Penn medical school expands minority candidate program that does not require MCAT

  • Thread starter Thread starter deleted1064759
  • Start date Start date
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rules and standards should be applied equally, regardless of race. Either the MCAT has merit to screen for people who will exceed in medical school, or it does not. Regardless, people should not be treated differently due to immutable characteristics.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Billiam95 said:
No MCAT and a 3.2 GPA doesn't sound like any early admissions program I've ever heard of.
Click to expand...
Certainly not at a T5/10!!! Since it's not a HBCU, and the program isn't open to everyone, or even low SES people of all races, whatever it is, it is NOT a "guaranteed/early admission program" under any generally accepted definition of that term.

It's exactly what it purports to be -- an alternate pathway for select URMs from select UGs. I wouldn't get all bent out of shape about it, since it only resulted in 67 people attending Penn over 14 years, but let's not start comparing it to true direct pathways that other schools set up for all deserving candidates.

I don't have a huge issue with it, and would actually analogize it more to the path some very well connected people take to get into schools like Penn who also don't have the credentials most otherwise need to even get an interview. Probably in similar numbers over a similar period of time.

So why not consider it Penn's attempt to somewhat level the playing field for a few promising URMs with no connections, rather than getting bent out of shape over something like 4-5 people in a class of ~125 each year? The odds of those seats otherwise going to anyone pulling their hair out over it are still close to zero.
 
Last edited:
Seems like what happens at Ivy league schools trickles down... I fully expect my state school to adopt the same system in 1-2 years, and they already seem to be making moves in that direction.
Arguments for lowering admission standards have already moved from high school, then to college, and now to medical school - where does it stop? Different standards for step passage? Different standards for residency applications?
 
Billiam95 said:
Seems like what happens at Ivy league schools trickles down... I fully expect my state school to adopt the same system in 1-2 years, and they already seem to be making moves in that direction.
Arguments for lowering admission standards have already moved from high school, then to college, and now to medical school - where does it stop? Different standards for step passage? Different standards for residency applications?
Click to expand...
I'm guessing it stops when the qualified workforce more fairly represents the population as a whole. "Passing" isn't going to change, because it is essential that everyone demonstrate a level of competence.

But, beyond that, don't you realize that people with higher step scores are passed over in favor of people with lower ones today, for a variety of reasons? Better LORs, research, connections, interpersonal skills, whatever. Why wouldn't diversity be a legitimate factor, and why would you think it isn't already happening?
 
Not advocating for a complete meritocracy with step scores being the end all be all - all the things you mentioned are completely worthy of consideration in residency selection. However, and as a fundamental principle, I do not believe that people should be discriminated for or against for immutable characteristics (race, sex, etc). Should barriers be removed to allow people to complete on a level playing field - absolutely yes. Should candidates be evaluated differently with DEI initiatives in mind - I would say no.
 
Billiam95 said:
Not advocating for a complete meritocracy with step scores being the end all be all - all the things you mentioned are completely worthy of consideration in residency selection. However, and as a fundamental principle, I do not believe that people should be discriminated for or against for immutable characteristics (race, sex, etc). Should barriers be removed to allow people to complete on a level playing field - absolutely yes. Should candidates be evaluated differently with DEI initiatives in mind - I would say no.
Click to expand...
I think this is exactly what they try to do. The devil is in the details. If someone didn't come from a family of professionals, or doctors, they often begin college with systemic barriers. If someone doesn't do something to shake up the paradigm, nothing ever changes, or it changes so slowly that the change is imperceptible. The question becomes how to level the playing field?

The kludge is that "level playing field" has different definitions depending on who you are talking to. To some, it might mean equal GPAs, MCATs, Step scores, whatever, and just not openly discriminating against anyone. To others, it's valuing other attributes after candidates exceeding a certain minimum score. The justification for this is that giving people who have historically been excluded a shot, rather than valuing a 270 step score above a 260, when they are both very high, is more important than just going for the highest score when all candidates above a minimum are by definition highly qualified.
 
Both @Billiam95 and @SooConfused make great points and it's awesome you guys are just having a normal conversation without devolving to the many -ists and -phobias that can arise during theses topics.

I agree in that you have to provide unique pathways and opportunities for certain populations of people to have a chance at getting into medical school but I do believe that you have to do the major requirements that all of the other applicants have to do which includes taking the MCAT. For these pathways I'm cool for lowering the bar a little bit for MCAT scores but not completely removing it. AAMC data shows that basically once you get over a 500 on the MCAT your chances of performing well in medical school are well over 90% if I'm not mistaken so risk of failing out is mitigated and yet the school has a chance to provide a more unique student body. Win win. But one of the worst things you can do is admit students to your medical school with less qualifications based on DIE pathways and then have those students fail out. At my school I have suspicion that this may be occurring.
 
