Supreme Court Ruling, Race based admissions.

Started by 2024 or 5 ?
Tags Tags
affirmative action pre-med admissions racism
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
john7991 said:
Instead of completely throwing AA away, maybe they should’ve just altered it so wealthy URMs aren’t taking advantage of it.
Click to expand...
Completely agree, but unfortunately that's not what these elite schools want. Despite what they say online, they are the complete opposite of equity. They really have shown they don't have any desire to uplift disadvantaged kids. Actually, in the Supreme Court trials this past year, data from Harvard showed that low-income Black students were given less preference in admissions than low-income white students. Harvard just wants to admit the cream of the crop within each racial group (which tends to be the most wealthy in each group) and mask this as "equity".
 
MedGirl26 said:
Those issues overwhelmingly affect generational African Americans though. Generational African Americans' ancestors historically went to segregated schools, were locked out of owning property, and couldn't own businesses in many areas. We can't say the same for wealthy immigrants who have recently come to this country.
Also, I completely agree with you that if affirmative action was purely for restorative purposes (which I would support), Native Americans should absolutely be included in being able to benefit from it, because the ways in which they were treated by the US historically were atrocious (i.e. being forced off of their lands and onto reservations).
But I struggle with your argument regarding the LatinX community. How has the US treated them historically any different from Asians, or from the Irish? If your reasoning is because that many LatinX immigrants come over poor and with no resources, then you should apply that logic to any immigrant who comes over here poor and with no resources, whether they be from Vietnam, Cambodia, Albania, Ukraine, etc.
Click to expand...
Considering the damage that the US has done to their governments that causes them to seek a better life here is enough. And LatinX Americans experience racism and barriers greatly here.
 
MedGirl26 said:
True, but hasn't the US done a ton of damage to the governments in a lot of countries? I would argue that the US has definitely done much more damage to those governments and citizens in Syria, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and very much Iraq. But we don't give those immigrants massive preferences in admissions. So why should we give massive preferences to Latinos?
Click to expand...
Latinos of indigenous and African backgrounds are much more racially marginalized because of their proximity to blackness. The closer people are to whiteness the more privileged in navigating this country. And Vice versa.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
KoolGirlKaye123 said:
There are other marginalized ethnic groups too (e.g., Native American and LatinX communities) who should also be considered. It doesn’t seem like you’re grasping the severe damage that this country’s past actions have done to all of these communities. The damage didn’t just happen during slavery of ADOS. Damages have been caused all throughout reconstruction, Jim Crow, redlining, the CRM, the drug war, mass incarceration, and heavy policing in minority communities. This is a country that supposedly grants equal opportunity, and AA was meant to do just that. Black Americans and other minorities sacrificed their lives (MLK and Medgar Evers to name two of many), for all minorities to have these opportunities. And instead of receiving gratitude, our peoples’ intelligence and competence are always doubted. It’s a sad sight to see. Truly
Click to expand...
Asian Americans are minorities, too. And, the history of anti-Asian discrimination in this country is extensive, even if it doesn't get publicized very much. The first Chinese immigrants came to America essentially as indentured servants to work and die building the railroads. Japanese Americans on the entire West Coast had their property taken from them and in most cases never returned by Order 9066. There's a reason why there is a Chinatown/Koreatown/etc in nearly every major city (it wasn't just self-segregation): redlining affected Asian communities, too. During the Vietnam War, Asians on any decent were liable to face racist acts. Most recently, anti-Asian violent hate crimes spiked dramatically during the pandemic.

In spite of all of this, no one ever advocates for AA to benefit Asian Americans.
 
MedGirl26 said:
True, but hasn't the US done a ton of damage to the governments in a lot of countries? I would argue that the US has definitely done much more damage to those governments and citizens in Syria, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and very much Iraq. But we don't give those immigrants massive preferences in admissions. So why should we give massive preferences to Latinos?
Click to expand...
And I agree that sub groups shouldn’t be grouped together since experiences vary.
 
please.let.me.in said:
In spite of all of this, no one ever advocates for AA to benefit Asian Americans.
Click to expand...
^^THIS! Also, just because Asian Americans may be over-represented in medicine, that doesn't negate the fact that many individual Asian Americans still need a lot of help in having the playing field leveled for them in admissions (i.e. due to poverty, refugee status, etc.).
 
