MCATs, Affirmative Action, and DEI, Oh My

[Loren Pechtel]

SAT’s are far less an objective measure of academic ability than they are a measure of parental socioeconomic status.

It’s been discussed before.

One also must account for the fact that students attending high school during the pandemic frankly are behind what their older peers would be at the same age.

Does it not occur to you that academic ability is associated with parental socioeconomic status??

You keep treating a disparate outcome as proof of discrimination. In just about every case it actually means there's some sort of disparate input.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The bigger point of the data is that it implies that variation in MCAT scores are NOT particularly indicative of success in Medical School.

Why do you keep saying that when the actual data says the opposite?

Since dtopping out may have many factors unrelated to preparation and ability, using drop out rates as a measure of success seems a bit shaky.

Actually, statistics given upthread, I believe, indicate that of the very small number of students who drop out, most cite financial pressures and the remainder due to personal stresses, etc. No demographics are attached to reasons for leaving the program,

Gaining admissions to medical school is an extremely arduous, highly competitive process. Only very well qualified candidates succeed in gaining a spot in any med school. This is true no matter the demographic/ethnicity/race.

What is driving this fever to demonize black and Hispanic med students? It is not based on any data demonstrating that certain demographics of med school graduates make poor doctors.

I'm not aware of any data on medical schools, but at the university level the dropout rate difference disappears when the SAT differential disappears.

 

[Toni]

Derec, again, you cannot know that they accepted lower scoring black and hispanic applicants. We only know the average score by demographic. As far as we know, the highest score for any incoming med student was scored by a black student and the lowest by an Asian student.

And so what if there's an outlier. Doesn't make it possible to have the mean that we see without accepting some lower scoring black and hispanic applicants.

That 'some lower scoring black and hispanic applicants, by which I am guessing you mean black and Hispanic applicants who are accepted is no the same thing as 'lowering standards.' Please note that in order to become a licensed physician in the US, one must past each of 3 parts of the USMSLE test which is more rigorous than the MCAT. We are not licensing unqualified doctors.

Also please note that among all med students are those who are accepted, a portion are admitted to MD-PhD programs, which would probably skew test scores as well. It does affect time it takes to graduate.

 

[Emily Lake]

That sounds like you deny the effects of generational racism exists. It's they only way for your point to work.

Some might exist, sure. But I also think that just falling back and crying "generational racism!!!!" is a cheap out that gets used to shortcut actual discussions about how to best address issues. It gets used as an excuse to avoid accountability and agency.

The worst part is that it gets used by white people as a way to negate the agency of black people.

 

[Toni]

SAT’s are far less an objective measure of academic ability than they are a measure of parental socioeconomic status.

It’s been discussed before.

One also must account for the fact that students attending high school during the pandemic frankly are behind what their older peers would be at the same age.

Does it not occur to you that academic ability is associated with parental socioeconomic status??

You keep treating a disparate outcome as proof of discrimination. In just about every case it actually means there's some sort of disparate input.

No, I know for a fact that academic ability is assumed to be associated with parents socioeconomic status. My family was on the lower edge of middle class. My siblings and I all had stellar SAT scores and GPAs. In college and as an adult, I have known/do know plenty of people from extremely modest means who are frankly, brillliant.

Parental socioeconomic status helps students afford to be able to sit for the SATs multiple times, and pays for cram classes designed specifically to boost SAT scores. It pays for more academically rigorous (or by reputation more academically rigorous) schools for students.

It also purchases a presumption of being smarter which matters a lot more than any of us would like it to. And it reduces the economic strain on students who may be less likely to have to work multiple jobs in order to pay for school or who may choose fields that will pay well because their families need their help.

It does not make students smarter. Just look at Donald Trump. First example that popped into my mind that everyone would know. Or RFK Jr. Or any of the Trump kids.

 

[Toni]

That sounds like you deny the effects of generational racism exists. It's they only way for your point to work.

Some might exist, sure. But I also think that just falling back and crying "generational racism!!!!" is a cheap out that gets used to shortcut actual discussions about how to best address issues. It gets used as an excuse to avoid accountability and agency.

The worst part is that it gets used by white people as a way to negate the agency of black people.

I think closing your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears whenever generational racism is a good way to avoid having to actually think about how much racism has worked for or against you and your family.

PS: Racism still exists. In spades. I see it frequently.

 

[Toni]

The bigger point of the data is that it implies that variation in MCAT scores are NOT particularly indicative of success in Medical School.

Why do you keep saying that when the actual data says the opposite?

Since dtopping out may have many factors unrelated to preparation and ability, using drop out rates as a measure of success seems a bit shaky.

