- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,149
- Reaction score
- 4,608
Did you know the POTUS's name is Barack Hussein Obama?
Do you think the accomplishments of minorities are diminished because of AA?
- Thread starter Lollygag
- Start date
Did you know the POTUS's name is Barack Hussein Obama?
Barack Hussein Obama is a perfectly fine name. Don't assume you know anything about me or my name. And if your obscure response was referring to military service, please note that you aren't the only person in this conversation who has served, but you don't hear me or anyone else on this forum using it to assert superiority. You clearly think too highly of yourself, hon. Please quit now before you further embarrass yourself.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,149
- Reaction score
- 4,608
Unless your name is Fullo****, which is fitting, I don't really see any need to change it. My response wasn't obscure at all. I thought it was common knowledge that military service is centered around protection of freedoms. It is by no means a measure of superiority, it's blood given right. The only thing that I'm embarrassed about is having someone who gives up on freedom as easily as you call themselves an American.
Last edited:
If you can't see the irony of your whole "freedom" spiel, then I'm afraid I have nothing left to say to you. Have a nice day.
And please stop sending me emails. You're starting to creep me out.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,149
- Reaction score
- 4,608
I PM'd you to ask if you're serious because I think you're making a terrible mistake. If you think freedom is being allowed to change your name because of discrimination, you are lost. I'm pretty sure there's not a person on these forums who wouldn't agree with me. Since you're being rude I could care less what you do. Have fun being run over and embarrassing minorities the rest of your life. May sound harsh but it's true.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,149
- Reaction score
- 4,608
You know what Giggles I'm sorry. I just can't fathom that in America, you'd feel so inclined to change your identity for something as trivial as research. If things are that bad, you need support. You can hate me, but others can help you. If you go through with this and mention it to people, it will not be viewed admirably. If you're seeking pity, the vast majority of people will not give it.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 98
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't know if anyone else has pointed this out to you, but based on your responses to not only this thread but also previous threads, you seem to have an issue with reading comprehension. Perhaps, it's just "selective reading", but, either way, it could cause major problems for you in the future. You should get tested.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,149
- Reaction score
- 4,608
I don't know if anyone else has pointed this out to you, but based on your responses to not only this thread but also previous threads, you seem to have an issue with reading comprehension. Perhaps, it's just "selective reading", but, either way, it could cause major problems for you in the future. You should get tested.
Yes thanks for the advice random person who's majority of posts are fap fap fap and some sort of lol. Glad you're a fan though.
I don't know if anyone else has pointed this out to you, but based on your responses to not only this thread but also previous threads, you seem to have an issue with reading comprehension. Perhaps, it's just "selective reading", but, either way, it could cause major problems for you in the future. You should get tested.
+1Thank you.
I guess all the Caucasians, Asians, Latino and Black students below 23 even 20 here must have been URMs?
https://www.aamc.org/download/321518/data/2012factstable25-4.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321516/data/2012factstable25-3.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321514/data/2012factstable25-2.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321512/data/2012factstable25-1.pdf
Its funny how we like to call on data only as it suits our prior statement
I guess all the Caucasians, Asians, Latino and Black students below 23 even 20 here must have been URMs?
https://www.aamc.org/download/321518/data/2012factstable25-4.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321516/data/2012factstable25-3.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321514/data/2012factstable25-2.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321512/data/2012factstable25-1.pdf
Its funny how we like to call on data only as it suits our prior statement
D
deleted480308
Why are people so bad at statistics? If you take a sample group of 4 individuals with different races but identical below par stats.....AA causes large disparities in which race gets accepted. That's a fact. It is also a fact that all races have people who rock 4.0/and people who get 40+. Those facts mean that if you meet a urm med student they might be the 4.0/40+. They also mean that if you meet a 3.1/27 the likelihood of them being urm is higher than them being white or asian. If you, as a URM, like AA which lets some people get special preference based on race, you have to deal with people knowing that someone who looks like you might have got special preference for looking like you. Not that everyone who looks like you needs it, but some people who look like you did...and people remember that, and some people are bitter because they prefer the brutal reality not accounting for background and simply comparig results.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1,101
- Reaction score
- 2,209
That's actually untrue. There are more Whites in medical school with sub-par statistics than all URM matriculants combined...if someone's in medical school with below-average numbers they're more likely to be White than Black or Hispanic. Since 2010, there have been over 10 thousand White matriculants with sub-30 MCATs, whereas there have been roughly 9 thousand TOTAL Black & Hispanic matriculants.
