An example of institutional racism/discrimination:

[Blackened]

I've never argued otherwise. I don't need to concede something that I already typed before you asked.

You don't need to do anything. You didn't have to respond.

So your argument is we need more data to draw a conclusion. Let's take a look at more data then.

"For students applying to medical school with slightly below average GPAs of 3.20 to 3.39 and slightly below average MCAT scores of 24 to 26 (first data column in the table, shaded light blue), black applicants were more than 9 times more likely to be admitted to medical school than Asians (56.4% vs. 5.9%), and more than 7 times more likely than whites (56.4% vs. 8.0%). Compared to the average acceptance rate of 16.7% for all applicants with that combination of GPA and MCAT score, black and Hispanic applicants were much more likely to be accepted at rates of 56.4% and 30.5%, and white and Asian applicants were much less likely to be accepted to US medical schools at rates of only 5.9% and 8.0% respectively."

https://www.aei.org/publication/acc...imination-against-asian-americans-and-whites/

 

[panamaican]

You don't need to do anything. You didn't have to respond.

So your argument is we need more data to draw a conclusion. Let's take a look at more data then.

"For students applying to medical school with slightly below average GPAs of 3.20 to 3.39 and slightly below average MCAT scores of 24 to 26 (first data column in the table, shaded light blue), black applicants were more than 9 times more likely to be admitted to medical school than Asians (56.4% vs. 5.9%), and more than 7 times more likely than whites (56.4% vs. 8.0%). Compared to the average acceptance rate of 16.7% for all applicants with that combination of GPA and MCAT score, black and Hispanic applicants were much more likely to be accepted at rates of 56.4% and 30.5%, and white and Asian applicants were much less likely to be accepted to US medical schools at rates of only 5.9% and 8.0% respectively."

https://www.aei.org/publication/acc...imination-against-asian-americans-and-whites/

Oh, this argument? The same argument that lost once before and lost at Princeton in 2014 (overall admissions but the same argument that looking at GPA's and acceptance rates demonstrated bias against Asian Americans). The argument is a 2x loser but some people want this to be true so badly that they've thrown reason out the window. You want this so badly that you refuse to acknowledge the conclusion drawn by the very person whose graphs you cited to in the first place.

Here's a question that your link doesn't address...how many Asians are applying to med school. How many blacks? Then you can talk about the acceptance rates. If more are applying then it stands to reason that more will be rejected since there's finite amount of med school seats. And we know that only 5% of the seats go to URM with less competitive scores. So, they can't be accounting for the 90%+ of Asians that don't get in.

Or...how about the fact that there are fewer black males in med school than in 1978 despite there being more black males than then and there being more med schools. Which would suggest that if there is discrimination occurring, black males certainly aren't benefiting.

Listen, the data just doesn't support your conclusion. It doesn't rule it out but it doesn't support it either.

 

[CableandThanos]

About 1000 blacks were killed by cops last year, and I don't need to find the data in order to conclude the number of cop-black interactions far exceeded 20,000.

Yet I'm told cops killing black people is an example of systemic racism; but this isn't?

what???? more like 250, not 1000

 

[Blackened]

Oh, this law suit? The same argument that lost once before and lost at Princeton in 2014 (overall admissions but the same argument that looking at GPA's and acceptance rates demonstrated bias against Asian Americans). The argument is a 2x loser but some people want this to be true so badly that they've thrown reason out the window. You want this so badly that you refuse to acknowledge the conclusion drawn by the very person whose graphs you cited to in the first place.

Here's a question that your link doesn't address...how many Asians are applying to med school. How many blacks? Then you can talk about the acceptance rates. If more are applying then it stands to reason that more will be rejected since there's finite amount of med school seats. And we know that only 5% of the seats go to URM with less competitive scores. So, they can't be accounting for the 90%+ of Asians that don't get in.

Or...how about the fact that there are fewer black males in med school than in 1978 despite there being more black males than then and there being more med schools. Which would suggest that if there is discrimination occurring, black males certainly aren't benefiting.

Listen, the data just doesn't support your conclusion. It doesn't rule it out but it doesn't support it either.

You conveniently left out whites.

"For students applying to medical school with slightly below average GPAs of 3.20 to 3.39 and slightly below average MCAT scores of 24 to 26 (first data column in the table, shaded light blue), black applicants were more than 9 times more likely to be admitted to medical school than Asians (56.4% vs. 5.9%), and more than 7 times more likely than whites"

So your argument is that more blacks apply than whites? Is this supported by the data?

