Not mentioning ethnicity on applications - disadvantage?

[Chipster.]

Strong use of a Gawker article as evidence for something.

This webinar would probably be a better source of information about how the Fisher decision affects medical school admissions.

It's the first thing that came up on google...anyways not trying to prove much of anything with the article just giving background of the story.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ichor]

Wow, I can't.

Please tell me you aren't accepted to any schools I am, and if so, please tell me which ones and I will withdraw immediately.

The only emotion I wish to convey is contempt at your laughable attempt at "logic" and accusing me of sensationalizing for calling out your absurd reduction. Fact.


It's a terrible comparison.

Really? How about this: can we all agree that racism is bad? And that it has decreased tremendously here in the U.S. in the past 200 years? Do we want racism? No, of course not because it is unjust and unfair.

Today we can look back and say, "Wow, we really got rid of a good amount of the blatant and in your face racism!" But is that cause to think, "Oh, since we got rid of so much racism, it's not worth bothering to get rid of the remaining bits"? Because that's what you are saying. Quit pulling out things out of thin air that @Rik1111 never said. Of course slavery is worse than affirmative action. But slavery is gone. Is it not worth still continuing the eradication of racism?

Slavery is an example of a precedent in the same vein, but you're blind if you think it was presented as an injustice of the same magnitude.

To QuinnTheEskimo - it is my understanding that LizzyM is an administrator at a very well respected medical institution. You do not have to take what LizzyM says as gospel, but you should perhaps extend to her more respect than you have on this board.

How is @QuinnTheEskimo being disrespectful at all? I see no flaming, no trolling, no spamming, nothing negative like that. All Quinn did was challenge the ideas of @LizzyM. The word of god, gospel, and the like would be inappropriate to challenge; but like you said, Lizzy's word is not gospel. The day that you can't genuinely logically challenge someone else's ideas on SDN is the day it becomes obsolete.

I do really agree with a lot of the rest of your post as it has some very good points.

Does it really? The fact remains that some parents push their kids in directions that the offspring would not choose if they were acting independently. I see that on this board all the time with posters who don't know how to put the brakes on parents who are full-steam ahead although the kid doesn't want to go there. If someone doesn't really want to go to medical school, we are doing them a favor to see that they don't get in.

I understand that you're an adcom and all, so your input is always valuable...but your argument makes no sense. So you're gonna go out of your way to do Asian applicants the "favor" of accepting less of them based on how you think that they really don't want to go to med school?

And when @QuinnTheEskimo challenged your idea with a parallel stereotype, you're calling him out for stereotyping? I'm glad your realize how inane his stereotype was because it was an analogy for your stereotype of Asians. The difference is that Quinn doesn't actually believe those stereotypes about blacks (it was obviously for the sake of argument) and that you do, given you claim to use that against Asians as an adcom.

 

[baconshrimps]

Is it okay to say that Irish people are drunks.

Yes.

Polish people are dumb,

Yes.

or black people are violent criminals?

Yes.

(kidding, of course.)

 

[darklabel]

I somehow knew this would turn into an URM vs ORM debate, because SDN totally needed another one of those

All I will say is this:

https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

Page 25 has the percentage (and I bold this because that is a much more important indicator than overall #'s, stats, etc) and it shows that Asians and Whites are comparably accepted percentage wise based on the number accepted vs. number applied to all other races including hispanic (not a race but whatever) and AA. Is it fair that the last two groups have lower stats than the ORMs but are being accepted at the same percentage? Idc what the opinion is but the fact is that every group has an acceptance rate comparable to the rest.

I'm sick of these URM debates because it just boils down to people crying about the "URM advantages" and people defending it. SDN needs to give it a rest.

 

[histidine]

I'm sick of these URM debates because it just boils down to people crying about the "URM advantages" and people defending it. SDN needs to give it a rest.

Nope. We will battle this one out until the end. Which will occur when people cry all over their keyboards and short the circuits.

 

[MangoPlant]

.

 

[Womb Raider]

Lol you guys are acting like stereotypes are never true, or don't ever have any truth to them. They became stereotypes for a reason...

 

[histidine]

I somehow knew this would turn into an URM vs ORM debate, because SDN totally needed another one of those

All I will say is this:

https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

Page 25 has the percentage (and I bold this because that is a much more important indicator than overall #'s, stats, etc) and it shows that Asians and Whites are comparably accepted percentage wise based on the number accepted vs. number applied to all other races including hispanic (not a race but whatever) and AA. Is it fair that the last two groups have lower stats than the ORMs but are being accepted at the same percentage? Idc what the opinion is but the fact is that every group has an acceptance rate comparable to the rest.