This little factoid always infuriated me about the AfA debates...there are more White people getting into medical school with lower numbers and NOBODY questions why they're there, yet look at a Black face and people wanna assume all kinda ****.
D
deleted480308
Sorry, typing from my iphone in my bed produces poor results. I did phrase that incorrectly. If you create 4 identical poor quality students (stats etc) who have race as their only difference, the urm poor quality student is far more likely to matriculate. The reaction this garners from non-urm students is often akin to, "so I get a 3.0/27 and she does too but her race doubles her acceptance odds?...what equality is there in that?" There are hurt feelings, justifiably so, on both sides of the AA debate.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 386
- Reaction score
- 28
+1000 This subtly happens even at interviews. One applicant said to me "oh i'm from your state did you attend" First she says state school, i say no, then she says HBCU, I say no. Then she just looks at me with a blank stare like well what's left. I tell her I went to the top private school in that state and she's like wow no way. I was just like WTF
After a few moments I Harlem shook it off and went on about my day. My friends said she didn't want to feed into the well known stereotype.........That all black guys go to top colleges 
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2012
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 8
+1000 This subtly happens even at interviews. One applicant said to me "oh i'm from your state did you attend" First she says state school, i say no, then she says HBCU, I say no. Then she just looks at me with a blank stare like well what's left. I tell her I went to the top private school in that state and she's like wow no way. I was just like WTF
Yeah prejudice people are prejudice. I live in MS, no doubt the most racist state in the union. I swear all the white kids in my class hate me, as I destroy the test curve. In this state it hurts their soul to see black students who are smarter than they are.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 386
- Reaction score
- 28
That's funny as hell, but in all honesty most of the white kids in my classes were cool with the fact that I was a smart black guy. The problem arises if too many of "us" are smart
Jk Jk 
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 0
If we all are truly equals then why should certain groups of people be favored over others, just because we were born with 2 x chromosomes or a darker color skin? Double standards much? We are all part of one race, the human race.
I for one thinks its weird. I don't need the help of AA to help me be accepted. My grades and accomplishments are all I need to be accepted into the school I want..
I for one thinks its weird. I don't need the help of AA to help me be accepted. My grades and accomplishments are all I need to be accepted into the school I want..
D
deleted480308
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2012
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 1
If you had any common sense as well as a basic understanding of statistics, you would not readily jump to conclusions as to what these numbers ACTUALLY mean. Instead of looking at percentages and throwing a fit over "unfair" selection practices. Perhaps you should consider that:
1) Those stats are for ALL medical schools in the USA. NOT just Ivy League schools. Of course lower rank medical schools in areas densely populated by blacks and Hispanics will accept disproportionately higher percentages of blacks and Hispanics with lower GPAs.
If you look at Harvard or Yale's individual acceptance rates for blacks you will see a VERY different story. I remember looking at Harvard's acceptance rates and RARELY do they accept anyone with less than a 3.5 GPA into their program (regardless of race). The only blacks admitted into IVY League schools are high achieving! The minorities that go to those schools deserve to be there! Perhaps IVY League schools streamline the acceptance of minorities with excellent stats, which is another issues entirely. However, overgeneralizing and stating that the blacks who do get into IVY league schools do not deserve to be there is a statement deeply rooted in racism and stupidity. Anyone who has a high GPA and MCAT score deserves to be in an IVY League school. If we're going to throw a fit over a sprinkling of high achieving blacks getting priority access to the best schools (when historically it has been proven that they were systematically DENIED access). We might also throw a fit over the many low achieving whites who gain access to the best schools just because their parents donated money/ are alumni/ have connections within the school.
2) Whites are still more likely to be accepted into medical school. Blacks are 39.4% likely to be accepted VS 47.7% of whites. That means the likelihood of whites being accepted is 8.36% more than blacks. Which translates into 4,230 blacks vs 38,377 whites being accepted yearly. If affirmative action was really providing excessive amounts of blacks with access into medical school, then the amount of blacks being accepted yearly would be somewhere near 8,000 or 9,000 (close to 90% of applicants). So don't worry your prejudice little head off. Whites are still on top. Whites are still in control lol
....FOR NOW! 3) Even if someone with a low GPA and MCAT score happened to make it into a top tier medical school because of Affirmative Action. The rigorous class work would eject them from the program before the end of the first semester. Medical school is difficult and only the best students will end up graduating. I do not understand all of this hoopla about low achievers acceptance rates and the production of inadequate doctors. It just doesn't happen. All of the minorities who graduate from IVY League schools are the best that there is. They have proven themselves. Anyone who insists on questioning their credentials due to the use of A.A. is obviously a racist who would question their intelligence even if there was no A.A.
