The URM Advantage

[lobo.solo]

---

Members do not see this ad.

URMs are very prevalent at big name medical schools. Penn has more Hispanics/African American students than Asian students which is a huge joke.

Why is it a joke?

 

[Silo004]

Blacks have the lowest applied/acceptance ratio, lowest GPAs, lowest MCATs, lowest faculty percentage lowest everything. Go to a medical school interview? How many blacks do you see? Yes, the current 3rd year class of Yale has only one black male. Out of 45,000 applicants only 3,000 blacks apply. While other URMs are increasing. What is scary is that with all of the affirmative action more black students are applying. In three years only 100 students had GPAs over 3.6 and MCAT over 33. ONLY ONE HUNDRED (Data published by AAMC Black Acceptance Grid). That means roughly 30-40 students annually. That is the average for White and Asian students and is considered sub-par for most applicants. Top schools like Ivies will settle for a 3.5 and a 30 from a black student because they really don't have that much else to choose from. Oh, and blacks with stats much lower than that have a hard time getting in, again that's why blacks have the lowest acceptance rate. When you look at the data you see a sweet spot everything over 30 and 3.4 has a good shot pretty much anywhere and everything lower than that doesn't. Now, when you take into consideration the fact that blacks mean stats are much lower than that you arrive at the fact the most do not get in. WE DO NOT TAKE SPOTs.

Please don't get upset.

I get it. I really do.

I was very prepared to attend an HBCU for comments on this thread -- and I actually did attend an HBCU in undergrad because I didn't want to deal with the Gratz vs. Bollinger fallout. I am not going to justify the status quo, because 'fairness' as an idea is ridiculously complicated.

I imagine medical students at Johns Hopkins in the 1930s-70s never thought once about the spots they took from 'qualified' blacks because it was assumed that none existed, yet Vivian Thomas revolutionized Cardiology on a janitor's salary in the same buildings.

But that was years ago. Indeed it was. But people at institutions like JHU find the Vivian Thomas, Henrietta Lacks and Tuskegee Experiment stories embarrassing, so URMs have opportunities. Nevermind that most of the public primary and secondary schools in Baltimore, Detroit and Chicago are 95% black and failing. Diversity. Diversity. DIVERSITAY.

Take full advantage of the opportunity. It does not know where it came from and Lord knows that it came in a mop and a bucket for Vivian Thomas.

 

[ranson]

UPenn has 27 URM's and 28 Asians so no.

and anyway aren't Blacks & Hispanics roughly 1/3 of the American population vs. Asians being around 5%? If you were going for a population of med students which was reflective of the general population that we serve, Asians are still highly overrepresented here so I don't see what the big joke is.

http://www.med.upenn.edu/admiss/student2.html

URMs: 24%
Asians: 19%

Just because they make up 1/3 of the American population, they should be accepted with lower qualifications? Uhh, no.

 

[ranson]

penn state will forever be seen as a joke thanks to sandusky

I agree, lol.

 

[plumazul]

http://www.med.upenn.edu/admiss/student2.html

URMs: 24%
Asians: 19%

Just because they make up 1/3 of the American population, they should be accepted with lower qualifications? Uhh, no.

I looked over the site, but couldn't find your link to verify that the URMs at Penn have "lower qualifications". Or do you just think that all URMs have low stats?

 

[Lexdiamondz]

http://www.med.upenn.edu/admiss/student2.html

URMs: 24%
Asians: 19%

Just because they make up 1/3 of the American population, they should be accepted with lower qualifications? Uhh, no.

There's a difference between having lower stats and being unqualified. Furthermore, why assume that the URM's at UPenn are unqualified?

 

[plumazul]

Penn's entering class of 2012 stats:

ACADEMICS

Median MCAT:
VR 11
PS 13
BS 13
Median GPA 3.83

Hmmm, if one quarter of this class is low stat URMs, then if you take their scores out of the aggregate, what are the stats of the residual? 4.0/40??? A more reasonable hypothesis might be that perhaps there are a lot of high stat URMs out there and Penn seeks them out.