I'm sick of these URM debates because it just boils down to people crying about the "URM advantages" and people defending it. SDN needs to give it a rest.

Interestingly, blacks are the most likely to cite parental influence as very important towards their decision to study medicine, then american indian, then hispanics, then asians, then whites. Of course these are self reported and matriculant data.

 

[knv2u]

I'll help you out baconshrimps



And if you're Asian or White and list "No Ethnicity", they will simply "see" what race you are come interview day.

I think its in your best interest to put it, but to each their own. If you happen to be Asian but "look white" or "insert other race" then just put whatever you feel that you are and don't try to game something you shouldn't.

Agreed. And your name can also tell a lot about you. If your name is Lopez, Patel, Nguyen, or a highly anglicized name, it wouldn't be too hard to figure out. Also, I don't know too many white people named Leroy Devon Jones. I find humorous that people try to hide their ethnicities/race. As for me, I think everyone could figure out the Endo-European etymology. No one would mistake me for anything other than white.

I realize that there are exceptions (and heaven forbid I should actually offend someone).

 

[darklabel]

Agreed. And your name can also tell a lot about you. If your name is Lopez, Patel, Nguyen, or a highly anglicized name, it wouldn't be too hard to figure out. I find humorous that people try to hide their ethnicities/race.

Yes I agree, its like people on here think "Oh no ethnicity? We'll have no idea even after an interview or based on their name".

 

[ichor]

I somehow knew this would turn into an URM vs ORM debate, because SDN totally needed another one of those

All I will say is this:

https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

Page 25 has the percentage (and I bold this because that is a much more important indicator than overall #'s, stats, etc) and it shows that Asians and Whites are comparably accepted percentage wise based on the number accepted vs. number applied to all other races including hispanic (not a race but whatever) and AA. Is it fair that the last two groups have lower stats than the ORMs but are being accepted at the same percentage? Idc what the opinion is but the fact is that every group has an acceptance rate comparable to the rest.

I'm sick of these URM debates because it just boils down to people crying about the "URM advantages" and people defending it. SDN needs to give it a rest.

I don't see where you're getting that from. On page 25 all I see is a graph showing the gender breakdown within each race. Nothing comparing numbers of each races accepted as a whole. So in 2011, 52% of Asians applicants were male and 56.4% of white applicants were male. I don't understand how this is related in the slightest.

The way I see it, people are getting their asses handed to them by Chinese kids that study for 8 hours a day, and they're bitter about it.

I'm bitter, sure. I went to UCLA and had to be one of 2 white people in a class of 60 Chinese kids competing for grades. When I finally figured out that I couldn't have a life and had to live on loans by quitting my jobs to study 5 hours+ a day to get a 3.7, I came to the realization I mentioned, above.

All of this aside, being a good medical school applicant isn't about being a grade robot that lives an insular life. And, unfortunately, there are many stereotypes about Asians (Chinese, especially) that are true to life; namely, that they shun anyone that isn't Chinese, that they don't care about undeserved communities, and that they'll do anything for a better grade than you (cheating on labs and homework assignments, kissing up, and so on).

I suspect that these unbecoming stereotypes of Asians are typified during interviews when interviewers ask the Chinese kids their opinions on social issues, what it's like to get their hands dirty in community work, and things of that nature. Interviewers probably see a phony, overly-polite "I care about people" facade creep onto their faces while their eyes tell the true story, glinting with self-centered, unfeeling, hateful disdain for the world outside of their Chinese-only academic bubbles.

lol

 

[Womb Raider]

I don't see where you're getting that from. On page 25 all I see is a graph showing the gender breakdown within each race. Nothing comparing numbers of each races accepted as a whole. So in 2011, 52% of Asians applicants were male and 56.4% of white applicants were male. I don't understand how this is related in the slightest.

You're looking at page 23, scroll down to 25.

 

[Womb Raider]

I don't see why it is humorous. People have a right to privacy. Most people will be okay with releasing their race, and a few will not. It's a personal decision.


Ideally the only demographics information that would be attached to the application seen by the committee would be "URM" or "non-URM" and some ID number. There would be no age, gender, name, or specific race. Then, once the decision is made, the committee sends it back to the administrative staff, they look up your contact info using the unique ID number, and you get your result. It's hardly a new practice for medicine: This is often a part of how double-blind cohort studies are double-blinded.

The interviewer will know the applicant's race, of course, but the interview is only one component of the application. There is no reason that the rest of the application shouldn't be blinded.