My advice to minority applicants/ medical students: You will experience racism and unfair treatment regardless of how intelligent you are. This is just a fact of life. Even if A.A. did not exist, you would still be under attack. Before the 1960s A.A. did not exist and look how much adversity black physicians faced. Remember, they created affirmative action for a reason! The issue here is not A.A. it is racism and racism will always exist. Actually, racism will probably increase as blacks obtain more and more power. As whites lose their economic power and blacks gain more, racism on the part of whites will increase. However, hopefully by that time blacks will have so much economic power that white racism will be a laughable offense. The boneheads who seek to destroy your self esteem now just fear their loss of economic power. YOU ARE THE FUTURE! Do not listen to their rationalizations as they are irrational buffoons. Do not argue with them. Do not allow their words to lower your self worth. This is what they want. They want to stop you psychologically because they can no longer stop you physically. No matter how much huffing and puffing they do the fact remains that: They MUST hire you. They MUST pay you. Whether or not they respect you doesn't matter. You never had their respect to begin with and you never will.
There. That's my rant! Good luck.
(I am not referring to ALL whites. I'm referring to the racist idiots who think it is OK to question the intelligence of minorities who are accepted into medical school).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2012
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 1
1) If you're going to critique my perception of statistics, you should do so with some hard core statistical reasoning of your own.
"Looking at stats for all med school is important and shows general trends for the country." This is true, however the person to whom I sent my rebuttal was specifically making a statement about how IVY League schools are accepting low achieving applicants which is an absurd statement obviously based on prejudiced wishful thinking.
Your argument that lower ranked schools in densely population minority areas should take more minorities is a bit flawed; by that logic, school in rural areas should take predominantly caucasian applicants.
I never said that they SHOULD take more minorities. I said that they most likely do. And this argument would also help explain the fact that whites make up the majority of the medical school population in certain areas. YES, many out of state (as well as international applicants) apply into various medical school. However, I would argue that low ranking schools who accept low achieving applicants in areas with denser minority populations would give preferential treatment to in state students. If you're trying to argue that most people would rather go to school out of state, you are either naive or lawyering to prove your point. Why do i say this? Because most schools charge less tuition to instate students. Do I even have to mention the fact that some school based scholarships discriminate by state of residency? Do I also have to mention that a lot of this "high" enrollment could be due to blacks enrolling in historically black universities. ...You do remember that there are a large number of predominantly BLACK medical schools out there...right?
2) You note that whites are more likely to get in than blacks. However, this is really quite misleading as you are not comparing apples to apples. When parsed out by GPA and MCAT score, the data shows that blacks get in at a higher percentage at each GPA/MCAT stratification than whites. The reason for the overall lower acceptance is that blacks on average have lower GPAs/MCAT scores based on the AAMC data.
What part of a 39.4% black acceptance rate vs 47.7% white acceptance rate do you not understand? Who cares about individual GPA/ MCAT groups? That can be explained away by the schools that these students are entering into. Are they all going to top tier schools? or low rank schools? Or notoriously black universities? Minorities are obviously not getting accepted into top tier schools all that much. They barely make up 11% of Harvard's yearly admissions. So that must mean that they're getting into low rank schools in densely populated minority areas. The only way to truly understand whether or not A.A, is giving blacks preferential treatment is to dissect each school's individual acceptance rates while taking into account minority population density. In other words, we'll compare schools like Howard University: A notoriously BLACK university vs UCONN, or another predominately white university. Of COURSE black acceptance rates in individual categories will be higher. They're getting into SPECIFIC types of schools. Why is this hard for you to understand? Do you realize how many "black" medical schools are out there? These schools are all included into the general medical school admissions stats. What is so hard for you to understand about this? I don't understand how we're even having an argument about this.
3. You are somewhat misguided here; the matriculation rate once someone gets into med school is 90%+ which has been criticized as med school very rarely kick people out. Med schools do a very poor job of weeding out poor students at this time regardless of race.