 

[MangoPlant]

I looked over the site, but couldn't find your link to verify that the URMs at Penn have "lower qualifications". Or do you just think that all URMs have low stats?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what he is saying is that if you took all of the URMs at Penn, took their average MCAT/GPA (of the whole group of URMs) and compared with the average MCAT/GPA of the entire group of non-URMs at Penn, that the average MCAT/GPA of the URMs would be lower.

Of course, I do not have any data to back this up and nor is this my opinion. I am just clarifying what that above poster most likely meant.

 

[pp77]

Penn's entering class of 2012 stats:

ACADEMICS

Median MCAT:
VR 11
PS 13
BS 13
Median GPA 3.83

Hmmm, if one quarter of this class is low stat URMs, then if you take their scores out of the aggregate, what are the stats of the residual? 4.0/40??? A more reasonable hypothesis might be that perhaps there are a lot of high stat URMs out there and Penn seeks them out.

https://www.aamc.org/download/321514/data/2012factstable25-2.pdf

https://www.aamc.org/download/321512/data/2012factstable25-1.pdf

According to this there are ~ 130 black and Latino students in the country with that combination of GPA and MCAT. Given that all medical schools have affirmative action policies, it seems unlikely that Penn gets a huge number of these students (though I'm sure they get a good percentage of them). The more likely explanation seems to be that they lower their standards a bit for "URMs".

 

[goofball]

I think the problem with affirmative action is that the people it advantages the most are URMS from middle and upper middle class households. These people enjoyed backgrounds and opportunities very similar to the rest of us, but now they just get an additional advantage for no reason.

Consequently, affirmative action disadvantages poor Asians and Whites (and there are millions!) who lacked our opportunities, and now don't get any compensation.

It's really an outdated, archaic, and blunt policy. It's really clear that some segments of our society need affirmative action because of the disadvantages they face. But how do you select them? How do you decide who is worthy and who isn't? Because just using "race" is a really blunt instrument, and clearly isn't working.



The only thing we have as a result of AA is that the kids of wealthy Black professionals go to medical school with the kids of wealthy White and Asian professionals. What about everyone else?

 

[MangoPlant]

I think the problem with affirmative action is that the people it advantages the most are URMS from middle and upper middle class households. These people enjoyed backgrounds and opportunities very similar to the rest of us, but now they just get an additional advantage for no reason.

Consequently, affirmative action disadvantages poor Asians and Whites (and there are millions!) who lacked our opportunities, and now don't get any compensation.

It's really an outdated, archaic, and blunt policy. It's really clear that some segments of our society need affirmative action because of the disadvantages they face. But how do you select them? How do you decide who is worthy and who isn't? Because just using "race" is a really blunt instrument, and clearly isn't working.



The only thing we have as a result of AA is that the kids of wealthy Black professionals go to medical school with the kids of wealthy White and Asian professionals. What about everyone else?

Couldn't have said it any better 👍. Instead of looking at race, socioeconomic status and individual circumstances should be considered.

 

[lobo.solo]

I think the problem with affirmative action is that the people it advantages the most are URMS from middle and upper middle class households. These people enjoyed backgrounds and opportunities very similar to the rest of us, but now they just get an additional advantage for no reason.

Consequently, affirmative action disadvantages poor Asians and Whites (and there are millions!) who lacked our opportunities, and now don't get any compensation.

It's really an outdated, archaic, and blunt policy. It's really clear that some segments of our society need affirmative action because of the disadvantages they face. But how do you select them? How do you decide who is worthy and who isn't? Because just using "race" is a really blunt instrument, and clearly isn't working.



The only thing we have as a result of AA is that the kids of wealthy Black professionals go to medical school with the kids of wealthy White and Asian professionals. What about everyone else?

Do yo have any data for this statement or is this anecdotal? As far as I know adcoms consider SES, after all you put that information in your application. There is even a space where you can declare as disadvantage. I would think that adcoms take that into consideration. This is open to EVERY APPLICANT regardless of race/ethic background.

 

[lobo.solo]

Do yo have any data for this statement or is this anecdotal? As far as I know adcoms consider SES, after all you put that information in your application. There is even a space where you can declare as disadvantage. I would think that adcoms take that into consideration. This is open to EVERY APPLICANT regardless of race/ethic background.

A thought provoking video.

