opinion on URM..repeat? dont care

[Doc Martins]

if I were a URM, I may somehow be disadvantaged in my educational opportunities - Not all URMs come from this background. But all URMs are URMs in the admissions process - truly disadvantaged or not.

This is really the bottom line when it comes to AA.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BarrySanders]

Why doesnt everyone just stop rambling off their opinions and actually go ask your local friendly dean of medical admissions or admissions committee member about the subject. They will tell you that unless you are talking about the HBCU medical schools, JUST being an URM does not give you that large of an advantage. Everybody is so quick to point out the stats about the discrepancy between urm scores and non-urm scores but the Majority of the urm applicants with these lower scores are matriculating to the HBCU medical schools, which are schools which most of you who argue against urms would never think of attending. Everyones always talking about well you should put things in your personal statement, or non-urm students who are disadvantaged should also receive a boost. Well, from my own experience and after talking to my local friendly dean of medical admissions, there is a section on the AMCAS where ANYBODY and EVERYBODY who feels that they were disadvantaged may say so, and if it is sincere than they will indeed be given extra consideration (whether you are white, black, hispanic, indian etc.) That said, Please stop giving the example that if you're a white applicant who grew up underserved in an inner city that you won't receive extra consideration because you are not an urm, that is FAlse. You have the opportunity like everybody else to mark down that you are disadvantaged. If you are in the admissions process you have probably heard a million times that committees try to look at more than gpa and mcat. So why is there a question of whether not urms will go back to underserved or not? More than likely adcoms are not assuming that, the applicant has clearly showed his/her dedication to working with underserved populations through the personal statement and other activities, which a white applicant has the same chance to do. But since people are so caught up on merely stats, why don't we just ask the aamc to come out with stats for applicants who claim disadvantaged status versus those that don't. The reason that people blow up about urms is because that stat is available while the disadvantaged stat is not available. But like i said before, many urms are attending schools that many closed-minded people would never consider. Then lets look a little deeper. Black or white, even if you are disadvantaged (and you deserve extra consideration like most people say), there are still some in that category who have stellar stats regardless and we really need to stop assuming that they got in with lower stats.

 

[Stolenspatulas]

Why doesnt everyone just stop rambling off their opinions and actually go ask your local friendly dean of medical admissions or admissions committee member about the subject. They will tell you that unless you are talking about the HBCU medical schools, JUST being an URM does not give you that large of an advantage. Everybody is so quick to point out the stats about the discrepancy between urm scores and non-urm scores but the Majority of the urm applicants with these lower scores are matriculating to the HBCU medical schools, which are schools which most of you who argue against urms would never think of attending. Everyones always talking about well you should put things in your personal statement, or non-urm students who are disadvantaged should also receive a boost. Well, from my own experience and after talking to my local friendly dean of medical admissions, there is a section on the AMCAS where ANYBODY and EVERYBODY who feels that they were disadvantaged may say so, and if it is sincere than they will indeed be given extra consideration (whether you are white, black, hispanic, indian etc.) That said, Please stop giving the example that if you're a white applicant who grew up underserved in an inner city that you won't receive extra consideration because you are not an urm, that is FAlse. You have the opportunity like everybody else to mark down that you are disadvantaged. If you are in the admissions process you have probably heard a million times that committees try to look at more than gpa and mcat. So why is there a question of whether not urms will go back to underserved or not? More than likely adcoms are not assuming that, the applicant has clearly showed his/her dedication to working with underserved populations through the personal statement and other activities, which a white applicant has the same chance to do. But since people are so caught up on merely stats, why don't we just ask the aamc to come out with stats for applicants who claim disadvantaged status versus those that don't. The reason that people blow up about urms is because that stat is available while the disadvantaged stat is not available. But like i said before, many urms are attending schools that many closed-minded people would never consider. Then lets look a little deeper. Black or white, even if you are disadvantaged (and you deserve extra consideration like most people say), there are still some in that category who have stellar stats regardless and we really need to stop assuming that they got in with lower stats.

interesting points.

