Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I want to know how everyone feels about prop 54. If it passes, it basically means no more racial identification on AMCAS for public universities. I'd like to start the discussion by saying I'm for it and here is why:
When people see prop 54 in the context of med schools and schools in general, a lot will say "No way! Everyone in our schools will end up white or asian and we'll lose 'diversity.'" Yes, we'll lose diversity in the sense of the color of med students' skin will be but are we really losing diversity in the important sense of the word.
I think the problem with (med) schools trying to make their student population "diverse" is they think just by having certain ethnic groups represented, they are diverse. I think what ends up happening is for the most part, their student populations may come from different ethnicities but as far as socioeconomic backgrounds are concerned, they are highly homogenous. Speak English you say?
Basically, I think many of the underrepresented minorty applicants come from decent homes with medium to high incomes and have probably had just as many opportunities that any other applicant may have had. If he or she came from a very similar background as 80% of the other applicants, in a sense they are not increasing diversity in the school at all. Sure you have different ethnicities represented when they get in but when you look at socioeconomic backgrounds, everyone still looks the same.
So if applicant A gets into a school because he is part of an underrepresented minority with a 3.0 and 27 on the MCAT while applicant B gets rejected with a 3.6 and 31 on the MCAT because she is white or asian, that's not fair if they came from the same backgrounds and had the same opportunities. Now, you could make an argument for applicant A if he came from a disadvantaged background but what if he came from the same middle to upper income family that applicant B did?
I guess an argument people like to use is: well, applicant A is from an underrepresented minority and will be better able to treat minority patients. I think that makes no sense if that applicant was born and raised in the U.S. and only speaks English (the way many of the "underrepresented minorities" are.) Think about it. Who would be better able to help out a hispanic patient that only speaks Spanish: a hispanic doctor that doesn't speak any spanish or a white/asian doctor that speaks Spanish. I think it makes no sense to automatically assume that underrepresented minorities will be better able to serve the minority population.
I'm highly interested in how people feel about prop 54. Here are some links to check out:
AAMC web page showing the difference in GPA and MCAT scores among applicants/matriculants based on ethnicity:
http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/famg6b2002a.htm
Text of prop 54:
http://www.racialprivacy.org/language.htm
Alexander
When people see prop 54 in the context of med schools and schools in general, a lot will say "No way! Everyone in our schools will end up white or asian and we'll lose 'diversity.'" Yes, we'll lose diversity in the sense of the color of med students' skin will be but are we really losing diversity in the important sense of the word.
I think the problem with (med) schools trying to make their student population "diverse" is they think just by having certain ethnic groups represented, they are diverse. I think what ends up happening is for the most part, their student populations may come from different ethnicities but as far as socioeconomic backgrounds are concerned, they are highly homogenous. Speak English you say?
Basically, I think many of the underrepresented minorty applicants come from decent homes with medium to high incomes and have probably had just as many opportunities that any other applicant may have had. If he or she came from a very similar background as 80% of the other applicants, in a sense they are not increasing diversity in the school at all. Sure you have different ethnicities represented when they get in but when you look at socioeconomic backgrounds, everyone still looks the same.
So if applicant A gets into a school because he is part of an underrepresented minority with a 3.0 and 27 on the MCAT while applicant B gets rejected with a 3.6 and 31 on the MCAT because she is white or asian, that's not fair if they came from the same backgrounds and had the same opportunities. Now, you could make an argument for applicant A if he came from a disadvantaged background but what if he came from the same middle to upper income family that applicant B did?
I guess an argument people like to use is: well, applicant A is from an underrepresented minority and will be better able to treat minority patients. I think that makes no sense if that applicant was born and raised in the U.S. and only speaks English (the way many of the "underrepresented minorities" are.) Think about it. Who would be better able to help out a hispanic patient that only speaks Spanish: a hispanic doctor that doesn't speak any spanish or a white/asian doctor that speaks Spanish. I think it makes no sense to automatically assume that underrepresented minorities will be better able to serve the minority population.
I'm highly interested in how people feel about prop 54. Here are some links to check out:
AAMC web page showing the difference in GPA and MCAT scores among applicants/matriculants based on ethnicity:
http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/famg6b2002a.htm
Text of prop 54:
http://www.racialprivacy.org/language.htm
Alexander