Actually, statistics given upthread, I believe, indicate that of the very small number of students who drop out, most cite financial pressures and the remainder due to personal stresses, etc. No demographics are attached to reasons for leaving the program,

Gaining admissions to medical school is an extremely arduous, highly competitive process. Only very well qualified candidates succeed in gaining a spot in any med school. This is true no matter the demographic/ethnicity/race.

What is driving this fever to demonize black and Hispanic med students? It is not based on any data demonstrating that certain demographics of med school graduates make poor doctors.

I'm not aware of any data on medical schools, but at the university level the dropout rate difference disappears when the SAT differential disappears.

Not necessarily. I know two family members who (temporarily) dropped out of university and whose SAT scores made them National Merit finalists.

Smart people have family and personal problems and health issues, too, Loren.

 

[Emily Lake]

What do you call it when Asian students are presumed to be good in math, black students better at basketball, girls better at tending children?

Pattern recognition?

Or would you like to argue that the NBA is super racist, and white and asian people are just as good at basketball and are being unfairly excluded?

 

[Emily Lake]

Better at taking tests is not the same thing as being better at treating patients, which is what most physicians do.

True.

Do you have a recommendation on what objective measure colleges can use to reasonably predict which applicant will better at treating patients?

 

[Toni]

Better at taking tests is not the same thing as being better at treating patients, which is what most physicians do.

True.

Do you have a recommendation on what objective measure colleges can use to reasonably predict which applicant will better at treating patients?

Clinical rounds and residencies teach and provide opportunities for experienced medical professionals to evaluate student and resident strengths and weaknesses and guide them to improve.

Application materials aside from GPA and MCAT scores can highlight an applicant’s interest and efforts and abilities in working with people, working in high stress, arduous settings, etc. Prior medical experience such as working as an EMT or nurse or even Med tech or orderly can help demonstrate an applicant’s affinity and interest and sometimes talent for medical work.

If you mean a multiple choice exam?
No.

 

[laughing dog]

Better at taking tests is not the same thing as being better at treating patients, which is what most physicians do.

True.

Do you have a recommendation on what objective measure colleges can use to reasonably predict which applicant will better at treating patients?

Why would any rational person think an objective (whatever the fuck that means) measure could be devised to reasonably predict such a complex question as "ability to treat patients"?

 

[Emily Lake]

Early 20th Century on line 5 for you, they want their eugenics back.

Early 21st Century on line 6, reminding you that blank slate theory is widely considered debunked, and that evolution is real.

Observing that some skills and traits diverge when populations are geographically isolated isn't a prescription. Populations that stayed in Africa, under high levels of sun exposure, passed along higher melanin content. Populations in Northern European regions lost melanin in a way that allows for better Vitamin D processing. Some populations sexually selected for height, other populations sexually selected for aggression or muscle density or big breasts or any number of other heritable traits. To some extent, intelligence is heritable... but cultural emphasis on intellect also matters. To some extent, athletic performance is heritable... but social focus on competition and sports also makes a difference.

It's not one or the other. And accusing anyone who observes the real differences between groups of engaging in eugenics is a low blow that ignores evolution. Nobody at all has proposed controlled reproduction or sterilization in order to enhance specific traits, thus it's a misplaced ad hominem. On the other hand... if you want to pretend that sexual selection has no impact, I have a wolf here for you to consider:

 

[Emily Lake]

What do you call it when Asian students are presumed to be good in math, black students better at basketball, girls better at tending children?

If the people groups mentioned are 'better' at those things than other groups on average it is not racism to point that out. Rather an acknowledgement of reality.

Individuals are not groups, though.

Thus the term "on average".

 

[Toni]

What do you call it when Asian students are presumed to be good in math, black students better at basketball, girls better at tending children?

Pattern recognition?

Or would you like to argue that the NBA is super racist, and white and asian people are just as good at basketball and are being unfairly excluded?

Ever know a young tall black man who was not good at basket ball and had no interest in the game and was gd sick and tired of everyone assuming that he was? Or a black or Hispanic woman who was sick of being assumed to be the maid or janitor?

Unfortunately, professional sports remain one of the few and best known opportunities fir young black kids to make it big if they have the talent and skill,

 

[Toni]

Early 20th Century on line 5 for you, they want their eugenics back.

Early 21st Century on line 6, reminding you that blank slate theory is widely considered debunked, and that evolution is real.

