand all the comments on grade inflation just because a university has an average GPA that's higher than a C. A C is only "average" if you're grading on a curve, but often schools use a grading system in which a 90-100 is some form of an A, 80-89 is a B, etc. Sure there are classes where the class average is like a 50 and the class needs to be curved so that everyone doesn't get an F. But if I see an "A" on a transcript, I assume that the person got more than 90% of questions right on tests, etc. I don't assume that they were in the whatever percentile of the class. Maybe that's just me... but if that's the case, it is totally acceptable for the Ivy League schools to have averages that are around a high B - those students are LIKELY performing at a level where they get MOST things right. And don't tell me that the tests are EASIER than less competitive schools, because it's not true.

Thank you for your comment. One reason why some schools ask for letters from professors is because those professor letters often put the grades in context. Some seem to write the letter with their grade book in front of them telling us that the applicant had the 5th highest grade on the midterm and the second highest on the final placing the student in the top 1% of the class and earning the grade of A. Others will tell us that the student earned a grade of A- placing him in the top 35% of the class or might even tell us that a poor showing on the final pulled the grade down from what would have been an A to a B (and with a little digging you find out that something catastrophic happened just before the final). This information helps put the grade in context.

Some committee letters do some explaining about the grading system at the school, the average gpa of the students or the pre-meds at the school, or the applicant's gpa and class rank. That too, is helpful.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[scarletgirl777]

Well, it shows ignorance of history.

HYP started as a short-hand to describe a three way athletic rivalry in the late eighteenth century among the three oldest schools in the country: Harvard (1636), Yale (1701) and Princeton (1746). This pre-dates the "Ivy League" althletic league which was born in the mid-twentieth century.

In comparison, MIT and Stanford were founded in the mid-eighteenth century and have not been known for their athletic competitions nor for the admission and employment of WASPs, two things historically associated with HYP.

Simply amazing cuz it's true.

 

[slowbutsteady]

What about private non-ivy schools?...such as Harvey Mudd?

Harvey Mudd, 2004 SAT scores: median verbal 720 median math 770
Harvey Mudd also has essentially no grade inflation and minimal recognition off the west coast, though it's improving.

That being said, I don't think SAT scores really tell all that much, I've been at both Ivy and non-ivies and there's an awful lot of kids that aren't that bright at the ivies but their parents have had them prepped since childhood for the tests and applications. Comparing the quality of work and students I've seen, being at an Ivy league school does NOT in any way imply that you are either brilliant or hard working. Yes, there's some really smart people there that work hard, but there's also a whole lot of people that are there because their parents did whatever it took to get their kids there. Maybe back in the day it somehow implied a better caliber of student or a superior education, but I don't believe that's the case now...at least not for the majority of the students there.

You have it exactly backward. "Back in the day" it was much easier to be accepted and the "connections" were much more powerful. Add it that blacks, Jews and women weren't admitted, and the white Christian boys just sailed in.

Those days are over.

 

[slowbutsteady]

Thank you Lizzy. I was ready to make the clarification.

Slowbutsteady, like I said...BITE ME.

lol.

ok, not "illegal" (as in going to jail), but contrary to the Ivy League rules. That's what I meant.

Still very naughty. Undercuts your Brown sports bragging if you cheat to win.

 

[SiR99]

I really don't understand all the comments on grade inflation just because a university has an average GPA that's higher than a C. A C is only "average" if you're grading on a curve, but often schools use a grading system in which a 90-100 is some form of an A, 80-89 is a B, etc. Sure there are classes where the class average is like a 50 and the class needs to be curved so that everyone doesn't get an F. But if I see an "A" on a transcript, I assume that the person got more than 90% of questions right on tests, etc. I don't assume that they were in the whatever percentile of the class. Maybe that's just me... but if that's the case, it is totally acceptable for the Ivy League schools to have averages that are around a high B - those students are LIKELY performing at a level where they get MOST things right. And don't tell me that the tests are EASIER than less competitive schools, because it's not true.

You logic makes sense for some schools, but not all schools are on a grading system in which you described where there is no limit to the number of A's given out.

Professors are told by the department how many A's, B's and C's they can give out, which consists around 15-25% depending whether its a lower div or upper div class.

Also not every professor writes fair exams where a majority of the people can get a 90+. They make exams hard on purpose so that when they get a 50-60% average, they can easily divide the top students to give them A's.

 

[megamega]

Well, it shows ignorance of history.

HYP started as a short-hand to describe a three way athletic rivalry in the late eighteenth century among the three oldest schools in the country: Harvard (1636), Yale (1701) and Princeton (1746). This pre-dates the "Ivy League" althletic league which was born in the mid-twentieth century.

In comparison, MIT and Stanford were founded in the mid-eighteenth century and have not been known for their athletic competitions nor for the admission and employment of WASPs, two things historically associated with HYP.

I think that promisingcapita's point was that if you did a survey asking random people, "what schools do you think are considered ivy league?" Many people would probably think that either stanford or MIT are included.

