Supreme Court Ruling, Race based admissions.

[anonymoustiger]

Sorry, I thought that was well covered.

I hate the term ORM personally, and agree that the concept of grouping all Asians together leads to great harm. I didn't think that was in question.

And for the record I think what Harvard was doing is wrong, and was absolutely anti-Asian discrimination.

But I also think race-blind admissions is a bad practice that will hurt students from historically undeserved groups, including many of the PI populations I work with heavily.

Sounds good. Glad to hear your thoughts. I think those actions of Harvard and other schools bled into/affected medical school and other graduate admissions, because people question why discrimination can't similarly occur in graduate/professional admissions. While it's nice to hear that maybe you or one or two other school admissions member might keep it in mind, I don't think it was assuring enough as a whole.

Race-blind admissions will certainly hurt representation from historically underserved groups. Yes, this is a reality and I don't think that is good. The statistics from Berkeley shows that. However, I hope that you and others of the admissions committee keep in mind what I said and the articles I linked later in the post. AA protects historically underrepresented groups and other racial groups from past, present and future discrimination. There is countless history at our disposal that indicates the ill treatment of the Black community. However, what admissions people may miss is the relatively new concept of casteism and its effect both mentally, physically, health-wise and education-wise (see the rest of my post recent post). If you serve on the admissions team, it's your responsibility to also evaluate other historically underrepresented groups within the Asian diasporas. I was alarmed that a professor/faculty hadn't reflected on this and was quick to knock me down for trying to highlight it. I'm not as well educated or well spoken as you maybe, but don't miss the forest.

I don't know how else to phrase it without sounding insensitive. Is it impossible for admissions to evaluate individual experiences? Maybe I don't understand how med admissions work differently from undergrad.

Regardless, @eigen (and others) I didn't appreciate being called insensitive for trying to highlight something, which I believe a faculty member and others with more lived experience should have been able to rationalize and speak on in an equal manner to the populations you represent. Think of how many Laotian, Cambodian, Vietnamese physicians you've seen. Think of how many times you've discussed casteism and nuanced experiences amongst your Indian colleagues (if you have any). Asians are more likely to internalize racism and discrimination in the workplace/education/elsewhere and they just keep their heads down and push. Just because you and others don't hear about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist in a historical sense. Recent events are also part of history as much as events occurring hundreds of years ago.

I don't think anything more fruitful will come from my discussion of this topic, but just hoping it atleast offered a different perspective as you evaluate future applications.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Moko]

My problem is with some affirmative action proponents is that they make intellectually dishonest and bad faith arguments.

Intellectual honesty, integrity, and good faith arguments have long been absent from public discussion of any contentious issues. Any reasonable debate is usually hijacked by the extremes in both sides. It's much easier to mobilize people who are angry and riled up. AA is no different. Just my thoughts.

 

[darkamgine]

Given academia’s reactionary and liberal leanings, one would expect all these elite universities to defend affirmative action as a “reparation program for the historically underserved/ historically excluded”- which mainly applies to generational African Americans-along the lines of what you are stating. Not that this reason would have passed the muster with SCOTUS, but that might have atleast influenced public discourse and debates on the reparation programs which seems to be a hot take now in several liberal states.

However, the elite universities and their deans/ DEI counsels’ exclusive focus on “ educational benefits of diversity” as a justification for affirmative action, intentional stereotyping and discrimination against another minority groups ( Asian Americans), and the implicit co-opting of this flawed admission policy to benefit its ALDC students, sealed the fate of AA.

Quoting Chief Justice Roberts, "Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,"

When president Lyndon B Johnson used executive order to take "affirmative action", he said "You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, "you are free to compete with all the others," and still justly believe that you have been completely fair."

Academics, especially because they taught the history of the United States, understand how crippling the laws and discrimination have been for African-Americans. Even today, people from the Jim Crow era are alive. Unlike women who have basically equalized the number of men in medicine, blacks are still URM.

You can justify the law by saying there should be no racial discrimination. I would agree that any discrimination against a race is unlawful. However, I argue that one must be ignorant of the history or insensitive to say certain races have not been harmed for centuries because of past US law. As Johnson quote is appropriate, if no reparations are made, fairness of "no racial discrimination" is as hollow as ever. Has enough been done to help these oppressed groups, mainly blacks but also native americans? What would the objective results say?

Its quite sad that most people cannot imagine being someone of a different race. They may even empathize with lawbreakers because that could be them one day, but not someone of a different race. People see their side of the struggle yet cannot see others. This is why the debate on both sides feels so tone-deaf, screaming my pain is worse, I deserve better.

You can say this was a victory for racial equality yet I would argue LBJ's quote from the 60s can still apply today. Is it a fair race? I still cannot say so.

Edit: a word

 

[Med Ed]

Absolutely. They were mentioned upthread, but here they are again for convenience.

Data from AAMC about the predictive validity of the new MCAT (see pages 20-25)
Study showing that medical school performance is a good predictor of PGY-1 evals (see Table II). Ignore the MCAT findings: that was for the old MCAT. If you compare their calculated Step correlations with the correlations reported in the above AAMC link for the new MCAT, you can see the uplift is astonishing.

Turns out I got the Step score correlation with PGY-1 evals wrong. It was just medical school performance metrics like GPAs that were truly predictive on that front. Apologies for the mistake.

Unfortunately these predictive tools are of limited value when evaluating individual applicants. When you're sitting in a committee meeting discussing someone's file, the question of whether they have a 97% versus 99% chance of graduating in 5 years, or that their combined GPA/MCAT profile will explain 59% of their future Step 2 score, it doesn't mean anything useful. Metrics are only really compelling at the lower ends (MCAT <500, GPA <3.0), when the odds of academic trouble increase substantially.

 

[Kierkegaard's Bud]

Unfortunately these predictive tools are of limited value when evaluating individual applicants. When you're sitting in a committee meeting discussing someone's file, the question of whether they have a 97% versus 99% chance of graduating in 5 years, or that their combined GPA/MCAT profile will explain 59% of their future Step 2 score, it doesn't mean anything useful. Metrics are only really compelling at the lower ends (MCAT <500, GPA <3.0), when the odds of academic trouble increase substantially.

I think what people in threads like these need is a serious instruction in statistics, I have seen some blunders so far.

 

[deleted961749]

Unfortunately these predictive tools are of limited value when evaluating individual applicants. When you're sitting in a committee meeting discussing someone's file, the question of whether they have a 97% versus 99% chance of graduating in 5 years, or that their combined GPA/MCAT profile will explain 59% of their future Step 2 score, it doesn't mean anything useful. Metrics are only really compelling at the lower ends (MCAT <500, GPA <3.0), when the odds of academic trouble increase substantially.

I think what people in threads like these need is a serious instruction in statistics, I have seen some blunders so far.

I was one of those who made a serious blunder earlier with percentages vs raw numbers. Could you explain to me where I am wrong with the following reasoning:

The MCAT and GPA are among the only objective measures on an applicant's profile. Both have been shown to strongly correlate with medical student performance up to the highest percentiles. Top medical schools get many more applicants than they have seats. To get the students who are most likely to perform at the highest level in medical school (including during clerkships where they receive performance evaluations from actual physicians), MCAT and GPA should be the most important factors by far (as they currently are). That's not to say that they should be the only factors. Far from it. I just mean to say that those who insist that these measures are as worthless as height are being intellectually dishonest.