Observing that some skills and traits diverge when populations are geographically isolated isn't a prescription. Populations that stayed in Africa, under high levels of sun exposure, passed along higher melanin content. Populations in Northern European regions lost melanin in a way that allows for better Vitamin D processing. Some populations sexually selected for height, other populations sexually selected for aggression or muscle density or big breasts or any number of other heritable traits. To some extent, intelligence is heritable... but cultural emphasis on intellect also matters. To some extent, athletic performance is heritable... but social focus on competition and sports also makes a difference.

It's not one or the other. And accusing anyone who observes the real differences between groups of engaging in eugenics is a low blow that ignores evolution. Nobody at all has proposed controlled reproduction or sterilization in order to enhance specific traits, thus it's a misplaced ad hominem. On the other hand... if you want to pretend that sexual selection has no impact, I have a wolf here for you to consider:
View attachment 55165

Assigning intellectual capacity by race has been seriously debunked by all but the most ardent racists. Assuming that more wealthy people and their offspring as smarter and have greater capacity is obviously ridiculous. See the Trump family. .

 

[Emily Lake]

We are seeing a crisis in our education system, and I think it is closely linked to this war against objective measures in education and overreliance on vibes and feels.

I mean... Objectivity is a characteristic of White Supremacy Culture. Don't be racist.

White Supremacy Culture - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Smithsonian Race Guidelines: Rational Thinking & Hard Work Are White Values

A graphic displayed in the guidelines, entitled "Aspects and Assumptions of Whiteness in the United States," declares that rational thinking and hard work, among others, are white values.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Emily Lake]

So you think banks should be required to incur higher risk just to give more people in worse risk neighborhoods "fucking houses"?

Yes. Obviously. People need homes.

Who do you think should reimburse the banks when mortgage payments aren't made?

 

[Emily Lake]

Nobody disagrees that there was discrimination in the past. But that does not justify discrimination today.

Why not?

So you're admitting to discriminating.

I'm in no position to discriminate anyone.

Note that you're discriminating against those who have not even been accused of doing anything wrong. This is purely punishment for being of the wrong race. Why is it wrong if done to blacks but right if done to whites and Asians??

The ones that were discriminated in the past did nothing wrong too.

During the first half of the game one team has started on the fifty yard line, the other on the twenty. Now comes the second half and both teams must now start on the twenty. Is the game now fair?

But it's not the second half.

Now it's a new game, new players. Why should they be punished for the previous game they had no part in? You are punishing completely innocent people for having the wrong parents. The Constitution specifically prohibits this.

Great. Let’s start Team White on the opposing 20 yard line, like we always did prior to this horrible reverse discrimination that has made so being white makes it automatically true that you’re more likely to be poor if you’re white, than if you’re black or brown.

Oh, wait … the opposite is STILL the case. I guess black and brown people are just stupid. Right, Loren?

Why can't we invest in early childhood athletics and pre-game training, so that everyone can start on the fifty yard line?

 

[Emily Lake]

It is very possible to be an excellent test taker —and a less talented professional in any field you care to name.

You're not joking. I know I'm a bit biased... but some of the absolute worst practicing acturaries I've know breezed through exams like they were nothing. Great test takers, really crappy at doing the job. Some are good at both.

Doing well on tests doesn't guarantee success post exams. On the other hand... doing poorly on tests rarely results in success at the other end.

Exactly.

However, there is ZERO evidence that medical schools are admitting ANY students who do not meet their thresholds for admissions.

You somehow still believe that they do.

And that is where we seem to differ.

The problem is the evidence suggests they lowered the threshold so as to permit the admissions. Fox/henhouse!

Unless you can reasonably demonstrate that a lowered threshold has resulting in 1) poorer quality doctors in the real world and/or 2) no increase in the number of medical students entering school... then I don't think it matters one bit.

A lower threshold is not necessarily a bad thing. As long as the threshold is sufficient to serve as a reasonable assurance of likelihood to be a good doctor, I don't see a problem. And I rather strongly suspect that we have more total admissions to medical school now than we did 40 years ago.

If a car dealer only gives loans to people with a credit score of 800 or higher, that's really going to limit how many cars they can sell. If they lower that threshold to 750 without materially impacting the likelihood of repayment, that's not a bad thing to do. If they can do that while also selling more cars, then it's good for the dealership as well as for the people with scores of 775.

 

[Emily Lake]

No, there is zero evidence that any threshold has been lowered. I think there’s something in your eye there, Loren.

I don't think it's unreasonable to believe the threshold has been lowered. I do, however, think it's unreasonable to assume that lowering the threshold must be a bad thing. It's entirely likely that the threshold was higher than was justified in the past, and that lowering it gets more doctors overall without degrading performance.