 

[scarletgirl777]

I think that promisingcapita's point was that if you did a survey asking random people, "what schools do you think are considered ivy league?" Many people would probably think that either stanford or MIT are included.

Those people would be wrong and their responses are irrelevant. Also, the whole thinking Stanford is an Ivy thing is, I think, more common on the West Coast. It doesn't really matter anyway because adcoms do not care about who's officially part of what league, they just care about what your grades really mean in the context of where you went to school/what you studied.

 

[slowbutsteady]

I think that promisingcapita's point was that if you did a survey asking random people, "what schools do you think are considered ivy league?" Many people would probably think that either stanford or MIT are included.

Those are the same people who think "irregardless" is a word just because people use it frequently.

 

[LizzyM]

If you've ever seen Jay Leno's "Jay Walking" you know that asking random people about stuff is a good way to get a laugh. The ignorance of the man (and woman) on the street is laughable. Between that and the level of reading comprehension and writing ability I've seen this week, I just shake my head.

Atomi wrote:

it still seems silly to consider someone for need-based aid considering the fact that most all students are going to make an income of zero dollars while in school. What do they want you to do, withdrawl your 401(k) money to meet your EFC?

I still maintain the 'need' of all medical students that would otherwise be borrowing the full amount is the same. This business about parent's income is just silly.

Money given to students based on need or scholarship is usually donated by people who want to help the school attract excellent students who might otherwise choose to go elsewhere. Those generous donors want to know that there dollars are being used to help needy students who need help or to attract "the best" (with merit aid). If I give to my alma mater only to discover that it is using my dollars to lower the tuition for billionaires' kids I might decide to donate elsewhere.

Some people have had the talent and opportunity to make good money before matriculating to medical school. I know of several pro athletes who had enough earnings to cover medical training without applying for financial aid. They worked hard. Also having worked hard are those people who put in two years in Peace Corps or an NIH lab at a fraction of what a pro-athlete earns. Are they lazy and underserving of need-based aid?

Not every student has an income of zero dollars while in medical school. A precious few (if you will pardon the pun) have trust funds that provide them with a steady income. Does the student whose granny has left him $10 million have the same need as the student who put herself through school with loans and a part-time job? Should a school ask a family that has investment income of $1 million/year to cover the cost of attendance for the student rather than tapping the school's coffers?

 

[megamega]

If you've ever seen Jay Leno's "Jay Walking" you know that asking random people about stuff is a good way to get a laugh. The ignorance of the man (and woman) on the street is laughable. Between that and the level of reading comprehension and writing ability I've seen this week, I just shake my head.

This sounds slightly arrogant to me. I believe that our language has evolved over many years by the way common people use words. I don't think that it is laughable, it is just how things are. Given enough time words and terms can have their meanings changed through continuous use by the majority of people.

 

[atomi]

If you've ever seen Jay Leno's "Jay Walking" you know that asking random people about stuff is a good way to get a laugh. The ignorance of the man (and woman) on the street is laughable. Between that and the level of reading comprehension and writing ability I've seen this week, I just shake my head.

Atomi wrote:


Money given to students based on need or scholarship is usually donated by people who want to help the school attract excellent students who might otherwise choose to go elsewhere. Those generous donors want to know that there dollars are being used to help needy students who need help or to attract "the best" (with merit aid). If I give to my alma mater only to discover that it is using my dollars to lower the tuition for billionaires' kids I might decide to donate elsewhere.

Some people have had the talent and opportunity to make good money before matriculating to medical school. I know of several pro athletes who had enough earnings to cover medical training without applying for financial aid. They worked hard. Also having worked hard are those people who put in two years in Peace Corps or an NIH lab at a fraction of what a pro-athlete earns. Are they lazy and underserving of need-based aid?

Not every student has an income of zero dollars while in medical school. A precious few (if you will pardon the pun) have trust funds that provide them with a steady income. Does the student whose granny has left him $10 million have the same need as the student who put herself through school with loans and a part-time job? Should a school ask a family that has investment income of $1 million/year to cover the cost of attendance for the student rather than tapping the school's coffers?

I never said every student has no income. I said most. For instance, I run an automotive business while in school, and I'm sure there are others with similar employment. We all know the stories of the stripper med/law/whatever student paying her way through school. Regarding the pro athlete, there are many that used to make a million dollars a year and now make nothing, and they blew all the money they had. So in that case, the person would appear poor on paper even though they've lived it up until that point. I've known a number of models that were like this before going back to school. They earned high 6 low 7 figures and blew it all in NYC before going back to school. But if they had been responsible and saved their money, they would have been told to use that for school rather than being given need based aid because they blew all their cash and racked up debt leaving them with negative net worth at the time of application. So this is another case of giving a break to the reckless individual instead of the responsible and fiscally conservative one. It's not always black and white. And if you think the trust fund kiddies aren't good at hiding their wealth, you're dead wrong. I know more than a few that have it entirely in offshore accounts and looking at their assets in the U.S. you would think they are poor. This happens all the time - legal or not.

