Supreme Court Ruling on Affirmative Action: 4 Changes For Students
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 чер 2024
- No more affirmative action? The Supreme Court ruling that occurred on June 29, 2023, marks a major change to the admissions process for both college and medical school applicants. Let’s break down how this change will affect students and what future applicants need to know.
Affirmative action policies have long been controversial and are often far from perfect; however, they have helped certain patient populations see doctors from similar backgrounds as their own, which helps to build trust between patients and physicians. But now things are changing.
On June 29, 2023, in two separate decisions, the Supreme Court determined that college admission policies at Harvard and UNC that included race as a factor were unconstitutional. Therefore, it is not lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. These landmark decisions have effectively ended affirmative action in college admissions.
The impact of these rulings will vary from state to state and school to school, so it’s hard to know exactly how this change will specifically affect applicants. The only thing that is certain is schools in the US cannot consider race as the sole factor in admissions decisions.
🖋Accompanying Blog Post: medschoolinsiders.com/pre-med...
💌 Sign up for my weekly newsletter - medschoolinsiders.com/newsletter
🌍 Website - medschoolinsiders.com
📸 Instagram - / medschoolinsiders
🐦 Twitter - / medinsiders
🗣️ Facebook - / medschoolinsiders
🎥 My UA-cam Gear: kit.co/kevinjubbalmd/
👀 Hand-Picked Productivity Tools: www.amazon.com/shop/medschool...
🎵My Study Playlist: open.spotify.com/user/1231934...
TIME STAMPS:
00:00 - Introduction
00:18 - The Supreme Court Ruling
03:14 - 4 Changes Students Can Expect With No More Affirmative Action
07:11 - The Future of Admissions
07:55 - Applying to Medical School
LINKS FROM VIDEO:
Affirmative Action & Medical School Admissions | The Uncomfortable Truth: • Affirmative Action & M...
Should You Use ChatGPT for Medical School Applications?: • Should You Use ChatGPT...
Why Getting into Medical School is So Hard (& How to Stand Out): • Why Getting into Medic...
#medicalschool #affirmativeaction #premed
====================
Disclaimer: Content of this video is my opinion and does not constitute medical advice. The content and associated links provide general information for general educational purposes only. Use of this information is strictly at your own risk. Kevin Jubbal, M.D. and Med School Insiders LLC will not assume any liability for direct or indirect losses or damages that may result from the use of information contained in this video including but not limited to economic loss, injury, illness or death. May include affiliate links to Amazon. As an Amazon Associate, I may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through them (at no extra cost to you).
Do you agree with the recent ruling on affirmative action? 🤔 What concerns do you have about the future of school admissions? Leave a respectful comment below with your thoughts 💭
Please make a "So you want to be a CRNA" video!! ❤
It is unconstitutional + morally wrong to deny a person college admission just cause you already have enough people of their race attending your school
@@bruh-bn3ni But is it unconstitutional + morally wrong to admit a student because they are either paying their way in, or are deemed as legacy students?
@@Dndstories the constitution is silent on economic equality
Slight correction: in 0:33 you claim that direct affirmative action policies used a quota based system where a certain number of seats are reserved for applicants of a certain race. Even before the recent Supreme Court ruling that would have been illegal. In Regents of the University of California vs Bakke (1978) the Supreme Court ruled that the university could not use a strict quota based system to reserve a certain amount of seats for applicants, it could use race as a factor but it could not reserve seats for applicants of certain races, and therefore no one could be rejected or accepted based on their race alone.
Other than that slight inaccuracy, great video.
Yes you are technically correct. However if you implement programs that are designed to achieve racial parity based on demographic statistics, that is a de facto quota.
I can totally relate. Still remember when I applied to medical school in 2019, to a Federal University in my own state! Alot of persons from my state were denied admission, who scored higher than a few other candidates from a particular region of the country (the North) who got in. Did I feel terrible, of course! But this had to be done in order to maintain the 'balance' in admissions every year. If they were to admit solely on merit (grades and achievement), you'd have a far less amount of Northerners in school (not trying to say they're inferior or less smart, but then, the level of education available in that region can't be compared to what's available in the South). Was I pained, yes, but then I was considerate and knew the playing field wasn't the same for us all, and this was the school's system trying to make things a bit more 'neutral'.