 

[senecca]

You still haven't answered my question about whether you have any personal experience with the process / are planning to go to medical school.

I don’t see the relevance here. Is your answer going to change depending on my response?

 

[darkamgine]

I was one of those who made a serious blunder earlier with percentages vs raw numbers. Could you explain to me where I am wrong with the following reasoning:

The MCAT and GPA are among the only objective measures on an applicant's profile. Both have been shown to strongly correlate with medical student performance up to the highest percentiles. Top medical schools get many more applicants than they have seats. To get the students who are most likely to perform at the highest level in medical school (including during clerkships where they receive performance evaluations from actual physicians), MCAT and GPA should be the most important factors by far (as they currently are). That's not to say that they should be the only factors. Far from it. I just mean to say that those who insist that these measures are as worthless as height are being intellectually dishonest.

You can make the same argument for undergrad. So top schools should take apps with 4.0 and 1600 SAT and then consider 3.95 + 1580s. No need to consider 3.9 + 1560s, they would be significantly worse and graduate only 96% instead of 98% of the time. Do you think this is reasonable? No one is saying objective stats are completely useless, just that they are not as important as some students think.

 

[deleted961749]

You can make the same argument for undergrad. So top schools should take apps with 4.0 and 1600 SAT and then consider 3.95 + 1580s. No need to consider 3.9 + 1560s, they would be significantly worse and graduate only 96% instead of 98% of the time. Do you think this is reasonable? No one is saying objective stats are completely useless, just that they are not as important as some students think.

The key difference here, as I've repeatedly pointed out, is that the MCAT is predictive not just of academic performance in medical school, but also clerkship GPAs, where a large portion of your grade is determined by evaluations from actual physicians. No such measure exists by which to assess the SAT's predictive validity for success beyond college.

Edit: Also, my point was that MCAT is a strong predictive tool that cannot at all be compared to something like height (a comparison that was drawn earlier in this thread). Others seem to think that the MCAT stops mattering at a very low threshold (~500). I believe otherwise. This is why the average MCAT scores of top medical schools (and average SAT scores of top colleges for that matter) are all above the 95th percentile.

 

[senecca]

No one is saying objective stats are completely useless, just that they are not as important as some students think.

We made them not important.

 

[darkamgine]

The key difference here, as I've repeatedly pointed out, is that the MCAT is predictive not just of academic performance in medical school, but also clerkship GPAs, where a large portion of your grade is determined by evaluations from actual physicians. No such measure exists by which to assess the SAT's predictive validity for success beyond college.

I don't think you understand what med school clerkship GPAs are. It is a combination of Shelf exams (multiple choice questions) + evaluations. Every school/clerkship use a pretty much random combination of the two. Guess which one probably correlates with MCAT.

So you think SAT is not all that useful after college. You think MCAT is going to predictive of who is going to be a good physician? The degree of correlation will be low to where it cannot be predictive for any single individual.

 

[Kierkegaard's Bud]

I was one of those who made a serious blunder earlier with percentages vs raw numbers. Could you explain to me where I am wrong with the following reasoning:

The MCAT and GPA are among the only objective measures on an applicant's profile. Both have been shown to strongly correlate with medical student performance up to the highest percentiles. Top medical schools get many more applicants than they have seats. To get the students who are most likely to perform at the highest level in medical school (including during clerkships where they receive performance evaluations from actual physicians), MCAT and GPA should be the most important factors by far (as they currently are). That's not to say that they should be the only factors. Far from it. I just mean to say that those who insist that these measures are as worthless as height are being intellectually dishonest.

To make this rudimentary, y=mx where y is success in medical school and beyond, and m is an “your objective measure”, and m turns out to be like 0.57, that means some other things account for 43%. Now does this mean the objective measure is useless, no but to latch on it like a newborn paints an incomplete picture.

Another golden rule of statistics is data applies to populations not individuals.

 

[Moko]

Quoting Chief Justice Roberts, "Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it - but only when it benefits us"

FTFY. It's convenient for those on the right who claim to want to eliminate racial discrimination, but only do so in cases when it benefits them. These same arguments are not surprisingly absent when minority groups are being disproportionately and adversely affected or discriminated against with regards to voting, overall access to higher education, health, etc. Typically accompanied by a generous helping of bogus mental gymnastics to appear "fair" and "principled". Integrity and consistency are in short supply nowadays among our elected and non-elected leaders. So I'd take anything they say with a handful of salt, especially when said in a vacuum. Just my thoughts.

 

[darkamgine]

Edit: Also, my point was that MCAT is a strong predictive tool that cannot at all be compared to something like height (a comparison that was drawn earlier in this thread). Others seem to think that the MCAT stops mattering at a very low threshold (~500). I believe otherwise. This is why the average MCAT scores of top medical schools (and average SAT scores of top colleges for that matter) are all above the 95th percentile.

I am not going to say a 510 and 500 are going to be the same. I will say 518 and 520 will not be significant when deciding between applicants. A flaw or impressive extracurricular can easily make up the difference.

 

[deleted961749]

I don't think you understand what med school clerkship GPAs are. It is a combination of Shelf exams (multiple choice questions) + evaluations. Every school/clerkship use a pretty much random combination of the two. Guess which one probably correlates with MCAT.

So you think SAT is not all that useful after college. You think MCAT is going to predictive of who is going to be a good physician? The degree of correlation will be low to where it cannot be predictive for any single individual.

I understand that. The report I linked singles out clerkship exam performance as having a higher correlation with MCAT score than overall clerkship GPA. Thus, it is logical to conclude that the evals are less correlated. However, this does not change the fact that the composite GPA still exhibits a strong, statistically significant correlation. I think it would be interesting to see the correlation for the evals alone, but unfortunately, I cannot find that data.

I think that the MCAT and GPA are the best tools that we have for that task. That is why in every survey of admissions personnel, these two factors are always ranked the highest in terms of importance. Again, I'm not saying that they should be the end-all-be-all (and never have, not sure where you're getting that impression). I'm just saying I agree with their current place in the admissions hierarchy.

I agree wholeheartedly with your latest reply.

 

[deleted961749]

To make this rudimentary, y=mx where y is success in medical school and beyond, and m is an “your objective measure”, and m turns out to be like 0.57, that means some other things account for 43%. Now does this mean the objective measure is useless, no but to latch on it like a newborn paints an incomplete picture.

Another golden rule of statistics is data applies to populations not individuals.

Very true. I think what I mean to say is that minute MCAT and GPA should not be used to admit any one individual over another. Instead, top schools should aim to admit a class (a population instead of an individual) that has a high average MCAT and GPA. Of course, that's not to say that they should ignore all other factors when crafting their class. It's just that, given the research on average outcomes for various MCAT scores, I think it makes sense for top schools to have these high averages (as they currently do).

 

[Mr.Smile12]

For those who really have lots of time, here are recent results of a very impressive survey on the "Asian American" experience. Search through their website.