[YOUTUBE]6uH0vpGZJCo[/YOUTUBE]

 

[goofball]

Do yo have any data for this statement or is this anecdotal? As far as I know adcoms consider SES, after all you put that information in your application. There is even a space where you can declare as disadvantage. I would think that adcoms take that into consideration. This is open to EVERY APPLICANT regardless of race/ethic background.

EDIT: Found what I was looking for.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/feature/the_next_step_in_affirmative_a.php

(Even though black affirmative action beneficiaries are often wealthy, they usually attend college with even wealthier white classmates, according to research by William Bowen and Derek Bok.

Carnevale and Rose found that race-based affirmative action roughly tripled the representation of blacks and Hispanics, but that low income students received no leg up. Likewise, William Bowen—a strong supporter of race-based affirmative action—found that at 19 selective institutions, being black, Latino or Native American increased one's chances of being admitted by 28 percentage points, but coming from a low-income family didn't help at all.

Affirmative action doesn't stop favoring wealthy blacks outside college, though. This was one example of affirmative action in law school need scholarships.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444799904578050901460576218.html

Genuine need can be fully met through need-based scholarships; the race-based kind simply foster the sort of zero-sum competition that now causes American law schools to give four times as much grant aid to rich blacks as to poor whites, as one of us (Richard Sander) found in a 2011 study for the University of Denver Law Review.

Look, affirmative action just means that rich white kids get to work with rich black kids. And everyone else suffers.

 

[lobo.solo]

EDIT: Found what I was looking for.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/feature/the_next_step_in_affirmative_a.php





Affirmative action doesn't stop favoring wealthy blacks outside college, though. This was one example of affirmative action in law school need scholarships.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444799904578050901460576218.html






Look, affirmative action just means that rich white kids get to work with rich black kids. And everyone else suffers.

Well, this doesn't support your claim that adcoms don't consider the case of the poor Hmong kid. If anything this article brings up the issue that schools don't prepare students well enough for college, and we know that the funding of public schools is strictly related to the wealth of people that live around those schools.

 

[goofball]

Well, this doesn't support your claim that adcoms don't consider the case of the poor Hmong kid. If anything this article brings up the issue that schools don't prepare students well enough for college, and we know that the funding of public schools is strictly related to the wealth of people that live around those schools.

Ok, they consider his case. But he certainly doesn't receive the advantages of wealthy black kids.

I am a huge advocate for greater involvement in wealth for affirmative action. Race can matter, but right now, race is almost all that matters, and the results we get are not the results we want.

 

[plumazul]

A thought provoking video.

[YOUTUBE]6uH0vpGZJCo[/YOUTUBE]

I Tim Wise

 

[Espadaleader]

Obviously you're not a minority. Every black person knows about UPenn. UPenn takes most of the top black students. URMs in the 2011 entering class: MCAT median = 34, GPA 3.66

 

[Espadaleader]

Those stats are comparable with anyone else.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

Well, this doesn't support your claim that adcoms don't consider the case of the poor Hmong kid. If anything this article brings up the issue that schools don't prepare students well enough for college, and we know that the funding of public schools is strictly related to the wealth of people that live around those schools.

and the wealth of those schools are, more often than not, related to race.

 

[Girly X]

As has been repeated ad nauseum on SDN, the URM "advantage" is not in place to "benefit" URM applicants. It is in place to benefit the PATIENTS.




/thread

 

[ranson]

Those stats are comparable with anyone else.

Assuming your information is accurate (Mcat:34, GPA: 3.66), those stats are NOT comparable with anyone else, not even close. If an Asian had those stats, he/she would would not even receive an interview invite from UPenn or any top 10 school, yet African Americans get accepted with those stats.

 

[pp77]

Assuming your information is accurate (Mcat:34, GPA: 3.66), those stats are NOT comparable with anyone else, not even close. If an Asian had those stats, he/she would would not even receive an interview invite from UPenn or any top 10 school, yet African Americans get accepted with those stats.

Heck, with a 33 and a 3.6 I got 5 interviews and 1 acceptance over two cycles applying to about 25 schools, with none in the top 30 (and most well out of the top 50).

 

[pp77]

As has been repeated ad nauseum on SDN, the URM "advantage" is not in place to "benefit" URM applicants. It is in place to benefit the PATIENTS.




/thread

How does it benefit patients?

 

[Girly X]

How does it benefit patients?