Mind you this slot was only a fraction of the total number that was to be admitted, say 15-20%, so the rest of us had the greater slot to battle for. That seemed fair.
Finally, the fact that someone scored higher doesn't necessarily mean they'd become a better doctor, nor does someone scoring less than others mean they'd make less qualified or knowledgeable doctors.
PS: For context, I'm a Nigerian and this happened in my country.
LETS TALK ABOUT LEGACY ADMISSION THEN
Please what software do you use to make these videos? They're really engaging, and I would love to know how I can use this for school. Thanks in advance.
Patients should not have to question the merits of someone whom could, quite literally hold someone's life in their hands.
statitics dont apply to individuals, but populaitons. You can question the background of all your doctors, though I doubt people give equal questioning across different races. Unless of course there is some underlying prejudice and it was never really about the merit of the doctor/student, which is often the case when it comes to questioning minority students in my life. From my experience no one has ever questioned the white legacy or athlete on their merits before questioning the minority students.
@@marving8907 Well, because AA is on the basis of race, whereas Legacy and athletics admissions aren't. Athletes train for athletics, where they are entirely merit-based qualifications and standards. Legacy admissions are majority white, yes, but most white admissions aren't Legacy, and there are absolutely Legacy minority admissions.
Most people do judge Legacy Admission recipients when they find out, but it's not a benefit provided to whites as a group. AA is a benefit provided to minority groups, and only certain minority groups at that. How often does someone question an Asian student's merits? If it were simply due to prejudice as you claim, it would happen to Asian students and professionals just as often as other groups, but that's not the case. Everyone knows they have the highest standards to meet (which goes against the purported goals of AA in the first place, to help marginalized groups) and so they're confident in the expertise of these individuals.
@@smexijebus at harvard 35% of all students were legacy or faculty children, of those 75-80% where white. Taking the most conservative estimate over 25% of all students are white students who had different metircs in their admission process. Harvards campus makes up 15% black. If some of those students dont deserve to be there, I hope you would also say 25% of harvards current class doesn't deserve to be there as well. People want to focus on the 15% black population but if most were actually about making college admissions more fair we would address the actual elephant in the room. When a quarter of your class is legacy, do you really get judged when it seems like the cultural norm. If you want to widen out the demographic, 40% are either athletes, legacy, or faculty children. You are surrounded my many similar to you and the judgement one receives for being legacy or athlete is completely different than the minority student. No one can tell a white student a apart from legacy, athlete, or faculty, your shielded from judgement and have to ask about their metrics before finding out if they actually deserve to be accepted. While as a minority student, its almost assumed your metrics are below avg and have to prove yourself before anyone even talks to you. White students dont have to prove themselves if not questioned even if 1 in 4 should be questioned. Also athelets are not held to the same standards and its obvious, look at stanfords qualifications for regular admissions vs recruited atheles.
@@marving8907 Which is exactly why we need to get rid of AA (so minority students will no longer be judged negatively because of it, rather than your claim that it's due instead to prejudice). And I, and most opponents of AA, completely agree with getting rid of Legacy admissions. No argument there.
Athletes are not held to the same standards as non-athletic students because they bring different things to the table. Athletic students overwhelmingly go into the athletic sports departments where they are held to strict objective standards against other athletes. Points are points and records are records. You won't make it onto the basketball team due to 'helping marginalized individuals'.
Objective standards for all should be the default baseline. Every individual is treated as an individual, not punished or rewarded for factors they have no control over.
But, again, AA is racially based. Legacy and Athletics are not. I have a problem with all of them, but AA is especially egregious in that it is essentially tax-funded racial discrimination. And, again, all advocates of AA simply ignore us minorities when we ask why it's okay to discriminate against innocent Asian students so severely, more severely than even white majority students.
It's not about correcting wrongs, it's about a weird, almost fetishistic desire to statistically equalize racial groups. Statistical disparity is not evidence of discrimination. Nor should statistical equalization be considered an admirable or even acceptable goal. People are not the same, and we should not treat them as such. Every individual has different circumstances, and we cannot be reduced to simple statistics.