A) It's humorous because people with very ethnic-specific names try to hide their ethnicity when it's completely obvious what ethnicity they are in 99.9% of the cases. If you don't see the humor in that you need to take a break from SDN and chill out.

B) Why not just blindfold the interviewer while you're at it!!! The optimal demo info would be what you said, minus the URM / non-URM distinction.

 

[knv2u]

I don't see why it is humorous. People have a right to privacy. Most people will be okay with releasing their race, and a few will not. It's a personal decision.


Ideally the only demographics information that would be attached to the application seen by the committee would be "URM" or "non-URM" and some ID number. There would be no age, gender, name, or specific race. Then, once the decision is made, the committee sends it back to the administrative staff, they look up your contact info using the unique ID number, and you get your result. It's hardly a new practice for medicine: This is often a part of how double-blind cohort studies are double-blinded.

The interviewer will know the applicant's race, of course, but the interview is only one component of the application. There is no reason that the rest of the application shouldn't be blinded.

1. I'm saying it is humorous that people think they can hide their race from the adcom given that admission is contingent upon 1) an in person interview and 2) race can be gleaned from other portions of the application. Not providing/attempting to obscure your race is an exercise in futility.

2. I doubt most schools use the procedure that you outline. They are not running a clinical study and the review process is arduous enough without paying extra staffers to implement your system. Moreover, applications are considered in light of individual achievement which often reveals or could provide circumstantial evidence of other details, so it is pointless. Geography, income (when combined with other factors), schools (e.g. historically black, etc.), can also provide circumstantial evidence for speculating or inferring other details that you would seek to hide.

 

[touchpause13]

In 20 years people will look back and be appalled by this racism towards Asians. Just like 20 years ago, gay people were ridiculed, and 60 years ago, blacks were oppressed and shunned.

Can you not do this? Playing oppression Olympics helps no one. Minorities in this country still face great struggles TODAY.

 

[LizzyM]

So you're gonna go out of your way to do Asian applicants the "favor" of accepting less of them based on how you think that they really don't want to go to med school?

How many applicants have you interviewed? I've interviewed about 500 over the years... If I meet an applicant of any race who seems to be going through the motions but lacking a genuine interest in medicine as a career, I recommend that this specific applicant not be admitted. It has nothing to do with "accepting less of them". Each applicant is judged on his/her merits.

If I interview 100 white applicants with a given gpa/MCAT and 48 are admitted, it is just as likely that I will interview 100 Asian applicants within that same gpa/MCAT range and 45 will be admitted and it just may be that the difference between those 2 groups are 1 additional applicant with poor spoken English, 1 additional applicant who is quiet and shy and makes little eye contact during the interview and 1 additional applicant who is being pushed into medicine against their will.

I think that denying admission to someone who does not really want to pursue a career in medicine may make it possible for their to pursue their real dream whether that is marine biology or teaching high school, or stand up comedy.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

Can you not do this? Playing oppression Olympics helps no one. Minorities in this country still face great struggles TODAY.

I think you are missing the point I am trying to make. When it comes to education admissions, Asians are actively discriminated against (just look at this thread for evidence). I think that over the next few decades, this will come to an end as people realize that racial prejudices and stereotypes should not be used to judge individuals. It wasn't too long ago in our history that other groups were actively discriminated against, e.g., Jewish quotas, et cetera. I have no idea what you mean by "oppression olympics," I am not trying to compare or one-up anyone else's struggle. I am merely pointing out the societal pattern -- racism and prejudice towards minority groups, followed by shame and an effort to right past wrongs.

 

[Euxox]

I think you are missing the point I am trying to make. When it comes to education admissions, Asians are actively discriminated against (just look at this thread for evidence). I think that over the next few decades, this will come to an end as people realize that racial prejudices and stereotypes should not be used to judge individuals. It wasn't too long ago in our history that other groups were actively discriminated against, e.g., Jewish quotas, et cetera. I have no idea what you mean by "oppression olympics," I am not trying to compare or one-up anyone else's struggle. I am merely pointing out the societal pattern -- racism and prejudice towards minority groups, followed by shame and an effort to right past wrongs.

I think touchpause is saying that African-Americans still face racism that is worse than what Asians face, and I have to agree. (Ever hear of driving while black?) But I don't think that precludes us from discussing the racism that Asians face.

 

[touchpause13]

I think you are missing the point I am trying to make. When it comes to education admissions, Asians are actively discriminated against (just look at this thread for evidence). I think that over the next few decades, this will come to an end as people realize that racial prejudices and stereotypes should not be used to judge individuals. It wasn't too long ago in our history that other groups were actively discriminated against, e.g., Jewish quotas, et cetera. I have no idea what you mean by "oppression olympics," I am not trying to compare or one-up anyone else's struggle. I am merely pointing out the societal pattern -- racism and prejudice towards minority groups, followed by shame and an effort to right past wrongs.