I mean, I don't know how many trust fund kids there are out there trying to get into medical school, but from the sound of it, financial aid committees seem to think it's a pretty big problem and are pretty offended by it. The issue here in my opinion is that is absolutely absurd to 'expect' that the parents of a 22 year old adult should and will continue to support their 'child' as a dependent. I don't know what kind of self-respecting person of that age can be content with being a dependent and not making his or her own living at that point in life, regardless of whether his or her parents have the ability to pay and are willing to pay.

And just to clarify, I do not think that millionaires should be given need-based free rides to medical school. I do, however, think everybody should be treated as adults, regardless of how much money their parents have. You know what Warren Buffet (someone who refuses to leave an inheritance for his children because he doesn't believe in unearned income) would say if his kids came to him and said their school says he should have to pay for their school? He'd tell them to get a job.

 

[atomi]

This sounds slightly arrogant to me. I believe that our language has evolved over many years by the way common people use words. I don't think that it is laughable, it is just how things are. Given enough time words and terms can have their meanings changed through continuous use by the majority of people.

Of course it's not elitist though. The ivy-leaguers are in touch with the common man. They sympathize with their plight. Of course they wouldn't laugh at such peasants, er I mean commoners. America needs to give every citizen an ivy league education so they won't be so ignorant and made fun of by Jay Leno. Lets do what we can to make that happen

 

[atomi]

Well, it shows ignorance of history.

HYP started as a short-hand to describe a three way athletic rivalry in the late eighteenth century among the three oldest schools in the country: Harvard (1636), Yale (1701) and Princeton (1746). .

William and mary is second. 1693. Alas they are only a lowly college and not a proper university. What a bunch of sophomores!

 

[diosa428]

You logic makes sense for some schools, but not all schools are on a grading system in which you described where there is no limit to the number of A's given out.

Professors are told by the department how many A's, B's and C's they can give out, which consists around 15-25% depending whether its a lower div or upper div class.

Also not every professor writes fair exams where a majority of the people can get a 90+. They make exams hard on purpose so that when they get a 50-60% average, they can easily divide the top students to give them A's.

I definitely agree with you that every school, and even every class, goes by a different grading scale. My point was that just because a school has an average GPA that's higher than other schools doesn't necessarily meant that they're artificially inflating the grades by curving so the class average is a B+, it may just mean they grade differently and that is reflected in their average GPA.

 

[diosa428]

And just to clarify, I do not think that millionaires should be given need-based free rides to medical school. I do, however, think everybody should be treated as adults, regardless of how much money their parents have. You know what Warren Buffet (someone who refuses to leave an inheritance for his children because he doesn't believe in unearned income) would say if his kids came to him and said their school says he should have to pay for their school? He'd tell them to get a job.

Approximately 10% of my medical school class has their tuition being paid for by mommy and daddy. They're graduating with NO loans. I'm graduating with a ton of loans AND that's after need-based aid. So I'd have to disagree that parental income is irrelevant, because my parents certainly can't afford to give me $60k a year, regardless of whether or not they'd be willing to, but obviously some parents can and do.

 

[searun]

Well, it shows ignorance of history.

HYP started as a short-hand to describe a three way athletic rivalry in the late eighteenth century among the three oldest schools in the country: Harvard (1636), Yale (1701) and Princeton (1746). This pre-dates the "Ivy League" althletic league which was born in the mid-twentieth century.

In comparison, MIT and Stanford were founded in the mid-eighteenth century and have not been known for their athletic competitions nor for the admission and employment of WASPs, two things historically associated with HYP.

Lizzy, you do realize that Stanford is in the Pac 10 and competes against schools like USC and, well, Oregon in college sports. Stanford would not appreciate a comparison with MIT athletically. MIT is much more geeky than Stanford...Stanford does not win much, but MIT, no comparison in terms of studs....Actually, Stanford is pretty successful in the minor sports, plus women's basketball. MIT, well, debate and , oh, wait, not crew, Harvard, and Yale have crew covered.

 

[235009]

MIT Grad (to Harvard grad): At MIT we always used to talk about how easy the physics classes at Harvard are compared to MIT.

Harvard Grad (in response): Oh really? We never talked about MIT at all.

Kinda sums up this thread entirely, doesn't it? Clearly there's something about the "Ivy League" that makes people want to talk about it.

....hilarious and sums up this thread perfectly

Most people who hear the name Stanford or MIT consider them more prestigious than any of the lower ivies. HYPSM are peer schools whether you like it or not and their SAT averages, acceptance rates, etc are all roughly the same. This is in stark contrast to the lower ivies which have higher acceptance rates, lower SAT scores, and lower prestige.

except of course that Columbia has had the lowest acceptance rate for the past two years.

the whole point of this thread is to try and break some of the misconceptions and hearsay that surrounds ivies (since clearly the the original question of whether attending an ivy gives you a boost in med school admissions was answered with a resounding yes) and yet you use misconceptions and hearsay to try and make your uninformed points....absolutely ridiculous.