@@marving8907cancel legacy admissions too! How will the unqualified children of the unqualified blacks admitted under the racist affirmative action policy get into college then?😂. I’m with you. No need for legacy admissions. Should be about merit, not because your parents went there too
You will get in where you are supposed to get in.
As a physician, I am relieved that merit based med schools are still alive and well. Mediocre to poor achieving can still attend DO or Caribbean schools.
Thanks @Med School Insiders for posting this video about affirmative action / supreme court. Here are the viewpoints expressed by Supreme Court justices regarding affirmative action.
1) This case is about a group called Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) who sued Harvard College and the University of North Carolina (UNC). They said that these schools were not fair in their admissions process because they were using race as a factor, which they believed was against the law. The law they referred to is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment*.
2) The Equal Protection Clause is a part of the Fourteenth Amendment that says that every person should be treated equally by the law, no matter their race, color, or nationality. The SFFA believed that by considering race in admissions, Harvard and UNC were not treating all applicants equally.
3) The Court looked at the history of the Fourteenth Amendment and how it has been used in the past. They also looked at how other cases involving race and college admissions were handled. They found that while diversity in a student body can be a good thing, it must be handled in a way that treats all applicants fairly and equally.
4) The Court also looked at the idea of "strict scrutiny*". This is a way for the courts to look at laws to see if they are fair and necessary. If a law or policy is found to be unfair or unnecessary, it may not pass strict scrutiny and could be considered unconstitutional.
5) The Court found that the admissions systems at Harvard and UNC did not pass strict scrutiny. They said that the schools' use of race in admissions was not clear or specific enough, and it resulted in fewer admissions for certain racial groups. They also said that the schools' use of race in admissions seemed to stereotype certain racial groups, which is not allowed.
6) The Court also said that the schools' admissions systems did not have a clear end point. This means that there was no clear plan for when the schools would stop using race as a factor in admissions. This was another reason why the Court said the schools' admissions systems were not fair.
7) The Court decided that the admissions systems at Harvard and UNC were not fair and did not follow the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. They said that the schools' use of race in admissions was not clear, specific, or fair enough to be allowed.
8) However, the Court also said that schools can consider how race has affected an applicant's life. They can look at how an applicant's experiences with their race have shaped them and what they can bring to the school because of those experiences.
9) In the end, the Court decided that the admissions systems at Harvard and UNC were not fair and did not follow the law. They said that the schools' use of race in admissions was not allowed because it was not clear, specific, or fair enough.
10) So, the Court decided that the SFFA was right. They said that Harvard and UNC were not treating all applicants equally in their admissions process, which is against the law. They said that the schools needed to change their admissions systems to be fair to all applicants, no matter their race.
*The Equal Protection Clause is a part of the Fourteenth Amendment that says that every person should be treated equally by the law, no matter their race, color, or nationality.
*Strict scrutiny is a way for the courts to look at laws to see if they are fair and necessary. If a law or policy is found to be unfair or unnecessary, it may not pass strict scrutiny and could be considered unconstitutional.
Please is Anatomist function abroad like do they have good job opportunities
Just one thing I would recommend you should fix from the legal side, the direct affirmative action. Direct affirmative action policies were struck down under Regents of Univ. of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978).
statitics dont apply to individuals, but populaitons. You can question the background of all your doctors, though I doubt people give equal questioning across different races. Unless of course there is some underlying prejudice and it was never really about the merit of the doctor/student, which is often the case when it comes to questioning minority students in my life. From my experience no one has ever questioned the white legacy or athlete on their merits before questioning the minority students.
Well, because AA is on the basis of race, whereas Legacy and athletics admissions aren't. Athletes train for athletics, where they are entirely merit-based qualifications and standards. Legacy admissions are majority white, yes, but most white admissions aren't Legacy, and there are absolutely Legacy minority admissions.
Most people do judge Legacy Admission recipients when they find out, but it's not a benefit provided to whites as a group. AA is a benefit provided to minority groups, and only certain minority groups at that. How often does someone question an Asian student's merits? If it were simply due to prejudice as you claim, it would happen to Asian students and professionals just as often as other groups, but that's not the case. Everyone knows they have the highest standards to meet (which goes against the purported goals of AA in the first place, to help marginalized groups) and so they're confident in the expertise of these individuals.
"white legacy" wow. More anti white racism.