Again, you're making a general statement. Which schools have a 90% matriculation rate? Give me some individual stats! Perhaps Harvard and Yale would! (They only accept the best anyway. Why would they kick someone out?). If you factor these high matriculation rates in with the slightly lower rates of more mediocre schools, it will skewer the data....This is standard statistics. Anyone with a remotely scientific mind knows that CORRELATION does not equal CAUSATION. Data cannot be taken at face value! More research must be done.
I understand the premise of AA; that being said I don't agree with it. It was devised as measure to increase underrepresented minority representation but really has not done that.
Oh I don't know. an 11% minority enrollment rate at Harvard vs the 1% of yesteryears seems to be a pretty substantial increase! A.A. has FORCED ivy league schools to let high achieving blacks into their ranks. It was proven before that schools were deliberately trashing the applications of high achieving blacks. A.A. has forced them to make a place for them.
You can rebuttal all that you want. Most people do not want to accept anything that goes against what they want to believe.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2012
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 1
1) I wasn't "attacking" you. I was attacking your logic. I don't know you personally. All I know from you are your opinions about A.A. I respect you as a person, however It is within my right to rip apart your logic if and when I see holes. Your status as an attending does not make your logic immune to fault. You may be an attending and your years of experience may have given you some insight about some things. Which is great. But in no way, shape or form does your experience make your logic infallible and your though process immune to biased thinking. That being said:
does the data from these institutions show a difference between white/asian applicants and URMs even if all the URMs have GPAs above 3.5 as you note?
I do not have the statistical data to back this up. However, I am willing to bet that a school like Harvard receives a large number of qualified URM applicants per year. However only 11% are accepted. Meanwhile qualified white applicants are accepted at a much higher rate. Even the AAMC's data illustrates that quite a few of the high achieving blacks were not accepted. We can argue that what A.A. does at top tier schools is limits the amount of qualified URMs who can get in. If they have quotas, then once those quotas are filled. No more are let in. Thus leaving the rest of the room for whites and asians.
Saying that densely populated minority schools that are lower ranked are likely to take more minorities simply because of location is not the case.
It might not be the case all of the time, but it is a factor. My position on this issue is that the high acceptance rate of blacks seen on the AAMC's data spread is largely due to them applying into predominantly black schools. Whether they do so for geographical reasons, financial reasons, lack of other options or a need to be around people who look like them, is another issue entirely. I am arguing that the high acceptance rate of blacks cannot be due to A.A. because then we would see far more blacks on predominantly white campuses which just isn't the case.
you keep citing this 39.4% v. 47.7% for overall acceptance number but it's an incomplete number because the data suggests that on average, whites have higher average credentials in terms of MCAT/GPA compared with URMs; this is backed up by the AAMC data. If this was not the case, the data for overall acceptances would not make sense. The data shows that URMs are accepted at higher rates with lower MCAT/GPA scores; for whites to have higher overall acceptance rates means that on average they have to have higher MCAT/GPA scores otherwise URMs would have higher acceptance rates overall. This cannot be explained away by the schools students are going in to.
Of course it can be explained by the schools that students go to. Lets take a look at 3 notoriously black schools in the USA:
Howard University School of Medicine= Average enrollment: 454
Morehouse School of Medicine = Average Enrollment: 329
Meharry Medical College= Average Enrollment: 781
Total: 1,564
Source: http://medicalschools.college-scholarships.com/l/151/Meharry-Medical-College
So that accounts for 1,564 students out of the 4,230 black students that the AAMC listed on their website as being accepted into medical school. Those schools have notoriously low median GPA. I saw that Morehouse's is 3.29. This clearly explains that huge influx of low GPA/MCAT black enrollment. If we look at schools like New York Medical College, with it's 3.2 median GPA and high black student body count (it's in New York... Of course it has a high black student population), as well as other schools with the same demographics we'll see a trend!
The issue here is not Affirmative Action. It's supply and demand. Certain schools attract more of one race than another due to geographical, financial, practical and cultural reasons. A medical school in the Bronx is not going to have a large white population! So if only URMs are applying into the school OF COURSE the rate of acceptance for URMs will be higher! I still do not understand why you cannot see the logic. The numbers do not lie! With three schools I accounted for 36% of blacks being accepted into medical school. I probably also accounted for the large percentage of low GPA/ MCAT applicants. Imagine what would happen if I did more in depth research into the enrollment stats of other low rank schools popular with URMs!