 

[LizzyM]

Lizzy, you do realize that Stanford is in the Pac 10 and competes against schools like USC and, well, Oregon in college sports. Stanford would not appreciate a comparison with MIT athletically. MIT is much more geeky than Stanford...Stanford does not win much, but MIT, no comparison in terms of studs....Actually, Stanford is pretty successful in the minor sports, plus women's basketball. MIT, well, debate and , oh, wait, not crew, Harvard, and Yale have crew covered.

The Pac-10 was established in 1959... HYP go back to the late nineteenth century when the players were quite literally killing each other on the gridiron. The Ivy League was established in 1902 for basketball and other sports followed.

 

[scarletgirl777]

This sounds slightly arrogant to me. I believe that our language has evolved over many years by the way common people use words. I don't think that it is laughable, it is just how things are. Given enough time words and terms can have their meanings changed through continuous use by the majority of people.

It's not arrogant--it's just true. You are very easily offended and are now just being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn. I cannot believe that you are actually arguing the definition of Ivy League.

 

[SiR99]

I kind of understand why Ivy students get mad when people make generalizations about their schools when the people making the generalizations have not actually attended.

Ivy and other top university students have worked hard to be where they are at and it should be acknowledged, not bashed on just because its not your own university.

This thread has turned into bickering and arguing about petty things

 

[halekulani]

This sounds slightly arrogant to me. I believe that our language has evolved over many years by the way common people use words. I don't think that it is laughable, it is just how things are. Given enough time words and terms can have their meanings changed through continuous use by the majority of people.

wrong is wrong.

and arrogant? haha. right.

 

[LizzyM]

I never said every student has no income. I said most.

Actually, you said "most all". That's pretty poor English. You might want to work on learning to communicate clearly.

Regarding the pro athlete, there are many that used to make a million dollars a year and now make nothing, and they blew all the money they had. So in that case, the person would appear poor on paper even though they've lived it up until that point. I've known a number of models that were like this before going back to school. They earned high 6 low 7 figures and blew it all in NYC before going back to school.

Really? And they were admitted to medical school? We are talking about medical school.

I do, however, think everybody should be treated as adults, regardless of how much money their parents have. You know what Warren Buffet (someone who refuses to leave an inheritance for his children because he doesn't believe in unearned income) would say if his kids came to him and said their school says he should have to pay for their school? He'd tell them to get a job.

Well, seeing as his youngest is 50 and never graduated college,he might express some surprise. All three of Warren Buffett's children are very successful middle-aged adults. I don't know if daddy paid for college back in the 1970s when they were of college age.

You may not like that medical schools consider family assets and income in determining need-based aid but it has been that way for far more than 25 years and it is not likely to change. If a school thinks that you & your family should be able to provide a dollar amount and you don't have it in hand, then you need to find some alternative financing.

 

[atomi]

Actually, you said "most all". That's pretty poor English. You might want to work on learning to communicate clearly.

I know how to write well and am quite familiar with this language. I scored a 6 on the writing section of the GRE and an S on the MCAT. But this is the internet, where most people tend to write the same way they talk so as to sound more personal and convey more emotion. Having a written conversation with someone and using formal and precise English sounds rather stuffy. When I write technical papers and business reports, I use proper English. When I'm having a conversation with someone, I don't. It doesn't mean I don't know how to communicate. If you don't know the implicit meaning of 'most all,' I suggest you get out more. I'm sorry to have offended you. But considering I like to post from my iphone and netbook, poor English and typos are just going to happen. I love our language as much as you, but blame the internet. The same thing you told me about need-based aid remains true for this. It's not going to change any time soon. Actually, it's probably going to get worse. If you haven't seen it yet, eventually you will get a personal statement with LOL in it. A student turned in a paper to me a few years ago with multiple 'LOL's and 'u's in it.

Really? And they were admitted to medical school? We are talking about medical school.

Yep. Well to be fair, one went to dental school, one went to med school.

Well, seeing as his youngest is 50 and never graduated college,he might express some surprise. All three of Warren Buffett's children are very successful middle-aged adults. I don't know if daddy paid for college back in the 1970s when they were of college age.

You may not like that medical schools consider family assets and income in determining need-based aid but it has been that way for far more than 25 years and it is not likely to change. If a school thinks that you & your family should be able to provide a dollar amount and you don't have it in hand, then you need to find some alternative financing.

When talking about Buffet, I used 'would' - a hypothetical in the subjunctive mood. Whether or not Buffet would have paid for his children's graduate education if they had asked him (which I guess they didn't) in 1970 was not my point, just to give you an example that there are plenty of wealthy people out there who won't pay for their children's med school (rightly so), and plenty of young adults who would refuse even if offered because they have reached a point in their life where they accept full responsibility for their own actions and choose to take a higher moral ground rather than continuing to mooch off mommy and daddy (unfortunately this is rarely the case with many in my generation and even worse in the one behind). I know the need-based system isn't going to change, but it's not going to keep me from speaking my mind about it.

By the way, where's my props for the W&M call???

