Why so little discussion of class?

[Rogert]

---

Members don't see this ad.

- Not applying to top colleges because 'they're too expensive' even though some are need-blind and have generous aid packages.

I turned down Yale because I had no idea this was the case. 🙁

 

[ChillDawg]

@altblue @DokterMom, nobody is denying that its so much harder for SES to succeed, I know what that's like.

But to say that it's America's fault is ridiculous. Self-victimization keeps people like us down.

(I'm not talking about race - this is strictly SES)

 

[DokterMom]

@altblue @DokterMom, nobody is denying that its so much harder for SES to succeed, I know what that's like.

But to say that it's America's fault is ridiculous. Self-victimization keeps people like us down.

(I'm not talking about race - this is strictly SES)

It's not America's fault -- (though many other countries do have significantly more class mobility)
And I certainly don't advocate self-victimization. That helps no one.

But for 'The Haves' to denigrate the 'Have Nots' for not being able to just pull themselves up by the bootstraps and dismiss those who don't as less able or less deserving (We all admire those who do/can.) -- well, it's short-sighted, and doesn't acknowledge the very real impacts of what it's like to grow up disadvantaged.

 

[mehc012]

After I submit secondaries I will make a thread for disadvantaged students. I think it would be beneficial to have a list of schools that waives the secondary fee, among other pieces of information.

The problem I have is that the most useful piece of information I got from SDN on the disadvantaged status was not to claim it even though I qualify...the theory and idea is nice, but it's worthless if admissions committees are not themselves diverse enough to appreciate what a disadvantaged applicant worked past.

 

[DokterMom]

The problem I have is that the most useful piece of information I got from SDN on the disadvantaged status was not to claim it even though I qualify...the theory and idea is nice, but it's worthless if admissions committees are not themselves diverse enough to appreciate what a disadvantaged applicant worked past.

Boy, isn't that the truth! I think the trick is being able to identify just what your disadvantages were, to keep them sharply focused, and to acknowledge up front what areas you were not disadvantaged in. So hardships in a subordinate clause but at the start of the sentence, 'silver lining' in the subject portion (gramatically) of the sentence, but at the end. Ex:

• "While my parents were immigrants who did not speak English when they first arrived, their work ethic and the high value they placed on education were enormously beneficial to our family's eventual success."
• "While my high school was not able to offer AP classes or expensive extra-curricular activities, the closeness of our small rural community provided a wonderful sense of security and confidence. It wasn't until I reached university that I realized how ill-prepared I truly was. Fortunately, my strong support system helped me find a way to search out the extra research material I needed to get up to speed."
• "Though gangs ran rampant in our neighborhood, my responsibility of caring for my younger brothers kept me grounded at home and off the streets."

And if you weren't disadvantaged, say so.

• "My biggest challenge is likely to be living up to the high expectations my family has always had for me."

 

[Long Way to Go]

I turned down Yale because I had no idea this was the case. 🙁

Did you fail to apply for financial aid? Did you not get the financial aid award in time?

 

[Rogert]

Did you fail to apply for financial aid? Did you not get the financial aid award in time?

You need to take the acceptance before they give you aid. I saw the price tag and moved on with my life.

 

[NickNaylor]

It's not America's fault -- (though many other countries do have significantly more class mobility)
And I certainly don't advocate self-victimization. That helps no one.

But for 'The Haves' to denigrate the 'Have Nots' for not being able to just pull themselves up by the bootstraps and dismiss those who don't as less able or less deserving (We all admire those who do/can.) -- well, it's short-sighted, and doesn't acknowledge the very real impacts of what it's like to grow up disadvantaged.

Where does this denigration happen?

 

[Long Way to Go]

You need to take the acceptance before they give you aid. I saw the price tag and moved on with my life.

But the financial aid documents are due in March (http://admissions.yale.edu/application-deadlines), a month before Yale College releases decisions. Schools also send you plenty of reminders about filing out all required forms. How does that timeline make sense?

I'm not disagreeing with the rest of the positions on this thread; I just don't really understand this particular issue.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Where does this denigration happen?

It's pretty rampant during political campaigns. Discussions about the income gap and a lack of economic mobility are often framed as class warfare and attacks on the "job creators." In case you've forgotten, Mitt Romney actually gave us a glimpse of how many in the upper income brackets denigrate the poor with his 47% comments. I've actually heard similar remarks from quite a few upper class Manhattanites. In fact, I remember one dude (an investment banker) telling me that people below a certain income shouldn't be allowed to vote...