No. You are missing my point. Other minority groups are being actively discriminated against. Today. If I slipped up and my employer found out that I'm LGBTQ, and wanted to fire me for it, they could. And I couldn't do a damn thing about it.
There isn't some past history of racism and injustice in our country that doesn't exist anymore, it's still happening.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

No. You are missing my point. Other minority groups are being actively discriminated against. Today. If I slipped up and my employer found out that I'm LGBTQ, and wanted to fire me for it, they could. And I couldn't do a damn thing about it.
There isn't some past history of racism and injustice in our country that doesn't exist anymore, it's still happening.

I understand. I never said that racism doesn't exist anymore. But programs like affirmative action, etc, actively try to combat the problem and right past wrongs. This does not mean there is no longer racism, but it is no longer PC to openly discriminate against African Americans, for example. However, it is currently acceptable to characterize Asians in certain ways. All I am saying is I think this will change in the future.

 

[Reckoner]

just look at this thread for evidence

This thread is evidence of nothing but pre-allo's periodic need to offset all of the good advice and encouragement with a couple hundred posts of raw sewage. I wouldn't read into it too deeply.

 

[Womb Raider]

But programs like affirmative action, etc, actively try to combat the problem and right past wrongs.

No no no. Racism is about inequality. Affirmative action isn't righting any past wrongs; you can't do that by reversing the discrimination in the same way that two wrongs don't make a right. You can't claim to want equality while also supporting something like affirmative action.

 

[touchpause13]

This thread is evidence of nothing but pre-allo's periodic need to offset all of the good advice and encouragement with a couple hundred posts of raw sewage. I wouldn't read into it too deeply.

Haha not a fan of pre-allo's biweekly URM butthurt buffet?

Seriously, it's like dey terk er med skerl sperts up in here

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

No no no. Racism is about inequality. Affirmative action isn't righting any past wrongs; you can't do that by reversing the discrimination in the same way that two wrongs don't make a right. You can't claim to want equality while also supporting something like affirmative action.

I don't support affirmative action. My point is simply that the pendulum always swings backward. Who knows, in 20 years maybe we will have affirmative action for Asians (jk).

 

[baconshrimps]

Please stop trying to drag this thread back into the anti-URM nonsense.

 

[Aerus]

I understand what you are saying, but for the people in society that are racist against Latino and African-Americans, are there not also people that are racist against Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, Indians, White, Pakistani, and just about every other ethnicity as well?

And this is where we agree. I definitely understand that. Being Asian, I've definitely faced societal discrimination. I was just addressing solely on Latinos and African Americans. However, no, you cannot be racist against White people. You're misusing a term or completely misunderstanding what racism is. See my post below this one for an explanation.

But this is off topic. Med schools are seeking to build a diverse class of future physicians, not attempting to reverse institutional and hegemonic ideology.

 

[Aerus]

No no no. Racism is about inequality. Affirmative action isn't righting any past wrongs; you can't do that by reversing the discrimination in the same way that two wrongs don't make a right. You can't claim to want equality while also supporting something like affirmative action.

Wrong. This has nothing to do with racism.

If you actually analyze the fundamental roots and origins of racism, you will understand why you cannot be racist against people who have power (like White people). You can be discriminatory (and I think that's what you actually mean), but racism requires bigotry and a lack of power. There is nothing racist about giving URM's a boost over White people, since reverse racism is a contradiction of itself and is not actually real.

 

[baconshrimps]

Wrong. I don't think you understand what racism really means. If you actually analyze the fundamental roots and origins of racism, you will understand why you cannot be racist against people who have power (like White people). You can be discriminatory (and I think that's what you actually mean), but racism requires bigotry and a lack of power.

I FOUND THE PHILOSOPHY MAJOR! I FOUND THE PHILOSOPHY MAJOR! I FOUND THE PHILOSOPHY MAJOR!

WHAT PRIZE DO I GET?!?!!!!?!?


tellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellme

 

[Aerus]

I FOUND THE PHILOSOPHY MAJOR! I FOUND THE PHILOSOPHY MAJOR! I FOUND THE PHILOSOPHY MAJOR!

WHAT PRIZE DO I GET?!?!!!!?!?

tellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellmetellme

Two things. First, you're talking about sociology, not philosophy. I don't even understand how you would get the two mixed up.

Second, I'm a Neuroscience major, so nope. I can be into science, yet still be an informed citizen.