Thanks for the correction. I definitely have no issues with this pathway. There are a lot of different pathways being developed now as a way to increase the pipeline for URM candidates, and if this pathway has not been optimized, I'm happy to see it.
 
And let the Wailing and gnashing of teeth begin!

There are pluses and minuses about waiving the MCAT. The MCAT does let you know who is going to struggle in medical school, but there are societal issues built into the mcat,. You know people can afford lots and lots of test prep Etc.

Personally, I think a better fix would be a guaranteed admission into a special Masters program and letting underrepresented and low SES candidates have a chance to prove their mettle. Then one doesn't need the MCAT, as it will show who can handle the rigors of medical school.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
RocuROMANium said:
Both @Billiam95 and @SooConfused make great points and it's awesome you guys are just having a normal conversation without devolving to the many -ists and -phobias that can arise during theses topics.

I agree in that you have to provide unique pathways and opportunities for certain populations of people to have a chance at getting into medical school but I do believe that you have to do the major requirements that all of the other applicants have to do which includes taking the MCAT. For these pathways I'm cool for lowering the bar a little bit for MCAT scores but not completely removing it. AAMC data shows that basically once you get over a 500 on the MCAT your chances of performing well in medical school are well over 90% if I'm not mistaken so risk of failing out is mitigated and yet the school has a chance to provide a more unique student body. Win win. But one of the worst things you can do is admit students to your medical school with less qualifications based on DIE pathways and then have those students fail out. At my school I have suspicion that this may be occurring.
Click to expand...
Excellent points, and thanks for the shout out. Just to throw some love @Mr.Smile12's way, he is correct insofar as it's not like waiving MCATs is unheard of, since plenty of direct entry programs do just that. Not to game anything, and certainly not to give unqualified people seats in their schools, but to make the programs more attractive, and to give the very high achieving HS students they admit into their programs once less thing to worry about in college.

OTOH, as @srirachamayonnaise correctly pointed out above, Penn is very clearly doing this (gaming their reported stats by not having these folks take the MCAT) in service of its status as a stat wh*re, unwilling to see its bottom 10th percentile, as well as it median, drop as a result of admitting these students. I have no doubt that the screening they already perform on these students (only 78% of participants were admitted to Perelman after being selected to participate in the program) would ensure that all of these students would clear the 500 threshold, but that's not the point. I'm sure Penn's 10th percentile is currently something like 516, and they clearly wouldn't want to risk the possibility of having 5% of its class coming in below 510, thereby significantly altering that stat.
 
One of the many problems with this approach is that there are a number of downstream effects that cause even more damage. For instance, demographic disparities were one of the main reasons cited for the change of Step 1 to P/F. That change was a terribly destructive blow to whatever remnants of meritocracy remain in medical training, as excellent Step scores have been essentially the only way for students at State U to distinguish themselves and become competitive for certain specialties and residencies in desirable locations. Well, if you open up a backdoor that doesn't require an MCAT, you'll end up with more such disparities in med school, guaranteed. And that will lead to more idiotic decisions. Step 2 P/F next?
 
This is too far. On the old MCAT tables, some groups could score almost 1/2- full SD lower than others and have similar admit results. The solution now is just to take away the test. Positive discrimination can be done maybe to an extent. But this is way too far.

Supreme Court will kill the modern discrimination of different testing standards for admits based on race soon. But the work around will be just getting rid of tests for some in general. Absolutely brilliant. The ones who take advantage are those of privilege but a different sort. Full White Iberian Cuban kids of professors and former sugar plantation owners or the children of Nigerian oil barons or Ghanaian doctors. It is the progeny elite of the developing and underdeveloped world who overwhelmingly get benefitted.

This aesthetic diversity is a total farce. Positive discrimination is bad in my opinion. But at least do ot based on income. Some minorities are disproportionately poor so they will be helped anyway. Regardless, most recent Pew polling shows even underrepresented racial groups favor, in terms of clear super majority levels, a system of no race based AA.
 
RocuROMANium said:
I agree in that you have to provide unique pathways and opportunities for certain populations of people to have a chance at getting into medical school but I do believe that you have to do the major requirements that all of the other applicants have to do which includes taking the MCAT. For these pathways I'm cool for lowering the bar a little bit for MCAT scores but not completely removing it.
Click to expand...
So how long have you been anti-FlexMed?
 
Goro said:
And let the Wailing and gnashing of teeth begin!