Ugh really?

One of MANY examples: Have you ever experienced the comfort that comes from sharing your deepest secrets or concerns with or talking to someone who had the same experiences or background as you? Many people see this connection with people who look like them (even if they are wealthier). I think we owe it to patients to at least give them that experience or choice, when they are at their most vulnerable time. For all intents and purposes, this does not exist in many hospitals or private practices that serve minority populations today.

 

[pp77]

Ugh really?

One of MANY examples: Have you ever experienced the comfort that comes from sharing your deepest secrets or concerns with or talking to someone who had the same experiences or background as you? Many people see this connection with people who look like them (even if they are wealthier). I think we owe it to patients to at least give them that experience or choice, when they are at their most vulnerable time. For all intents and purposes, this does not exist in many hospitals or private practices that serve minority populations today.

Do all "URMs" have the same background? My understanding is that the typical African-American applicant, say, is a middle-class college graduate, whereas a pretty large percentage of African-Americans in this country are (unfortunately) from poor backgrounds and have not had much access to good education. I don't see what the two have in common except skin tone.

And if "URMs" need "URM" physicians, do "ORMs" also need "ORM" physicians? A physician should be a dispenser of science-based medical advice informed by a humanistic outlook, and I would dare say that most modern physicians come reasonably close to this ideal. Is the message diminished by the messenger? That's a pretty grim statement, especially in an America that is multi-ethnic and becoming more so with each passing year.

 

[MalinaRana]

Ugh really?

One of MANY examples: Have you ever experienced the comfort that comes from sharing your deepest secrets or concerns with or talking to someone who had the same experiences or background as you? Many people see this connection with people who look like them (even if they are wealthier). I think we owe it to patients to at least give them that experience or choice, when they are at their most vulnerable time. For all intents and purposes, this does not exist in many hospitals or private practices that serve minority populations today.

This is right on. I'm from a place that is mostly minorities of low SES that are routinely served by health professionals that are from an entirely different background. People from my community often complain about how they are treated by these, we'll say, interlopers. They might have the best intention of helping those underserved, but are not able to do so when there is such a huge disconnect.

To clarify, I am Native American from a reservation and I have yet, in my 26 years of seeing doctors, have been served by a Native doctor. Imagine a lifetime of doctors of a different race and background being the only ones available to you... the horror stories of how non-Natives treat Natives extend into health services to this day.

 

[Girly X]

Do all "URMs" have the same background? My understanding is that the typical African-American applicant, say, is a middle-class college graduate, whereas a pretty large percentage of African-Americans in this country are (unfortunately) from poor backgrounds and have not had much access to good education. I don't see what the two have in common except skin tone.

And if "URMs" need "URM" physicians, do "ORMs" also need "ORM" physicians? A physician should be a dispenser of science-based medical advice informed by a humanistic outlook, and I would dare say that most modern physicians come reasonably close to this ideal. Is the message diminished by the messenger? That's a pretty grim statement, especially in an America that is multi-ethnic and becoming more so with each passing year.

There are certain experiences that all URMs go through regardless of SE status. So that nuanced connection is always there.

And I'm not saying ORMs need ORM docs and URMs need URM docs. In fact many do not think like this. But for those who feel more comfortable with such experiences, the options must be there, especially when they are sick and we want to do everything we can to get them well, for the benefit of the entire system. And just so you know, race relations have come a long way, but unfortunately, they are far from over. It would be naive to think so.

 

[plumazul]

Do all "URMs" have the same background? My understanding is that the typical African-American applicant, say, is a middle-class college graduate, whereas a pretty large percentage of African-Americans in this country are (unfortunately) from poor backgrounds and have not had much access to good education. I don't see what the two have in common except skin tone.

And if "URMs" need "URM" physicians, do "ORMs" also need "ORM" physicians? A physician should be a dispenser of science-based medical advice informed by a humanistic outlook, and I would dare say that most modern physicians come reasonably close to this ideal. Is the message diminished by the messenger? That's a pretty grim statement, especially in an America that is multi-ethnic and becoming more so with each passing year.