 

[NickNaylor]

It's pretty rampant during political campaigns. Discussions about the income gap and a lack of economic mobility are often framed as class warfare and attacks on the "job creators." In case you've forgotten, Mitt Romney actually gave us a glimpse of how many in the upper income brackets denigrate the poor with his 47% comments. I've actually heard similar remarks from quite a few upper class Manhattanites. In fact, I remember one dude (an investment banker) telling me that people below a certain income shouldn't be allowed to vote...

Romney's comments may not have been PC, but it is a fact that 47% of "taxpayers" do not pay any tax at all and, instead, are the recipients of tax outlays. It also isn't unreasonable to believe that those same people would likely vote Democratic given that the Democrats are, at least prima facie, in support of those programs while the Republicans are not. I'd agree that painting all of those people as "irresponsible" and "relying on government handouts" is painting with a broad brush, but I do think there's a kernel of truth to his comments. Handouts can and do result in reliance on them and, in my view, fail to incentivize productively contributing to society when used for anything but stop-gap measures. After all, why get a job when you can attain a minimal (but by no means desirable, for most) standard of living by doing nothing at all? There are people in this world that actively make that choice. I think that's a problem myself. I don't think having those opinions is "denigrating" the poor. Quite the opposite: it's attempting to figure out a way to get more people involved in the economy and prompting them to sustain themselves rather than relying on others to sustain them.

Edit: I should add that this is simply one example from one person who held the limelight. I still don't see how this means that America "denigrates" the poor as a whole.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Romney's comments may not have been PC, but it is a fact that 47% of "taxpayers" do not pay any tax at all and, instead, are the recipients of tax outlays. It also isn't unreasonable to believe that those same people would likely vote Democratic given that the Democrats are, at least prima facie, in support of those programs while the Republicans are not. I'd agree that painting all of those people as "irresponsible" and "relying on government handouts" is painting with a broad brush, but I do think there's a kernel of truth to his comments. Handouts can and do result in reliance on them and, in my view, fail to incentivize productively contributing to society when used for anything but stop-gap measures. After all, why get a job when you can attain a minimal (but by no means desirable, for most) standard of living by doing nothing at all? There are people in this world that actively make that choice. I think that's a problem myself. I don't think having those opinions is "denigrating" the poor. Quite the opposite: it's attempting to figure out a way to get more people involved in the economy and prompting them to sustain themselves rather than relying on others to sustain them.

Edit: I should add that this is simply one example from one person who held the limelight. I still don't see how this means that America "denigrates" the poor as a whole.

Mitt Romney's perspective is shared by many people in this country. Is it America as a whole? No. But the poor are often painted with a broad brush.

However, I agree that people who are able to work should not rely solely on handouts.

 

[mehc012]

Mitt Romney's perspective is shared by many people in this country. Is it America as a whole? No. But the poor are often painted with a broad brush.

However, I agree that people who are able to work should not rely solely on handouts.

Interestingly, there are studies that indicate it may be human nature to feel, even in the face of clear disparities of opportunity, as if your successes are due primarily to your own merit - a mentality that leads straight into the perspective you are discussing.

Here's a longer writeup on the research http://nymag.com/news/features/money-brain-2012-7/index1.html
...but it doesn't emphasize what I think is one of the key points, so here's a quote from one of the researchers from another source which does:

The rich players are determined randomly by coin toss, the game rigged so they cannot lose. And yet...

PAUL PIFF: When we asked them afterwards, how much do you feel like you deserved to win the game? The rich people felt entitled. They felt like they deserved to win the game. And that’s a really incredible insight into what the mind does to make sense of advantage or disadvantage.

PAUL SOLMAN: So, even though a subject like myself is just play-acting — you consistently find that I begin to attribute success to myself, even though it’s a coin flip that got me on this side of the board as opposed to that?

PAUL PIFF: You...start to attribute success to your own individual skills and talents, and you become less attuned to all of the other things that contributed to you being in the position that you’re in.

*note 'rich person' means the player designated to receive advantages in Monopoly

 

[DokterMom]

Interestingly, there are studies that indicate it may be human nature to feel, even in the face of clear disparities of opportunity, as if your successes are due primarily to your own merit - a mentality that leads straight into the perspective you are discussing.