There are pluses and minuses about waiving the MCAT. The MCAT does let you know who is going to struggle in medical school, but there are societal issues built into the mcat,. You know people can afford lots and lots of test prep Etc.

Personally, I think a better fix would be a guaranteed admission into a special Masters program and letting underrepresented and low SES candidates have a chance to prove their mettle. Then one doesn't need the MCAT, as it will show who can handle the rigors of medical school.
Click to expand...
My undergrad had agreements with a couple of nearby med schools. If we a had good GPA (and better science GPA) we could be guaranteed admission at the end of sophomore year. No MCAT needed.

I was accepted into one of those programs, ended up at my state school instead but it was a pretty sweet deal.
 
RocuROMANium said:
Please enlighten me as to what that is ha?
Click to expand...
A direct entry program run by Mt. Sinai that actually dismisses people from the program if they take the MCAT. This is to ensure that they give up their guarantee if they want to apply out, since the school cannot see other applications, but can certainly see a MCAT score if one exists. It is a very competitive, highly desirable program that no one thinks is waiving MCATs as part of a plan to lower the bar for med school admission.
 
Last edited:
For what its worth I would not take this article at face value. If you do some digging at the school websites that actually have these programs the requirements are different than what is stated on the college fix website.

For example at Cornell you have to maintain a 3.5 GPA or higher Penn Access Summer Scholars

At Xavier you need a 3.6 GPA or higher and had to score a 29 on the ACT or 1300 on the SAT https://www.xula.edu/premed/upennpass_hbcu.pdf

At Bryn Mawr 3.6 GPA and 1300 SAT is required. They have a separate linkage program with a required 3.2 GPA at graduation but thats for RWJMS. Im wondering if the first website mixed up the GPA requirements between these two programs to be honest. ACES and PASS Programs | Bryn Mawr College

I know not having to take and excel at the MCAT to get into Penn is a huge advantage for sure, but based on a quick search the program seems more rigorous than the website makes it out to be. Also scoring a 29 ACT/1300 SAT is the 88th/91st percentile respectively. That is still commendable coming out of high school and it is not a stretch to say that these students are probably generally good at school or at the very least not waltzing their way in.

My post probably wont change anyones mind about this and I know that there is no silver bullet but I think its important to report things accurately especially with charged material such as this.
 
Chromium Surfer said:
My post probably wont change anyones mind about this and I know that there is no silver bullet but I think its important to report things accurately especially with charged material such as this.
Click to expand...
Indeed. FWIW most of the programs that do not require the MCAT substitute a proxy metric like the SAT.

What is important to understand about these programs is that they are not designed to open a floodgate of unqualified URMs into medical school. PASS is a good example of what they are, in fact, designed to accomplish, which is give UPenn a first crack at identifying (and locking in) some unicorns. Unicorns who, if they go into the regular admission pool, will end up with multiple acceptances.
 
Goro said:
SDNers are reminded that the reality is that it's about what med schools want, not want applicants want.
Click to expand...

What med schools want is limited by the constitution. My guess is that these types of policies will be struck down going forward as the courts start to reject the constitutionality of discrimination by race in college admissions.

SCOTUS will address this exact question in November when it hears Students for Fair Admissions Inc. vs Harvard/UNC
 
Last edited:
Racial preference should be manifested as helping minorities to achieve the same level of competitiveness with respect to a given school’s admission requirement. So instead of doing those dodgy shortcut programs, medical schools should offer free prep for MCAT and other services to boost up competitiveness of URM’s. The whole AA process has corrupted the education system. It’s basically saying it’s ok we don’t educate you as well as other races, but our mistake will be compensated for with a more lenient measuring stick for your advancement.
 
Take a good look at what U Penn requires of applicants. Note that there is not a single mention of a minimum MCAT score or GPA.

Technical Standards for Admission | MD Admissions | Admissions | Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

The Perelman School of Medicine enjoys an international reputation for innovation in areas ranging from leadership training to global health. Our groundbreaking curriculum set a new standard for medical education nationwide. The six-module MD curriculum integrates basic sciences and clinical...
www.med.upenn.edu

General Academic Competencies | MD Admissions | Admissions | Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

The Perelman School of Medicine enjoys an international reputation for innovation in areas ranging from leadership training to global health. Our groundbreaking curriculum set a new standard for medical education nationwide. The six-module MD curriculum integrates basic sciences and clinical...
www.med.upenn.edu

Now here's what the AAMC requires in terms of competencies:
students-residents.aamc.org

What Medical Schools are Looking for: Understanding the 15 Core Competencies

Many medical schools use holistic review and to help define holistic review further, they use 15 Core Competencies as a tool to evaluate your application.
students-residents.aamc.org students-residents.aamc.org

Again, no mention of stats. Note that the humanistic domains outnumber (by a lot) the intellectual domains.