😕😕 uhh, do you understand what the acronyms mean? Do you understand the importance of a detailed history in patient care? It is a lot more than just "skin color", there is a culture to understand. Do you think that perhaps a URM with a lifetime of immersion in an associated culture (and yes, the culture transcends any move into the middle class or geography) might have a better understanding of his/her patients of a similar ethnicity? Their beliefs, their diet, their taboos, their fears, their genetic predispositions, etc. are all things that can significantly affect patient care.

 

[pp77]

😕😕 uhh, do you understand what the acronyms mean? Do you understand the importance of a detailed history in patient care? It is a lot more than just "skin color", there is a culture to understand. Do you think that perhaps a URM with a lifetime of immersion in an associated culture (and yes, the culture transcends any move into the middle class or geography) might have a better understanding of his/her patients of a similar ethnicity? Their beliefs, their diet, their taboos, their fears, their genetic predispositions, etc. are all things that can significantly affect patient care.

This is an interesting comment and frankly kind of demoralizing. If people from certain ethnicities will generally relate better (i.e. be more trusting) of people from the same ethnicity then multi-ethnic democracies such as ours are probably doomed because the same logic must extend into politics, education and other areas. Actually, I believe there is some sociological evidence for this.

My use of the term "ORM" was a joke on my part, a play on the term URM which besides being in a sense redundant is also increasingly outmoded ("minorities" are becoming the majority in the United States).

 

[plumazul]

This is an interesting comment and frankly kind of demoralizing. If people from certain ethnicities will generally relate better (i.e. be more trusting) of people from the same ethnicity then multi-ethnic democracies such as ours are probably doomed because the same logic must extend into politics, education and other areas. Actually, I believe there is some sociological evidence for this.

My use of the term "ORM" was a joke on my part, a play on the term URM which besides being in a sense redundant is also increasingly outmoded ("minorities" are becoming the majority in the United States).

Yes, this is true, but not in medicine. URM == "Underrepresented in Medicine". If anything, it's getting worse. The percentage of Mexican Americans entering medical schools is actually falling while their numbers in the general population are exploding.

 

[pp77]

One question: what evidence is there that "URM" physicians work with "URM" patients? I have known and patronized a few "URM" physicians in my day and it was my impression that they mainly worked with the same comfortable, well-insured, mostly-white patient cohort as other physicians (unless they are in a specialty such as Emergency Medicine). What percentage of "URM" physicians end up practicing in the Mississippi Delta, rural southern Texas or other underserved, majority-minority areas?

A follow up question would be why schools such as Yale (whose explicit mission is to train leaders in academic medicine and medical policy) practice affirmative action.

 

[pp77]

Yes, this is true, but not in medicine. URM == "Underrepresented in Medicine". If anything, it's getting worse. The percentage of Mexican Americans entering medical schools is actually falling while their numbers in the general population are exploding.

I appreciate the correction. Is it just ethnic minorities who are under-represented in medicine? For example, I believe something like 15% of Americans are Baptists, and a growing number identify with various Pentecostal movements, but I've met very few physicians with those beliefs. Actually, according to one study (http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/050714/doctorsfaith.shtml), physicians are less likely than the general population to be religious or to identify with certain religions (e.g. Catholicism, mainline Protestantism).

 

[lobo.solo]

One question: what evidence is there that "URM" physicians work with "URM" patients? I have known and patronized a few "URM" physicians in my day and it was my impression that they mainly worked with the same comfortable, well-insured, mostly-white patient cohort as other physicians (unless they are in a specialty such as Emergency Medicine). What percentage of "URM" physicians end up practicing in the Mississippi Delta, rural southern Texas or other underserved, majority-minority areas?

A follow up question would be why schools such as Yale (whose explicit mission is to train leaders in academic medicine and medical policy) practice affirmative action.

Look it up in pubmed. I don't know specifically but like I said before URM graduates are in general going to serve underserved populations, this makes the school look good. There is plenty of evidence out there.

 

[pp77]

Look it up in pubmed. I don't know specifically but like I said before URM graduates are in general going to serve underserved populations, this makes the school look good. There is plenty of evidence out there.

I looked a little bit and couldn't find anything on URMs specifically, however I did find an interesting study that is somewhat related:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23167050

The University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMC) has been the only medical school in the state since its inception in 1955 (until the 2008 establishment of the William Carey College of Osteopathic Medicine, yet to graduate its first class). Recruiting out-of-state physicians is difficult in Mississippi, and stakeholders frequently talk of "growing our own" physicians, especially challenging with a single public medical school.