As if legacy admission is only for white people. Legacy admission is open to all alumni, show me one single school that had a "white legacy" admission system in the past decade.
Be better.
Because minority students ARE given special treatment.
So NOW their meritocratic achievements are tainted.
Hey love your videos! Can you do a so you want to be an allergist video?
We will have a video on this topic soon!
@@MedSchoolInsiders thank you so so much!! Can’t wait for it!!
Hi Dr. Jubbal,
Please consider creating a "So You want to be a Surgical Oncologist". Thanks for all your videos. They're a great help!
Thank god it ended. Now everyone has a fair shot at admissions
So there will be no ORM or URM categorization now?
Well I feel as thought race, ethnicity, and gender should be removed from applications in general so the most qualified applicants would be accurately approved.
But then where wil find my black transgender lesbian doctr
@@DAMfoxygrampa😭
Will this affect people with learning disabilities
Why does the voiceover sound so weird?
Thank you for this video
This is a great neutral video. However, I can already tell this comment section is gonna go downhill. It worries me that some if these people wi be future doctors…
The real benefit of diversity is to lower the curve.
Dear Dr Jubbal, I'm 19 and I'm a new optometry student. Please make a video on optometry
Thanks for the suggestion and for watching. It's on our list!
Need a video badly
Please can you make a so you want to be an oncologist video
This is devastating for healthcare as cultural competence is becoming increasingly important as well as having doctors that reflect the diversity of this country. Being a good physician is so much more than test scores and GPA. Interpersonal skills and empathy are not assessed in either yet are essential in medicine.
Would you rate a surgeon based on their ability to achieve successful surgeries or one with better interpersonal skills?
Bottom line, if a group is underrepresented (strictly statistically speaking) we need programs that encourage academics at the beginning of the decline, not the end.
The group needs to look inward and stop blaming white peoples for their self inflicted problems. ✊🏾🤣
Great video
So you could say an Asian or white person with a 3.8 gpa deserves getting in less than a black or hispanic person with a 3.6 gpa (lets assume everything else about their application is similar)
It depends on how much more advantaged the Asian/white person was. If the Asian was like 70% of Asian/White pre-med kids out there, with rich parents paying private tutors to teach them everything and despite that mountain of an advantage, only managed to outdo a non-white person by only 0.2 GPA points, then it should be incredibly obvious the non-white person is more competent and would easily outdo the Asian/White person under the same circumstances. If the Asian has normal parents, then it should be obvious that the Asian is more competent than the non-white person. Alot of brats out there ragg on affirmitive action because it separates to boys from the men. I honestly have always deeply hated the idea of parents passing their wealth onto their children. It's bad. I'd rather have no one inherit anything from anyone and earn their merit.
I mean GPA is just average Grade Point Average
Smart people who are burnt out could have a smaller GPA
Colleges already look down to poor people
...Yup.
Exactly.
Well, that is CLASS and NOT race, @@rainsong1803.
@@emiliomartineziii2980It should make more sense to throw the idea of race out the window and give seats to low income then. AA gives seats to rich black people all the time and excludes hard working students.
I was a white student planning on putting “prefer not to say” on racial demographics, would it still be wise to do so?
Yes, it would.
so affirmative action doesn’t mean students that aren’t qualified will get the seat over qualified student that is a misconception!!! Students that are qualified ie able to do graduate in their school are given consideration that fill in the gap of why certain metric was not achieved. In every higher Educational school blacks and Hispanics make up no more than 5% of each graduating class and that’s with affirmative action . While white and Asian students make up close to 95% of each graduating class of every higher education in America, with the exception of the HBCUs . There tells us racism is still big issue on America. In this case systemic and institutional racism . Also legacy students make up 75% of the graduating class at Harvard I wonder why conservative groups are not addressing that with the supreme court.
👆black fragility and entitlement or white guilt? 😂
It's because of AA that the graduation rates have and continue to have such a disparity. It means that these AA students are mismatched in terms of peer group, and as a result, there is a massive discrepancy between AA acceptance rates and AA graduation rates. You're setting these kids up to fail by placing them in institutions they are not prepared for.
Much of these failing students, ironically, would've been very successful without AA, as schools that have less strict requirements would and do happily accept those students.