What It Means To Be Asian in America

In a Pew Research Center analysis based on dozens of focus groups, Asian American participants described navigating their own identity.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[anonymoustiger]

When president Lyndon B Johnson used executive order to take "affirmative action", he said "You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, "you are free to compete with all the others," and still justly believe that you have been completely fair."

Academics, especially because they taught the history of the United States, understand how crippling the laws and discrimination have been for African-Americans. Even today, people from the Jim Crow era are alive. Unlike women who have basically equalized the number of men in medicine, blacks are still URM.

You can justify the law by saying there should be no racial discrimination. I would agree that any discrimination against a race is unlawful. However, I argue that one must be ignorant of the history or insensitive to say certain races have been harmed for centuries because of past US law. As Johnson quote is appropriate, if no reparations are made, fairness of "no racial discrimination" is as hollow as ever. Has enough been done to help these oppressed groups, mainly blacks but also native americans? What would the objective results say?

Its quite sad that most people cannot imagine being someone of a different race. They may even empathize with lawbreakers because that could be them one day, but not someone of a different race. People see their side of the struggle yet cannot see others. This is why the debate on both sides feels so tone-deaf, screaming my pain is worse, I deserve better.

You can say this was a victory for racial equality yet I would argue LBJ's quote from the 60s can still apply today. Is it a fair race? I still cannot say so.

No offense, but you also succumbed to the bolded section. Look at how you immediately assumed I was pitting people against each other. You didn't quote/highlight/address the rest of my post about cultural solidarity. Furthermore, like eigen you never once acknowledge that certain subgroups/groups of Asians may experience a different reality than the overall or particular Asian groups. Not once. Yet doing that may have alleviated a lot of tension (not just you but in general). You offer no solution either, only the bad without even considering the possibility you may be grossly generalizing people yourself. Yet, despite this you expect solidarity? Yikes.

I agree that it's hard for people being someone in a different race and the tone deaf nature of discussion. I think many Asian Americans may feel their histories are not important. In school, we learn about MLK, Jim Crow Laws, Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, etc. We also learn about Asian related history as well. However, it seems that much of Asian history as it relates the US is largely forgotten? It seems difficult for people to grasp the historical oppression and damage done to them as well. See below:

On systemic racism against Asians (1790-2021/present):

Timeline of Systemic Racism Against AAPI

exhibits.stanford.edu

Exposing Caste Discrimination in the United States

Phillip Martin and Suraj Yengde explored how the caste system has followed many migrants from India, Nepal, and elsewhere in South Asia to the United States. They discussed caste discrimination in India and issues of caste, race, and ethnic discrimination in the United States.

berkleycenter.georgetown.edu

 

[deleted1156722]

FTFY. It's convenient for those on the right who claim to want to eliminate racial discrimination, but only do so in cases when it benefits them. These same arguments are not surprisingly absent when minority groups are being adversely affected or discriminated against with regards to voting, health, etc. Typically accompanied by a generous helping of bogus mental gymnastics to appear "fair" and "principled". Integrity and consistency are in short supply nowadays among our elected and non-elected leaders. So I'd take anything they say with a handful of salt, especially when said in a vacuum. Just my thoughts.

In this quote, Chief Justice Roberts is referring to discrimination against Asian Americans when colleges employ AA- reflecting back on Harvard’s admissions and personality ratings.
I wouldn’t consider this particular statement in this context “mental gymnastics” or “bogus”…

After all, one can see that there is a Hispanic justice and a Black justice on the SCOTUS, but where is the democratic representation of Asian American or Native American justice to round out the SCOTUS demographics ( if indeed the liberals really care about proportional demographic representation that they constantly harp about in medical school admissions)? President Obama nominated Merrick Garland instead-after his previous nominee Justice Sotamayor. We can all agree that actions speak louder than words!

 

[darkamgine]

No offense, but you also succumbed to the bolded section. Look at how you immediately assumed I was pitting people against each other. You didn't quote/highlight/address the rest of my post about cultural solidarity. Furthermore, like eigen you never once acknowledge that certain subgroups/groups of Asians may experience a different reality than the overall or particular Asian groups. Not once. Yet doing that may have alleviated a lot of tension (not just you but in general). You offer no solution either, only the bad without even considering the possibility you may be grossly generalizing people yourself. Yet, despite this you expect solidarity? Yikes.

I agree that it's hard for people being someone in a different race. I think many Asian Americans may feel their histories are not important. In school, we learn about MLK, Jim Crow Laws, Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, etc. We also learn about Asian related history as well. However, it seems that much of Asian history as it relates the US is largely forgotten? It seems difficult for people to grasp the historical oppression and damage done to them as well. See below:

On systemic racism against Asians (1790-2021/present):

Timeline of Systemic Racism Against AAPI

exhibits.stanford.edu

And you realize that I am an ORM, one of which has experiences some of the things you described. I never said anything negative against Asian-Americans as I am one myself. I mentioned in past posts that the only win was the abolishment of anti-american sentiment at top undergrad admissions, something I had personally experienced.

I do not see how you showed cultural solidarity to others who were not in your position. Between backhanded remarks and ignorance, I fail to see how you present yourself in a positive manner to those who are suffering. You keep presenting your side without the other such that I and others feel like we have point out the flaws.

 

[anonymoustiger]

And you realize that I am an ORM, one of which has experiences some of the things you described. I never said anything negative against Asian-Americans as I am one myself. I mentioned in past posts that the only win was the abolishment of anti-american sentiment at top undergrad admissions, something I had personally experienced.

I do not see how you showed cultural solidarity to others who were not in your position. Between backhanded remarks and ignorance, I fail to see how you present yourself in a positive manner to those who are suffering. You keep presenting your side without the other such that I and others feel like we have point out the flaws.

And what position am I in? I said already that AA is necessary, but people have felt it's execution was flawed. I asked if there are better methods to which none were presented...

All I said is that the evaluation of each individuals experience with race and ethnicity is important. Rather than just grossly generalizing or overlooking it through the monolithic grouping of Asians into one category, we should look to emphasize how unique experiences can help someone provide equitable healthcare to others (regardless of whether they are the same or different).

I volunteer with low income and underserved communities regularly and my research affects cancer outcomes of one group in particular. I've acknowledged the difficulties experienced by other historically underrepresented communities and said those experience should not be overlooked. I never said I was right. Only to point out alternative viewpoints to people that may clarify why certain groups of people felt the way they did about AA.

How have you helped with cultural solidarity? If you have a better solution please say it. If there's a better/different way to equitably increase the prsence of underserved groups, please let me know. I just didn't see anyone offer nuanced views of certain groups within the Asian diaspora.

 

[darkamgine]

Sorry that my points are never getting across. Seeing how you refuse to acknowledge any of my points and only want me to answer your questions, you can converse with yourself about cultural solidarity.

 

[docdoc912]

And what position am I in? I said already that AA is necessary, but people have felt it's execution was flawed. I asked if there are better methods to which none were presented...

All I said is that the evaluation of each individuals experience with race and ethnicity is important. Rather than just grossly generalizing or overlooking it through the monolithic grouping of Asians into one category, we should look to emphasize how unique experiences can help someone provide equitable healthcare to others (regardless of whether they are the same or different).