Approximately 56% of UMC 1990-1999 cohort grads are practicing in Mississippi. Moreover, UMC graduates--of any year--constitute about 58% of Mississippi's practicing physicians. UMC graduates are not more likely to practice in rural, small towns, or geographically isolated areas in Mississippi than physicians who graduated elsewhere. Controlling for other factors, UMC grads are not more likely to recommend practicing in Mississippi than physicians trained elsewhere.

 

[lobo.solo]

Ok, they consider his case. But he certainly doesn't receive the advantages of wealthy black kids.

I am a huge advocate for greater involvement in wealth for affirmative action. Race can matter, but right now, race is almost all that matters, and the results we get are not the results we want.

Dude this not true... There are plenty of things that matter. GPA, mcat, interview, SES, volunteer, research, leadership, etc. You're making the admin process black and white and we all know on SDN that is not the case. We all know that there is more to numbers.

 

[metview]

LizzyM score: 10(gpa)+mcat

LizzyM score for URMs: 10(gpa)+mcat+4

 

[Calculon]

Dude this not true... There are plenty of things that matter. GPA, mcat, interview, SES, volunteer, research, leadership, etc. You're making the admin process black and white and we all know on SDN that is not the case. We all know that there is more to numbers.

I believe goofball was referring only to the "disadvantage" factors (like race, socioeconomic status, etc.) and not "merit" factors (like the ones you cited).

 

[Espadaleader]

Okay last reply. 3% of physicians are black, 3% of medical students are black. Lay off it. If AA went away those numbers would decrease. There isn't really any where else the numbers could decrease to. Now to answer your question about "low stat applicants". Listen, blacks that get top 10 acceptances get MCAT scores usually in the 90th percentile and GPAs magna cum laude or better. You have to understand, medical schools don't accept people that will fail out. Are you telling me I don't deserve my spot when I scored better than 91 percent of test takers? Screw you. It's because of people like you that discriminate on this forum that affirmative actions exists.

 

[galaxyx]

One question: what evidence is there that "URM" physicians work with "URM" patients? I have known and patronized a few "URM" physicians in my day and it was my impression that they mainly worked with the same comfortable, well-insured, mostly-white patient cohort as other physicians (unless they are in a specialty such as Emergency Medicine). What percentage of "URM" physicians end up practicing in the Mississippi Delta, rural southern Texas or other underserved, majority-minority areas?

A follow up question would be why schools such as Yale (whose explicit mission is to train leaders in academic medicine and medical policy) practice affirmative action.

http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/19/4/76.short

An to your "follow up," Do you think that leaders in academic medicine and medical policy should only be "white males" that only understand the health issues of "white males"?

 

[Iampanic]

According to AMCAS Table 25. There were 11696 accepted to medical school last year with a MCAT score of 27-29 that many here in SDN considered sub-par.10406 of those were ORM. There were URM's with better stats and were not accepted. It is not like they are admitting students just for being URM's they need to have other qualifications.

 

[MelonMan]

I am an ORM and I have never once complained about URMs getting an advantage. Seriously, if you're good enough to get into medical school, you will. If you aren't, you won't be. It's pretty sad that people continue to complain and throw out excuses when the problem resides with themselves.

 

[pp77]

http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/19/4/76.short

An to your "follow up," Do you think that leaders in academic medicine and medical policy should only be "white males" that only understand the health issues of "white males"?

Your article states:

Using data from the Commonwealth Fund 1994 National Comparative Survey of Minority Health Care, we found that black and Hispanic Americans sought care from physicians of their own race because of personal preference and language, not solely because of geographic accessibility.

While this tells us that minorities may have a personal preference for minority physicians, it does not state that personal preference is the major factor in their choosing minority physicians (nor that minority physicians are more likely to treat minority patients when other factors are controlled for). In fact, the article states that less than a quarter of "URM" patients with race-concordant physicians explicitly listed ethnicity as a factor they used to choose their physicians (pg. 79).

As to your second point, I think (or hope!) that medicine is a fundamentally scientific endeavor, meaning that medical problems are only soluble by the application of modern scientific methods. Since these methods are by definition universal, no ethnicity has any particular advantage in applying them.