And no, statistical differences does not equate to evidence of discrimination. Unless you believe the NBA is racist and we have to have affirmative action for asian athletes and requiring black athletes to score several ranks higher for the same positions. Everyone I've talked to who is against AA is also against Legacy admissions.
Further, legacy is not on the basis of race. That's the crux of the issue. There are minority legacy students. The funding from Legacy admissions also heavily subsidizes the enrollment of those who can't afford full rides, whereas AA actively punishes the poor and innocent students struggling to get by.
@@smexijebus … No you are wrong on what affirmative action actually is … it is giving students from a racial minority group that are INTELLECTUALLY QUALIFIED a seat. These students are not being set up fail because they are intellectually capable to graduate. A Medical school will not accept student who can not graduate. It is bad business. You even have a racist view on the educational capacity of racial minority. which shows that you out touch with reality the of institutional racism. Please use google instead just living in ur entitled privileged worldview. We are not in post racist society. If you are confuse on what that means please do some research so you don’t continue to be part of the problem.
Let me make it a simple. In a medical school a graduating class has 100 students. 5 students are black or hispanic and 95 students are white or Asian. How are those 5 students taking an imaginary spot for white or asian student? when white and asian students have 95 seats. The numbers themselves refute discrimination claims against white and asian students who are overwhelming represented, and overwhelmingly have the majority of seats. The numbers, the statistics and the data proves otherwise. Discrimination claims are not justified HERE! if Asian and White students are really discriminated against due their race then they would have less seats not more.
The NBA is different because teams and the league is privately owned. State Schools for example are federally funded which mean our tax dollars contribute to those schools.
Also before you say Blacks don’t care about school or didn’t work hard enough or you start perpetuating the other falsehood of dumb stereotypes that you seen on TV. Ask yourself a question. Do those two groups have the same educational opportunities? If the answer is no. Then Affirmative Action is still needed! A group of students with higher test score shows is only one metric it doesn’t dictate whether you’re going to be a great doctor or if you’re going to serve your community well.
Without legacy admissions you can still donate to ur school of choice. It’s a tax break! The issues is donating so that ur child has seat is like bribery. These students are not showing scholastic affinity to graduate the school. They are occupying a seat because their parent paid for it. My point is that it was not apart of the lawsuits thus it is still legal.
Not allowing students to participate due to incompetence isn't racist.
Great news for us asians
Affirmative action is racist. I agree with Candace Owens on this. As a women of colour, I want to be selected on the basis of my academic intelligence, not my afro Caribbean background, economic circumstances and/or skin colour.
Same. From the Caribbean and go to an HBCU. Remove affirmative action and the race/ethnicity section of the application. A good doc has never been guarded by the color of one’s skin
@@rashidawilkinson black ppl from the civil rights era would like a word
@@swaggggyb2560 you mean the same era that strove for equality of black people because they were oppressed and discriminated against unfairly? The one leading to the end of discrimination across the board including the civil rights act of 1964? Discrimination that was based on race, color, religion, or national origin? The discrimination that did not only apply to black Americans nor black immigrants? Would you prefer to be chosen because you’re black or because you’ve put in the same work as other applicants and understand the empathy a physician should have for all people?
However, there is a difference between academic intelligence and academic performance. The admissions process is based on performance both in and outside the classroom as well as on standardized assessments. Many are arguing that admissions should be based on meritocracy but how can a whole system base something on merit when the current education system is wholly inequitable? I respectfully disagree that affirmative action is racist. It’s simply giving access and opportunity to students marginalized by a system - the real culprit- that’s inherently racist. Ultimately, the classroom environment is stronger when the individuals within it reflect the diverse society in which we live. Even if they modified the system to be based instead on socioeconomics it still does not level an educational system where many students of color are placed at a disadvantage.
@@TexasGal. Affirmative action is racist. That it's purported goal is to "give access and opportunity to marginalized students" does not make its racist methods any less racist. This is the standard case of 'ends justify the means'. Discriminating against current innocent students on the basis of race to rectify past discrimination on the basis of race is not a solution, it is not just, and it is not moral.
A statistical disparity does not prove discrimination, nor does actively discriminating against innocent students for ancestral wrongs seem justified. As a minority, the only thing affirmative action does is erode trust in standards and qualifications and exacerbate the racial division between groups.
