Is there are reason for the nearly 75/25 F/M ratio?

[Guest HK]

I am just curious as to how this occurs. I assume that the ratio of actual applicants is not at this ratio. Assuming that there are an equal number of acceptable candidates, what happens?

I guess my question is, does Mac intentionally do this?

I know ottawa shoots for 50/50....

 

It has been the same pattern for the last two years, I guess then, for males applying, your competiion is even tought, because you are automatically competing for only 1/4 of the spots available....

[Guest gucio93]

McMaster does not choose its applicants with any ratio in mind. What usually happens is that the larger proportion of applicants are women and so it is only natural that more women are accepted. I do not know why more women than men apply to Mac, and unfortunately I do not have the precise statistics, but I can tell you that when I marked the thirty essays, approximately 70% of them were written by women. It was a similar scenerio for many of my colleagues, so I'm only extrapolating from that data and can't make any conclusions about the overall applicant pool

[Guest Liana]

This may be somewhat stereotyped, but I think that McMaster's perspective on healthcare tends to appeal more to a "female" way of thinking. I know that there have been other arguments on this board about these sort of comments, but I do believe there is scientific evidence supporting the fact that men tend to think more rationally, whereas women are stronger verbalizers.

 

Regardless, I think that women are also more quick to embrace more compassionate, and dare I say "new-age" ideas (while I'm not commenting that Mac is into hokey medicine, I do believe that they are probably one of the most open to different uses of medicine, like their offering of the midwifery program, for instance). This is not to say that a man can't exhibit the ideal Mac mindframe, but the McMaster curriculum, unlike the more traditional curricula of schools like U of T, tends to cater toward a more female way of thinking. (ie, sharing, verbalizing, maternal roles; vs the competitive, paternal, empirically-based styles of other schools)

[Guest Tanya23]

The Mac representative that visited my home university last year stated that women tend to "conduct themselvse better" in the interview than the men. He said this is why there are so many females in Mac Med.

[Guest surprised]

It surprises me that the admissions committee KNOWS that the whole process is biased toward females, but yet doesn't do anything to try and change this. If the admissions process had a "physical" component (ie: obstacle course), it would be fair to assume that a lot of males would probably out-perform females. This would obviously be unfair, and biased toward males. An uproar would ensue, and the process changed because of its lack of fairness. I think that the mac admissions process is extremely sketchy in terms of equality, and I don't think that the 75/25 ratio is really justified by saying that the mac curriculum jives more with the female "way of thinking." That's absurd.

[Guest gucio93]

Remember that this was one person's comment, and it might have been just his personal opinion, or something that was said without thinking. I bet if you called the admissions department you would get a different answer. If you look back to an earlier post in this thread, I addressed this issue. Suffice it to say that the applicant pool to Mac is indeed closer to the 70/30 ratio, thus the actual statistics tend to be skewed more in that direction. It is not so much that females are admitted preferentially because their style of learning "jives with the Mac system," but rather, there are more female applicants, because generally (and I know this is a generalization) females tend to do better (and feel more comfortable) in a setting that relies heavily on discussion, communication, oral evaulation, and work in small groups. There really is no conspiracy.

[Guest Shelby]

Are you sure about the 70:30 applicant ratio. I highly, highly doubt that. I think the bias really occurs at the Essay selection process. Females, tend to have a greater ability to colour their world and make the mundane seem exciting (I know I'm a female). I think these characteristics further serve them during the interview selection process.

 

 

Its interesting because Mac has an obligation to at least look at the issue. I remember my stats prof stopped giving Multiple choice tests because he read several studies and found from his own studies that males perform better on MC tests for various reasons I won't get into here.

 

Of course if a procedure systematically keeps a certain group out of the school, it becomes a human rights issue and I think Mac has an obligation to explore the process at all stages.

 

Just my thoughts, sorry gals but I as an incoming, I wouldn't mind seeing some males who would have made great Mac students in my opinion get a fighting chance.

 

Gucio93, I know you believe the applicant ratio is based 70:30 but you have no support for this assumption and base it on a few essay samples containing more female essays. I would highly doubt a 70:30 applicant ratio and will express this in Sept, along with 35 males who are very concerned about the issue. Infact a reputable media (won't name who) is will to fund the issue and is gathering more applicants that believe a bias to exist. They will then present the facts to the public, and to the various gov't funding commitees.

 

So hang in there all.

[Guest surprised]

Hey shelby - I am totally with you. I too am a female, and although I did not apply at mac (I am headed to U of T med in the fall), I find that the overwhelming number of females who matriculate there each year very disturbing. In addition, it seems very strange that the applicants would be in a ratio of 70:30 females:males. Most - if not all - the med schools across Canada have had ~50:50 splits in all their classes, and it really surprises me that mac would intimidate so many males into NOT applying. Is mac overcompensating for the lack of females in the medical profession?? Anyway, this is certainly an issue that should be addressed. It surprises me that mac has not looked into this issue further. Perhaps there is not a "conspiracy", so to speak, but there should certainly be an investigation into why the program turns off males. If this had been a case where the school graduates 70 MALES: 30 FEMALES each year, I could certainly see it being a MASSIVE issue in the media and medical community. Don't get me wrong - I'm all for women's lib and rah rah - but I'm just very skeptical about this skewed ratio.