A career in Medicine is not a reward for being a good student or getting the highest grades. SDNers are strongly advised to not fall into the trap of thinking that admitting someone with a lower GPA or MCAT is somehow racist because stats aren't the only admissions criteria.
 
Goro said:
Take a good look at what U Penn requires of applicants. Note that there is not a single mention of a minimum MCAT score or GPA.

Technical Standards for Admission | MD Admissions | Admissions | Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

The Perelman School of Medicine enjoys an international reputation for innovation in areas ranging from leadership training to global health. Our groundbreaking curriculum set a new standard for medical education nationwide. The six-module MD curriculum integrates basic sciences and clinical...
www.med.upenn.edu

General Academic Competencies | MD Admissions | Admissions | Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

The Perelman School of Medicine enjoys an international reputation for innovation in areas ranging from leadership training to global health. Our groundbreaking curriculum set a new standard for medical education nationwide. The six-module MD curriculum integrates basic sciences and clinical...
www.med.upenn.edu

Now here's what the AAMC requires in terms of competencies:
students-residents.aamc.org

What Medical Schools are Looking for: Understanding the 15 Core Competencies

Many medical schools use holistic review and to help define holistic review further, they use 15 Core Competencies as a tool to evaluate your application.
students-residents.aamc.org students-residents.aamc.org

Again, no mention of stats. Note that the humanistic domains outnumber (by a lot) the intellectual domains.

A career in Medicine is not a reward for being a good student or getting the highest grades. SDNers are strongly advised to not fall into the trap of thinking that admitting someone with a lower GPA or MCAT is somehow racist because stats aren't the only admissions criteria.
Click to expand...
Basically, either the schools think MCAT has any validity of predicting success or not. If not, don’t set a higher expectation for certain groups and lower for others. If yes, apply that equally to everyone.
 
srirachamayonnaise said:
Racial preference should be manifested as helping minorities to achieve the same level of competitiveness with respect to a given school’s admission requirement. So instead of doing those dodgy shortcut programs, medical schools should offer free prep for MCAT and other services to boost up competitiveness of URM’s. The whole AA process has corrupted the education system. It’s basically saying it’s ok we don’t educate you as well as other races, but our mistake will be compensated for with a more lenient measuring stick for your advancement.
Click to expand...
This is somewhat tangential to the original post (where I generally agree, the school is probably trying to have their cake and eat it by recruiting URMs while not needing to worry about where they stack up academically). But I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about diversity recruitment as it pertains to medical school admissions. The point is not to "level the playing field" and reward URMs with admission to medical schools through affirmative action, which more or less is kind of how it works for undergrad admissions. Basically, the end goal is not to just recruit each individual future physician in a vacuum. Rather, the NIH has decided that there is intrinsic value in training a diverse workforce of physicians that: 1) more actively recapitulates the American population at large; and 2) benefits from diversity of backgrounds and ideas.

NOT-OD-20-031: Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity NOT-OD-20-031. NIH
grants.nih.gov

Diversity Matters | Diversity in Extramural Programs

NIH Diversity in Extramural Programs, Find Opportunities to Participate in Diversity Programs, Information about NIH initiatives that promote scientific workforce diversity, Increasing scientific breakthroughs through diversity for NIH Funded Researchers, Extramural Diversity that supports NIH...
extramural-diversity.nih.gov

You can choose to disagree that having a diverse workforce has intrinsic value, but as @Goro highlighted, the MCAT is only one aspect to consider when assessing applicants. And if a school is trying to build the best class of 200 students with diversity of backgrounds and ideas rather than selecting individual applicants in a vacuum, then whether someone got a 517 or a 514 may not be the most important consideration.
 
GoSpursGo said:
This is somewhat tangential to the original post (where I generally agree, the school is probably trying to have their cake and eat it by recruiting URMs while not needing to worry about where they stack up academically). But I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about diversity recruitment as it pertains to medical school admissions. The point is not to "level the playing field" and reward URMs with admission to medical schools through affirmative action, which more or less is kind of how it works for undergrad admissions. Basically, the end goal is not to just recruit each individual future physician in a vacuum. Rather, the NIH has decided that there is intrinsic value in training a diverse workforce of physicians that: 1) more actively recapitulates the American population at large; and 2) benefits from diversity of backgrounds and ideas.