 

[baconshrimps]

Two things. First, you're talking about sociology, not philosophy. I don't even understand how you would get the two mixed up.

Second, I'm a Neuroscience major, so nope. I can be into science, yet still be an informed citizen.

It is very simple. I am very ignorant when it comes to the humanities. I'm that guy who says "I don't know art, but I know what I like".


I was just having a go at ya mate, I was a biology major but I have some culinary certificates. Would like to be certified form sommelier

 

[Dbate]

I don't think not putting your race on the application places you at a disadvantage. I'm black but chose to opt out and it didn't adversely effect my admissions at all.

The one really disturbing thing I noticed, however, is that on several of my interview dates, I was the only black person in the room. The school didn't know I was black until after I showed up, so that means there would not have been a single black person at multiple interview dates otherwise :O

I didn't really know what being underrepresented meant until I got to med school interviews. Holy cow!

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

I don't think not putting your race on the application places you at a disadvantage. I'm black but chose to opt out and it didn't adversely effect my admissions at all.

The one really disturbing thing I noticed, however, is that on several of my interview dates, I was the only black person in the room. The school didn't know I was black until after I showed up, so that means there would not have been a single black person at multiple interview dates otherwise :O

I didn't really know what being underrepresented meant until I got to med school interviews. Holy cow!

I've interviewed at a bunch of schools, including top 20s. At the top 20 interviews, the interviewees were nearly all Caucasian and ostensibly upper middle-class. At the bottom-tier schools, there were a lot more Asians (like, 10 Asian dudes out of a room of 20 people). At all interviews, there were maybe 1-2 black applicants.

 

[sniderwes]

I don't think not putting your race on the application places you at a disadvantage. I'm black but chose to opt out and it didn't adversely effect my admissions at all.

The one really disturbing thing I noticed, however, is that on several of my interview dates, I was the only black person in the room. The school didn't know I was black until after I showed up, so that means there would not have been a single black person at multiple interview dates otherwise :O

I didn't really know what being underrepresented meant until I got to med school interviews. Holy cow!

fck. your. double. negatives.

seriously, that first sentence made my head explode D=

 

[Dbate]

I've interviewed at a bunch of schools, including top 20s. At the top 20 interviews, the interviewees were nearly all Caucasian and ostensibly upper middle-class. At the bottom-tier schools, there were a lot more Asians (like, 10 Asian dudes out of a room of 20 people). At all interviews, there were maybe 1-2 black applicants.

You must have been interviewing at some odd Top 20 schools if you didn't see any Asians

 

[Dbate]

.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

You must have been interviewing at some odd Top 20 schools if you didn't see any Asians

Lol, maybe it was just luck. Just something I noticed. Seemed to be a higher proportion of Asians (especially guys) at the lower tier schools.

 

[Dbate]

Lol, maybe it was just luck. Just something I noticed. Seemed to be a higher proportion of Asians (especially guys) at the lower tier schools.

I guess I technically only interviewed at 1 top 20 school (Baylor), but there seemed to be a strong asian male representation there. And at UTSW as well.

I declined my Emory interview, so I can't really state how many asian guys there were for them.

Either way, asians are certainly well represented.

 

[baconshrimps]

You must have been interviewing at some odd Top 20 schools if you didn't see any Asians

Maybe Liberty University?

 

[darklabel]

I think you are missing the point I am trying to make. When it comes to education admissions, Asians are actively discriminated against (just look at this thread for evidence). I think that over the next few decades, this will come to an end as people realize that racial prejudices and stereotypes should not be used to judge individuals. It wasn't too long ago in our history that other groups were actively discriminated against, e.g., Jewish quotas, et cetera. I have no idea what you mean by "oppression olympics," I am not trying to compare or one-up anyone else's struggle. I am merely pointing out the societal pattern -- racism and prejudice towards minority groups, followed by shame and an effort to right past wrongs.

Did you even read the AAMC document I posted?
https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

AA: 40% that applied got admitted
Asian: 45.5% that applied got admitted
White: 47.9% that applied got admitted
Native Hawaii or other Pacific Islander: 25% that applied got admitted
Hispanics: 49.2% that applied got admitted
Total Applicants: 45.9% that applied got admitted

How are Asians discriminated? They are still getting accepted at a higher percentage than AA and Native Hawaiian and are only .3% below the overall average of accepted individuals regardless of race. All found at page 25 (according to the pages AAMC listed as some people have problems noticing this).

 

[Goro]

To add to my learned colleague's comment, we have noticed that some Asian applicants never make eye contact with us. This is a cultural difference and one we're not too sympathetic with.