 

[punky brewster]

I really wish I could post a picture of the 15 new doctors doing their residency at the hospital I work at. Only one white guy.....

Things have been interesting since they implemented a new executive position two years ago..... A nice little six figure position called CDO - Chief Diversity Officer. You can't make this shit up.

 

[panamaican]

You conveniently left out whites.

"For students applying to medical school with slightly below average GPAs of 3.20 to 3.39 and slightly below average MCAT scores of 24 to 26 (first data column in the table, shaded light blue), black applicants were more than 9 times more likely to be admitted to medical school than Asians (56.4% vs. 5.9%), and more than 7 times more likely than whites"

So your argument is that more blacks apply than whites? Is this supported by the data?

No, that's not my argument. I didn't leave out whites, it's the same argument. If more white people apply to med school than blacks and there are only 141 med schools then a greater percentage of them will not be accepted than blacks. It's just a pure numbers game.

Again, we know that only 5% of the seats go to URM's with less competitive stats. So, the other URM's belong there.

Which is why I'm waiting for you to pull the applicant data by race. That will tell you if the rejection rates are unreasonable since they're going to be based on the size of the applicant pool.

 

[Blackened]

what???? more like 250, not 1000

Erm... no. 1/20=1000/20000=5%

 

[CableandThanos]

I would like to see more research into this, I find it funny that with the push by schools to get in more minorities that only 5% of spots got taken by under qualified people.

 

[CableandThanos]

Erm... no. 1/20=1000/20000=5%

no 250 blacks were killed by cops not 1000

i was responding to the guy who said 1000 blacks were killed by cops

 

[Blackened]

No, that's not my argument. I didn't leave out whites, it's the same argument. If more white people apply to med school than blacks and there are only 141 med schools then a greater percentage of them will not be accepted than blacks. It's just a pure numbers game.

Again, we know that only 5% of the seats go to URM's with less competitive stats. So, the other URM's belong there.

Which is why I'm waiting for you to pull the applicant data by race. That will tell you if the rejection rates are unreasonable since they're going to be based on the size of the applicant pool.

Please pull it up. What your saying here is complete nonsense. More white people apply than than blacks, so it can be discredited and more blacks apply than asians so it can be discredited (your argument, not mine).

*EDIT: I don't see how any of this holds water as it is a percentage of acceptance in the original data I posted. And 5% go to URM's with less competitive stats, which I am arguing is discriminatory.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

what???? more like 250, not 1000

Yeah, 1000 was the number of people killed of all races. My mistake. I also thought it was around 250 for blacks, too.

 

[panamaican]

I would like to see more research into this, I find it funny that with the push by schools to get in more minorities that only 5% of spots got taken by under qualified people.

Because med school is so difficult that it's self selecting only those candidates who think they have a shot. It's like Harvard, no one with a 2.5 and mediocre SAT even bothers applying. So, even with a diversity push, you're just not going to get a lot of underqualified candidates, black or otherwise.

The real problem is one of entitlement. The people who didn't get in can't fathom that maybe they just weren't good enough and so they look for an external explanation. Which is understandable considering that they probably have exceptional credentials in the absolute. But when your entire academic life has been about achieving this one goal and you don't get there...

Plus they're not accounting for where people are applying. There are no bad med schools but I'm sure some get a higher application pool than others. And if a large numbre of high qualified Asian applicants are applying to Harvard, Yale and 1 safety school and the black candidates are applying to mostly safety schools then you get different outcomes.

The conclusion that it's bias and nothing else just isn't supported...which is why this has lost at the undergrad level 2x already.

 

[panamaican]

Please pull it up. What your saying here is complete nonsense. More white people apply than than blacks, so it can be discredited and more blacks apply than asians so it can be discredited (your argument, not mine).

*EDIT: I don't see how any of this holds water as it is a percentage of acceptance in the original data I posted. And 5% go to URM's with less competitive stats, which I am arguing is discriminatory.

You're not understanding what I wrote. More Asians and more whites than blacks. Not more blacks than asians.

I don't need to pull up the application data. You're the one who convinced that it's racial bias just on acceptance percentages. Percentage of acceptance is absolutely dependent on percentage of applicants. If 10 blacks apply and 5 are qualified then 50% get in. But if 100 asians apply and 20 get in, then it's only 20% accepted. You're saying "See 50% vs. 20%...discrimination." But 4x more Asians were accepted than blacks. So you need the applicant numbers to put the acceptance rates into context.

 

[Blackened]

Because med school is so difficult that it's self selecting only those candidates who think they have a shot. It's like Harvard, no one with a 2.5 and mediocre SAT even bothers applying. So, even with a diversity push, you're just not going to get a lot of underqualified candidates, black or otherwise.