Very true -- Google 'Just World Fallacy' for some very interesting reading about our inherent belief in the cosmic superiority of the more fortunate. Karma's a witch, apparently.

 

[Flashfan]

Romney's comments may not have been PC, but it is a fact that 47% of "taxpayers" do not pay any tax at all and, instead, are the recipients of tax outlays. It also isn't unreasonable to believe that those same people would likely vote Democratic given that the Democrats are, at least prima facie, in support of those programs while the Republicans are not.

It is not a fact. Your percentage is limited to Federal income tax. It does not count state income tax, payroll tax, sales tax and excise taxes. Even the governments most popular program Earned-Income Tax Credit, requires the working poor to actually WORK! It s a bell curve scale tat rewards people to work full-time at minimum wage to get the most benefit for families with children.

My geek is showing, I apologize.

 

[altblue]

Many of these "meritocratic" politicians had parents who pulled strings repeatedly, and still preach about the importance of rewarding talent and hard work, and discouraging people from getting handouts. You may know a few politicians like this...

Hopefully something similar isn't in medicine.

 

[Spinach Dip]

Financial barriers exist. Take it from someone who grew up ORM in a family that barely made more than the poverty level. They do.

There were several terms I had to take half (or less) credits because my parents refused to pay for more and threatened to disown me if I went into debt.

The actual story is complex and covers ~10 years, so I won't go into great detail here. (I also don't want to say so much that I reveal my identity.)

 

[pageantry]

First, everyone laying it down in this thread, thank you.

Beyond all the points you mentioned, as a disadvantaged applicant (FAP), I suspect I wouldn't fit in well at fancy schools with kids who had lots of advantages. I know too many people who became nearly/suicidal after getting accepted on scholarship to such schools. It's hard to hang with the level of blind privilege you see.

At my college, the most diverse college in the nation, our pre-med advisor steers students away from some top schools because of the constant barrage of elitist, sexist, and racist microaggressions she experiences when she goes to their conferences.

 

[Rogert]

First, everyone laying it down in this thread, thank you.

Beyond all the points you mentioned, as a disadvantaged applicant (FAP), I suspect I wouldn't fit in well at fancy schools with kids who had lots of advantages. I know too many people who became nearly/suicidal after getting accepted on scholarship to such schools. It's hard to hang with the level of blind privilege you see.

At my college, the most diverse college in the nation, our pre-med advisor steers students away from some top schools because of the constant barrage of elitist, sexist, and racist microaggressions she experiences when she goes to their conferences.

Fully agree with you here. As I said above, I had the opportunity to attend a top school but turned it down for bad reasons. While I wish I taken it, basically everyone I know who knows me and knows anything about Yale says I would have hated it because of the culture divide. And this honestly my biggest fear about med school. I can clearly work my butt off and perform well, but in a profession so dependant on connections as medicine, I'm not sure how I'll fare.

 

[pageantry]

Fully agree with you here. As I said above, I had the opportunity to attend a top school but turned it down for bad reasons. While I wish I taken it, basically everyone I know who knows me and knows anything about Yale says I would have hated it because of the culture divide. And this honestly my biggest fear about med school. I can clearly work my butt off and perform well, but in a profession so dependant on connections as medicine, I'm not sure how I'll fare.

On the bright side, rich people will always need their token _[blank]_ friends. Just master the art of keeping a straight face and squashing all your feelings down deep into gastrointestinal disorders.

 

[Pacna]

At my college, our pre-med advisor steers students away from some top schools because of the constant barrage of elitist, sexist, and racist microaggressions she experiences when she goes to their conferences.

What? And people listen to her?

 

[Rogert]

What? And people listen to her?

This seems to upset you. Why?

 

[mehc012]

First, everyone laying it down in this thread, thank you.

Beyond all the points you mentioned, as a disadvantaged applicant (FAP), I suspect I wouldn't fit in well at fancy schools with kids who had lots of advantages. I know too many people who became nearly/suicidal after getting accepted on scholarship to such schools. It's hard to hang with the level of blind privilege you see.

At my college, the most diverse college in the nation, our pre-med advisor steers students away from some top schools because of the constant barrage of elitist, sexist, and racist microaggressions she experiences when she goes to their conferences.