I volunteer with low income and underserved communities regularly and my research affects cancer outcomes of one group in particular. I've acknowledged the difficulties experienced by other historically underrepresented communities and said those experience should not be overlooked. I never said I was right. Only to point out alternative viewpoints to people that may clarify why certain groups of people felt the way they did about AA.

How have you helped with cultural solidarity?

No you didn't just say that AA was flawed, you went on about how Jews and African Americans were somehow similar and how if Jews can "overcome" why can't African Americans. You can talk about your struggles as an Asian without bringing others down, without making wrong assumptions about others. You explaining that Asians value education because it is "the only way to the top" and suggesting that African Americans/ Latinos don't as well is racist. How do you know what they value? Even though you are a ORM on a medical application you are still a minority in this country who by your own admission has experienced racism so what is the point of you coming and spewing it here? You will be a physician so maybe check your biases.

 

[anonymoustiger]

That's what I was trying to get at for everyone too. You can have a system which offers equitable healthcare and increase underrepresented physicians without bringing down Asians, as well (vice versa). I don't know how it would be done. I'm not a policy analyst.

Yes, I understand how my reflection of the Jewish community may come across as tone deaf. Here I was trying to show that despite immense discrimination (institutional and otherwise) they resourcefully found a way out. However it took time. Like I said it took one step/foot at a time. One generation at a time. I went on to say that increasing representation of Black, Hispanic and other historically underrepresented groups may be possible in a roundabout way. Specifically, I mentioned the encouragement/gradual movement of these groups into coding/tech jobs, nursing, PA, or other allied health professions. I think this is happening slowly. It's not easy, right or ok, but it takes a lot of time. You saying my implication is one group did it so why can't others is reductive. I acknowledged that it takes time and has to take hold at the bottom up.

I said Asians value education because it is the only way up and out. I don't like the phrasing to the top (didn't say that). It implies some weird superiority imo. Furthermore, your opinion that I'm saying the Hispanic and Black community doesn't value education is an incorrect assumption, as well. Respectfully, that's not what I said. In fact I have seen the opposite. Don't twist my words for your misinterpretations. I grew up in a very racially homogenous state where a vast majority of my friends were the few Black, Hispanic or ethnic families there. A lot of times when I talked to them and was hanging out with their communities/social gatherings, it was a very common theme that they felt the need for money now (not later) to help their families. Thus, some of my friends turned away from medical school in pursuit of software engineering, PA, nursing, all of which are shorter paths to financial freedom. Medical school is a long path that a lot of underrepresented community members don't have the luxury of engaging in. Atleast that's what I've seen/heard at the moment in my albeit limited experience. I don't think I can speak for anyone but myself. However, my reflections were based on trying to take history and current experiences/talks with my friends and volunteering in low income communities. I think efforts should be made to continue recruiting these communities into medicine (MD/DO), but it goes back to the previous paragraph that it takes time. Cultures will adjust over time.

Also @docdoc912 I was attacked first without being offered a chance to clarify and explain, so I just replied in kind! Something about your comments makes it seem like I'm racist. I don't like that. Doesn't feel right.

The reason why I'm attempting to debate still is to highlight other perspectives within a community that is classified as historically overrepresented and to learn as well. Everyone has biases which need to be explored doc. I have spoken extensively in my essays on the importance of challenging my biases and heuristics, but thanks for the suggestion. Beyond the topics you mentioned above, why is it difficult to acknowledge that nuanced experiences of subgroups of Asians? Like I said before, a simple yes I understand and validate your feelings or the feelings of those you're speaking of - would have been awesome. Exercising a little less dismissal would've been great. We can build equity/progress while acknowledging that. Regardless of whether your Asian or otherwise, agree or disagree.

Look I'll leave it with this, so we don't go in circles. I wish the best for everyone and hope the right people get into medical school. Peace.

 

[eigen]

@eigen Not to be too testy, but one might argue that you yourself display a shocking lack of compassion for what some subgroups have been through as well!

Furthermore, like eigen you never once acknowledge that certain subgroups/groups of Asians may experience a different reality than the overall or particular Asian groups. Not once.

I like how you're still saying I haven't acknowledged this after completely ignoring a post where I said exactly that. First you accused me of insensitive comments. Then you said it wasn't that I made insensitive comments, it was that I hadn't commented on a particular thing you thought I should have. Then I wrote a very clear comment explaining it, and even talking specifically about a very underpresented Asian subpopulation I work extensively with that I'm worried will be negatively impacted, and you still keep referencing me, by username, to express your "disappointment" in my responses. At this point, like @darkamgine I'm going to assume that no matter what I say you won't really read or accept it, and stop responding.

I don’t see the relevance here. Is your answer going to change depending on my response?

Yes. I'm here to spend time trying to help and educate people who are trying to become doctors (and other healthcare professionals). I'm not particularly interested in having politically focused debates with someone who's just here to provide "outside commentary".

 

[anonymoustiger]

Listen if you @darkamgine and everyone else are understanding that certain subpopulations of Asians (PI for sure) can be underrepresented, as much as other individuals then we're on the same page. As long as there is a method in place to evaluate those without gross generalizations, then we're good. That's all I was hoping to get across. I'm out. 🤙

 

[deleted961749]

As part of the discussion here, I think this article from a few years ago was an excellent piece on how recent discussions, especially in media, have colored how Affirmative Action is viewed and a lot of the myths about what it is and isn't.

SFFA v. Harvard: How Affirmative Action Myths Mask White Bonus

In the ongoing litigation of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, Harvard faces allegations that its once-heralded admissions process discriminates against Asian Americans. Public discourse has revealed a dominant narrative: affirmative action is viewed as the presumptive cause of...

scholarship.law.bu.edu

This article, on what happened in the late 90s in California when the state banned AA is also worth reading: https://cshe.berkeley.edu/sites/def...ps.cshe.10.2020.bleemer.prop209.8.20.2020.pdf

Both of these articles were excellent reads. Thank you for linking them.

Regarding the first article, I am personally guilty of conflating Harvard's anti-Asian discrimination with its practice of affirmative action. I see now that I was very wrong to make that assumption. Their proposed solution of masking race only at known points of discrimination in the admissions process makes a lot of sense to me, as does the suggestion of dismantling ALDC preference. I hope to see universities conduct more thorough investigations (preferably transparently) and implement these changes in the coming years.

The second article took me a long time to read, and I cannot pretend to understand even half of the statistical techniques employed. But wow, it was also an incredible write-up. The author rigorously quantified the negative impact that Prop 209 had on URM STEM degree attainment, wages decades after graduation, and more. Additionally, they proved that before Prop 209, top UCs did not negatively discriminate against Asians compared to White applicants, unlike Harvard (for those with access, see Appendix E at the official journal link here). Lastly, they showed that race-blind admissions would have yielded only small improvements to long-term outcomes for on-the-margin, non-URM applicants (those who were rejected but likely would have been admitted to Berkeley had they applied after Prop 209 was passed). That is all to say: the author used data to prove that race-conscious admissions practices did work and that their removal had a disproportionately large negative impact on minority applicants well beyond graduation. I'd love to see a follow-up on this with more recent UC data. I'm dying to know if UCs have figured something out and if minority outcomes have improved in the decades since Prop 209. Many other universities would probably really appreciate their insight right about now.