The real problem is one of entitlement. The people who didn't get in can't fathom that maybe they just weren't good enough and so they look for an external explanation. Which is understandable considering that they probably have exceptional credentials in the absolute. But when your entire academic life has been about achieving this one goal and you don't get there...

Plus they're not accounting for where people are applying. There are no bad med schools but I'm sure some get a higher application pool than others. And if a large numbre of high qualified Asian applicants are applying to Harvard, Yale and 1 safety school and the black candidates are applying to mostly safety schools then you get different outcomes.

The conclusion that it's bias and nothing else just isn't supported...which is why this has lost at the undergrad level 2x already.

In regards to the bold quoted, the data I posted shows the sum of all medical schools. Where is the data to suggest black candidates apply to mostly safety schools? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just haven't seen any evidence to support your claim.

I'll quote Rex here, "Now, what are your chances of matriculation if you've got a 27O and a sub 3.5 GPA? 20.6% if you're Asian, 29% if you're white, 81.2% if you're black." This is pretty damning to your argument if you can't support your claim.

Look, all I'm arguing is leave the fucking ethnicity out of it. Let people be judged based on their academic achievement.

 

[Blackened]

You're not understanding what I wrote. More Asians and more whites than blacks. Not more blacks than asians.

I don't need to pull up the application data. You're the one who convinced that it's racial bias just on acceptance percentages. Percentage of acceptance is absolutely dependent on percentage of applicants. If 10 blacks apply and 5 are qualified then 50% get in. But if 100 asians apply and 20 get in, then it's only 20% accepted. You're saying "See 50% vs. 20%...discrimination." But 4x more Asians were accepted than blacks. So you need the applicant numbers to put the acceptance rates into context.

Well, I remain unconvinced unless evidence is provided to the contrary.

 

[panamaican]

In regards to the bold quoted, the data I posted shows the sum of all medical schools. Where is the data to suggest black candidates apply to mostly safety schools? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just haven't seen any evidence to support your claim.

I'll quote Rex here, "Now, what are your chances of matriculation if you've got a 27O and a sub 3.5 GPA? 20.6% if you're Asian, 29% if you're white, 81.2% if you're black." This is pretty damning to your argument if you can't support your claim.

Look, all I'm arguing is leave the fucking ethnicity out of it. Let people be judged based on their academic achievement.

I didn't say it was true. I said it was not accounted for.

 

[Blackened]

I didn't say it was true. I said it was not accounted for.

OK, then based on the evidence we have, we can't make a conclusion. Fair, but the evidence suggests racial bias.

 

[mtron929]

Again, I feel like people are talking past one another because there is not a general agreement on the data itself. And what is clear is this.

1a. Black people apply in far fewer numbers compared to Asians and whites.
1b. Accordingly, even though it is clear that there is favoritism towards black applicants, the proportion of numbers it takes up "unfairly" is small at 5%.
1c. That said, there is significant bonus points for the black candidates as opposed to whites/Asians tell gives them significant advantage.

So in summary, in terms of the individual applicant, there is significant advantage given to the black candidate over white candidate that has nothing to do with the 5% discrimination. However, given that the number of black applicants is small to begin with, the overall effect it has on the student body is small. So basically, there can be four different scenarios here and it is case A.

case A: number of black applicants is small and the favoritism towards a given black applicant is large.
case B: number of black applicants is small and the favoritism towards a given black applicant is small.
case C: number of black applicants is large and the favoritism towards a given black applicant is large.
case D: number of black applicants is large and the favoritism towards a given black applicant is small.

So whether this constitutes a big discrimination or not is pretty much subjective. But let's at least agree on the facts first.

 

[panamaican]

Well, I remain unconvinced unless evidence is provided to the contrary.

You remain unconvinced that your unsupported position isn't true. Not a surprise. If you needed data to support your position, you would have gotten it already. 5%. Lost 2x already. Tons of unaccounted data - applicant numbers, where they apply, legacies, donors, family of faculty, etc.

All of which should be addressed if you're trying to legitimately prove racial bias. Standard statistical stuff. Disproving alternative explanations. This is just the basics. It's lazy to claim "racial bias" when you refuse to look at deep numbers.

 

[panamaican]

OK, then based on the evidence we have, we can't make a conclusion. Fair, but the evidence suggests racial bias.

Evidence suggest nothing of the kind. Evidence suggests that the differences in acceptance rates don't mean anything since this was unpacked in greater detail 2x already and the argument lost both times.