And not only is it legally and morally wrong, it just straight up doesn't work. Highly recommend Thomas Sowell's book "Affirmative Action Around the World" for an extremely detailed and well-researched look at all the real world effects such policies result in, which are always in stark contrast to the proposed results. It doesn't help the poor and vulnerable, the benefits overwhelmingly go to the most well off individuals of the preferred group, to the detriment of the poor and struggling persons of the non-preferred group. The well off members of the non-preferred group are unaffected, it's only the innocent struggling ones that are punished.
It also means that these AA students are mismatched in terms of peer group, and as a result, there is a massive discrepancy between AA acceptance rates and AA graduation rates. You're setting these kids up to fail by placing them in institutions they are not prepared for.
Much of these failing students, ironically, would've been very successful without AA, as schools that have less strict requirements would and do happily accept those students.
Furthermore, it directly contradicts the purported goal of helping marginalized students. In what way is forcing Asian students to meet a far stricter standard than even 'majority white' students helping the marginalized? When have Asian students been privileged?
I'm not against trying to rectify substantial and provable past harms suffered by individuals, but the support must go to that individual alone, and it cannot be at the expense of other innocent individuals. This is why Affirmative Action is unjust and immoral.
“Most colleges and medical schools still consider campus diversity a top priority” if that’s true, that is so awful to hear. I don’t care what ethnic background my doctor is from, as long as I know I can trust my life in their hands.
Vascular surgery video!!!!
As someone who's been through med school in a less diverse area...this is worrying. But life goes on and I guess we have to keep trying to care even when the world doesn't...
This new change is supposed to help people from less diverse areas, like you, as well as Asian heritage students. If a student is “not diverse”: 1) Introspect: There are many ways you might have diversity but just don’t realize. Overcoming a hardship or having a parent who has a disability or mental illness, any family military connection, for examples, count as diversity that’s not race related. Low income also counts. Moving a lot as a child etc. 2) It can help if you do volunteer or paid work with diverse communities so you can at least discuss the impact your experience with diverse groups has made in your cultural competency and on you personally as a practitioner. I used to work in college admissions. Hope this helps.
@@JessieInTheSky09 I have also worked with admissions and with every decision there are pros and cons. Personally I feel "outreach" is not nearly enough to balance the scales of hundreds of years of stunting the development of generations of families. And those who are fortunate enough to actually make it to the admissions, at least until now, could have a semblance of balanced scales for those generations. Now, it's simply removing those options, and ensuring the majority who haven't had that generational deprivation continue to have the loudest voice, and the largest presence.
I don't have a personal issue with anyone who disagrees, but I don't see any genuinely "positive" reason this decision was made other than to help the "majority" who were already more likely to not only apply for medicine, but more likely to see themselves as doctors in the first place. And the sad part is, even after this, the minority of groups in the medical field will STILL be told they only became a doctor because of "diversity" allowing them to get in...lose-lose for them...
Diversity of thought is far more important than trying to statistically equalize students by colour. A statistical disparity does not prove discrimination, nor does actively discriminating against innocent students for ancestral wrongs seem justified. As a minority, the only thing affirmative action does is erode trust in standards and qualifications and exacerbate the racial division between groups.
And not only is it legally and morally wrong, it just straight up doesn't work. Highly recommend Thomas Sowell's book "Affirmative Action Around the World" for an extremely detailed and well-researched look at all the real world effects such policies result in, which are always in stark contrast to the proposed results. It doesn't help the poor and vulnerable, the benefits overwhelmingly go to the most well off individuals of the preferred group, to the detriment of the poor and struggling persons of the non-preferred group. The well off members of the non-preferred group are unaffected, it's only the innocent struggling ones that are punished.
@@Justiceisone The "positive" reason this decision was made was not to help the "majority" or to harm the "minority". It wasn't made with any of those considerations in mind, and that's they way it should be. It was made with individuals in mind, and whether it is fair and just to discriminate for or against them on the basis of race, something they have no control over. We cannot continue down the collectivist path where we pit groups against one another, battling to see who gets the lion's share of government benefits.