KoolGirlKaye123 said:
And I agree that sub groups shouldn’t be grouped together since experiences vary.
Click to expand...
In the UNC trial, one of the justices asked the UNC lawyer, "what racial check box should a Middle Eastern student (i.e. from Iraq) check?" The UNC lawyer responded, "I don't know sir". Total bull****. The UNC lawyer knew very well what box would need to be checked. He just didn't want to say it, because it would hurt his extremely faulty narrative.
 
please.let.me.in said:
Asian Americans are minorities, too. And, the history of anti-Asian discrimination in this country is extensive, even if it doesn't get publicized very much. The first Chinese immigrants came to America essentially as indentured servants to work and die building the railroads. Japanese Americans on the entire West Coast had their property taken from them and in most cases never returned by Order 9066. There's a reason why there is a Chinatown/Koreatown/etc in nearly every major city (it wasn't just self-segregation): redlining affected Asian communities, too. During the Vietnam War, Asians on any decent were liable to face racist acts. Most recently, anti-Asian violent hate crimes spiked dramatically during the pandemic.

In spite of all of this, no one ever advocates for AA to benefit Asian Americans.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree with all that’s said about the Asian American experience. However, the CRM is what helped Asian Americans get these opportunities. Asian Americans were also involved in the CRM up until some random white psychologist came up with the term “model minority.” Then there was a debate within the Asian community about whether to assimilate to the myth (mostly older Asian Americans) or continue with the CRM (younger Asian Americans). Eventually, the model minority side won. AA has benefitted Asian Americans by granting them the opportunity to make up the second majority at most of these institutions when Asians make up much less than 10% of the population. I don’t think any minority would have such opportunities without the Civil Rights Movement and subsequent policies like AA (which statistically benefits white women more than anyone).
 
KoolGirlKaye123 said:
subsequent policies like AA (which statistically benefits white women more than anyone).
Click to expand...
That doesn't make it any better of a policy. That most likely makes it even more atrocious. White women are not deserving of anything more than anyone else (no one is).
 
MedGirl26 said:
That doesn't make it any better of a policy. That most likely makes it even more atrocious. White women are not deserving of anything more than anyone else (no one is).
Click to expand...
Now you’re seeing how legislations get passed. It still has to benefit white folks more. AA didn’t level the playing field because that’s extremely difficult to do at this point in time. However, it has helped increase diversity greatly.
 
MedGirl26 said:
Completely agree, but unfortunately that's not what these elite schools want. Despite what they say online, they are the complete opposite of equity. They really have shown they don't have any desire to uplift disadvantaged kids. Actually, in the Supreme Court trials this past year, data from Harvard showed that low-income Black students were given less preference in admissions than low-income white students. Harvard just wants to admit the cream of the crop within each racial group (which tends to be the most wealthy in each group) and mask this as "equity".
Click to expand...
I can’t speak to the intentions of other people, but yes, while preventing wealthy URMs from taking advantage of AA instead of completely getting rid of it seems like the more sensible move, it would risk there being a lesser amount of URMs applying/getting in which is a problem because then poorer URMs might have less people to look up to/see the possibilities. Let’s keep in mind that wealthy URMs aren’t the only URMs getting in; poorer ones are too.

An African American child seeing an African doctor with an African accent is still beneficial to the prospects of that child even if they have completely different stories and that’s impactful.
 
Last edited:
please.let.me.in said:
A more sustainable and effective response to solving inequalities between racial populations would be to invest in primary school education and after school programs among our poorest, least-educated communities. By the time you get around to higher education like medical school, it's quite frankly too late.
Click to expand...
We’re currently doing all of the responses you’ve mentioned.

And, no, I don’t think it’s ever too late.
 
KoolGirlKaye123 said:
AA has benefitted Asian Americans by granting them the opportunity to make up the second majority at most of these institutions when Asians make up much less than 10% of the population.
Click to expand...
100% wrong. AA never helped Asian Americans, it hurt them exclusively. If you take the undergraduate admissions, Asian Americans would have secured 45% of the seats in top universities on merit if the race is not considered. CalTech is the standing proof and also Harvard admitted to it. But these universities take around 20% of the Asian Americans’ seats and distribute them among blacks and Hispanic.