 

[atomi]

Approximately 10% of my medical school class has their tuition being paid for by mommy and daddy. They're graduating with NO loans. I'm graduating with a ton of loans AND that's after need-based aid. So I'd have to disagree that parental income is irrelevant, because my parents certainly can't afford to give me $60k a year, regardless of whether or not they'd be willing to, but obviously some parents can and do.

Would you take their money if they could afford it? And yes, there is a right and wrong answer here.

 

[LizzyM]

Parents have responsibility to support their children to the best of their ability until the children are able to support themselves. Some children are able to become gainfully employed and support themselves from a young age, others require years of higher education before they have any earning power. Parents support their children and the child pays it forward by educating their own children. (In some families, grandparents pay to educate their grandchildren and it is paid forward in that way.)A parent who is able to educate his child but refuses is abrogating responsibilty.

 

[atomi]

Parents have responsibility to support their children to the best of their ability until the children are able to support themselves. Some children are able to become gainfully employed and support themselves from a young age, others require years of higher education before they have any earning power. Parents support their children and the child pays it forward by educating their own children. (In some families, grandparents pay to educate their grandchildren and it is paid forward in that way.)A parent who is able to educate his child but refuses is abrogating responsibilty.

I'm sorry, a 22 year old is not a child. And if a college graduate with a bachelor's degree can't find gainful employment, then it's not the parents' problem. That is absolutely ridiculous to imply that parents who have the money but don't pay for their 'child's' medical school are irresponsible What about parents who couldn't save enough money for their child's medical school? Were they irresponsible in that they did not work harder and save more money the past 22 years? And it is very presumptuous to assume that all families will and should fit some traditional mold about how they interact with their grown children. Again, the EFC for medical school is just silly.

 

[LizzyM]

I'm sorry, a 22 year old is not a child. And if a college graduate with a bachelor's degree can't find gainful employment, then it's not the parents' problem. That is absolutely ridiculous to imply that parents who have the money but don't pay for their 'child's' medical school are irresponsible. And it is very presumptuous to assume that all families will and should fit some traditional mold about how they interact with their grown children. Again, the EFC for medical school is just silly.

You will always be your parents' child. It is a synonym for offspring. Employment in a professional capacity often requires graduate or professional education. Parents who have saved and invested for their children's education and who are able to provide for their children's higher education should do so. If not, the student ends up borrowing to cover the cost. That is not the best way to give your kid a good start in life.

From an evolutionary perspective, it makes sense to support your children to the point where they can be maximally successful as this will increase the likelihood that they will be able to thrive, attract a successful mate, and give you grandchildren. But you are too young to be thinking that far ahead. I'm not.

 

[PromisingCapita]

Actually, you said "most all". That's pretty poor English. You might want to work on learning to communicate clearly.

l

Lizzy, you probably think words like "aint" or "dawg" are a travesty to the English language as well. I want to defend atomi's use of colloquial and "incorrect" grammar. The whole purpose of human language is to convey one's thoughts, emotions, and ideas since we unfortunately do not have telepathic abilities. The way that the common man or woman speaks should be absolutely acceptable because it still conveys one's thoughts effectively. I understood what atomi said, just as I am sure that 99% of all people understood him.

"Correct" English is just a way of maintaining the status quo of the rich old conservative crusties who refuse to acknowledge change in an ever-evolving language. Why isn't the word "aint" acceptable English? Because it happens to have been created by poor, suppressed black people in this country and who wants to speak the words of "those kind of folk?" Now if Warren Buffet or some other rich white guy came up with the word aint, or if some in-bred monarch came up with it, we would surely be using it like it were the most official thing in the world. White people language is acceptable, but black people who have lived and toiled and gave their blood for this country since its inception have no right to add any words to our official dictionary.

You should be more understanding of colloquial and informal language. Don't be elitist and think that only one mode of speaking is "proper" and anyone who doesn't use the same words and syntax as you are ignorant *****s. Not all people have the "privilege" of growing up in a white suburbian environment where everybody speaks in the "correct" manner.

 

[atomi]

You will always be your parents' child. It is a synonym for offspring. Employment in a professional capacity often requires graduate or professional education. Parents who have saved and invested for their children's education and who are able to provide for their children's higher education should do so. If not, the student ends up borrowing to cover the cost. That is not the best way to give your kid a good start in life.

From an evolutionary perspective, it makes sense to support your children to the point where they can be maximally successful as this will increase the likelihood that they will be able to thrive, attract a successful mate, and give you grandchildren. But you are too young to be thinking that far ahead. I'm not.

wow.

 

[tiamat360]

Don't be elitist

You are a rotting pile of hypocrisy.

Oh, and atomi - it sounds like you've had to pay your own way through school. I'm sorry if that's the case; I'm sure that's hard to do. However, I'm curious as to why you think that justifies denying anyone else any kind of financial assistance, whether from the school itself or from parents.