We all want to help those who need it, but present discrimination does not fix past discrimination. The only fix is no discrimination. Which is also the only way you stop people thinking 'diversity got them in'. Because, right now, there's a real reason to think that, and despite being true for only a relatively small portion of those groups, it taints all of them. Focusing on race only gets more people to focus on race.
@@Justiceisone We want the people with the most merit and hardest working to become doctors. If a medical school applicant hasn't recovered from past circumstances, they still don't deserve it over someone who works harder or is smarter in the field. It's not supposed to be based on who had it easier, it's supposed to be fair and balanced on who is the better applicant in general. We're trying to save lives here, what's fair is irrelevant.
Hopefully we now we will start having qualified people in the right positions based on merit. Not their skin color. Good riddance!
I agree but Doctors come to America in many ways such as certain pipeline programs, the carribean, DO schools, and etc. I do not think you understand how their test scores and other scores vary between these areas. You may have an amazing doctor that graduated from the carribean that got there with a 490 mcat and a low gpa. This does not mean they aren't qualified as they were able to pass several board exams and also land an American residency.
and many many years later, the lightbulb came on
bros video made some strong points but this comment section ain't it. wait till all these daily wire commenter talking points watch the gender surgery video lmaoo
At least Asian and white people can stop being disrespectful to black and Hispanic people who are in the top colleges😁
At least the black people who will be admitted to top college next year will of will actually deserve to be there now. 😁. Unlike the ones that were admitted under the racist affirmative action law that allowed blacks to score hundreds of points lower than an Asian and still be admitted to school over a more qualified Asian. 😁
Hopefully this doesn’t cause a spike in the already disproportionately high preponderance for black on Asian crime. Look at who victimizes who on the FBI crime stats. And You’re smugly commenting about alleged disrespect by Asians against blacks? 🙄
@@thegunnylocker5783 based on your comment alone that disrespect will still continue. If you see a black or Hispanic student in a top university and your automatic thought is they only got into the school due to affirmative action yeah I got some news for you pal lol. Those students were mainly there because of their grades period just like white and Asian . However your comment just proves they had to over come certain peoples bias on top of performing well in the class room to be considered unlike white and Asian students.
But HOW can you tell if they are there meritocratically or not, @@shanabear4688?
I mean, I know there are smart and deserving black students but how do you tell them apart from the Affirmative Action selected?
No they won't. They hate them simply because they are Black.
Comment section is about to be a good example of why we need more black physicians and a more diverse healthcare field in general. Good balanced video
Earn it
This comment is a good example of why we need more qualified professionals, rather than discriminatory collectivists.
@@liamwinter4512 They did earn it and still will. They passed those tests. We are intelligent enough. The point of AA was to make up for the decades of discrimination we faced in education. Try again
👆typical black fragility and entitlement. Why are blacks so afraid to earn positions based on their own merit and not the color of their skin? 🤔🤣
@@swaggggyb2560 The point of AA does not erase the discriminatory methods of AA. Nor does it erase its disastrous consequences. The ends do not justify the means.
It's also very revealing that you have no problem discriminating against other races so long as your race benefits. Why do Asians deserve to be forced to meet far higher standards than even the white majority students? In what way does that 'make up for decades of discrimination'? What 'Asian Privilege' are we 'making up' for? When they were put in internment camps just a few decades ago?
It is far, far more fair to judge individuals on the basis of their merits, abilities, and experiences than it would be to judge individuals based on the historical legacy of groups of people who happen to look like them.
I'm not even against trying to rectify substantial and provable past harms suffered by individuals, but the support must go to that individual alone, and it cannot be at the expense of other innocent individuals. This is why Affirmative Action is unjust and immoral.
This comment section is about to show why affirmative action was put in place in the first place.
It’s going to show the typical black entitlement and black fragility. Why are blacks so afraid of earning positions based on merit and not their skin color? 😂🤔
Yes, I’m already disappointed but not surprised.
No. It shows that people believe merit matters more than skin color. The opposite view that you seem to hold.
@@DarthSion6987 You know nothing of my views. If people truly cared about merit the skin color of said person wouldn’t be mentioned. If people cared about merit they’d focus on improving their CV’s/resumes to be more competitive. They’d take accountability vs blaming affirmative action for why they weren’t admitted into a school.