I understand what you're saying, but I personally am averse to adding another layer of barriers for myself.
I did experience some definite culture shock transitioning to an extremely wealthy college. It was difficult to adjust to, yes, but I feel better able to meld with that group now. That may seem silly, but I think it's an important skill for many reasons.
1) if you ever want to change things, that's the group you need to influence.
2) don't kid yourself; top undergrads may end up with a concentration of advantaged students, but so do med schools. Maybe HMS has more than Wayne state, but medicine as a whole is primarily comprised of the wealthy. The most painful statements of privilege I ever heard came from a few particular PAs and docs at the ER I worked at, and they didn't go to particularly fancy med/PA schools. Basically, you can choose to avoid JHU, but odds are you'll miss out on the school without avoiding the elitism.
3) As I said, I refuse to limit myself further. That's a personal choice, though.
4) Many perfectly nice people can end up uncomfortably elitist simply because they've never really interacted with someone from another background, or they do so only in a context where it is easy not to respect them enough to change their thinking (i.e. only at the needle exchange program they volunteered at for their app). If we self-segregate to avoid these uncomfortable encounters, we miss a chance to change that story.

 

[Pacna]

This seems to upset you. Why?

If I learned that I ended up not going to a top institution because when I was naïve, someone I trusted advised me to avoid them because of microaggressions, that would make me much more likely to kill myself as opposed to my professor mentioning that I didn't talk like a normal black person.

How can that not make you angry? This woman is literally a reason there aren't more URMs in top institutions.

 

[altblue]

Fully agree with you here. As I said above, I had the opportunity to attend a top school but turned it down for bad reasons. While I wish I taken it, basically everyone I know who knows me and knows anything about Yale says I would have hated it because of the culture divide. And this honestly my biggest fear about med school. I can clearly work my butt off and perform well, but in a profession so dependant on connections as medicine, I'm not sure how I'll fare.

Good choice. I'm at an undergrad with a possibly less diverse class than Yale, because there's no token effort to get a variety of people of different backgrounds

1. Rich international students and suburban kids driving up apartment, bar and restaurant prices
2. Rich international students complaining about luxury 900 dollar apartments
3. Kids complaining about how they'll live in the shadows of their brilliant surgeon/lawyer parents
4. Modest bragging about a vacation to some foreign country
5. Complaining about not getting their vacation to some foreign country
6. Getting tutoring I can't begin to afford

Can't imagine what it's like to be in med school

 

[pageantry]

If I learned that I ended up not going to a top institution because when I was naïve, someone I trusted advised me to avoid them because of microaggressions, that would make me much more likely to kill myself as opposed to my professor mentioning that I didn't talk like a normal black person.

How can that not make you angry? This woman is literally a reason there aren't more URMs in top institutions.

I doubt anyone with the scores would hesitate very long to apply to top schools. But she warns people about what she's seen and does a lot of handholding for anyone heading down those paths.

 

[Rogert]

If I learned that I ended up not going to a top institution because when I was naïve, someone I trusted advised me to avoid them because of microaggressions, that would make me much more likely to kill myself as opposed to my professor mentioning that I didn't talk like a normal black person.

How can that not make you angry? This woman is literally a reason there aren't more URMs in top institutions.

For starters, that why it's advice. You don't have to take it. I'd rather be applying knowing full well that I'm likely to be a social misfit rather than unaware. I also think you're really underestimating the importance of a welcoming (or at least not unwelcoming) environment. One of the highest risk factors, if not the highest, for suicide is social isolation. Something which is almost guaranteed to be the case at the beginning in these scenarios and very possibly could last the entire time.

And that person is not the "literal" reason for that. It's not like there are scores of high quality URM applicants being dissuaded by this person. There's not a lot of URMs at the top because very few URMs have the numbers to get them into the top.

 

[Rogert]

I understand what you're saying, but I personally am averse to adding another layer of barriers for myself.
I did experience some definite culture shock transitioning to an extremely wealthy college. It was difficult to adjust to, yes, but I feel better able to meld with that group now. That may seem silly, but I think it's an important skill for many reasons.
1) if you ever want to change things, that's the group you need to influence.
2) don't kid yourself; top undergrads may end up with a concentration of advantaged students, but so do med schools. Maybe HMS has more than Wayne state, but medicine as a whole is primarily comprised of the wealthy. The most painful statements of privilege I ever heard came from a few particular PAs and docs at the ER I worked at, and they didn't go to particularly fancy med/PA schools. Basically, you can choose to avoid JHU, but odds are you'll miss out on the school without avoiding the elitism.
3) As I said, I refuse to limit myself further. That's a personal choice, though.
4) Many perfectly nice people can end up uncomfortably elitist simply because they've never really interacted with someone from another background, or they do so only in a context where it is easy not to respect them enough to change their thinking (i.e. only at the needle exchange program they volunteered at for their app). If we self-segregate to avoid these uncomfortable encounters, we miss a chance to change that story.