 

[megamega]

l

Lizzy, you probably think words like "aint" or "dawg" are a travesty to the English language as well. I want to defend atomi's use of colloquial and "incorrect" grammar. The whole purpose of human language is to convey one's thoughts, emotions, and ideas since we unfortunately do not have telepathic abilities. The way that the common man or woman speaks should be absolutely acceptable because it still conveys one's thoughts effectively. I understood what atomi said, just as I am sure that 99% of all people understood him.

"Correct" English is just a way of maintaining the status quo of the rich old conservative crusties who refuse to acknowledge change in an ever-evolving language. Why isn't the word "aint" acceptable English? Because it happens to have been created by poor, suppressed black people in this country and who wants to speak the words of "those kind of folk?" Now if Warren Buffet or some other rich white guy came up with the word aint, or if some in-bred monarch came up with it, we would surely be using it like it were the most official thing in the world. White people language is acceptable, but black people who have lived and toiled and gave their blood for this country since its inception have no right to add any words to our official dictionary.

You should be more understanding of colloquial and informal language. Don't be elitist and think that only one mode of speaking is "proper" and anyone who doesn't use the same words and syntax as you are ignorant *****s. Not all people have the "privilege" of growing up in a white suburbian environment where everybody speaks in the "correct" manner.

I agree. I also might add that our language was originally from England and we have completely changed it from the way it was originally spoken. There are also examples in Hawaii, where many people use pidgin english. Some people outside of Hawaii may not quite understand some meanings, but most people there fully understand everything. Language is evolving.

 

[megamega]

You are a rotting pile of hypocrisy.

Oh, and atomi - it sounds like you've had to pay your own way through school. I'm sorry if that's the case; I'm sure that's hard to do. However, I'm curious as to why you think that justifies denying anyone else any kind of financial assistance, whether from the school itself or from parents.

I think a good solution to this problem would be if more schools recognized financial independence. It is ridiculous to an extent that a 40 year old medical student still has to report parent information. Or even the fact that married students who can show years of independent tax forms, still have to report parent information. I think the system needs to change to adapt to the wider variety of medical students.

 

[LizzyM]

The whole purpose of human language is to convey one's thoughts, emotions, and ideas since we unfortunately do not have telepathic abilities. The way that the common man or woman speaks should be absolutely acceptable because it still conveys one's thoughts effectively. I understood what atomi said, just as I am sure that 99% of all people understood him.

You should be more understanding of colloquial and informal language. Don't be elitist and think that only one mode of speaking is "proper" and anyone who doesn't use the same words and syntax as you are ignorant *****s. Not all people have the "privilege" of growing up in a white suburbian environment where everybody speaks in the "correct" manner.

I am fine with colloquial and informal language. What I object to is someone who is either so sloppy or in such a hurry that he jumbles things and then wonders why he is misunderstood:

Yes, I think I didn't explain my point of view very well.

That's not exactly what I said and wasn't my main point,

sigh...again, not the point I was trying to make. By equal, I don't mean someone determining how much you can afford to pay - I mean the price being the same for everybody.

Not at all what I said. Not even close.

 

[tiamat360]

I think a good solution to this problem would be if more schools recognized financial independence. It is ridiculous to an extent that a 40 year old medical student still has to report parent information. Or even the fact that married students who can show years of independent tax forms, still have to report parent information. I think the system needs to change to adapt to the wider variety of medical students.

That's fair, and it would make a lot of sense. However, I don't think recognizing the financial independence of older/married medical school students precludes giving undergraduate students school-specific financial aid or allowing (willing) parents to help their children finish school (whether undergrad or graduate/professional). What atomi seems to have been arguing (alternately) is that undergraduate schools shouldn't give financial aid to students in need and neither should their parents. That's what I disagree with.

 

[atomi]

I am fine with colloquial and informal language. What I object to is someone who is either so sloppy or in such a hurry that he jumbles things and then wonders why he is misunderstood:

What I object to is someone who refuses to discuss the points being made and instead resorts to ad hominem personal attacks and bizarre ramblings about the importance of proper grammar in an attempt to avoid having to admit the legitimacy of what was said.

 

[atomi]

However, I'm curious as to why you think that justifies denying anyone else any kind of financial assistance, whether from the school itself or from parents.

I'm looking at this issue from a moral standpoint, which is how I look at and try to analyze any issue. My moral code is centered around the concept of paying your own way through life, not taking handouts, and earning everything you have through your hard work, effort, and skilled labor. This concept is what I believe makes one moral. Someone who, as an adult, has the ability to pay his or her own way for medical school, either by working beforehand to save, or promising to work afterwards in order to obtain a loan, should not EXPECT others to carry this burden for them. By others I mean anybody willing to give him or her an unearned buck, whether that person is mom or dad or a committee of our so distinguished and respected elders who so honorably take on the task of determining whose 'need' outweighs the needs of others to not have to carry a debt burden throughout medical school and beyond.