Yes, the goal was to remove Black immigrants from the Ivy's. Black Americans attend HBCU's and state schools because we are very aware of how hateful and hostile these so-called "elite" pale spaces are. Black immigrants are about to get their N-wake up call over the coming years.
The comments are about to show a lot of black fragility and black entitlement. 😂
if you consider black people being upset that the discriminatory system just got worse, then I wonder what you consider white fragility and white entitlement to be?
@@prettypinkprincehow is it discriminatory against black people if applications are based on gpa only? Are you saying black people aren’t smart and that they NEED affirmative action to get into med school? That’s not right, everyone should have an equal chance regardless of race, and now it’s equal for everyone.
@@Bluewaterbottle applications have always been about gpa even with affirmative action. Be serious. College has never been an equal opportunity playing field because most colleges have a predominantly white student body. Affirmative action made it equal by creating space for people of color. Do you know what a minority is? Minorities have a disadvantage because they are not the majority, which creates inequality and affirmative action works to even out the inequalities.
I agree but Doctors come to America in many ways such as certain pipeline programs, the carribean, DO schools, and etc. I do not think you understand how their test scores and other scores vary between these areas. You may have an amazing doctor that graduated from the carribean that got there with a 490 mcat and a low gpa. This does not mean they aren't qualified as they were able to pass several board exams and also land an American residency.
@@prettypinkprince So they're upset that they'll actually have to earn their way in like everyone else instead of it being given to them because of their skin color? 😂 They're not upset that the system is discriminatory, they're upset because they can no longer benefit from it and that they are being held to the same standard as everyone else. Welcome to equality.
No more black privilege in school admissions. 😂
There’s no such thing as black privilege and you know that
I agree but Doctors come to America in many ways such as certain pipeline programs, the carribean, DO schools, and etc. I do not think you understand how their test scores and other scores vary between these areas. You may have an amazing doctor that graduated from the carribean that got there with a 490 mcat and a low gpa. This does not mean they aren't qualified as they were able to pass several board exams and also land an American residency.
@@fahsurfer123I don’t think you know the means institutions to include the medical field will go to artificially increase their “blackness” to virtue signal about DEI. 😂
@@fahsurfer123you do know Kamala and KBJ were chosen specifically for their race despite obviously not being the most qualified. Listen to them speak. One doesn’t know what a woman is and the other appears to be drunk all the time spewing out nonsensical word salads. 😂
@@thegunnylocker5783 did you not read what I said
You quote Biden and I’ve loose every ounce of the much respect I had for this channel.
“Underrepresented students” what does that mean? For what reason should any group be represented by race? And by what metric is representation measured? Is it proportional to the racial demographics of the country? How about we just admit the best applicants because they’re the best; regardless of race?
The notion that one race is underrepresented implies that there are too much of another. That’s the only logical inference. So the question is, what do you mean, “too much”? Isn’t that inherently racist?
black people can't get into med school with a 2.1 gpa anymore. This is awful!
Why default to black people when discussing AA?
@@0Mynameisearl0 Because that's what defenders and proponents of AA do. Ask them why Asians deserve to be forced to meet far higher standards than even white students and they just ignore you and call you a racist.
Black people never got into med schools with that GPA. Whereas the average GPA for a med school might have been 3.8, perhaps african americans could have been accepted with 3.6. Does that mean they're dumb or unqualified? Absolutely not. You have to work your butt off to get those grades. Getting into med school was never easy for anyone.
Fact of the matter is that having less black doctors affects their health outcomes in a negative manner. We need more black doctors.
I'm white as far as the AMCAS is concerned and am already in med school, so I have no personal stake in this.
@@0Mynameisearl0because they are the ones whining the most, loudest and the group that benefitted the most.
@@thefenerbahcesk4156 It doesn't mean they're unqualified, but it does mean they are less qualified. It also means that they are mismatched in terms of peer group, and as a result, there is a massive discrepancy between AA acceptance rates and AA graduation rates. You're setting these kids up to fail by placing them in institutions they are not prepared for.
Much of these failing students, ironically, would've been very successful without AA, as schools that have less strict requirements would and do happily accept those students.
It also doesn't answer why artificially limiting the number of Asian students and Asian doctors is justifiable. What about those students who worked their butts off to an even greater degree? "Too many of your colour, too bad"?