Do you have a stat or evidence to back this up?

 

[sunnyjohn]

Why doesnt everyone just stop rambling off their opinions and actually go ask your local friendly dean of medical admissions or admissions committee member about the subject....

Dude, didn't you know that medical school deans and admissions committees are stupid?


They can't seperate Bill Cosby, Ellen Ochoa, Severe Ochoa, Alberto Gonzales, Collin Powell's kids from the REAL white kids on 8 mile road or Joe from Appalachia or Juan with the hard working dad or Shaniqua who studies, but is on welfare or Nyguen Jr or Sunela who's parents are immigrants or good ole average John from the 'burbs?

Naw, adcomms are IDIOTS!

[/sarcasm off]

 

[BarrySanders]

Stolenspatulas I actually don't know if there any official stats surrounding that but if you look at the MSAR you will find that statement is supported by counting up urms at those schools and counting them up at all the other allopathic schools across the country and you will find that the urms at the 3 HBCU schools either outnumber or come pretty close to rest of the 100 + other schools of the country. Then if you look at the average mcat and gpa's at those 3 schools versus the rest of the schools in the country you will see that the averages are significantly lower.

Also, something I forgot to say. Please Please Please stop saying "checking off the URM box." There is no such thing on the AMCAS. People simply indicate their race and/or ethnicity like everybody else. There IS however a disadvantaged box to check off.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Also, something I forgot to say. Please Please Please stop saying "checking off the URM box." There is no such thing on the AMCAS. People simply indicate their race and/or ethnicity like everybody else. There IS however a disadvantaged box to check off.

That's a technicality: you are right there is no URM box, but med schools are aware which race/ethnicities are underrepresented. The point is that since it is open information on the AMCAS, it could be used to make decisions. So it might as well be an "URM box"

 

[DoctaJay]

That's a technicality: you are right there is no URM box, but med schools are aware which race/ethnicities are underrepresented. The point is that since it is open information on the AMCAS, it could be used to make decisions. So it might as well be an "URM box"

So we should lie to make you feel better. If I have to put in AMCAS that I got a B+ in Volleyball, and that the class was worth 1 credit, and that the class was a sport activity class in my AMCAS application; if I have to be that bloodly specific for AMCAS, why can't I honestly put my race, just as you can, on the AMCAS? I don't care what the do with it; I fill out the AMCAS just like you do. Do you not check off white on your app for fear that you may be held up to different standards? No, you check of white, because thats what you are (I think?), and you are honestly filling out your app.

 

[sirus_virus]

God forbid we actually find a way to recruit minority doctors(which we need) without premeds whinning about it. I really hope they change the policy so people that have been using that excuse to justify their medschool rejection could look for a new excuse. Seriously, one of the schools that accepted me only had 17 URMs in a class of ~200. Maybe we ought to try a healthcare system with no minority doctors so you guys could stop whinning.

 

[sgglaze]

I am a URM and I really do not feel as though it helped me significantly if at all in this process.

Stats:
33R
3.86GPA
3.75 Science
Research Experience, Volunteer Experience, Varied ECs

I applied to every school in NY state and all the ivy's. The only school which I received an interview at with average stats higher than mine was NYU and I was waitlisted there. I was rejected pre-interview at all of the Ivy's and U of Rochester. The other schools which offered me interviews, the SUNY's, AECOM, Albany, have stats in line with or slightly below my own. So far, one acceptance.

I'm just one person, and take it for what you will, but I get the impression from a lot of non URM's on SDN that someone with my stats would unfairly have a full ride to Harvard for being a minority. Sorry, but the admissions process just does not work that way.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

So we should lie to make you feel better. If I have to put in AMCAS that I got a B+ in Volleyball, and that the class was worth 1 credit, and that the class was a sport activity class in my AMCAS application; if I have to be that bloodly specific for AMCAS, why can't I honestly put my race, just as you can, on the AMCAS? I don't care what the do with it; I fill out the AMCAS just like you do. Do you not check off white on your app for fear that you may be held up to different standards? No, you check of white, because thats what you are (I think?), and you are honestly filling out your app.