And what I find so maddening, so infuriating, to the point that it has caused me to walk out of a required medical school financial aid presentation and subsequently withdraw my application is such committees absolutely preposterous notion that ADULTS should be expected to and are told to beg to their parents for handouts and if such parents are unwilling to give them (as they rightly shouldn't), that such parents are therefore deemed irresponsible and unloving of their children. Nevermind the fact that EVERYBODY who graduates with the MD has the option of easily making 6 figure salaries to start out, no no the parents aren't giving these 'children' a FAIR start in life, and they will never be able to make ends meet as an MD without their parental support.

Excuse me just a minute here, NOBODY (any adult who is capable of taking care of him- or herself, which is true for 100% of MD applicants) has more of a right to a handout than anybody else. The fact is, morally speaking, that NOBODY has a right to those handouts at all, and the moral thing to do if it is insisted that money is to be given out, is to reward aptitude instead of 'need.' The idea that need is justly a sole prerequisite for reward is straight communism and has no place in this society. Unfortunately, as it has been ever so clearly demonstrated in this thread, the upper echelon of this country's academia are so out of touch with this society that this comes as no surprise.

 

[atomi]

What atomi seems to have been arguing (alternately) is that undergraduate schools shouldn't give financial aid to students in need and neither should their parents. That's what I disagree with.

Yes, this is exactly what I am arguing. Every single medical school applicant in the US has the option of financing his her education through loans. Every single medical school graduate will be able to pay their loans back without any trouble because the AMA has a cartel-like system in place to limit supply and guarantee extremely high reimbursements for those who can make it through. My point is that no student has more of a 'need' to have less debt that another student. The E'F'C is a thinly veiled attempt at wealth redistribution, plain and simple.

Regardless of whether or not any adult is brazen enough to go to his or her parents and demand a handout because the school says they should have to pay for their grown children, the fact remains that it is wrong and insulting for schools to suggest that their students are and/or should be this unethical. Now I know that most students don't do this, they just go borrow all the money when the school tells them what their E'F'C is, but I'm sure there are some that run to mommy and daddy or gramps or whoever.

 

[searun]

Wow, someone needs to go a martini bar and chill out. The old saying about martinis is true: one martini is perfect, two is too many, and three martinis is not enough. And I am not suggesting this just because the martini is the Ivy League drink of choice.

 

[scarletgirl777]

What I object to is someone who refuses to discuss the points being made and instead resorts to ad hominem personal attacks and bizarre ramblings about the importance of proper grammar in an attempt to avoid having to admit the legitimacy of what was said.

It's not so much your grammar that sucks. It's just that you are apparently incoherent and are not making arguments that use clear logic. That's very different from using a colloquialism.

 

[PromisingCapita]

It's not so much your grammar that sucks. It's just that you are apparently incoherent and are not making arguments that use clear logic. That's very different from using a colloquialism.

Guys, if you truly want to be doctors, you better get used to patients communicating to you in ways that may seem strange to you.

 

[tiamat360]

Yes, this is exactly what I am arguing. Every single medical school applicant in the US has the option of financing his her education through loans. Every single medical school graduate will be able to pay their loans back without any trouble because the AMA has a cartel-like system in place to limit supply and guarantee extremely high reimbursements for those who can make it through. My point is that no student has more of a 'need' to have less debt that another student. The E'F'C is a thinly veiled attempt at wealth redistribution, plain and simple.

Regardless of whether or not any adult is brazen enough to go to his or her parents and demand a handout because the school says they should have to pay for their grown children, the fact remains that it is wrong and insulting for schools to suggest that their students are and/or should be this unethical. Now I know that most students don't do this, they just go borrow all the money when the school tells them what their E'F'C is, but I'm sure there are some that run to mommy and daddy or gramps or whoever.

You know, you complain of being the victim of ad hominem attacks, but it's so easy when you've completely ignored a vital part of an argument, as you have in this post.

Go back and re-read the post you responded to here. Note the word "undergraduate." It's important, and pretty much undermines every point you're trying to make in your response. Do you think most college freshmen have financial reserves, besides their parents, that they can draw on? Do you think every college graduate will make six figures and easily pay back any loans they took out to pay for college? (never mind whether a medical school graduate has any guarantee of this...) You're responding to a post about undergraduate financial aid by discussing medical school financial aid - not the best way to prove your points.

Regardless, you've now decided you want to talk about medical school finances? Fine. I don't have terribly much to say on the topic (since I've been posting about undergraduate finances this whole time), but I do have to say that for traditional applicants need-based aid should still apply - children with wealthy parents will probably still receive aid from them, whether you like it or not, and I think it's great that some medical schools are willing to give students without wealthy parents a chance to emerge from med school as debt-free as those with wealthy parents. Now, non-trads, especially married non-trads? Yes, they should be looked at independently from their parents' finances. It is too bad that, for the most part, they're not, but it doesn't mean traditional students should get screwed over.

There you go, I've said my piece in response to your post, despite it not at all having responded to my post. Let me know if you want to continue talking about what I've actually been talking about (undergrad finances), instead of changing the subject willy-nilly.

 

[scarletgirl777]

Guys, if you truly want to be doctors, you better get used to patients communicating to you in ways that may seem strange to you.