NOT-OD-20-031: Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity NOT-OD-20-031. NIH
grants.nih.gov

Diversity Matters | Diversity in Extramural Programs

NIH Diversity in Extramural Programs, Find Opportunities to Participate in Diversity Programs, Information about NIH initiatives that promote scientific workforce diversity, Increasing scientific breakthroughs through diversity for NIH Funded Researchers, Extramural Diversity that supports NIH...
extramural-diversity.nih.gov

You can choose to disagree that having a diverse workforce has intrinsic value, but as @Goro highlighted, the MCAT is only one aspect to consider when assessing applicants. And if a school is trying to build the best class of 200 students with diversity of backgrounds and ideas rather than selecting individual applicants in a vacuum, then whether someone got a 517 or a 514 may not be the most important consideration.
Click to expand...
If race matters, make it explicit on the application. Say something like we target 20% Asian, 20% black/Latinx or whatnot. Just be open about it. Instead of raising the bar on some groups, they should just treat the score as pass fail, if it is true that 517 and 514 are the same.
 
srirachamayonnaise said:
If race matters, make it explicit on the application. Say something like we target 20% Asian, 20% black/Latinx or whatnot. Just be open about it. Instead of raising the bar on some groups, they should just treat the score as pass fail, if it is true that 517 and 514 are the same.
Click to expand...
I think they are pretty open about it. I highly doubt that there is a specific percentage of any given race/ethnicity that they are targeting in any given year, and I don't know that pinning themselves down to such a specific number would answer the complaints of people who disagree with the policy.

And I'm not saying MCAT shouldn't be considered at all, as there is obviously a huge difference between some imaginary "passing" score like 500 and, say, 522.
 
srirachamayonnaise said:
Basically, either the schools think MCAT has any validity of predicting success or not. If not, don’t set a higher expectation for certain groups and lower for others. If yes, apply that equally to everyone.
Click to expand...
The MCAT predicts success if scores are higher than 500, and disaster if lower than 500.

That's it.
 
GoSpursGo said:
This is somewhat tangential to the original post (where I generally agree, the school is probably trying to have their cake and eat it by recruiting URMs while not needing to worry about where they stack up academically). But I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about diversity recruitment as it pertains to medical school admissions. The point is not to "level the playing field" and reward URMs with admission to medical schools through affirmative action, which more or less is kind of how it works for undergrad admissions. Basically, the end goal is not to just recruit each individual future physician in a vacuum. Rather, the NIH has decided that there is intrinsic value in training a diverse workforce of physicians that: 1) more actively recapitulates the American population at large; and 2) benefits from diversity of backgrounds and ideas.

NOT-OD-20-031: Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity NOT-OD-20-031. NIH
grants.nih.gov

Diversity Matters | Diversity in Extramural Programs

NIH Diversity in Extramural Programs, Find Opportunities to Participate in Diversity Programs, Information about NIH initiatives that promote scientific workforce diversity, Increasing scientific breakthroughs through diversity for NIH Funded Researchers, Extramural Diversity that supports NIH...
extramural-diversity.nih.gov

You can choose to disagree that having a diverse workforce has intrinsic value, but as @Goro highlighted, the MCAT is only one aspect to consider when assessing applicants. And if a school is trying to build the best class of 200 students with diversity of backgrounds and ideas rather than selecting individual applicants in a vacuum, then whether someone got a 517 or a 514 may not be the most important consideration.
Click to expand...

If that were really true we would do much more to recruit doctors who actually reflect our population, for example highly prioritizing low SES students.
 
RocuROMANium said:
Both @Billiam95 and @SooConfused make great points and it's awesome you guys are just having a normal conversation without devolving to the many -ists and -phobias that can arise during theses topics.

I agree in that you have to provide unique pathways and opportunities for certain populations of people to have a chance at getting into medical school but I do believe that you have to do the major requirements that all of the other applicants have to do which includes taking the MCAT. For these pathways I'm cool for lowering the bar a little bit for MCAT scores but not completely removing it. AAMC data shows that basically once you get over a 500 on the MCAT your chances of performing well in medical school are well over 90% if I'm not mistaken so risk of failing out is mitigated and yet the school has a chance to provide a more unique student body. Win win. But one of the worst things you can do is admit students to your medical school with less qualifications based on DIE pathways and then have those students fail out. At my school I have suspicion that this may be occurring.
Click to expand...
I think providing resources for MCAT and setting a 500 minimum would be an ideal move. As you stated, data have shown that after 500, there's not a significant increase in chance of passing medical school. And I'll take it a step further and highlight additional data demonstrating that after 500, the correlation between step scores becomes very weak....add to this the fact that Step 1 is now pass/fail, and the MCAT correlates to Step 2 even less than it does to Step 1, and I think that strategy makes even more sense.