And a final note about the discrepancy between white and Asian applicants being admitted. Keep in mind that there are two things I frequently see that could explain that: international applicants are more likely to be Asian than to be white and we know those international applicants have a lower likelihood of admission due to visa issues. Foreign born applicants, whether citizens or not, sometimes have language skills that are less than acceptable for admission. We also face a proportion of applicants, more commonly among some ethnic groups than others, that are being pushed into medicine rather than making the choice themselves. That could easily explain a 3% difference in admission between white and Asian applicants.[/quote]

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

Did you even read the AAMC document I posted?
https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

AA: 40% that applied got admitted
Asian: 45.5% that applied got admitted
White: 47.9% that applied got admitted
Native Hawaii or other Pacific Islander: 25% that applied got admitted
Hispanics: 49.2% that applied got admitted
Total Applicants: 45.9% that applied got admitted

How are Asians discriminated? They are still getting accepted at a higher percentage than AA and Native Hawaiian and are only .3% below the overall average of accepted individuals regardless of race. All found at page 25 (according to the pages AAMC listed as some people have problems noticing this).

They are discriminated against because the expectations are higher for them. For every MCAT/GPA combo, Asians have a lower chance of being admitted compared to white, black and hispanic applicants with the exact same numbers.

For an applicant with a GPA between 3.40-3.59, and an MCAT between 30-32:

If he is black, he has a 93% chance of admission
If he is Hispanic, he has an 80% chance of admission
If he is white he has a 54% chance of admission
If he is Asian, he has a 48% chance of admission

The trend is essentially the same for every MCAT/GPA combo.
https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/app...mcat-gpa-grid-by-selected-race-ethnicity.html

I don't want to get into an argument about the black/hispanic numbers. But white applicants clearly have an advantage over Asian applicants with the same stats. Others on this thread have argued that it's because Asian applicants are somewhat more likely to be socially awkward/shy/pushed into medicine by their parents. I guess that is possible, but I would argue it's because there is an inherent bias against Asians due to cultural stereotypes. It may be slight, but it exists.

 

[Goro]

Here's a very simple answer to this. URMs get cut some slack in the admissions process because they're, well, under represented as a demographic amongst physicians. Given that there is a an over-supply in qualified applicants, it's perfectly acceptable to pick up some applicants who might not have the highest numbers.

It's OK to have a physician population that mirrors the US, even if it means the process is not 100% meritocratic. Actually, the process IS meritocratic, it's just not 100% numbers driven.

Let me ask you this: the point of med school selection is to choose the applicants who have the most potential to become the best doctors, right? People who are going to be seeing patients and whose actions may directly decide if they live or die?

Then why is race even considered? I don't care if my doctor if black or white. I want the person who will be able to provide the best care for me, because that's what patients deserve.

 

[ichor]

They are discriminated against because the expectations are higher for them. For every MCAT/GPA combo, Asians have a lower chance of being admitted compared to white, black and hispanic applicants with the exact same numbers.

For an applicant with a GPA between 3.40-3.59, and an MCAT between 30-32:

If he is black, he has a 93% chance of admission
If he is Hispanic, he has an 80% chance of admission
If he is white he has a 54% chance of admission
If he is Asian, he has a 48% chance of admission

The trend is essentially the same for every MCAT/GPA combo.
https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/app...mcat-gpa-grid-by-selected-race-ethnicity.html

I don't want to get into an argument about the black/hispanic numbers. But white applicants clearly have an advantage over Asian applicants with the same stats. Others on this thread have argued that it's because Asian applicants are somewhat more likely to be socially awkward/shy/pushed into medicine by their parents. I guess that is possible, but I would argue it's because there is an inherent bias against Asians due to cultural stereotypes. It may be slight, but it exists.

Yeah I definitely agree. Regardless of whether URM deserve advantages, one thing I'll never understand about affirmative action is how it hurts Asians more than whites. Asians definitely have it tougher in America than whites.

skip over this quote if you don't want to read about my Asian racism rant

Asians are a minority! Not only are we a tiny minority by population compared to blacks and Hispanics, but we are also so damn stratified to make matters even worse. We are socially hurt by this lack of unity. We are politically hurt by not only our small numbers, but the fact that not many Asians pursue politics and that fact that it would probably be hard to given the bamboo ceiling. We do well financially, but that's not to say that the bamboo ceiling extends into business as well.