 

[john7991]

Listen if you @darkamgine and everyone else are understanding that certain subpopulations of Asians (PI for sure) can be underrepresented, as much as other individuals then we're on the same page. As long as there is a method in place to evaluate those without gross generalizations, then we're good. That's all I was hoping to get across. I'm out. 🤙

Let’s say Asians switched places with Hispanics. Hispanics are now ORM and Asians are URM. AA in this alternate world exists mainly for the benefit of Asians, blacks, others, because they’re URM. The main Hispanics in medical school are Puerto Rican and Dominican. There’s a lack of Mexican, Colombian, Ecuadorian, and other Hispanic subpopulations in medical schools. Keep in mind that AA exists. In this alternate world of ours, Hispanics wouldn’t say (which is what you said about Asian subpopulations), “well there are subpopulations of Hispanic that are URM but they’re not being given the same AA consideration as Asians and blacks are, therefore it isn’t fair and it’s wrong that supporters of AA don’t recognize that.”

Hispanics wouldn’t say that though because to Hispanics, Latino is Latino.

I guess Asians are just different that way? Or is saying that “underrepresented Asian subpopulations are not given enough consideration in AA” (which I honestly believe is a remarkably weak argument against AA) just an excuse? Do you feel entitled?

The only reason I can see as to why Hispanics in that alternate world would complain about admissions not considering underrepresented Hispanic subpopulations, is because they were feeling spiteful (or entitled) that Asians and blacks were “taking seats,” an excuse as to why they didn’t get into medical school. Instead of blaming themselves which would make them feel like failures (when they shouldn’t feel that way, life goes on, other things in life, or they can try again), they would blame those who “unfairly” benefit from AA. They would look for someone to blame, anyone, anything, including a program created for the sole purpose of helping the underserved progress.

Not written with the intent to offend. Apologies in advance if anyone is offended.

 

[LunaOri]

Not everyone is telling this. Handfull of people typing in this forum doesn't mean everyone is telling. The fact that Top tier like John Hopkins, Harvard, NYU has median MCAT above 520 and GPA 3.9+ denies this. The fact that 85% of 3.8+ and 517+ get admitted says defy that argument. As I told people could create stories in essay and practice interview to give different answers. That's the main issue of credibility of essay and interviews.

You still fail to understand: those accepted with higher stats STILL HAVE ALL THE EXPERIENCES, CHARACTER, ETC, to show that they are the applicants we want. Those with high stats who are not accepted do not.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

For @C++ I think this is the official admissions website for the UC system.

UC statement on SCOTUS decision regarding the use of race in college admissions

A friend also shared


Sorry if I can't figure out IG sharing.

From

SoCal Filipinos

socalfilipinos.org

Also, I am processing why the exemption for the service academies. By extension, can MSIs and HBCUs thus could use AA?

 

[LunaOri]

No. Not Med school interviews yet. But in research Labs, Work related interviews I always be like me. I am hoping my work will speak for me during the interview. When people put enough work to maintain good GPA, MCAT score, Research work, Volunteer work experience, it will speak for themselves. All are correlated. But as you mentioned whether people game it, Sure.. unfortunately

Practicing for interviews is not “gaming the system”. Whether traditional interviews or MMI, we can assess your communication skills and other factors we wish to consider. Your grades may get you the interview, but the interview gets you the acceptance (or not).

 

[sugasathya]

It's disheartening to see ethnic groups in the US pitted against one another.

The US has a process allowing 13,000 foreign-educated medical graduates for year 2022, including both US and non-US citizens, to enter as residents. In recent years, India has the follwing system involving a 3-hour entrance exam after high school that tests Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Medical colleges consider only this score. Students scoring above ~92 percentile typically gain admission into government-funded colleges where tuition is less than 1000 USD per year. Students who score above the 50th percentile can be admitted into private colleges where the tuition exceeds 30,000 USD per year. This amount is prohibitively high for most middle-income families in India (even Educational loan is not possible unless the family has that networth). So typically only students from wealthy backgrounds with scores around the 50th percentile can afford it. Students with higher percentiles, such as 70 or 80, often cannot afford these private institutions and they don't study medicine.

It's important to note that these students are admitted solely based on the 50th percentile of that entrance exam score after high school and their financial capabilities. Criteria like clinical work, high GPA in high school, research, essays, and interviews are not considered. Worse still, when students fail to clear this 50th percentile, they often resort to medical colleges in countries like the Philippines and Eastern Europe. Most of them study for medical degree for 5-6 years after high school.

The match rate for Non-US citizen IMG’s is 55 percent.

On this forum, we seem to be undervaluing the challenging post-undergrad Med school admission process in US. There's a tendency to underestimate the consistent effort required to achieve a 3.9+ GPA and the extraordinary commitment needed to score 515+. We might also be downplaying the importance of expressing our personal qualities through essays and interviews because some deserving candidates miss out due to this process. Yet, our system seems to be creating a pathway for residency less deserving candidates than US undergrads who couldn't get into med school.

I want to clarify that I am not anti-immigrant. We have so many successful and wonderful Physicians from Indian MBBS working in US, but typically they got through before 10 years ( before current NEET entrance exams) and scored high in both school and entrance tests.

But it's worth discussing the thousands of lost opportunities for deserving candidates within the US, whether they are underrepresented groups, high scoring students, or those with remarkable character and extracurricular accomplishments.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

On this forum, we seem to be undervaluing the challenging post-undergrad Med school admission process in US.

Quick thoughts:

We are loosening the restrictions for nurses due to workforce challenges. Many foreign-trained nurses exist. Talk to nurses about how they like this. Dentistry is very strict.

Also talk to accrediting bodies and the people responsible for setting those rules up.

I'm also guessing CMS? and federal support contribute to the tight restrictions on the international physician workforce.

 

[darkamgine]

It's disheartening to see ethnic groups in the US pitted against one another.

The US has a process allowing 13,000 foreign-educated medical graduates for year 2022, including both US and non-US citizens, to enter as residents. In recent years, India has the follwing system involving a 3-hour entrance exam after high school that tests Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Medical colleges consider only this score. Students scoring above ~92 percentile typically gain admission into government-funded colleges where tuition is less than 1000 USD per year. Students who score above the 50th percentile can be admitted into private colleges where the tuition exceeds 30,000 USD per year. This amount is prohibitively high for most middle-income families in India (even Educational loan is not possible unless the family has that networth). So typically only students from wealthy backgrounds with scores around the 50th percentile can afford it. Students with higher percentiles, such as 70 or 80, often cannot afford these private institutions and they don't study medicine.

It's important to note that these students are admitted solely based on the 50th percentile of that entrance exam score after high school and their financial capabilities. Criteria like clinical work, high GPA in high school, research, essays, and interviews are not considered. Worse still, when students fail to clear this 50th percentile, they often resort to medical colleges in countries like the Philippines and Eastern Europe. Most of them study for medical degree for 5-6 years after high school.