I'm not being antagonistic (and frankly I'm for increasing diversity in medicine)...however, let's not kid ourselves, its not a race-blind (or URM-blind) process.

 

[BarrySanders]

Stolenspatulas I actually don't know if there any official stats surrounding that but if you look at the MSAR you will find that statement is supported by counting up urms at those schools and counting them up at all the other allopathic schools across the country and you will find that the urms at the 3 HBCU schools either outnumber or come pretty close to rest of the 100 + other schools of the country. Then if you look at the average mcat and gpa's at those 3 schools versus the rest of the schools in the country you will see that the averages are significantly lower.

Also, something I forgot to say. Please Please Please stop saying "checking off the URM box." There is no such thing on the AMCAS. People simply indicate their race and/or ethnicity like everybody else. There IS however a disadvantaged box to check off.

Lol, sorry I was rushing off to class and typed something that was not what I meant. What I meant was that if you count them up then you will see that a significantly large portion of African Americans for example are concentrated at these 3 schools with lower avg stats which would bring down the overall avg for African American matriculants.

Anyway, sgglaze no you are not the only one, I know of many urm applicants from advantaged backgrounds with avg numbers for All applicants who were not shown any love from schools. I just think that it is interesting that people are quick to say that a urm with lower stats took their spot (putting aside the argument of the whole applicant) but nobody says that a white applicant with lower stats took their spot. Because like I said in an earlier post, if you ask your friendly adcom member, you'll find that some white applicants matriculate with less than avg numbers as well.

 

[BigRedPremed]

It's always interesting how pro-AAers argue ardently for affirmative action while maintaining that it doesn't help "that much."

 

[EndSong]

Nice Post Bigred

 

[BarrySanders]

Well, like i said, instead of all the opinions, just go talk to somebody in admissions and/or read all of the literature about diversity on the aamc website and you'll see that affirmative action in the medical school admissions process is much different than in general, such as undergrad.

 

[sirus_virus]

It's always interesting how pro-AAers argue ardently for affirmative action while maintaining that it doesn't help "that much."

It helps, otherwise we would only have white and asian doctors. We need to increase the number of URMs. If it was just our personal gains in play, then I would understand why people are bent out of shape, but remember we are trying to provide healthcare for the entire country.

 

[cgscribe]

At the risk of getting flamed on my mdapps again, I'll post what I always post in these forums. URM helps. It can take an average student and make them good, take a good one and make them great. But, the right people are still getting into medical school. Anytime a student with a low 30 gets in at the Harvard types, it'll be debated why. Sometimes they're collegiate athletes, sometimes their excellent musicians, sometimes they've grown up in a unique way that is far different than most of the school's class.

 

[sgglaze]

It's always interesting how pro-AAers argue ardently for affirmative action while maintaining that it doesn't help "that much."

I'm not sure if you were referring to me, but I did not state my opinion on whether or not I supported AA in medicine. I posted my stats and showed how they only made me a competitive applicant (interview worthy) at schools with averages similar to mine or slightly below.

You can draw whatever conclusions you want from that, but the obvious answer is that it just wasn't that large a factor in the admissions game for me.

 

[Instatewaiter]

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION


5) Isn’t AA causing me to think that all minorities that are in my medical school got in only because of their race?

Don’t blame affirmative action. If you feel this way, there were already preconceived biases within you about the intelligence level of minorities. AA just provides an avenue to openly express these biases.

I really think that the real issue is how the public perceives URM doctors. Knowing that one group does much more poorly than another (on average) is going to make people be wary of the group that performs more poorly. With the same performance before and during medical school there would be no rational basis for this perception.

