Reverse Discrimination in Admissions Process?

[martinelli]

Hi,
First, thanks for being so cordial with your response. Others haven't been quite as merciful.

ok 2 ideas.
Let's say you are AA or Native American. Are you really going to claim this has no effect on your app???

I actually agreed that being African American or Native American affect your application considerably. Despite the fact that I don't belong to either of these groups; I do support efforts of some state school to recruit qualify applicants into their program. why? Because as a state institution, the school needs to ensure that ALL their citizens needs are being met. As a patient, I think most African and Native Americans would be more likely to seek care from someone with their same background and ethnicity. I think this is just a fact of life; you identify more with someone who practices the same social and cultural habits as yourself. In additon, most AA and NA don't come from affluent neighborhoods and will be more likely to go back upon graduation.
new addition: I found this on the "Annual ADEA Survey: 2004 graduation class":"Over 72 percent of the black/African American respondents indicated that service to one’s own race/ethnic group was somewhat or highly important in their decision to pursue dentistry as a career. This was about 44 percent for Hispanic/ Latinos, 37 percent for Native Americans, and 34 percent for Asian/Pacific Islanders. It was rated somewhat or highly important by only 13 percent of white respondents. Opportunity to serve vulnerable and low-income populations was rated somewhat or highly important by almost 70 percent of the black/African American respondents and over 55 percent of the Hispanic/Latino respondents. Almost 55 percent of the Asian/Pacific Islander respondents indicated this was of somewhat or high importance to them in selecting dentistry as a career, followed by Native Americans at over 43 percent. Thirty-three percent of the white respondents indicated service to vulnerable and low-income populations was somewhat or highly important in their decision to pursue dentistry as a career."

Another situation. We had 10 white males. All have a 3.9 GPA. 20 DAT. Then we have 2 Asian people. 3.5 GPA. 18 DAT. All have equal ECs and LoRs. Well, since for this game we are going to be blind to race, are you telling me, that if they had to select 10 people, the class would be 10 white guys ? (based on superior numbers, all other things equal)
Is there not the slightest possibility of some admissions person saying "Hm..let's maintain diversity here. It seems we have met a "quota" (so to speak) for white people." Does race not influence the need for diversity?

I am assuming that this is a hypothetical situation. So are you saying that Asian students generally have 0.4 lower GPA and 2 points lower on their DATs compared to Caucasian folks? That they are academically inferior to Caucasians? Do you have stats to back up this claim? I don't have any stats regarding to this statement but my good sense tells me that it is all nonsense.

Again, here you are forgetting the white guys. Yes, more minorities and women are applying. However, an even greater number of white males are applying. Doesn't this imply a skyrocketing of white male acceptances? but is that the case?

Wait...where are the stats for this. According to the Journal of Dental Ed (JDE--Weaver et al 69 (9): 1064 Table 2) analysis of male/female ratio entering dentistry; the percentage of male applicants vs. enrollees have remained virtually the same. Same goes for the women.
Here are the numbers to be exact.
Applicants:
2001: Male applicants: 4179 (56.4%); Woment applicants: 3088 (41.7%)
2002: Male applicants: 4232 (56.1%); Women applicants: 3294 (43.75)
2003: Male applicants: 4545 (55.6%); Women applicants: 3618 (44.3%)
2004: Male applicants: 5288 (565); women applicants: 4142 (43.95)
Enrollees:
2001: Male (2445 (57.3%); women: 1791 (42.0%)
2002: male 2491 (57.0); women: 1869 (42.7%)
2003: male 2530 (55.9%) women: 1980 (43.7%)
2004: male 2564 (57.55) women: 1891 (42.4%)
whew! So, STATISTICALLY, the percentage of male who applied vs. enrolled have remained fairly stable the last few years as opposed to your claim that "even a greater number of males are applying" and are not being accepted.

last remark, i promise. Here you are saying being Asian doesn't affect chances? What if 100 Asians apply to UCSF, all have 4.0. all same EC, LoR. Are all 100 getting in? Wouldn't an adcom say "hm..so many qualified Asians, but why don't we save room for those who need a chance? Why don't we admit 50 Asians, and leave 50 seats for some white and AA students;.." but No, according to your utopia, this doesn't happen.

well, this doesn't really happen in real life; that is, 100 Asians having 4.0 applying to the same school. But a school like UCSF in 2002 (this is the latest data I have; couldn't fine more current ones) actually accepts 8.9% of their Asian applicants (484 app/43enrollees) and ONLY 4.36% of their Caucasian applicants (482appl/21 enrollees). This was also from the JDE. So, it appeared UCSF, a very respectable school too I might add, accepts a disproportionate % of their Asian applicants. Why? I don't know but my only guess is that they accept pretty qualified applicants and it could be that most these applicants (who happen to be Asians) have the academic credentials and background that UCSF like. As for a the U of Colorado, they didn't accept even 1 of their 108 Asian applicants and 87.5 % of their enrollees are Caucasian. what's the deal? I have no idea but schools's selection are pretty arbitrary to me.