My biggest qualm with the expansion is actually the institutions that they've chosen. There are 2 HBCUs in Pennsylvania, both not far from Penn (Cheyney and Lincoln), but neither of those schools were chosen. Interestingly, they chose Morehouse and Howard (2 HBCUs that pump out tons of medical students and also have their own medical school), Spelman (sister school to Morehouse), Xavier (the school in the US that produces more Black medical students than any other undergrad institution), and Oakwood (honestly not sure why this one was chosen over one like Hampton...probably an Oakwood alum involved with decision-making). But regardless, they are intentionally passing up on local talent to recruit from the most prestigious and low-risk HBCUs. Would be great if they'd do outreach programs with those local schools and provide MCAT prep + a 500 MCAT median and whatever else they think is relevant to add as requirements.

Lastly, I do want to highlight that this program has been going on for several years with Princeton, Penn, and Haverford and I've never seen anybody complain about it. Food for thought.
 
throwaway123342 said:
If that were really true we would do much more to recruit doctors who actually reflect our population, for example highly prioritizing low SES students.
Click to expand...
We try to do that. It's just that there aren't that many of them Last time I looked, only some 400 African-American men applied to MD schools.

Low SES do get priority. The road traveled is an EC, after all.
 
GoSpursGo said:
That's in there too.
Click to expand...
Low SES students are not prioritized even close to the same as URMs. Not even in the same stratosphere. When I was applying to both med school and residency I was being actively recruited because of the color of my skin. Not once was I invited to a "diversity" event because I grew up poor.

Does your GME track how many residents in your program are women or URM? How about low SES? I doubt it, since when I applied they didn't even bother to ask.
 
throwaway123342 said:
Low SES students are not prioritized even close to the same as URMs. Not even in the same stratosphere. When I was applying to both med school and residency I was being actively recruited because of the color of my skin. Not once was I invited to a "diversity" event because I grew up poor.

Does your GME track how many residents in your program are women or URM? How about low SES? I doubt it, since when I applied they didn't even bother to ask.
Click to expand...
Hard for me to say how much low SES is prioritized in med school admissions since I've never been directly involved in the decisions. I agree it is important.

To your second question, I think it depends on your institution and your program. At the faculty level, it DEFINITELY is becoming increasingly discussed how women and URMs are disproportionately not being promoted or represented as first/senior authors on high impact publications. Particularly since 2020, it has noticeably been a focus on hiring women and URMs into faculty positions and retaining them. There even are some "diversity supplements" to specifically promote such hiring and retention, and again unclear how it is being used in practice but the same allowance is made for low SES:

Expired PA-20-222: Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (Admin Supp - Clinical Trial Not Allowed)

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (Admin Supp - Clinical Trial Not Allowed) PA-20-222. NIH
grants.nih.gov
 
GoSpursGo said:
To your second question, I think it depends on your institution and your program. At the faculty level, it DEFINITELY is becoming increasingly discussed how women and URMs are disproportionately not being promoted or represented as first/senior authors on high impact publications. Particularly since 2020, it has noticeably been a focus on hiring women and URMs into faculty positions and retaining them. There even are some "diversity supplements" to specifically promote such hiring and retention, and again unclear how it is being used in practice but the same allowance is made for low SES:

Expired PA-20-222: Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (Admin Supp - Clinical Trial Not Allowed)

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (Admin Supp - Clinical Trial Not Allowed) PA-20-222. NIH
grants.nih.gov
Click to expand...
Right, thats my point. Women and URM is prioritized. Growing up in poverty is not. Odd since that is the single characteristic that is most reflective of our patient population.
 
Current Penn student, URM, did not go through PASS, has worked with the diversity office in roles adjacent to PASS

A quick fact that I want to point out that the article neglects to mention and seems important to the current discussion: socioeconomic status is actually one of the biggest factors in the selection for PASS students. In fact, the PASS program has had a couple of Asian students go through it that were FGLI or immigrants. Yes, the cohorts are predominately black since a lot of the partner institutions are HBCUs, but skin color or ethnicity isn’t a requirement.

Less fact, more rumor: supposedly the program has rejected students that appeared like they wouldn’t need a program like PASS to get into a top caliber med school. The program supposedly does have a massive focus on “uplifting”.

Also typically the program only selects one student per partner school, rarely two, each year so it is still pretty selective to get into. I just wanted to add this to the conversation but I’ll let people form their own opinions.
 