Everyone assumes that Asians are so affluent (and east Asians are on average...my SE Asian friends, I'm sorry you're pigeonholed with us) yet we have so little power in the U.S. Coupled with constant perpetual foreigner stereotypes, it's bs for anyone to say that Asians don't face racism. And if you want to go back in history, there was extreme racism against Japanese (probably other east Asians too) because of WWII. And even further back, the Chinese went through crap for the transcontinental railroad. And today, one of the most stinging points is how some people simultaneously think racism against black people is bad, but racism against Asians is okay.

People constantly trivialize the hard work of Asians to get where they are. I honestly think this is why so many people think affirmative action is okay against Asians. "Oh, they're all so naturally smart anyway, it's not fair!" People are holding us to an unrealistic standard, one imposed by first immigrant parents. Give any immigrated Asian family a few generations in the U.S. and they probably won't accomplish nearly as much as the children of first generation immigrants. Yet in that few generations time, Asians are still expected to live up to that standard.

What I don't think many people understand is that to get to America from Asia, you have to be the cream of the crop. The richest, the hardest working, and the most cutthroat people are the ones who come overseas. We're not just magically smart. I've known many Asians growing up and I swear to you that those whose families have been in the U.S. for 3 or 4+ generations achieve way less than the children of immigrants.

Asians have the least political and social power in America (besides Native Americans I guess) and we still overcome to make the highest median income. The result? We're penalized more than whites even though we worked harder to get where we are.


As a final note, please don't interpret my words as attacking any other races. I always get that response from people. No, I'm blaming the system and how the cultural values ended up forming. I understand that the people who do have the power to change things in the U.S. don't go day to day thinking, "How can I make life worse for Asians?"

People seem to always say that black people have to deal with the most bs in America. I'm not disagreeing with that, but the social connection black people have and their political power is something I've always admired.

 

[buttercup12]

Yeah I definitely agree. Regardless of whether URM deserve advantages, one thing I'll never understand about affirmative action is how it hurts Asians more than whites. Asians definitely have it tougher in America than whites.

skip over this quote if you don't want to read about my Asian racism rant


Asians have the least political and social power in America (besides Native Americans I guess) and we still overcome to make the highest median income. The result? We're penalized more than whites even though we worked harder to get where we are.

Source?

People seem to always say that black people have to deal with the most bs in America. I'm not disagreeing with that, but the social connection black people have and their political power is something I've always admired.

Ummm, what social connection? What political power?

 

[darklabel]

Source?



Ummm, what social connection? What political power?

Problem is, they aren't taking into account ECs, Personal Statement, life travelled and other things that make up a person and their desire to become a physician besides purely MCAT and GPA.

 

[ichor]

Source?

Ummm, what social connection? What political power?

For the sake of my explanation, I'll focus on black people. The vast majority of black people have roots in the U.S. for some time now. They share a common language, English, and their culture has become one with American culture. This immediately means that black Americans are unified to a great extent. On the other hand, with Asians you have Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Filipino, etc., all with their own languages and cultures. Not to mention that many people of these nations dislike, or even hate, each other. Between uncommon culture, uncommon language, and dislike for each other, this just means that the unity among Asians isn't there.

As for political power, look at all the figures blacks have standing up for themselves. There have been countless ones in the past century. Still living, you have Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. People who stand up for and protect their race. You don't get that with Asian people because there's no unity. Hell, look at the NAACP; it's to help all colored people, but it basically focuses on black people.

This is something the Asian community (can you even call it that?) needs.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

This thread reminds of back in the day -- Harvard used to rely solely on entrance exams in selecting its incoming class. In the 1920s, Jewish students were scoring high on the exams, and bursting in on the ivy league scene. When the Harvard president realized that, he did away with the test, and instead decided to pick and choose top students from American high schools, no test necessary. He argued that this would make admissions more "fair" and more based on "intangible qualities," but really this was sugar-coated racism. I think the same thing continues today.

Edit: This DOES happen today. In New York. Stuyvesant grads know what I'm talking about.

 

[buttercup12]

For the sake of my explanation, I'll focus on black people. The vast majority of black people have roots in the U.S. for some time now. They share a common language, English, and their culture has become one with American culture. This immediately means that black Americans are unified to a great extent. On the other hand, with Asians you have Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Filipino, etc., all with their own languages and cultures. Not to mention that many people of these nations dislike, or even hate, each other. Between uncommon culture, uncommon language, and dislike for each other, this just means that the unity among Asians isn't there.

As for political power, look at all the figures blacks have standing up for themselves. There have been countless ones in the past century. Still living, you have Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. People who stand up for and protect their race. You don't get that with Asian people because there's no unity. Hell, look at the NAACP; it's to help all colored people, but it basically focuses on black people.