Sorry for the long post but I would like to make a final remark. I think find it somewhat irritating that there are some here who imply that their white Caucasian maleness are hindering their chances of going to dental school because this implies that they do not think that all those women/AA/NA/ASIANS did not pay their dues in order to get into dental school and that they DO NOT DESERVE to be there. I resent that implication and I'm sure a lot of the women/AA/NA/ASIANS feel the same.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AUG2UAG]

Hi,
First, thanks for being so cordial with your response. Others haven't been quite as merciful.

I actually agreed that being African American or Native American affect your application considerably. Despite the fact that I don't belong to either of these groups; I do support efforts of some state school to recruit qualify applicants into their program. why? Because as a state institution, the school needs to ensure that ALL their citizens needs are being met. As a patient, I think most African and Native Americans would be more likely to seek care from someone with their same background and ethnicity. I think this is just a fact of life; you identify more with someone who practices the same social and cultural habits as yourself. In additon, most AA and NA don't come from affluent neighborhoods and will be more likely to go back upon graduation.



I am assuming that this is a hypothetical situation. So are you saying that Asian students generally have 0.4 lower GPA and 2 points lower on their DATs compared to Caucasian folks? That they are academically inferior to Caucasians? Do you have stats to back up this claim? I don't have any stats regarding to this statement but my good sense tells me that it is all nonsense.


Wait...where are the stats for this. According to the Journal of Dental Ed (JDE--Weaver et al 69 (9): 1064 Table 2) analysis of male/female ratio entering dentistry; the percentage of male applicants vs. enrollees have remained virtually the same. Same goes for the women.
Here are the numbers to be exact.
Applicants:
2001: Male applicants: 4179 (56.4%); Woment applicants: 3088 (41.7%)
2002: Male applicants: 4232 (56.1%); Women applicants: 3294 (43.75)
2003: Male applicants: 4545 (55.6%); Women applicants: 3618 (44.3%)
2004: Male applicants: 5288 (565); women applicants: 4142 (43.95)
Enrollees:
2001: Male (2445 (57.3%); women: 1791 (42.0%)
2002: male 2491 (57.0); women: 1869 (42.7%)
2003: male 2530 (55.9%) women: 1980 (43.7%)
2004: male 2564 (57.55) women: 1891 (42.4%)
whew! So, STATISTICALLY, the percentage of male who applied vs. enrolled have remained fairly stable the last few years as opposed to your claim that "even a greater number of males are applying" and are not being accepted.




well, this doesn't really happen in real life; that is, 100 Asians having 4.0 applying to the same school. But a school like UCSF in 2002 (this is the latest data I have; couldn't fine more current ones) actually accepts 8.9% of their Asian applicants (484 app/43enrollees) and ONLY 4.36% of their Caucasian applicants (482appl/21 enrollees). This was also from the JDE. So, it appeared UCSF, a very respectable school too I might add, accepts a disproportionate % of their Asian applicants. Why? I don't know but my only guess is that they accept pretty qualified applicants and it could be that most these applicants (who happen to be Asians) have the academic credentials and background that UCSF like. As for a the U of Colorado, they didn't accept even 1 of their 108 Asian applicants and 87.5 % of their enrollees are Caucasian. what's the deal? I have no idea but schools's selection are pretty arbitrary to me.

Sorry for the long post but I would like to make a final remark. I think find it somewhat irritating that there are some here who imply that their white Caucasian maleness are hindering their chances of going to dental school because this implies that they do not think that all those women/AA/NA/ASIANS did not pay their dues in order to get into dental school and that they DO NOT DESERVE to be there. I resent that implication and I'm sure a lot of the women/AA/NA/ASIANS feel the same.

would you write my paper for me?

 

[martinelli]

would you write my paper for me?

Hahahaha.. But I'm seriously considering writing a research paper about this issue so we can verify some of the myths that is flying around in dentistry.