As to the argument that URMs go to underserved areas:
Wouldnt it be easier to have people sign a contract saying they will serve in X area for Y years and give those people some preferential admissions? I would think that this would efficiently allocate enough physicians to underserved areas. Basically now we are hoping Jonny URM will go back to his home city as a PCP instead of pursuing that lucrative Rads position.

Although people who don't do well on standardized tests (many URMs) probably won't do well on the boards, if they pass, then they passed. Does the level of passing denote a good doctor? No. Ask any person in their residency,and they will tell you that it doesn't matter. What you do in the hospital is a completely different bowl of soup than a standardized test. So that correlation can't be made. Heck even PandaBear has said something to the effect that he could teach a well trained monkey to do medicine. Its not about performance of your MCAT and GPA.

I have to agree with you here. Tests in general don't give people any indication of the level of knowledge you possess, your ability to integrate that knowledge or your raw reasoning ability. It is rare for those who know the material the best to perform well on exams.

This is why residencies don't use board scores when they decide whether to take you. Board scores tell you almost nothing of the person's aptitude for medicine and their knowledge.

Step 2 also does not test your clinical knowledge or skills.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

This is why residencies don't use board scores when they decide whether to take you. Board scores tell you almost nothing of the person's aptitude for medicine and their knowledge.

Step 2 also does not test your clinical knowledge or skills.

nvm

 

[DoctaJay]

wtf are you talking about? residency directors do use Board scores in their decisions, it might not be a major factor in some specialties but its definitely a factor.

as for your statement about Step 2, why don't you go make that claim to the NBME? I'm sure that they would wholeheartedly agree with you that their tests are useless metrics

I think he was being horribly sarcastic. He assumed that I was implying that Step 1 scores have zero correlation to the kind of doctor you will be. What I was saying is that, if you have pass step 1, 2, and 3; gone through a residency; and passed a state license exam you are a good doctor. But idiots will be idiots.

 

[BarrySanders]

I really think that the real issue is how the public perceives URM doctors. Knowing that one group does much more poorly than another (on average) is going to make people be wary of the group that performs more poorly. With the same performance before and during medical school there would be no rational basis for this perception.

Is there any evidence that URM students do much more poorly in medical school? Are they on average failing their classes and the boards?

 

[DoctaJay]

I think he was being horribly sarcastic. He assumed that I was implying that Step 1 scores have zero correlation to the kind of doctor you will be. What I was saying is that, if you have pass step 1, 2, and 3; gone through a residency; and passed a state license exam you are a good doctor. But idiots will be idiots.

Passing the MCAT and the boards MAKE you a doctor.

How much you know, your bedside manners, your diagnosing accuracy, luck, etc. make you a GOOD doctor. But I know this is heresy to pre-meds, so I guess reason will set in in about 12 years.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I think he was being horribly sarcastic. He assumed that I was implying that Step 1 scores have zero correlation to the kind of doctor you will be. What I was saying is that, if you have pass step 1, 2, and 3; gone through a residency; and passed a state license exam you are a good doctor. But idiots will be idiots.

whoops didnt read his post at all...

 

[Instatewaiter]

This is some concrete evidence in URM advantage. This is from a Umichigan study. http://www.ceousa.org/pdfs/UMichMed final.pdf

"Odds ratios favoring black over white candidates in admission--controlling for test scores, grades, Michigan residency, sex, and alumni connections--were very large. In 1999, the odds favoring blacks over whites with the same background and credentials were 38 to 1; they remained high (21 to 1) in 2005. Odds favoring Hispanics over whites, all other things being equal, were large but significantly less so than the odds favoring blacks. In 1999, odds favoring Hispanics over whites were 3 to 1, increasing to more than 5 to 1 in 2005."

Passing the MCAT and the boards MAKE you a doctor.
How much you know, your bedside manners, your diagnosing accuracy, luck, etc. make you a GOOD doctor. But I know this is heresy to pre-meds, so I guess reason will set in in about 12 years.

