Posted on 07/03/2002 7:55:59 AM PDT by white trash redneck
During the first several decades of the twentieth century, colleges and universities commonly denied admission to minority-group members whose high-school grades and standardized test scores surpassed those of whites who were offered an opportunity to enroll. Thanks to the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, such blatant discrimination became illegal. But since then, the pendulum has swung strongly in the opposite direction. Many colleges have created affirmative action programs designed to boost minority enrollments by granting preferences to blacks and Hispanics in the admissions process.
Defenders of preferences claim that these policies are little more than “tie-breakers,” designed merely to tip the scales in favor of a minority applicant over a white applicant of basically equivalent credentials. There is an ever-growing body of evidence, however, that preferential policies bear far less resemblance to “tie-breakers” than to the virtual abandonment of standards. A recent study by the Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO), which examined the extent of preferences in several American medical schools, offers a most important addition to this body of evidence. The issue of preferences is especially vital with regard to medical schools, because what is at stake is not merely a theoretical construct, but rather the quality of our doctors – which can literally be a matter of life and death.
The CEO study focused on admissions to the medical schools at Michigan State University, SUNY Brooklyn, the University of Washington, and the Medical College of Georgia during the late 1990s. The median undergraduate grade-point-averages (GPAs) of white students admitted to the aforementioned schools during those years was 3.64. The corresponding median for blacks was 3.23, for Hispanics 3.30, and for Asians 3.63. On the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT), the median score for whites was 37, for blacks 31, for Hispanics about 34, and for Asians 38. In short, Asian and white students had the highest academic qualifications, followed by Hispanics and blacks, respectively.
The CEO study explains that in order for schools to admit a higher proportion of students from a demographic group that under-performs in comparison to other groups, “admission officers must essentially reach down into the applicant pool and pull up certain students, a practice that results in at least some students with better credentials than [others] being rejected . . . despite their superior qualifications.” The extent of these preferences is nothing short of shocking. In 1996, for instance, black applicants were 19 times likelier than similarly qualified whites to be admitted to Georgia Medical College. That same year blacks were 23 times likelier than academically equivalent whites to be admitted to SUNY Brooklyn, and a year later blacks were 30 times likelier than comparable whites to be admitted to the University of Washington. In some years at each school, the disproportions were not quite so extreme. But in general, black students were still between 4 and 14 times likelier to be admitted to a given medical school than were their white counterparts. Hispanic students were usually between 3 and 7 times likelier to be admitted than similarly qualified whites. Notably, Asians were consistently less likely to be admitted than were whites of equivalent credentials.
The CEO researchers also calculated – in terms of absolute percentages – the likelihood of admission for black, white, Hispanic, and Asian applicants with the same test scores and grades. Again, the results were startling. For example, consider those students with MCAT scores of 30 and GPAs of 3.25. At the Medical College of Georgia in 1996, black applicants with such credentials had a 51 percent chance of admission. For Hispanics, whites, and Asians, the corresponding figures were 14 percent, 5 percent, and 2 percent. At Michigan State College of Human Medicine in 1999, black applicants with the aforementioned credentials had a 43 percent chance of admission. The corresponding numbers for other groups were: 26 percent for Hispanics, 5 percent for whites, and 3 percent for Asians. For similarly qualified applicants to SUNY Brooklyn in 1999, the likelihood of admission was 25 percent for blacks, 13 percent for Hispanics, 3 percent for whites, and 3 percent for Asians. At the University of Washington in 1997, the numbers were 61 percent for blacks, 20 percent for Hispanics, 5 percent for whites, and 4 percent for Asians.
These numbers raise some serious questions, both ethical and practical. Do we want to create a society that applies different standards to different demographic groups? Is it appropriate to “redress” one set of historical wrongs by replacing it with another? With regard to physicians, who play a vital role in determining how healthy we are as a people, are we willing to exchange some degree of quality for a greater diversity of skin tones? Is it wise to form social policy in compliance with former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall’s assessment of affirmative action’s propriety: “You [white] guys have been practicing discrimination for years. Now it’s our turn”?
An old medical school professor of mine wore a Medic-Alert bracelet that said something like "I decline treatment by any physician admitted to medical school under an affirmative action program."
I think it shows our liberal rulers contempt for their subjects that they are willing to risk our health in order to pander to minorities.
I was applying for a home equity line of credit at the bank just this morning. The woman was entering the information on the computer. It got to one point, where I had to read some Federal Notice on her screen. It said that they were asking for racial and other information, I could choose not to answer, but the bank employee was required to enter a guess based on observations if I refused.
I told her I wouldn't answer any of those questions. She put down White and Male. I congratulated on her stellar observational skills.
To be a liberal, you must believe that an official racial classification based spoils system made South Africa undeniably evil, but it's wonderful in the United States.
Hypocritical retards.
If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)
Sure, the end result will be that large numbers of unqualified people will end up becoming medical doctors. But I suspect that all of these people will end up working in store-front clinics in Third World-style urban areas where the ingrained expectation for "medical treatment" involves nothing more than a medicine man dancing around the end of your bed anyway.
That's a good point, but you should note that Step #2 in this process is the dumbing-down those professional licensing exams. To eliminate "racial bias," of course.
I've been looking for such data for years and I've never seen it once.
When she couldn't get anywhere in her argument, she resorted to name calling, the last defense of Leftists everywhere.
When I finished school and went to work in the department of one of the specialties at the other medical school in St. Louis, the interns who rotated through the program were all very white in color. There were more females, however. Maybe that's how it worked there. At any rate, two wrongs don't make a right, and the minority doctors who finished, passed their exams and hung out their shingles had, and will continue to have, to fight the prejudice surrounding their degrees.
There's no way that's true. When I took the MCAT, the mean scores for the biological sciences, physical sciences, and verbal reasoning sections were 8.4, 8.1, and 7.8 for a total of 24.3.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.