The 90%+ matriculation from my understanding has been consistent at most schools, non-Ivy and Ivy school. I looked for hard data but could not find any; that being said, I asked a few friends of mine who are in academic medicine and they gave me the same percentage as long as you exclude those that do MD/PhD or research fellowships (as these students matriculate but not with their initial class)
And if your argument is correct that 90% of students matriculate than every year close to 2,000+ blacks should be graduating from medical school. If 2,000+ blacks graduate from medical school every year, why is there still a huge shortage of black doctors? In 2004 only 1,034 black students graduated from medical school. http://www.jbhe.com/features/47_medicalschools.html Anyway, if we're going to complain about the under 2,000 Low GPA/MCAT URMs (blacks) graduating from medical school and going on to be crappy doctors. Fine. But I think we should be equally if not MORE afraid of the 12,000 white students with low GPA/MCAT scores being accepted every year and going on to be doctors!
Here is some more food for thought. The AAMC lists total amounts of acceptances vs applicants. These numbers are reported individually by each institution and then totaled indiscriminately. However, it does not take into account that each person applies on average to many different schools and will often be accepted into many different schools. We cannot know the exact numbers! Each applicant does not equal a single individual. I think the total amount of applicants is in reality a MUCH smaller number. Which would then increase the rate of acceptance drastically depending on the amount of times each individual member of a race submitted an application. You see...Things are never as they seem. That is why I become so annoyed by people point out statistical data and trying to infer their meaning. We can't draw any conclusions about this data because we don't really even know what the data actually represents!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Messages
- 2,551
- Reaction score
- 0
That's actually a remarkably untrue statement, one that can easily be disproved using AAMC facts. For the 2012 matriculating class, ORMs comprised 55% of the matriculating demographic of 3.0-3.19 GPA and 27-29 MCAT, with Whites being the largest subgroup of matriculated students within this category. Hence P(matriculant=URM | ~3.1/27) = .45
https://www.aamc.org/download/321516/data/2012factstable25-3.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321518/data/2012factstable25-4.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321520/data/2012factstable25-5.pdf
Maybe you should make an effort to look at real data before berating others on their capabilities.
EDIT: I see someone pointed this out earlier, but did not post the calculation. I will leave the above unaltered with the acknowledgement that it has been addressed earlier but substantiated here
But honestly, are any of us? What we are doing is comparing a significantly smaller pool of applicants (AA: ~10,000) to much larger pools (Whites: ~80,000, Asians: ~29,000). The fact that URMs get in at higher percentages at each GPA/MCAT stratification can almost certainly be explained by the relatively low number of applicants compared to ORM. The reality is that if Blacks and Hispanics were applying in larger numbers, assuming that the distribution of GPA/MCAT stats within these groups remained faithful, the percentage of 3.0/27 matriculated URMs would significantly decrease. Medical schools, including Howard, Meharry, and Morehouse, would most likely opt to take the higher scoring applicants.
To tease out the reasons behind why this occurs, it should be noted that 1) US Medical Schools, like all prominent American institutions, have made pledges to promote diversity in their programs and 2) Patients tend to identify with people from their ethnic/racial group, and this may be especially important in underserved/underprivileged communities where serious injustices by white physicians have occurred. With these facts and the reality of low overall URM applicant numbers, you can easily see why there is apparent amplification of URM success in the AAMC data.
Last edited:
D
deleted480308
Hi quadratic, I corrected my statement later in the thread. Thank you for acknowledgine that
- Joined
- May 10, 2012
- Messages
- 90
- Reaction score
- 0
this all day!!!!
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Messages
- 2,551
- Reaction score
- 0
This approach essentially penalizes broader ethnic communities of URMs for not producing enough college educated students with interests in medicine, even though their numbers and resources are significantly lower than ORM groups. Not to mention the fact that URMs have been historically discriminated against. Basically, if the number of applicants stemming from these groups were larger, then you'd be without complaint. You might feel warm and fuzzy because a smaller percentage of ORMs are matriculating at these numbers, but because of the overall number of ORMs that do apply and matriculate, their representation at these thresholds surpasses URMs. These are individuals who still have enough nerve to want to treat patients. Ironically, this seems to be less bothersome, even though your overall argument is centered on the quality of patient care (dictated, presumably, by these individuals). If you really want to add a functional twist to this argument, we should add in osteopathic data, since at the end of their training, they too will be as "qualified" to treat patients like allopathic trainees. Guess who comprises the overwhelming majority of students in these schools at <25 MCAT (Hint: It isn't URMs).