 

[pp77]

Seriously, if you're good enough to get into medical school, you will.

This is a tautology. What is the universal standard for "good enough enough to get into medical school"? Admissions committees claim that there is no universal standard, although they evidently prefer white, Asian and Indian applicants with high GPAs and MCATs and black and Latino candidates with lower GPAs and MCATs.

 

[jw3600]

Penn's entering class of 2012 stats:

ACADEMICS

Median MCAT:
VR 11
PS 13
BS 13
Median GPA 3.83

Hmmm, if one quarter of this class is low stat URMs, then if you take their scores out of the aggregate, what are the stats of the residual? 4.0/40??? A more reasonable hypothesis might be that perhaps there are a lot of high stat URMs out there and Penn seeks them out.

Kind of a pointless thread, but I couldn't let this one go unnoticed. Do you know what a median IS? You used it several times in your post, so one would hope so...

 

[The Beyonder]

Increased height does correlate with increased MCAT. But that's only because 2 year olds aren't very good at verbal reasoning. amateurs

LOL.

A thought provoking video.

[YOUTUBE]6uH0vpGZJCo[/YOUTUBE]

Great video. Reminds me of these charts and how people look at the percentages, but ignore the magnitude of the numbers.

12,000 White students where admitted to med school with sub 30 scores.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321518/data/2012factstable25-4.pdf
2,800 Asian students where admitted to med school with sub 30 scores.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321516/data/2012factstable25-3.pdf
2,400 Black students where admitted to med school with sub 30 scores.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321514/data/2012factstable25-2.pdf

If you're outraged about students with low scores becoming doctors, why are these students never addressed?

I am an ORM and I have never once complained about URMs getting an advantage. Seriously, if you're good enough to get into medical school, you will. If you aren't, you won't be. It's pretty sad that people continue to complain and throw out excuses when the problem resides with themselves.

Blaming others is convenient. Have you noticed that people who previously argued against URM's in earlier threads fall silent once they get accepted?

 

[Calculon]

This is a tautology. What is the universal standard for "good enough enough to get into medical school"? Admissions committees claim that there is no universal standard, although they evidently prefer white, Asian and Indian applicants with high GPAs and MCATs and black and Latino candidates with lower GPAs and MCATs.

Yes, exactly! The phrase "good enough" is dependent on the preferences of adcoms, which take affirmative action into account. There's no universal standard for "good enough."

 

[Planes2Doc]

I've pretty much stayed out of this debate. I'm not URM and don't actually have any African Americans in my class.

But here's a few thoughts... First of all, I know people of all nationalities. Some people I know are idiots and some are very intelligent. Then you have them all along the spectrum. They come in all shapes, colors, and sizes.

One of my best friends is Ghanian. He was originally pre-med. It's a shame he didn't continue the pre-med track because he would have made a great physician. Not because he's African American and would be able to check the URM box on his application.

I also have two heroes in medicine, Dr. Robert Spetzler and Dr. Keith Black. One is white, and the other is black. Both have incredible accomplishments and have positively changed the lives of countless people, and race or skin color have nothing to do with it.

Another thing is that the medical school curriculum and USMLE aren't changed for anyone. They are both equalizers. If a URM who doesn't deserve to be in medical school gets in with URM status, they will fail out. The people I know who failed out or are repeating a year aren't URM either by the way.

I think things like Affirmative Action, URM, and racial preference are definitely not black and white issues, no pun intended.

 

[Oluedo]

LOL.



Great video. Reminds me of these charts and how people look at the percentages, but ignore the magnitude of the numbers.

12,000 White students where admitted to med school with sub 30 scores.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321518/data/2012factstable25-4.pdf
2,800 Asian students where admitted to med school with sub 30 scores.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321516/data/2012factstable25-3.pdf
2,400 Black students where admitted to med school with sub 30 scores.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321514/data/2012factstable25-2.pdf

If you're outraged about students with low scores becoming doctors, why are these students never addressed?



Blaming others is convenient. Have you noticed that people who previously argued against URM's in earlier threads fall silent once they get accepted?

I was going to ask this same question!

 

[LaughingMan]

Lot of interesting opinions here.