This seems like fighting an impossible war. We might very well be the only URM/low SES person some physicians will interact with at the peer level. Nothing we do is going to change their views on things on the societal level. At best, we'll be a "credit to our race/class." The only way these views change is if the entire demographic landscape of medicine changes. One or two of us per class isn't going to change that.

 

[Affiche]

I want to stay away from the elitism as much as I can. I went to a pretty elitist undergraduate school, and not only did I feel disconnected and sometimes isolated from my peers, I occasionally felt disgusted with their outlooks on society. In medicine, it's difficult to distance yourself from the elitism, but I'll be damn sure to try.

 

[mehc012]

This seems like fighting an impossible war. We might very well be the only URM/low SES person some physicians will interact with at the peer level. Nothing we do is going to change their views on things on the societal level. At best, we'll be a "credit to our race/class." The only way these views change is if the entire demographic landscape of medicine changes. One or two of us per class isn't going to change that.

Cool, then let's just give up!

 

[Rogert]

Cool, then let's just give up!

On our peers and those who came before us? Absolutely. It's a lost cause. If we actually want to change this we need to work with kids. We need to encourage and support them in the ways that the world supports ORMs and the upper class. But that isn't affected by us forcing ourselves into crappy social situations right now; in fact it probably discourages it.

 

[Affiche]

The problem I have is that the most useful piece of information I got from SDN on the disadvantaged status was not to claim it even though I qualify...the theory and idea is nice, but it's worthless if admissions committees are not themselves diverse enough to appreciate what a disadvantaged applicant worked past.

This advice bothers me so much. I did apply disadvantaged because I am damn proud of the obstacles I've overcome. They shaped who I am. The fact that this forum trivializes others' adversity is not only ignorant and offensive, but it epitomizes blind privilege. I do think sometimes people try to spin that they are disadvantaged and they do need to be given perspective, but to tell someone who does qualify as disadvantaged not to apply as such is disappointing, to say the least. I figured that if an adcom dismisses my background then I probably wouldn't fit in well with their program anyway.

 

[nwts]

Good choice. I'm at an undergrad with a possibly less diverse class than Yale, because there's no token effort to get a variety of people of different backgrounds

1. Rich international students and suburban kids driving up apartment, bar and restaurant prices
2. Rich international students complaining about luxury 900 dollar apartments
3. Kids complaining about how they'll live in the shadows of their brilliant surgeon/lawyer parents
4. Modest bragging about a vacation to some foreign country
5. Complaining about not getting their vacation to some foreign country
6. Getting tutoring I can't begin to afford

Can't imagine what it's like to be in med school

I agree with all of those things, except I think we need to be a little more understanding of #3. I am not a person in a situation like that, but I know several people who are, and most of them are heavily pressured by their parents to measure up. A lot of them are being constantly reminded by their parents that their parents were much more successful in high school, college, professional school, etc. While it is definitely true that people from very wealthy families often do a lot of complaining about "problems" that are actually just the advantages life gives them because they're rich (like you mentioned about complaints about $900 apartments), I don't think this qualifies. I can't imagine how terrible I would feel if I were working my hardest and doing my best, and my parents were still saying: "That's not good enough, I did better when I was your age." I think it is very legitimate to be hurt and upset by this. I don't think this is elitism showing; I think it's a manifestation of parents who are more concerned with what they can say to others about their children than their relationship with their children.

 

[Affiche]

On our peers and those who came before us? Absolutely. It's a lost cause. If we actually want to change this we need to work with kids. We need to encourage and support them in the ways that the world supports ORMs and the upper class. But that isn't affected by us forcing ourselves into crappy social situations right now; in fact it probably discourages it.