I don’t have or analyzed the data from the medical schools. But I have the admission statistics of our only state medical schools for 6 years. For the first four years Asian Americans matriculants were capped at 40%, black 10% and Hispanics 10%. Then suddenly two cycles back, they reduced the Asian Americans by 10% and increased the black percentage by 10% and it continues now. Holistic admission is myth.
 
Last edited:
please.let.me.in said:
@Goro
You seem to be very passionate in pointing out how prominent Rebublicans should be fighting equally as hard against legacy admissions if they were truly against preferential treatment. How do you feel about the hypocrisy of prominent Democrats who benefit from legacy admissions? Here's a quote from Michelle Obama yesterday:

"Of course, students on my campus and countless others across the country were — and continue to be — granted special consideration for admissions. Some have parents who graduated from the same school. Others have families who can afford coaches to help them run faster or hit a ball harder. Others go to high schools with lavish resources for tutors and extensive standardized test prep that help them score higher on college entrance exams. We don’t usually question if those students belong. So often, we just accept that money, power, and privilege are perfectly justifiable forms of affirmative action, while kids growing up like I did are expected to compete when the ground is anything but level."

This couldn't possibly be the same Michelle Obama who (poorer upbringing aside) sent her daughters to private high schools and got them the best tutors the White House could buy? And, of course, there's absolutely no way that her husband being the former president of the United States had anything at all to do with her daughter getting into Harvard, right?

If you're going to take shots across the aisle, perhaps examine your own side first.
Click to expand...
Democrats are moving AGAINST legacy admits now, so whataboutisms need not apply
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
please.let.me.in said:
A more sustainable and effective response to solving inequalities between racial populations would be to invest in primary school education and after school programs among our poorest, least-educated communities. By the time you get around to higher education like medical school, it's quite frankly too late.
Click to expand...
Very well said. I agree 100%. But the politicians won’t do it because they won’t be able to project themselves as URM saviors and gain their votes. I would even extend the special programs to ALL interested students irrespective of their race.
 
MedGirl26 said:
But if the people who are overwhelmingly benefitting from it were never historically denied opportunities in this country (i.e. children of recent privileged immigrants), then affirmative action is not serving as a restorative measure. That was actually a major criticism of the Bakke decision in the 1970s, which outlawed affirmative action for restorative purposes and made affirmative action only lawful for diversity's sake. I actually think if affirmative action were only limited to descendants of enslaved people, it would garner a lot more support. I myself know I would definitely support it if it were like that.
Harvard's undergraduate student body is 15% Black, but only 10% of Harvard's Black students are generational African American (descendants of enslaved people).
Click to expand...
Now this is a good and interesting point. Discloser, I come from African immigrants. I, and many other African(ish) people, should probably be compared to ORMs. Due to America’s immigration system it’s often the college educated/cream of the crop that gets visas from those parts of the world. And culturally, we too were driven to succeed (anything less than a master’s would have been a massive failure, and even then…). It’s probably why my family became friends most of the Asian families in our community, we just vibe. So, I do struggle with the fact that people like me benefit from AA when it’s meant to right the wrongs of the past. However, I do think AA should continue as is for a few reasons:

  • It’s clearly imperfect for the reasons stated above. However, just because many wealthy immigrants benefit doesn’t mean that black Americans don’t at all. Taking it away just adds more barriers for the black community. And making it only benefit the descendants of slaves or activists is tricky due to intermarriage between groups through the decades. I wouldn’t qualify, but if I stick with my black American partner our kids would (or would they?). Is that much more fair? And besides that, until the systematic issues impacting the black community are fixed, not many black American would benefit. I mean despite AA, blacks are still VERY underrepresented and it’s going to get worse.
  • We need black doctors period. I come from an immigrant family but I grew up in America around black spaces, and I consider myself black before African (racism doesn’t give a crap about where I’m from). I’m comfortable/relaxed around black spaces; while my white and ORM classmates fret about going to the dangerous, predominantly black part of the town, I get my hair done there, I eat there, pump my gas there, etc. And in the future, if I’m not practicing in a predominantly black, underserved area, something has gone wrong. So, I’m still going to positively impact black Americans. From what I gather, my other African(ish) classmates have similar mindsets and even do quite a bit to promote the local black community.
  • Slight continuation of the above, but black patients trust black doctors more, and for good reason; the American scientific and medical world has not been historically kind to them. Having more black physicians they can trust is going to improve the health of black America. I’ve sort of seen this play out already. Patients have been appreciative of me being in the room even though I’m still in the learning phase. And when conducting medical research with a project that recruited a lot of black participants, multiple participants mentioned they went through with the research because I was part of the team. The fact that I have a clearly African name was a mere interesting fact if mentioned, never a barrier. It’s never been. I won’t pretend I have the same history as people whose ancestors were enslaved here or fought for Civil Rights, but I do consider myself a part of the black community, and I have more black Americans I consider family than people back in Africa, which is why I’m 100% invested in the long-term good of black Americans. I mentioned it previously, but when I see black patients, I often see the aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. that have become my family here, and strive to treat them accordingly.
  • I won’t pretend to know the issues impacting the Asian community, and frankly a pissing contest about who has been discriminated against more sounds like a headache. But right now, most underserved Asians in the vicinity of my medical school could find a doctor from their cultural background if they wanted. Not so much with black patients.
  • That said, circling back to my first point, if the systematic issues impacting the black community were fixed, I’d be happy doing away with AA.
 
Isn't most of this mitigated by the new/changed "Other Impactful Experiences Essay" essay anyways? If race is something that one feels has greatly impacted their life, couldn't they write about it and schools can consider that?
 
senecca said:
100% wrong. AA never helped Asian Americans, it hurt them exclusively. If you take the undergraduate admissions, Asian Americans would have secured 45% of the seats in top universities on merit if the race is not considered. CalTech is the standing proof and also Harvard admitted to it. But these universities take around 20% of the Asian Americans’ seats and distribute them among blacks and Hispanic.

I don’t have or analyzed the data from the medical schools. But I have the admission statistics of our only state medical schools for 6 years. For the first four years Asian Americans matriculants were capped at 40%, black 10% and Hispanics 10%. Then suddenly two cycles back, they reduced the Asian Americans by 10% and increased the black percentage by 10% and it continues now. Holistic admission is myth.
Click to expand...
I don’t think those seats were Asian Americans’ to begin with… those were reserved for White students. Their merit before diversity was introduced to these schools was solely based on race and wealth.
 
senecca said:
But there is a big difference between earning something and a gift. Asian Americans earned it.
Click to expand...
There are things we have to fix. Helping those who need it get into higher education is imperative to the further development of our society and us all as a people. AA (which has taken the form of impact essays I guess) is, or was ish, the best we have thought of, as far as I’m aware, to help the underserved become served.
 
Last edited:
john7991 said:
. AA (which has taken the form of impact essays I guess) is, or was ish, the best we have thought of, as far as I’m aware, to help the underserved become served.
Click to expand...
It is not the best we have thought of. Colleges have undoubtedly thought of using socioeconomic status/family wealth/parental education level/zip code affirmative action before, but they refuse to use these.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Great discussions all. I wanted to touch on a different point that I have not seen mentioned as much here or anywhere else. What are your opinions on the discrimination against Asian Americans in Harvard’s undergraduate admissions as backed by statistics presented in court and affirmed in the majority opinion? Here’s a piece that highlights the irony. Most people, the justices included, seem hesitant to directly address this, so I was curious what you all have to say about it.
 
StaticVoid said:
Great discussions all. I wanted to touch on a different point that I have not seen mentioned as much here or anywhere else. What are your opinions on the discrimination against Asian Americans in Harvard’s undergraduate admissions as backed by statistics presented in court and affirmed in the majority opinion? Here’s a piece that highlights the irony. Most people, the justices included, seem hesitant to directly address this, so I was curious what you all have to say about it.
Click to expand...
The numbers and data doesn't lie. It is clear that Asian Americans were unlawfully held to massively higher standards in admissions. At every single academic decile (based off of GPA/class rank/etc), they had the lowest chance of acceptance. Harvard and UNC were blatantly discriminating against Asian students and at the same time lying about it.
 