What you are doing is shifting away from the topic of URM matriculation into medical school and the prospects of their success to a much broader topic of "affirmative action" in society. Can you prove using attrition data that URMs are less likely to graduate medical school or pass their boards than ORMs? My hypothesis is that we will NOT see the dramatic change in graduation rates and board exam failures if we decrease URM amplification. The reason being is because we already know that the relationship between MCAT scores and boards scores is a step ladder function, with the final step occurring at MCAT > (or equal) to 24. This invalidates your implicit suggestion of the relationship being more linear.
Furthermore, URM designation in medicine isn't designed to fix "core" issues at all, but rather designed to train clinicians of different backgrounds to increase the chances of better patient outcomes in ALL groups of people. Despite your perspective of diversity being a "perceived need", the reality is that underprivileged communities have suffered terrible indignities in terms of medical treatment and ethics; consequently a significant percentage of these individuals DO NOT trust or fully comply with the medical establishment. This can (and does) have long term, detrimental effects on the quality of life for many people. The promise of URM physicians is that their ability to traverse socioeconomic lines will ultimately result in better patient outcomes and increase the body of knowledge concerning minority communities.
Technically, he requested that African American nurses abstain from caring for his child. But doesn't that example reinforce my point?
Presumably for you, a background check (Undergraduate, Medical, and Residency Education) precludes any attempts to relate at all? I would think that you would have an appreciation for the fact that for many patients, their degree of co-operativity is not dependent on these factors plus GPA/MCAT, especially those from URM communities where many people do not finish high school, minute percentages of individuals with diplomas graduate from college, and even a fraction of this group attends professional schools. Do you think that the neo-nazi that opted to "ban" AA nurses from caring for his child considered whether or not they graduated from an Ivy program with high scores?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2011
- Messages
- 1,101
- Reaction score
- 2
Great articles about gifted programs in grade school.
http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...y_to_make_programs_more_inclusive.single.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/e...-by-gifted-label-and-race.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...y_to_make_programs_more_inclusive.single.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/e...-by-gifted-label-and-race.html?pagewanted=all
D
deleted480308
I'm confused by the shock that wealthier kids would perform better than poorer kids when wealthier kids have more likely access to educational toys/care/experiences.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2011
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 15
R
RockChalkJayDoc
Hey guys. All I know is that if you get into medical school, whether white, black, hispanic, asian, native american, pacific islander, international, and so on, you probably are going to graduate because most schools will do everything in their power to help you succeed and become a physician. I guess my point is that we need to quit whining about who gets in, and why, and focus on what each group does and can offer while already IN medical school, and going on into a career in medicine. Can anyone really argue that a URM who makes it through school and residency is any less qualified to be a good physician? Sure, maybe some might argue that an "unqualified" URM stole someone else's spot during the application process. But really, if that same URM goes through all of the same steps and hard times as everyone else in their class, then I don't think anyone can say the medical schools made a bad decision by letting that URM in.
Do you see what I mean? Once the URMs get in, it is up to them to prove themselves. And for the most part URMs do just as well, and may times exceed their peers in medical school. So while some may complain about AA on the front end (admissions), the rubber will most certainly meet the road on the back end (school, boards, residency, practice). So if someone can prove that URMs flunk out of med school all the time, or can't cut the mustard then I will shut up. But from I can see, the overwhelming majority of URMs do just fine once they're in. And isn't that the whole point admissions committees are going for? They want people who will represent their schools well. From what I can see URMs are pulling their weight when the lights come on.
Do you see what I mean? Once the URMs get in, it is up to them to prove themselves. And for the most part URMs do just as well, and may times exceed their peers in medical school. So while some may complain about AA on the front end (admissions), the rubber will most certainly meet the road on the back end (school, boards, residency, practice). So if someone can prove that URMs flunk out of med school all the time, or can't cut the mustard then I will shut up. But from I can see, the overwhelming majority of URMs do just fine once they're in. And isn't that the whole point admissions committees are going for? They want people who will represent their schools well. From what I can see URMs are pulling their weight when the lights come on.
Similar threads