Respectfully, I disagree. In high school, I met a physician that was homeless when he was in high school. This resonated with me and gave me hope that if he could do it, so could I. It's one thing to tell a kid that they can push ahead of you and do well for themselves, it's another to show a kid that it can be done.

 

[Rogert]

Respectfully, I disagree. In high school, I met a physician that was homeless when he was in high school. This resonated with me and gave me hope that if he could do it, so could I. It's one thing to tell a kid that they can push ahead of you and do well for themselves, it's another to show a kid that it can be done.

Apparently I wasn't clear. What that physician did is exactly what I was saying we all need to be doing if/when we become physicians and want to change things.

 

[altblue]

I agree with all of those things, except I think we need to be a little more understanding of #3. I am not a person in a situation like that, but I know several people who are, and most of them are heavily pressured by their parents to measure up. A lot of them are being constantly reminded by their parents that their parents were much more successful in high school, college, professional school, etc. While it is definitely true that people from very wealthy families often do a lot of complaining about "problems" that are actually just the advantages life gives them because they're rich (like you mentioned about complaints about $900 apartments), I don't think this qualifies. I can't imagine how terrible I would feel if I were working my hardest and doing my best, and my parents were still saying: "That's not good enough, I did better when I was your age." I think it is very legitimate to be hurt and upset by this. I don't think this is elitism showing; I think it's a manifestation of parents who are more concerned with what they can say to others about their children than their relationship with their children.

I'll give you that, it's a legitimate issue if it causes serious stress. It's more that these problems are presented in juxtaposition to the problems poorer people face, like "we all have issues", which are generally more serious.

 

[Affiche]

@Rogert but if he refused to force himself into a crappy social situation, I would have never had him as an example to look up to.

 

[mehc012]

This advice bothers me so much. I did apply disadvantaged because I am damn proud of the obstacles I've overcome. They shaped who I am. The fact that this forum trivializes others' adversity is not only ignorant and offensive, but it epitomizes blind privilege. I do think sometimes people try to spin that they are disadvantaged and they do need to be given perspective, but to tell someone who does qualify as disadvantaged not to apply as such is disappointing, to say the least. I figured that if an adcom dismisses my background then I probably wouldn't fit in well with their program anyway.

I felt the same way, until finally having a respectful disagreement with LizzyM over the issue. She described some of the reactions she'd seen in her colleagues, and shared a personal anecdote where she recommended to a young applicant that they check the 'Disadvantaged' box, only to listen to her committee use it against that person...I just get the impression that maybe admissions committees aren't currently capable of responding appropriately to it.

To me, though, that doesn't necessarily mean that the school itself is toxic. It is easy for those in a position of power (such as admissions) to linger without updating themselves or their views. And, with the fierce competition for med school, it really doesn't take more than one or two people with a negative reaction to sink a candidate. Those one or two people do not necessarily reflect the attitude of the student body or even the majority of admins/adcoms. I'd rather fight the issue by getting in (even if that means skipping the Disadvantaged essay; I'll bring it up in secondaries about diversity/adversity), rocking the school, earning respect, and then being blunt about my opinions on the matter. I don't gain anything by essentially boycotting all schools with elitist adcoms.

 

[DokterMom]

Begin Rant:

How will things ever change if capable SES-disadvantaged applicants don't apply or refrain from attending elite schools to avoid a possible social misfit? This is precisely the type of diversity elite schools try to encourage. SES-disadvantaged applicants attending elite schools is the ideal of meritocracy embodied. And many, many SES-advantaged students welcome that diversity with open arms. Sure, they might make some bone-headed statements that reflect their sheltered upbringings -- but that's an opportunity to change minds and broaden horizons. There will be micro-aggressions - but many will be accidental. Again, an opportunity to educate. That's why the elite schools truly try to bring in a diverse student body.

Why stay in a 'lower tier' environment if you're capable of better? Because it's more 'comfortable' socially? Because it fits your inner monologue of 'not worthy'? Because you think you can't break some imaginary glass ceiling? Self-segregating attitudes like that perpetuate the class divide as much as micro-aggressions from the top-down.

The American ideal is of a pure meritocracy. To move closer to that ideal, both sides need to embrace it and act accordingly.

End Rant

 

[pageantry]

For me, the answer is in balance. For money, I tutor rich kids so they can get into Yale and then tutor kids who are getting their GED (like I did) for free. It keeps me from going bananas.