You speak like you are some sort of expert yet havent attended a single med school lecture or rotation... a little over zealous?

Is there any evidence that URM students do much more poorly in medical school? Are they on average failing their classes and the boards?

I'm too lazy to search. I recall that there is no major published data on Step 1 scores. Also I can't imagine they would publish that info. I was surprised enough that AAMC released the race data for the MCAT with all the crazy Canadians running around.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

It's always interesting how pro-AAers argue ardently for affirmative action while maintaining that it doesn't help "that much."

I wonder if they think people are actually buying their absurd, disingenuous arguments.

 

[Chuckwalla]

5) Isn’t AA causing me to think that all minorities that are in my medical school got in only because of their race?

Don’t blame affirmative action. If you feel this way, there were already preconceived biases within you about the intelligence level of minorities. AA just provides an avenue to openly express these biases.

An under the radar way of calling people racists, almost smooth. So you are racist if you wonder if a minority doctor would have gotten there if admission was not race based? **** that. Take away AA and minority doctors who really deserve to be there won't face doubt.

 

[RokChalkJayhawk]

I don't think URMs really have an advantage at all, when you consider how few apply in the first place.

They most certainly aren't "Taking your spot."

Besides, get your own spot. Do what you have to do to get in.

 

[BarrySanders]

so does a white applicant who got in with lower stats than you not deserve to be there as well?

 

[BarrySanders]

also, is it fair for a urm student to look at a white student and assume that that student was born with a silver spoon in his/her mouth? We need to look at both sides of the coin.

 

[jsnuka]

Quick question, when people talk about "URM status and affirmative action, are women, (of any race) counted in the equation or are the opinions espoused here just about Blacks, "Hispanics", and Native Americans?

 

[BigRedPremed]

Women don't seem to be heavily underrepresented at med schools. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[jsnuka]

Women don't seem to be heavily underrepresented at med schools. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Ok, why do you think that is the case?

 

[BarrySanders]

Ok, why do you think that is the case?

jsnuka I think that people like to ignore the fact that white women have historically benefited the most from affirmative action.

 

[Instatewaiter]

Women don't seem to be heavily underrepresented at med schools. Correct me if I'm wrong.

This is true. Women are 51% of my class.

 

[Instatewaiter]

I don't think URMs really have an advantage at all, when you consider how few apply in the first place.

They most certainly aren't "Taking your spot."

controlling for test scores, grades, Michigan residency, sex, and alumni connections--were very large. In 1999, the odds favoring blacks over whites with the same background and credentials were 38 to 1; they remained high (21 to 1) in 2005.

Prolly not taking your spot but saying there is no advantage is way off.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

jsnuka I think that people like to ignore the fact that white women have historically benefited the most from affirmative action.

Women have not benefited at all from Affirmative Action in medical school admissions.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

controlling for test scores, grades, Michigan residency, sex, and alumni connections--were very large. In 1999, the odds favoring blacks over whites with the same background and credentials were 38 to 1; they remained high (21 to 1) in 2005.

Prolly not taking your spot but saying there is no advantage is way off.

The AAMC states that 1,331 spots were taken away in 2001.
www.aamc.org/diversity/amicusbrief.pdf Page 21

 

[Mozzo]

Please read...

http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/emc598ge/Unpacking.html

 

[Instatewaiter]

You know that is the first solid piece of evidence that I have seen for that argument. Good work Ryo.

 

[jsnuka]

jsnuka I think that people like to ignore the fact that white women have historically benefited the most from affirmative action.

Yeah, it is like the pink elephant in the room that NO ONE wants to talk about even though it is SO OBVIOUS.

I guess some folx need room, time and an avenue to vent.

I will continue on ignoring these types of threads.

 

[BarrySanders]

excellent link mozzo. Unfortunately as the author implies, many will not open their minds enough to realize or accept these things.