The match rate for Non-US citizen IMG’s is 55 percent.

On this forum, we seem to be undervaluing the challenging post-undergrad Med school admission process in US. There's a tendency to underestimate the consistent effort required to achieve a 3.9+ GPA and the extraordinary commitment needed to score 515+. We might also be downplaying the importance of expressing our personal qualities through essays and interviews because some deserving candidates miss out due to this process. Yet, our system seems to be creating a pathway for residency less deserving candidates than US undergrads who couldn't get into med school.

I want to clarify that I am not anti-immigrant. We have so many successful and wonderful Physicians from Indian MBBS working in US, but typically they got through before 10 years ( before current NEET entrance exams) and scored high in both school and entrance tests.

But it's worth discussing the thousands of lost opportunities for deserving candidates within the US, whether they are underrepresented groups, high scoring students, or those with remarkable character and extracurricular accomplishments.

You are bringing up an issue outside the scope of this thread. This is an issue of the number of medical school slots in the U.S. vs residency slots. There are more residency slots than MD and DO graduates every year, especially considering the distribution of specialties. Medical schools are opened by typically universities with closeby hospitals. Residencies are operated by hospitals hence the discrepancy.

 

[deleted1156722]

Also, I am processing why the exemption for the service academies. By extension, can MSIs and HBCUs thus could use AA?

The majority opinion from Justice Roberts came with a footnote explaining that military academies are not subject to the ruling because they were not involved in the prior cases that were eventually heard in the Supreme Court.

"The United States as amicus curiae contends that race-based admissions programs further compelling interests at our Nation’s military academies," the footnote said. "No military academy is a party to these cases, however, and none of the courts below addressed the propriety of race-based admissions systems in that context. This opinion also does not address the issue, in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present."

Furthermore, Biden’s solicitor general, Prelogar stated that the US govt. did not want the rulings to combine the universities cases with military academies, or the military academies to “rise and fall” with these universities cases, as the military academies have their own distinct interests that pertain to national security concerns. This ultimately can be summarized to read as educational diversity is not a compelling interest as is national security concerns.

 

[theoceanman]

As an Asian-American who was first-Gen, from an immigrant family, etc., I grew up in a home where we made less than average wage by a significant mile, went to a high school with known issues and lack of resources and opportunities, worked part-time basically since I was 15/16, and couldn’t even join sports teams because club dues were too expensive. Despite this, I was constantly compared to other people of all races, especially my own Asian race, when applying for competitive programs, organizations, and other opportunities, which is simply not fair given my socioeconomic circumstances and financial restraints. Now, I’m not here to complain, but there should be more nuances noticed and differentiated in admissions for anything as there people of all races and backgrounds that may be at a significant disadvantage due to some odd or unique conditions. Case-by-case is what should be done, instead of over-generalization.

 

[senecca]

It's disheartening to see ethnic groups in the US pitted against one another.

The US has a process allowing 13,000 foreign-educated medical graduates for year 2022, including both US and non-US citizens, to enter as residents. In recent years, India has the follwing system involving a 3-hour entrance exam after high school that tests Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Medical colleges consider only this score. Students scoring above ~92 percentile typically gain admission into government-funded colleges where tuition is less than 1000 USD per year. Students who score above the 50th percentile can be admitted into private colleges where the tuition exceeds 30,000 USD per year. This amount is prohibitively high for most middle-income families in India (even Educational loan is not possible unless the family has that networth). So typically only students from wealthy backgrounds with scores around the 50th percentile can afford it. Students with higher percentiles, such as 70 or 80, often cannot afford these private institutions and they don't study medicine.

It's important to note that these students are admitted solely based on the 50th percentile of that entrance exam score after high school and their financial capabilities. Criteria like clinical work, high GPA in high school, research, essays, and interviews are not considered. Worse still, when students fail to clear this 50th percentile, they often resort to medical colleges in countries like the Philippines and Eastern Europe. Most of them study for medical degree for 5-6 years after high school.

The match rate for Non-US citizen IMG’s is 55 percent.

On this forum, we seem to be undervaluing the challenging post-undergrad Med school admission process in US. There's a tendency to underestimate the consistent effort required to achieve a 3.9+ GPA and the extraordinary commitment needed to score 515+. We might also be downplaying the importance of expressing our personal qualities through essays and interviews because some deserving candidates miss out due to this process. Yet, our system seems to be creating a pathway for residency less deserving candidates than US undergrads who couldn't get into med school.

I want to clarify that I am not anti-immigrant. We have so many successful and wonderful Physicians from Indian MBBS working in US, but typically they got through before 10 years ( before current NEET entrance exams) and scored high in both school and entrance tests.

But it's worth discussing the thousands of lost opportunities for deserving candidates within the US, whether they are underrepresented groups, high scoring students, or those with remarkable character and extracurricular accomplishments.

You are way smart, intelligent and well informed for your age.

“We might also be downplaying the importance of expressing our personal qualities through essays and interviews because some deserving candidates miss out due to this process”.

Couldn’t have said it better, you are the first person who said this to my knowledge. I have been following Medical School Admissions on SDN, Reddit and other sites for over six years. What I observed in those years is that our Medical Schools are willing to compromise on the GPA and MCAT and be sympathetic, considerate and accommodating to applicants with lower stats, say 3.0 and 495-500, in a lot of cases even when not accompanying with stellar achievement on the subjective components. But, they don’t seem to be equally be sympathetic, considerate and accommodating to high stats applicants with less impressive writing or interviews skills . It is as if they found a reason to reject them.

That’s probably the reason why a lot of highly deserving applicants fall through the cracks and gave to go through three or four cycles.

Some people are gifted with academic ability and some with writing and interpersonal skills and some both . By nature , I was quiet, reserved and introvert. I never realized the importance of these soft skills because of my rural upbringing and no one there to teach me . I forced myself to develop those skills because it hurt my career. I am pretty sure there are a lot of people like me among medical school applicants.

I am not critical of anyone. This is just my observation.

 

[Hong_bing]

Students scoring above ~92 percentile typically gain admission into government-funded colleges where tuition is less than 1000 USD per year. Students who score above the 50th percentile can be admitted into private colleges where the tuition exceeds 30,000 USD per year. This amount is prohibitively high for most middle-income families in India (even Educational loan is not possible unless the family has that networth). So typically only students from wealthy backgrounds with scores around the 50th percentile can afford it. Students with higher percentiles, such as 70 or 80, often cannot afford these private institutions and they don't study medicine.

It's important to note that these students are admitted solely based on the 50th percentile of that entrance exam score after high school and their financial capabilities. Criteria like clinical work, high GPA in high school, research, essays, and interviews are not considered. Worse still, when students fail to clear this 50th percentile, they often resort to medical colleges in countries like the Philippines and Eastern Europe. Most of them study for medical degree for 5-6 years after high school.

The match rate for Non-US citizen IMG’s is 55 percent.