Goro said:
Take a good look at what U Penn requires of applicants. Note that there is not a single mention of a minimum MCAT score or GPA.

Technical Standards for Admission | MD Admissions | Admissions | Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

The Perelman School of Medicine enjoys an international reputation for innovation in areas ranging from leadership training to global health. Our groundbreaking curriculum set a new standard for medical education nationwide. The six-module MD curriculum integrates basic sciences and clinical...
www.med.upenn.edu

General Academic Competencies | MD Admissions | Admissions | Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

The Perelman School of Medicine enjoys an international reputation for innovation in areas ranging from leadership training to global health. Our groundbreaking curriculum set a new standard for medical education nationwide. The six-module MD curriculum integrates basic sciences and clinical...
www.med.upenn.edu

Now here's what the AAMC requires in terms of competencies:
students-residents.aamc.org

What Medical Schools are Looking for: Understanding the 15 Core Competencies

Many medical schools use holistic review and to help define holistic review further, they use 15 Core Competencies as a tool to evaluate your application.
students-residents.aamc.org students-residents.aamc.org

Again, no mention of stats. Note that the humanistic domains outnumber (by a lot) the intellectual domains.

A career in Medicine is not a reward for being a good student or getting the highest grades. SDNers are strongly advised to not fall into the trap of thinking that admitting someone with a lower GPA or MCAT is somehow racist because stats aren't the only admissions criteria.
Click to expand...

But these standards aren't evenly applied. Thats the problem.

You can say that a URM with low MCAT or GPA has other characteristics which make them a compelling candidate and will make excellent physicians.

Ok. Fine. By itself I have no problem with that.

It's just that somehow that isn't applied equally to other groups like Asians.

If an Asian applicant has similar scores and is of a similar socioeconomic background they still need to get higher scores to have the same chance of admission as a URM applicant. That's the unfairness.

Vietnamese applicant, son/daughter of refugees, living in a poor neighborhood, studies hard and gets a mediocre MCAT/GPA.
Black applicant, son/daughter of Nigerian immigrants (Dad is an engineer), lives in a nice suburb, studies hard and also gets a mediocre MCAT/GPA.

Who do you think has the same chance of getting in?

I guess the Asian applicant just isn't creative enough. Or well-rounded enough.

It's not like the IVY league doesn't have a history of changing admissions standards in order to obtain the desired demographics.
 
qwerty89 said:
It's just that somehow that isn't applied equally to other groups like Asians.
Click to expand...
When Asians make up, average, some 30% of all medical student at MD schools (at least 10% at the HBCs!), and up 50% at my own school, you can't say realistically that it's applied unequally to Asians, who make up some 6% of the US population.
qwerty89 said:
If an Asian applicant has similar scores and is of a similar socioeconomic background they still need to get higher scores to have the same chance of admission as a URM applicant. That's the unfairness.
Click to expand...
It's not unfair because, quite simply we need URM doctors. Patient outcomes are riding on it.
qwerty89 said:
Vietnamese applicant, son/daughter of refugees, living in a poor neighborhood, studies hard and gets a mediocre MCAT/GPA.
Black applicant, son/daughter of Nigerian immigrants (Dad is an engineer), lives in a nice suburb, studies hard and also gets a mediocre MCAT/GPA.

Who do you think has the same chance of getting in?
Click to expand...
See above. Also, it's other ORM applicants who are keeping the Vietnamese applicant out. And I repeat: it's not what the applicants want, it's what the med schools want.

And thank you for allowing me to bring this out:
 

Attachments

  • Aggreived entitlement.jpg
    Aggreived entitlement.jpg
    199.3 KB · Views: 113
Goro said:
When Asians make up, average, some 30% of all medical student at MD schools (at least 10% at the HBCs!), and up 50% at my own school, you can't say realistically that it's applied unequally to Asians, who make up some 6% of the US population.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that because a group is overrepresented that it can't still be discriminated against?

Asians were "overrepresented" throughout the University of California system before Affirmative Action was banned. After it was banned they became even more "overrepresented" which suggests that they were being discriminated against in favor of other groups that were being propped up.


And how far should be go with this? Do we have to go specialty by specialty and make sure that each one is equal in proportion to the population at large.

Are young boys getting shortchanged in their healthcare by not having as many male pediatricians?
Should we have programs to get more men into OBGYN? or Derm?

I can't think of a single institution in the country in which its racial or ethnic or gender or educational or socioeconomic, etc breakdowns resemble the population at large.

You see a group that is underrepresented in a given field and automatically assume that they are being discriminated against and, as a result, need policy changes to rectify the "problem".
 
qwerty89 said:
Are you saying that because a group is overrepresented that it can't still be discriminated against?