 

[Chuckwalla]

Don't anyone dare say that I am responsible for discrimination by dead white males because I happen to be one too. What happened is awful, but punishing me makes you just as bad as those oppressive dead white males.

Women don't seem to be heavily underrepresented at med schools. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Let's get something straight. If anyone is struggling in education it is males. Women make up 58% of undergrads in the US. Is there an outcry for men? No, actually feminists still manage to cry about how there aren't enough women in math and science.

Boys are struggling in school getting beat in pretty much everything including math and science. Feminists use this as evidence that females are better when in reality education has been focused on girls while ignoring boys. There is literally no gender difference when it comes to home schooling.

Women dominate pharmacy, vet, teaching, and nursing. But there is no push to get men into those. The only school men still dominate is business school (MBA programs) and that is labeled sexist while they are desperately trying to get more women.

The problem? Men have no movement supporting them. No one is there to stop feminists from hurting males. Advances for women used to mean equality, now they mean domination. Men need to get our collective head out of our collective ass.

 

[BarrySanders]

...yet men still make significantly more money than women

 

[Chuckwalla]

...yet men still make significantly more money than women

That statistic is a load of crap. It throws everyone into the same pool, Bill Gates along with the woman working at CVS. When that statistic is true for people working the same job we will talk.

But you know what, lets hypothetically say that the statistic is sound. That generation is on its way out. This new female dominated generation is taking over and when it finally is in place I am sure mindless feminists, both men and women, will dig for ways women are oppressed.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

...yet men still make significantly more money than women

this is because women go into fields that simply don't pay as much money, read Thomas Sowell's "A Quest for Cosmic Justice" for more on this topic

 

[baylormed]

That statistic is a load of crap. It throws everyone into the same pool, Bill Gates along with the woman working at CVS. When that statistic is true for people working the same job we will talk.

But you know what, lets hypothetically say that the statistic is sound. That generation is on its way out. This new female dominated generation is taking over and when it finally is in place I am sure mindless feminists, both men and women, will dig for ways women are oppressed.

Um...researches aren't idiots. Women, on average, earn less for doing the same job as their male counterparts.

 

[Chuckwalla]

Um...researches aren't idiots. Women, on average, earn less for doing the same job as their male counterparts.

Correction, USED to make less. If it was found a woman was making less for the same job there are many women's rights groups who would jump on it.

 

[mountainhare]

Correction, USED to make less. If it was found a woman was making less for the same job there are many women's rights groups who would jump on it.

Maybe it's late at night here, but what on earth does this string of posts about women have to do with medical school admissions? Is someone trying to claim that women are favored over men in medical school admissions, or has this thread simply devolved into a generalized "Vent about how non-white non-straight non-Christian non-males are getting uppity and are ruining America" thread?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Um...researches aren't idiots. Women, on average, earn less for doing the same job as their male counterparts.

You're right, researchers aren't stupid...but sometimes they have agendas.

http://www.forbes.com/work/compensation/2006/05/12/women-wage-gap-cx_wf_0512earningmore.html

But what happens when women make the same lucrative decisions typically made by men? The good news--for women, at least: Women actually earn more. For example, when a male and a female civil engineer both stay with their respective companies for ten years, travel and relocate equally and take the same career risks, the woman ends up making more. And among workers who have never been married and never had children, women earn 117% of what men do. (This factors in education, hours worked and age.)

 

[DoctaJay]

You speak like you are some sort of expert yet havent attended a single med school lecture or rotation... a little over zealous?

Do you think that because you are a first year that you all of a sudden have a vast amount of knowledge? Your status means nothing. The only difference between you and me is that I still have an ounce of freedom. I'm am no expert, but I listen, read, and research. I know that this whole AA debate matters not in the 3rd and 4th years, and I know its virtually non-existent in residency, and attendings will just think that you are stupid. Its just stupid premeds who are still hung up on numbers and stressed out medical students still in their pre-clinical years that give a crap about the issue anymore.