I don't know people who commented high stats are less important for serving patient are going to comment about this "Mainly money" criteria of admission process and let these people as our future physicians. I hope we could reduce the intake of Foreign educated residents ( especially filter out these type of places where they have ridiculous admission process ) and increase our intake in US medical colleges and fill in candidates who are much much more deserving and dont get in. I hope someone in the forum forward to your Representative to address this issue. I am sure money may not be an issue to increase intake as Medical schools makes insane amount of money and also many students willing to pay based on the competitive nature of the admissions. If we admit more students, we might not filter out deserving students and they won't lament ( atleast make it less of an issue ) when we admit under-represented minority who rightly deserves to be serving the community as well.

 

[deleted961749]

Here’s some interesting data I found at a UC link containing research on the effects of Prop 209. I’m surprised that the representation gap actually grew significantly in the years pre-209 (with race-conscious admissions) and only leveled off afterwards. I wonder if the prior affirmative action boost was not aggressive enough. Maybe the ban almost served as motivation for schools to try harder to meet their diversity goals. Very sad to see that the ~25% gap has not closed at all in the over two decades since.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Here’s some interesting data I found at a UC link containing research on the effects of Prop 209. I’m surprised that the representation gap actually grew significantly in the years pre-209 (with race-conscious admissions) and only leveled off afterwards. I wonder if the prior affirmative action boost was not aggressive enough. Maybe the ban almost served as motivation for schools to try harder to meet their diversity goals. Very sad to see that the ~25% gap has not closed at all in the over two decades since.

You are correct noting that AA should be viewed as one of many tools or principles towards redressing historic inequality. Now we understand you need the resources at the school to make sure those who were used to surviving without resources to trust that they belong and will be given resources to succeed. The modern way we discuss this is DEIJ/JEDI/diversity, inclusion, equity, belonging, justice. But we have institutionalized backlash by conferring the efforts as one where individual meritocracy is compromised and not acknowledging the progress benefits from having an informed, educated community be engaged in solving challenges. (I think this sentence highlights the political philosophical conflict which all boils down to "capitalism" vs. "socialism" again.)

Of course, in many states such efforts and offices are now being threatened because of states not wanting to fund social-emotional learning, DEIJ, or "uncomfortable subjects" in classrooms and libraries. Bring in "critical race theory" which many places are trying to ban (don't say CRT). There is definitely an effort to systematically dismantle any acknowledgement that we discriminated against marginalized communities, and we even have gone to a point where those that do aren't going to be punished (the Colorado case decision on LGBTQ discrimination).

We can definitely argue about the lack of diversity progress in the curriculum, in the faculty, in higher ed administration, in supporting student services, in supporting mental health and learning services until fairly recently. The problems still stem from early access and motivation. AA is not the cure-all solution, but it must be part of a systematic improvement where we value the differences in life experience and support our individual growth for the long-term societal benefit.

I noticed that Tennessee State today announced it will support a hockey team, the first HBCU to do so. "Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell has some interesting examples where structural bias dictates diversity, and not necessarily one based on race. Early access and nurturing students positively with role models and educational support/supplemental support is what ultimately sets students up for getting prepared for college (or even community college), which feeds the pipeline to medical school and health professions (and other professions). AA should take those elements into account, and it recognizes the historical challenges.

 

[darkamgine]

I think it is getting more and more hilarious how premeds demonstrate how little they know of how medical schools, hospitals, and residencies work. And deserving of a medical school spot is like saying someone deserves a good job. It sounds so privileged even if that is not your intention.

If you believe that some med schools are colluding to not take highly qualified applicants, you are deluding yourself in some conspiracy theory.

What I observed in those years is that our Medical Schools are willing to compromise on the GPA and MCAT and be sympathetic, considerate and accommodating to applicants with lower stats, say 3.0 and 495-500, in a lot of cases even when not accompanying with stellar achievement on the subjective components. But, they don’t seem to be equally be sympathetic, considerate and accommodating to high stats applicants with less impressive writing or interviews skills . It is as if they found a reason to reject them.

That’s probably the reason why a lot of highly deserving applicants fall through the cracks and gave to go through three or four cycles.

Some people are gifted with academic ability and some with writing and interpersonal skills and some both . By nature , I was quiet, reserved and introvert. I never realized the importance of these soft skills because of my rural upbringing and no one there to teach me . I forced myself to develop those skills because it hurt my career. I am pretty sure there are a lot of people like me among medical school applicants.

I am not critical of anyone. This is just my observation.

Don't you answer your own question? Why would they not reject someone who cannot communicate well? If you talk to someone and you can't get along with them, do I ever think, "this person has such high stats, I have to get along with them?". No, I simply say they won't be a good teammate.

I don't know people who commented high stats are less important for serving patient are going to comment about this "Mainly money" criteria of admission process and let these people as our future physicians. I hope we could reduce the intake of Foreign educated residents ( especially filter out these type of places where they have ridiculous admission process ) and increase our intake in US medical colleges and fill in candidates who are much much more deserving and dont get in. I hope someone in the forum forward to your Representative to address this issue. I am sure money may not be an issue to increase intake as Medical schools makes insane amount of money and also many students willing to pay based on the competitive nature of the admissions. If we admit more students, we might not filter out deserving students and they won't lament ( atleast make it less of an issue ) when we admit under-represented minority who rightly deserves to be serving the community as well.

Yes, everything for the qualified applicant who is deserving to get in and don't. We should bend to their needs. That is the purpose of medical schools. And clearly, you have not been to a medical school and seen what is required in the medical school curriculum.

If people can only see things from the pre-med/applicant view, they fail to recognize the bigger picture. I have pointed out many times what is wrong with this perspective but if they keeps thinking like that, they can live in their own illusory disconnected world. And the thing is they do not even realize how disconnected they are.

 

[sugasathya]

(I think this sentence highlights the political philosophical conflict which all boils down to "capitalism" vs. "socialism" again.)

"Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell has some interesting examples where structural bias dictates diversity, and not necessarily one based on race. Early access and nurturing students positively with role models and educational support/supplemental support is what ultimately sets students up for getting prepared for college (or even community college), which feeds the pipeline to medical school and health professions (and other professions). AA should take those elements into account, and it recognizes the historical challenges.

Interesting post and you reminded me from Malcolm Gladwell's book "A child born in a particular time of year decides the place in hockey team". I'll try to add couple of my thoughts to it :

Google or ask GPT4 about "butterfly effect". That is how small changes somewhere affect big changes in totally other place. We used to live as small tribes with less than few dozen people and evolved independently. Now suddenly we are hundreds of million people from all over the world trying to make a unified system. The result -> chaos, unfairness, uncertainty. Our societal growth has outgrown our human brain. Our human brain to another human brain interface is extremely poor. When we have 4-7 years of residency just to specialize one sub-field of medicine, how can we expect to 9-Justices or Self-interest Politicians or Admission officers or people in this forum to get a good solution ?

The same way we use supercomputers/deep learning to solve complex issues like weather prediction or protein folding predictions, its time for us use computing and AI to get us a more optimal problem for socio-economic issues. Once we are clear on what we want, (1) more equality (2) Stable growth of community and happiness (3) Security etc., we just input all these parameters ( AA, inequity in racial, competitiveness with other countries, Better healthcare system, etc., etc.,)., I am sure Linear algebra, Calculus and Probability/Statistics will do its magic using Trillions of computing nodes to find the most optimal solution than humans could ever figure out. We are at a point we need to be extremely humble about our brain and get help. Our ancestors have been humble about the unknowns and created stories (religion) to organize society. With fragmented society based of religious and racial division, If we need to move peacefully, I feel this is one of the way.