Yeah it really sucks when schools won't let you in solely because they don't want your kind...
 

Attachments

  • hood.png
    hood.png
    160.2 KB · Views: 203
MedGirl26 said:
It is not the best we have thought of. Colleges have undoubtedly thought of using socioeconomic status/family wealth/parental education level/zip code affirmative action before, but they refuse to use these.
Click to expand...
I mean if you think about it, most low-income Hispanics/blacks aren’t bothering to try getting into higher education. Way more of Asians than more of Hispanics/blacks are trying. Way more of wealthy Hispanics/blacks (which make up a very small portion of them) are trying than low-SES Hispanics/blacks. So if the goal is to increase the number of Hispanics/blacks in higher education, the best way actually is to use race instead of SES.
 
KoolGirlKaye123 said:
And black and LatinX students haven’t? Really think deeply about your response to this question
Click to expand...
One group certainly seems to stick out as being held to a higher standard than others. It is not so much that black and LatinX students at medical schools haven't "earned their place;" it is that it is at the expense of others who may have "earned it more."
1688192512253.png
 
john7991 said:
I mean if you think about it, most low-income Hispanics/blacks aren’t bothering to try getting into higher education. Way more of Asians than more of Hispanics/blacks are trying. Way more of wealthy Hispanics/blacks (which make up a very small portion of them) are trying than low-SES Hispanics/blacks. So if the goal is to increase the number of Hispanics/blacks in higher education, the best way actually is to use race instead of SES.
Click to expand...
True, but then you have to ask yourself if "diversity for diversity's sake" is truly what the goals of affirmative action were. Also, you have to ask yourself if giving massive advantages to predominantly wealthy Black and Hispanics is ethical. I don't think that's ethical.
 
lolthroaway said:
Just find it somewhat tone deaf to talk about discrimination regarding an initiative that was meant to rectify these past mistakes,
Click to expand...
This is exactly why I've always said affirmative action needs to be limited to being used just for generational African Americans (who were obviously here in 1959). It isn't fair to let affirmative action apply to privileged African immigrants who came to the US decades later.
 
lolthroaway said:
I'm aware. Just find it somewhat tone deaf to talk about discrimination regarding an initiative that was meant to rectify these past mistakes, especially when Asians make up, what, a third of medical school students?
Click to expand...
Do you mean to suggest that Harvard did not discriminate against Asian-American applicants? As a previous poster said, the data could not be more clear on this matter. The discrimination exists. My question was what people thought about affirmative action in light of this fact.

For the record, I believe that the disproportional composition of entering classes is an important but entirely separate issue. If minorities are being accepted at higher rates yet still falling behind in representation, I think colleges should strive to recruit more diverse applicants instead of introducing further bias into the admissions process, especially since the data shows that this bias actively harms Asian-American applicants.
 
please.let.me.in said:
One group certainly seems to stick out as being held to a higher standard than others. It is not so much that black and LatinX students at medical schools haven't "earned their place;" it is that it is at the expense of others who may have "earned it more."
View attachment 373716
Click to expand...
I don't think a rich kid with a 4.0 GPA has earned admission "more" than a poor kid with a 3.6 GPA. But I do think a poor Asian refugee with a 3.8 has earned it "more" than a rich URM with a 3.5 (assuming all other aspects of their applications are identical). It's all about what educational opportunities one has had access to.
 
MedGirl26 said:
This is exactly why I've always said affirmative action needs to be limited to being used just for generational African Americans (who were obviously here in 1959). It isn't fair to let affirmative action apply to privileged African immigrants who came to the US decades later.
Click to expand...
Am I misreading you or are you suggesting limiting AA in higher education to people who currently range from elderly to dead?
 
StaticVoid said:
Do you mean to suggest that Harvard did not discriminate against Asian-American applicants? As a previous poster said, the data could not be more clear on this matter. The discrimination exists. My question was what people thought about affirmative action in light of this fact.