I also think smart, disadvantaged students would do well to think twice before going to a school that has claws and teeth sunk into supporting and defining the status quo. For me, there's a real ethical question there. By buying in to the elite school demographic, you accept a certain stance in relationship to the people you're supposed to serve. That's how personal statements full of "I want to hellllp people" are born. I question the idea that top schools--by their nature--can ever actually "change the world" (as they all claim) in ways that truly serve the poor and disenfranchised.

 

[Rogert]

@Rogert but if he refused to force himself into a crappy social situation, I would have never had him as an example to look up to.

You can can become a doctor without going to some elitist school though. We can select for schools with better environments and demographics (unless you only get into one school, but if the "top" schools are on your radar you can probably get in other places). Like Mech said, there's always going to be some of that, but there's no need to force ourselves into the worst possible situation.

 

[mehc012]

@Rogert but if he refused to force himself into a crappy social situation, I would have never had him as an example to look up to.

This. Also, maybe 1 or 2 students per class doesn't make a huge difference, but if those 1 or 2 people allow 3 or 4 other students gain a perspective they were never before forced to confront, well...that's 4-6 doctors who are better prepared to deal with low SES patients, and who will influence the next generation of docs and adcoms. Is that not a worthwhile victory? It doesn't have to be about making grand, sweeping, systemic changes.

 

[Gandyy]

Financial barriers exist. Take it from someone who grew up ORM in a family that barely made more than the poverty level. They do.

There were several terms I had to take half (or less) credits because my parents refused to pay for more and threatened to disown me if I went into debt.

The actual story is complex and covers ~10 years, so I won't go into great detail here. (I also don't want to say so much that I reveal my identity.)

And this is why it is so irritating to have people assume that you were born in a super wealth affluent family if you are ORM. I sympathize with you 100 percent.

While my situation does not sound as bad as yours, it was not "optimal"

 

[pageantry]

Begin Rant:

Why stay in a 'lower tier' environment if you're capable of better? Because it's more 'comfortable' socially? Because it fits your inner monologue of 'not worthy'? Because you think you can't break some imaginary glass ceiling? Self-segregating attitudes like that perpetuate the class divide as much as micro-aggressions from the top-down.

The American ideal is of a pure meritocracy. To move closer to that ideal, both sides need to embrace it and act accordingly.

End Rant

Respectfully, I question both the idea and the ideal of a pure meritocracy. The world will never be a level playing field. People will always be born with unfair disadvantages. I side with those who prefer to dream of learning to swim beyond or outside the system, unbuckled from one's capacity to become "elite" in a sinking ship.

 

[DokterMom]

For me, the answer is in balance. For money, I tutor rich kids so they can get into Yale and then tutor kids who are getting their GED (like I did) for free. It keeps me from going bananas.

Love this part!

I also think smart, disadvantaged students would do well to think twice before going to a school that has claws and teeth sunk into supporting and defining the status quo. For me, there's a real ethical question there. By buying in to the elite school demographic, you accept a certain stance in relationship to the people you're supposed to serve. That's how personal statements full of "I want to hellllp people" are born. I question the idea that top schools--by their nature--can ever actually "change the world" (as they all claim) in ways that truly serve the poor and disenfranchised.

Not so much this... Chip on your shoulder? Or perhaps it's just a jaded view about elite schools? Or maybe when you say "a school that has claws and teeth sunk into supporting and defining the status quo" you don't mean the same schools I mean when I say "Elite schools". Except I suspect you do mean those same schools.

Having attended one of those and doing alumni interviewing for them now, I think you're misinformed. (Yes, they do accept the privileged children of rich alumni. But the view is that those rich kids will grow up to be 'captains of industry' with or without an Ivy education, so better to train them well and gain their support than have them go elsewhere. Cynical, but real-world practical as well.) But they also seek out the SES disadvantaged and racial minorities and LGTBQ applicants as well, because these schools truly do want to shape the world for the better. And those students are supported at those particular schools. (Yeah, there are other schools geared to less-capable/more-rich students who do not strive for diversity. But they generally don't churn out future presidents and they're not most people's top-choice anyway.)