This is something the Asian community (can you even call it that?) needs.

So much wrong. I don't mean that in a bad way, but you're obviously not black and it shows because you're unable to speak from a position of authority on the subject. The same thing that you are arguing for for Asians and their various subsets of Chinese, Korean, etc. is the same for black people. Not everyone eats fried chicken or has ancestors who were slaves. In fact, especially in today's globalized America a lot of blacks are actually Africans. So exactly like those of Asian descent, you have your Somalians, Ethiopians, Nigerians, South Africans, Egyptians, Moroccans, etc. etc. as well as your African-Americans. And within these groups of people is a whole set of different languages and cultures. Hell, there are even different languages and cultures in each of the individual groups I just listed in smaller proportions where the hate is just as strong, and the culture and language just as uncommon. What do you think genocide in Africa is? Just because you think it's unified doesn't mean it is.

And black political power is as much of a joke as it is non-existent. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are fools. And if you are insinuating MLK and Malcolm X, let's just be clear that they did not see eye to eye. Sure they had some common goals, but that in no way means they were unified in the ways to get there, and that the people in different parties didn't have there own set of strife within or even against each other. Furthermore, there are Asians who have stood up and protected their race. If you've never heard of Minoru Yasui or Gordon Hirabayashi (sp?), than I don't know what to tell you.

 

[buttercup12]

Oh, and of course the NAACP "basically focuses on black people" it was founded to help black people. And regardless, it hasn't even been relevant in years so w/e.

EDIT: You still didn't give me a source.

 

[ichor]

So much wrong. I don't mean that in a bad way, but you're obviously not black and it shows because you're unable to speak from a position of authority on the subject. The same thing that you are arguing for for Asians and their various subsets of Chinese, Korean, etc. is the same for black people. Not everyone eats fried chicken or has ancestors who were slaves. In fact, especially in today's globalized America a lot of blacks are actually Africans. So exactly like those of Asian descent, you have your Somalians, Ethiopians, Nigerians, South Africans, Egyptians, Moroccans, etc. etc. as well as your African-Americans. And within these groups of people is a whole set of different languages and cultures. Hell, there are even different languages and cultures in each of the individual groups I just listed in smaller proportions where the hate is just as strong, and the culture and language just as uncommon. What do you think genocide in Africa is? Just because you think it's unified doesn't mean it is.

And black political power is as much of a joke as it is non-existent. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are fools. And if you are insinuating MLK and Malcolm X, let's just be clear that they did not see eye to eye. Sure they had some common goals, but that in no way means they were unified in the ways to get there, and that the people in different parties didn't have there own set of strife within or even against each other. Furthermore, there are Asians who have stood up and protected their race. If you've never heard of Minoru Yasui or Gordon Hirabayashi (sp?), than I don't know what to tell you.

According to the 2010 Cenus, the U.S. had:
3,183,104 African immigrants
38,929,319 black Americans
= 8.2% of blacks are African immigrants (I know not all of these immigrants are black, but I couldn't find that number)

In 2009, the U.S. had:
10,651,757 Asian immigrants
and in 2010, there were a total of
14,674,252 Asian Americans
= 72.6% of Asians are Asian immigrants

Considering that the vast majority of Asians are immigrants who probably still hold on strongly to their own culture, do you really think that American culture isn't far more ingrained in blacks considering there are far more blacks by sheer number and proportion whose families have been in the U.S. for generations?

By the way, are you actually stupid? Your bringing up the stereotypes of blacks eating friend chicken is completely irrelevant here, as is the possibility of blacks having slave ancestors. Who says that a black person's ancestors had to have been slaves for their family to be in the U.S. for generations?

Of course the African immigrants are very diverse in language in culture. I never said they weren't. But there are over 30,000,000 blacks who aren't immigrants. And of course there's gonna be a lot of them whose families have been in the U.S. for generations. These people are the ones I said are unified.

And Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton being fools is just a matter of opinion. In one regard I think what they're doing is very crucial: showing how others can't just step over blacks. Today, Asians don't have figures like that. It doesn't matter what ideologies this or that black activists have because all of their bottom lines are to makes sure blacks don't get the short stick.

Minoru Yasui and Gordon Hirabayashi are but 2 men. The fact of the matter is that you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of actually notable Asian activists. Even harder pressed to find ones who are still alive today and actually doing things. Asians are the most affluent race in the U.S., yet there are still very few activists.

And as for Asians having the least power (besides Native Americans), how do exactly you want me to give you source? You can't quantify the power Asians have with some complicated formula. But it doesn't take a genius to see that Asians have less power than whites even though you can't quantify that either.