For the record, I believe that the disproportional composition of entering classes is an important but entirely separate issue. If minorities are being accepted at higher rates yet still falling behind in representation, I think colleges should strive to recruit more diverse applicants instead of introducing further bias into the admissions process, especially since the data shows that this bias actively harms Asian-American applicants.
Click to expand...
I mean sure you can call it "discrimination." But surely you understand there's a difference between "discrimination" that says "You are more than adequately represented, we're trying to right some wrongs by focusing on this other group," and "Your kind isn't allowed here, period." It's just kind of tone deaf.
 
lolthroaway said:
I mean sure you can call it "discrimination." But surly you understand theres a difference between "discrimination" that says "You are more than adequately represented, we're trying to right some wrongs by focusing on this other group," and "Your kind isn't allowed here, period." It's just kind of tone deaf.
Click to expand...
As Chief Justice Roberts said in his opinion: "Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it."
There is no such thing as positive discrimination. Discrimination is discrimination, period. And it is wrong.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
MedGirl26 said:
As Chief Justice Roberts said in his opinion: "Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it."
There is no such thing as positive discrimination. Discrimination is discrimination, period. And it is wrong.
Click to expand...
And I'm sure you and him are actively working to eliminate all the discrimination that disproportionally impacts black people.
 
lolthroaway said:
I mean sure you can call it "discrimination." But surely you understand there's a difference between "discrimination" that says "You are more than adequately represented, we're trying to right some wrongs by focusing on this other group," and "Your kind isn't allowed here, period." It's just kind of tone deaf.
Click to expand...
Why the air quotes? If someone was asked to rate the personal characteristics of a diverse group of people and consistently rated those of one race lower than others, they would be racist and discriminatory, no air quotes necessary. That’s precisely what Harvard was revealed to have done to Asian Americans under race conscious admissions.

That said, I agree that righting past wrongs is a valid justification for affirmative action. I just dislike how many will pretend that discrimination against Asian Americans is not a direct consequence of this practice.
 
lolthroaway said:
And I'm sure you and him are actively working to eliminate all the discrimination that disproportionally impacts blacks people.
Click to expand...
I know I am. I spend hours every single week volunteering at organizations that specifically serve underprivileged URM's. I'm very young right now so I obviously don't have the power that Chief Justice Roberts has, but I have always served on my county boards and commissions, advocating for justice for underprivileged groups. When I'm older, I plan to adopt multiple foster children and give them the absolute best life possible. As a future physician, I know I'll spend every waking moment outside of work at a free clinic or homeless shelter. Literally. Anyone who knows me will attest to all of these things.
Also, I think that since Chief Justice Roberts said "Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it", he should absolutely be obligated to fight for equality for all groups - including making sure every child has access to superb education, making sure parents are being held accountable for their children's outcomes, and ensuring that housing becomes desegregated.
 
Goro said:
Democrats are moving AGAINST legacy admits now, so whataboutisms need not apply
Click to expand...
*Ongoing discussion about a conservative-leaning Supreme Court ending race-conscious admissions in higher education*

Goro: (reposted from another source) Well, whatabout conservative leaders that benefit from legacy/privilege in admissions?

Me: Well, whatabout progressive leaders that benefit from legacy/privilege in admissions?

Goro: No more whataboutisms.
 
StaticVoid said:
Why the air quotes? If someone was asked to rate the personal characteristics of a diverse group of people and consistently rated those of one race lower than others, they would be racist and discriminatory, no air quotes necessary. That’s precisely what Harvard was revealed to have done to Asian Americans under race conscious admissions.

That said, I agree that righting past wrongs is a valid justification for affirmative action. I just dislike how many will pretend that discrimination against Asian Americans is not a direct consequence of this practice.
Click to expand...
Because it's discrimination only in the most technical sense. In a similar way I'm discriminated against when I can't apply for scholarships or programs for first generation college students, but I understand why such things exist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Kond16
Pre-med applying this 2026-2027 cycle – seeking admissions committee perspective (adcoms)
Replies
3
Views
2K
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
W
Successful IA Applicants (Institutional Action)
Replies
8
Views
2K
RagingBolt34
R
Mr.Smile12
Pathway to Med School Admissions Forum (Southwest Georgia AHEC)
Replies
0
Views
370
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
P
Feedback on My Son’s Pre-Med Path
Replies
20
Views
6K
IlDestriero
IlDestriero
E
SDN Article: Self-Awareness vs. Self-Accountability Competency in Med School Admissions
Replies
0
Views
399
Emil Chuck, PhD
E