 

[darkamgine]

Interesting post and you reminded me from Malcolm Gladwell's book "A child born in a particular time of year decides the place in hockey team". I'll try to add couple of my thoughts to it :

Google or ask GPT4 about "butterfly effect". That is how small changes somewhere affect big changes in totally other place. We used to live as small tribes with less than few dozen people and evolved independently. Now suddenly we are hundreds of million people from all over the world trying to make a unified system. The result -> chaos, unfairness, uncertainty. Our societal growth has outgrown our human brain. Our human brain to another human brain interface is extremely poor. When we have 4-7 years of residency just to specialize one sub-field of medicine, how can we expect to 9-Justices or Self-interest Politicians or Admission officers or people in this forum to get a good solution ?

The same way we use supercomputers/deep learning to solve complex issues like weather prediction or protein folding predictions, its time for us use computing and AI to get us a more optimal problem for socio-economic issues. Once we are clear on what we want, (1) more equality (2) Stable growth of community and happiness (3) Security etc., we just input all these parameters ( AA, inequity in racial, competitiveness with other countries, Better healthcare system, etc., etc.,)., I am sure Linear algebra, Calculus and Probability/Statistics will do its magic using Trillions of computing nodes to find the most optimal solution than humans could ever figure out. We are at a point we need to be extremely humble about our brain and get help. Our ancestors have been humble about the unknowns and created stories (religion) to organize society. With fragmented society based of religious and racial division, If we need to move peacefully, I feel this is one of the way.

Yes, hail our almighty communism/socialism AI. Cuz that is everyone wants. Very simple solution for all of our problem.

 

[eigen]

If people can only see things from the pre-med/applicant view, they fail to recognize the bigger picture.

Ironically, it's exactly this issue that has some of my "high stat" applicants fail in their applications. They're too focused on themselves and their accomplishments, and miss the big picture. Accordingly, they focus all of their application on proving they will be successful in medical school, rather than spending any focus talking about what kind of a physician they will be after.

It's the same challenge with students I have who want to load up on every recommended STEM course, but neglect my advice to take time learning languages, taking classes on other cultures, spending time taking social science and humanities classes that will let them better understand people, systems, and ways of thought that will make them more effective physicians.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Ironically, it's exactly this issue that has some of my "high stat" applicants fail in their applications. They're too focused on themselves and their accomplishments, and miss the big picture. Accordingly, they focus all of their application on proving they will be successful in medical school, rather than spending any focus talking about what kind of a physician they will be after.

It's the same challenge with students I have who want to load up on every recommended STEM course, but neglect my advice to take time learning languages, taking classes on other cultures, spending time taking social science and humanities classes that will let them better understand people, systems, and ways of thought that will make them more effective physicians.

^^^ this.

Becoming a Student Doctor: spreading your focus beyond YOUR accomplishments and impact. Now I will grant, I have had several advisees/applicants who really have taken time to learn about (non-majority) cultures other than their own or taken the call to consider public/community health seriously. They are clearly the favorites among the didactic faculty.

 

[Plut0]

Interesting post and you reminded me from Malcolm Gladwell's book "A child born in a particular time of year decides the place in hockey team". I'll try to add couple of my thoughts to it :

Google or ask GPT4 about "butterfly effect". That is how small changes somewhere affect big changes in totally other place. We used to live as small tribes with less than few dozen people and evolved independently. Now suddenly we are hundreds of million people from all over the world trying to make a unified system. The result -> chaos, unfairness, uncertainty. Our societal growth has outgrown our human brain. Our human brain to another human brain interface is extremely poor. When we have 4-7 years of residency just to specialize one sub-field of medicine, how can we expect to 9-Justices or Self-interest Politicians or Admission officers or people in this forum to get a good solution ?

The same way we use supercomputers/deep learning to solve complex issues like weather prediction or protein folding predictions, its time for us use computing and AI to get us a more optimal problem for socio-economic issues. Once we are clear on what we want, (1) more equality (2) Stable growth of community and happiness (3) Security etc., we just input all these parameters ( AA, inequity in racial, competitiveness with other countries, Better healthcare system, etc., etc.,)., I am sure Linear algebra, Calculus and Probability/Statistics will do its magic using Trillions of computing nodes to find the most optimal solution than humans could ever figure out. We are at a point we need to be extremely humble about our brain and get help. Our ancestors have been humble about the unknowns and created stories (religion) to organize society. With fragmented society based of religious and racial division, If we need to move peacefully, I feel this is one of the way.

Technically, the backpropagation algorithm in deep neural networks does not guarantee global optimality.

 

[Lawpy]

BIG NEWS

Activists spurred by affirmative action ruling challenge legacy admissions at Harvard

A civil rights legal group is challenging legacy admissions at Harvard University, saying the practice discriminates against students of color by giving an unfair boost to the mostly white children of alumni.

apnews.com

 

[Mr.Smile12]

If you get beyond the paywall:
For Most College Students, Affirmative Action Was Never Enough Opinion | For Most College Students, Affirmative Action Was Never Enough

 

[deleted1156722]

BIG NEWS

Activists spurred by affirmative action ruling challenge legacy admissions at Harvard

A civil rights legal group is challenging legacy admissions at Harvard University, saying the practice discriminates against students of color by giving an unfair boost to the mostly white children of alumni.

apnews.com

When the Supreme Court heard the Harvard and UNC cases last October, the lawyer for SFFA
argued that eliminating legacy/ ALDC preferences "would make Harvard far less white, wealthy, and privileged."
Conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas appeared to agree, and pressed Harvard's lawyer on why the school could not get rid of the legacy policy instead of granting separate preferences to blacks and hispanic students.
However, the Harvard lawyer Seth Waxman, told the court that there was no evidence that ending legacy preferences would lead to a more diverse student body, and that Harvard could not lose its character and originality by eliminating the ALDC policies.
AA was just a cover for Harvard’s ALDC and now the lid has blown off!

 

[john7991]

When the Supreme Court heard the Harvard and UNC cases last October, the lawyer for SFFA
argued that eliminating legacy/ ALDC preferences "would make Harvard far less white, wealthy, and privileged."
Conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas appeared to agree, and pressed Harvard's lawyer on why the school could not get rid of the legacy policy instead of granting separate preferences to blacks and hispanic students.
However, the Harvard lawyer Seth Waxman, told the court that there was no evidence that ending legacy preferences would lead to a more diverse student body, and that Harvard could not lose its character and originality by eliminating the ALDC policies.
AA was just a cover for Harvard’s ALDC and now the lid has blown off!

Harvard is just one school and the claim you make at the end isn’t well supported at all, unless you have further proof. What seems and what is are two different things.

My immediate thought is that Waxman just might be right in doubting that legacy admissions would allow for more diversity. There’s no evidence and who’s to say that more not-rich Asians and whites won’t just take the places of the legacy students which doesn’t increase diversity?

As for them saying they would lose their character and originality, I’m not sure what that meant.