 

[mehc012]

Begin Rant:

How will things ever change if capable SES-disadvantaged applicants don't apply or refrain from attending elite schools to avoid a possible social misfit? This is precisely the type of diversity elite schools try to encourage. SES-disadvantaged applicants attending elite schools is the ideal of meritocracy embodied. And many, many SES-advantaged students welcome that diversity with open arms. Sure, they might make some bone-headed statements that reflect their sheltered upbringings -- but that's an opportunity to change minds and broaden horizons. There will be micro-aggressions - but many will be accidental. Again, an opportunity to educate. That's why the elite schools truly try to bring in a diverse student body.

Why stay in a 'lower tier' environment if you're capable of better? Because it's more 'comfortable' socially? Because it fits your inner monologue of 'not worthy'? Because you think you can't break some imaginary glass ceiling? Self-segregating attitudes like that perpetuate the class divide as much as micro-aggressions from the top-down.

The American ideal is of a pure meritocracy. To move closer to that ideal, both sides need to embrace it and act accordingly.

End Rant

THIS. This is what I've been trying to get at.

Yes, avoiding the top schools may be more comfortable. And that's fine, you do you.
But, though nobody is required to sacrifice comfort in order to further change, I still think that it is worth noting that there is a choice to be made: I feel that low SES students choosing to go to the top school makes more progress on the problem as a whole, even if it is sometimes less comfortable.

Again, nobody should be forced to decide one way or another on this, but let's not paint the two options as "equal, but one is more comfortable." Let's outline it clearly: progress or comfort? Then individuals can look at it and decide whether it's enough progress or too much discomfort to tip their own personal scales in one direction or the other.

 

[Affiche]

I recognize that I will be in a crappy social situation no matter what lol. No matter which medical school I attend, there will be an elitist mentality prevalent. But, the alternative is to not attend a professional school or further my education, and I don't exactly fit in with the "bachelors and done" crowd, either. I think a nice balance is to attend medical school, but attend the best one I can that also minimizes its elitism as much as possible.

 

[raiderette]

I let the demographic information speak for me. Parent education level, income, % of scholarships, grants, underserved communities. If the adcom cares at all, it is blatantly obvious that I come from a disadvantaged background. If they are prejudiced against those who have received assistance, I don't want to give them an opportunity to go after me, especially since my parents now make more money and I don't qualify for FAP now.

 

[DokterMom]

I recognize that I will be in a crappy social situation no matter what lol. No matter which medical school I attend, there will be an elitist mentality prevalent. But, the alternative is to not attend a professional school or further my education, and I don't exactly fit in with the "bachelors and done" crowd, either. I think a nice balance is to attend medical school, but attend the best one I can that also minimizes its elitism as much as possible.

Do you know how intimidating / impressive (in a good way) it is to see a SES-disadvantaged student kick butt in a top medical school? Look at Ben Carson -- I don't care for his politics, but that man made a difference. Those students who 'were born on third base' generally know it at some level, and to see students who started from behind pull ahead -- that says something!

Kick butt and take names @rachiie01 and don't let any fear of elitism hold you back.

 

[pageantry]

Love this part!



Not so much this... Chip on your shoulder? Or perhaps it's just a jaded view about elite schools? Or maybe when you say "a school that has claws and teeth sunk into supporting and defining the status quo" you don't mean the same schools I mean when I say "Elite schools". Except I suspect you do mean those same schools.

Having attended one of those and doing alumni interviewing for them now, I think you're misinformed. (Yes, they do accept the privileged children of rich alumni. But the view is that those rich kids will grow up to be 'captains of industry' with or without an Ivy education, so better to train them well and gain their support than have them go elsewhere. Cynical, but real-world practical as well.) But they also seek out the SES disadvantaged and racial minorities and LGTBQ applicants as well, because these schools truly do want to shape the world for the better. And those students are supported at those particular schools. (Yeah, there are other schools geared to less-capable/more-rich students who do not strive for diversity. But they generally don't churn out future presidents and they're not most people's top-choice anyway.)

I think we may have very different perspectives on what is meant by "a better world."

But, without going into details, I think I have had a very up close and personal perspective on top institutions. Of course part of me wishes those were more in reach, but they're not, and there's no meritocracy for some of the reasons why not.

Because that is my experience, I'm infinitely more attuned to the people in my community who haven't even had the chance I have had to try to go to medical school. And because of that critical mass, I am much more skeptical about top schools than someone with the potential to gain something from them might be. But to dismiss that as "a chip on my shoulder"? What can I say but, from my perspective, that is certainly what an elite school would train its students to believe about the anger of the poor and broken.