Of course. I expect to have patients that will vary widely in age, race, and language abilities. I expect that all my colleagues will have a solid command of the English language, be able to communicate their opinions clearly, and have solid critical reasoning skills to interpret data and understand how it applies to their practice. I don't think it's unreasonable to have a different standard for colleagues v. patients. Patients will be in a state of shock or only be 5 years old or will have their mental acumen affected by whatever drug I've doped them up on, so of course that's different.

EDIT: You are SUCH a hypocrite. It's one thing to make an observation about people's undergrads, but it's another to say that the fact that your classmates are from a "podunk university" is actually going to affect your decision to attend a medical school.

 

[slowbutsteady]

Guys, if you truly want to be doctors, you better get used to patients communicating to you in ways that may seem strange to you.

I will be quite understanding of patients who express themselves poorly, as you do.

Do you want to be my patient or my colleague?

 

[slowbutsteady]

What I object to is someone who refuses to discuss the points being made and instead resorts to ad hominem personal attacks and bizarre ramblings about the importance of proper grammar in an attempt to avoid having to admit the legitimacy of what was said.

None of us understands anything you are trying to say. Have you not figured that out yet?

And when we think we understand, we say to ourselves: "Nah, he can't possible mean that. That would be ridiculous."

 

[BrainBuff]

Scarlet, you are right on the money about PromisingCapita.

I would venture to guess that the individual did not get accepted to any ivies for undergrad. He/she attends one of the "HYPSM". That makes it a non ivy for sure. The ridiculous remarks about "lower ivies" and "stark contrast" about acceptance rates and SAT scores for the non HYP usually come from those suffering from IVY ENVY. MIT and Standford are peer schools with ALL the ivies. Just ask their Presidents. Harvard's admit rate was 9% with Yale and Princeton at 10%, Columbia 11%, Brown 14%, UPenn 16% and Cornell 21%. Stark difference?? HArvard and Yale's SATs 25-75 percentile's range was 1400-1590, Princeton 1380-1580, Brown, Dartmouth, Upenn and Columbia 1330-1350, Cornell 1290-1500 Stark differences??

Get a grip and take a good Statistics course...(in addition to english composition like you have already been told) You will need it in medical school.

And, get over your ivy issues. Stanford and MIT are great, but unfortunately, the schools do not carry the cachet that has traditionally gone hand in hand with the Ivy League.

 

[WannaBePreMed]

Wow LizzyM vs. Atomi



epic.

 

[megamega]

None of us understands anything you are trying to say. Have you not figured that out yet?

And when we think we understand, we say to ourselves: "Nah, he can't possible mean that. That would be ridiculous."

I think that many people understand what atomi is saying. It's just that many people don't agree with it. I think atomi makes an interesting point that there are students with wealthy parents, who don't help to support them financially. The system assumes that parents will help, when not all parents do help.

I think the system needs to be fixed, but I still like need-based financial aid. Schools should just expand their view of who is in need.

 

[scarletgirl777]

Scarlet, you are right on the money about PromisingCapita.

I would venture to guess that the individual did not get accepted to any ivies for undergrad. He/she attends one of the "HYPSM". That makes it a non ivy for sure. The ridiculous remarks about "lower ivies" and "stark contrast" about acceptance rates and SAT scores for the non HYP usually come from those suffering from IVY ENVY. MIT and Standford are peer schools with ALL the ivies. Just ask their Presidents. Harvard's admit rate was 9% with Yale and Princeton at 10%, Columbia 11%, Brown 14%, UPenn 16% and Cornell 21%. Stark difference?? HArvard and Yale's SATs 25-75 percentile's range was 1400-1590, Princeton 1380-1580, Brown, Dartmouth, Upenn and Columbia 1330-1350, Cornell 1290-1500 Stark differences??

Get a grip and take a good Statistics course...(in addition to english composition like you have already been told) You will need it in medical school.

And, get over your ivy issues. Stanford and MIT are great, but unfortunately, the schools do not carry the cachet that has traditionally gone hand in hand with the Ivy League.

The last part of your last sentence is completely undermining your credibility. Why did you include it? EDIT: Is the purple statistic correct because it seems too narrow.

 

[BeardedRunner]

Going to Ivy League def helps. I'd say about half of my fellow interviewees were from ivy league schools while the rest were from top tier national universities (according to US News).

 

[tiamat360]

I think that many people understand what atomi is saying. It's just that many people don't agree with it. I think atomi makes an interesting point that there are students with wealthy parents, who don't help to support them financially. The system assumes that parents will help, when not all parents do help.

I think the system needs to be fixed, but I still like need-based financial aid. Schools should just expand their view of who is in need.

So, let me preface by saying that I agree with you (talked about this a bit earlier too). The problem is that atomi has been unable to clearly articulate what you stated here in just a few sentences. So we continue to argue with him, because the way he's presented himself makes it seem as though he's against anyone ever having financial help in this process, ever, regardless of which level of education is being discussed.