Asians were "overrepresented" throughout the University of California system before Affirmative Action was banned. After it was banned they became even more "overrepresented" which suggests that they were being discriminated against in favor of other groups that were being propped up.


And how far should be go with this? Do we have to go specialty by specialty and make sure that each one is equal in proportion to the population at large.

Are young boys getting shortchanged in their healthcare by not having as many male pediatricians?
Should we have programs to get more men into OBGYN? or Derm?

I can't think of a single institution in the country in which its racial or ethnic or gender or educational or socioeconomic, etc breakdowns resemble the population at large.

You see a group that is underrepresented in a given field and automatically assume that they are being discriminated against and, as a result, need policy changes to rectify the "problem".
Click to expand...
Discrimination is a med school saying "we have too many Asians". URM admissions is not discrimination because med schools do not do that. And, professional school admissions have been given a carve out by the Supreme Court, unlike UG schools.
 
Grutter vs Bollinger?

"Race-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time. The Court takes the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admissions formula and will terminate its use of racial preferences as soon as practicable. The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today." - Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

Limited in time? Where in the world has it ever been limited in time? Pakistan had programs for east Pakistan. The programs continued even after that region became Bangladesh. In India you have had various groups campaigning in get included in the "backwards caste" category in order to get benefits (government seats, college & university admissions, etc). In Malaysia you had the majority Malays get preferences decades ago over the Chinese minority.

I wonder where that 25 year period came from? Which law school text? Based on historical analysis or just a nice random round number to work with? Either way the expiration date according to the Supreme Court is 2028. We got 6 more years.
 
Goro said:
When Asians make up, average, some 30% of all medical student at MD schools (at least 10% at the HBCs!), and up 50% at my own school, you can't say realistically that it's applied unequally to Asians, who make up some 6% of the US population.

It's not unfair because, quite simply we need URM doctors. Patient outcomes are riding on it.

See above. Also, it's other ORM applicants who are keeping the Vietnamese applicant out. And I repeat: it's not what the applicants want, it's what the med schools want.

And thank you for allowing me to bring this out:
Click to expand...
1) You can make that assertion if Asian applicants tend to be more qualified on average, which they are. In that case, Asian applicants are being placed in medical school specifically because they are highly qualified.

2) This is an odd take. Racial discrimination is acceptable as long as there is some justification for that discrimination? You are opening up huge can of worms there

3) This whole conversation is moot really, I am very hopeful the court strikes down this logic in November.
 
Why is it thought to be helpful to get rid of the MCAT requirement for these low-SES URM applicants? Is it because the MCAT cost is too expensive and serves as a financial barrier? (The AAMC has a fee waiver program to help financially struggling applicants pay for the MCAT.) Or is it because low-SES URM applicants are considered incapable of performing well enough on the MCAT? If we ought to assume that these applicants are incapable of performing well enough on the MCAT, why should we expect that they’ll succeed in medical school?
 
Goro said:
When Asians make up, average, some 30% of all medical student at MD schools (at least 10% at the HBCs!), and up 50% at my own school, you can't say realistically that it's applied unequally to Asians, who make up some 6% of the US population.

It's not unfair because, quite simply we need URM doctors. Patient outcomes are riding on it.

See above. Also, it's other ORM applicants who are keeping the Vietnamese applicant out. And I repeat: it's not what the applicants want, it's what the med schools want.

And thank you for allowing me to bring this out:
Click to expand...
I'm always torn on this subject. Yes outcomes are better with same race physicians for some minority groups. The question I always have is: why is that? I've read lots of different theories and suspect its little bits of most of them.

Just saying we need more physicians who are members of that minority group is fine, but that's more treating the symptom than treating the cause. I'd rather take the underlying reasons and fix those. It certainly won't be easy, and the treat-the-symptom approach is fine until we figure out how to do it in a better way.

And that cartoon is not at all applicable to medical school unless admission rate overall for applicants is 100%.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
Making an AI app that generates MCQ's from medical school lectures.
Replies
11
Views
1K
turtleai
T
Emily_N_C
MD Need Guidance on Transferring into a U.S. Medical Program after Studying Abroad
Replies
3
Views
706
Dral
Dral
PathNeuroIMorFM
  • Question Question
Emailing a program that didn't invite me?
Replies
12
Views
1K
DOFOSHO
D
S
Penn Highlands Psychiatry Residency program
Replies
0
Views
449
shrinkmed
S
aricena318
What to do After Medical School
Replies
8
Views
1K
BreadXray
B
Top