 

Say gucio93 is correct about more females applying to mac each year - this is still cause for some concern! McMaster should be interested in finding out what it is about their program that turns off males. On the other hand, is Liana is correct about the application process being more geared towards women - that is also cause for some concern. In either case, this should certainly be investigated.

[Guest gucio93]

I never meant that my inference to the 70:30 ratio has statistical significance. However, I marked 30 essays and have a multitude of friends who each also marked 30 essays, and all of us had the same observation. So although I agree that women tend to do better in interviews, more women also apply to Mac, hence proportionally more of them are invited to interviews.

 

In reply to the point that Mac has an obligation to make sure that there's a 50:50 split, I could not disagree more. Mac has an obligation to make sure that the applicants they choose have the best possible chance to succeed in the highly unstructured program; it just so happens that more females have the characteristics that will ensure success in such a program than males do. Again I do not know if the inference I'm making is statistically significant, and I realize that certain males (as supported by those admitted into Mac) do have those characteristics.

 

I'm just a bit tired (frustrated?) with everything having to be 50:50. This debate has been going on over and over again and the same points have been made. In my humble opinion, as long as there's no intentional bias, candidates should be chosen based on their skills, their fit to the position, and based on being the "best person for the job," NOT based on the fact that they are either male or female. I would hate to think that an applicant with better qualifications has been passed over simply because the quota for that gender has been reached.

[Guest KG]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> I'm just a bit tired (frustrated?) with everything having to be 50:50. This debate has been going on over and over again and the same points have been made. In my humble opinion, as long as there's no intentional bias, candidates should be chosen based on their skills, their fit to the position, and based on being the "best person for the job," NOT based on the fact that they are either male or female. I would hate to think that an applicant with better qualifications has been passed over simply because the quota for that gender has been reached.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->

 

While I respect your opinion, I also believe that if the disparity were the other way around (M:F ratio = 75:25 in favour of males), there would be a huge uproar and some sort of action would be taken - even if it was because males tend to perform better under the criteria the school used, rather than any intentional bias.

 

Also, how do you feel about affirmative action in American medical school admissions? Certain groups are favoured in the selection process to increase their representation in the population, even if their qualifications may be below that of other applicants.

[Guest marmotYVR]

guico-

How did you know the gender of the author of the essays that you were reading? I just re-read mine, and there is nothing there that would tell the reader whether I am male or female. What information are you given along with the essays? Do you know the name of the applicant? Their age? Gender? Race (often evident from the name)? Hometown?

 

If the readers/markers are given any info beyond the actual responses to the autobiographical questions, then I certainly see potential for bias, and hope that this is changed in the future.

 

Giving Mac the benefit of the doubt, however, I will assume that the above is not the case, and that the essays are marked without any knowlege of "demographics". If this is the case, then I think we ought to remind ourselves that the entire selection process is, by definition, discriminatory! Adcoms are trying to discriminate between 3000 people, in order to select the group that is most likely to be successful in their non-traditional program.

 

Frankly, I have wondered if the other schools don't *ensure* that they have a 50:50 ratio at the end, to avoid this kind of controversy! In my mind, that is even worse!!!

[Guest Ian Wong]

My autobiographical essay made it fairly apparent that I was a male, due in large part to a few references to team sports and other such activities that are more likely male than female. I don't presume to know what the Mac med students get access to when they grade papers, nor do I really want to know. I have no idea how accountable they would be held to the administration for stating these sorts of admissions processes here online.

 

At the other end of the spectrum, I think it highly unlikely that an admissions selection criteria is going to be balanced in such a way that a 50/50 split results. In fact, random chance would predict AGAINST a 50/50 split always occurring. If a medical school uses an admissions criteria that screens for characteristics that the medical school feels are necessary to succeed in that curriculum, then applicants need to realise this fact.

 

I personally believe that the average female applicant has better one on one and group communication skills than the average male applicant. If this leads to a skewed class towards females, then so be it, but it also means that the males who ARE accepted are (in the ideal world anyway) also similarly strong in their communication abilities as the females.

 

To suggest that the admissions criteria need to be adjusted (perhaps by lowering the emphasis on certain criteria that females may do better in) in order to minimize this skew, is simply a discrimination of a different sort.

 

At the end of the day, every medical school discriminates against its applicants. Each medical school has a slightly different weighting system in order to get the most qualified individuals (for that particular curriculum) into their classes. It's unreasonable to expect that each system is going to lead to a 50/50 split between males and females. As a Mac applicant, you have access to old statistics on previous years. Once you've got these rules, you can play the admissions game, and find out what in your background makes you a strong candidate for each particular school.

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3

[Guest gucio93]

marmotYVR - in answer to your question, we get the printout of your autobiosketch you submit on line. It has nothing beyond your name and answers to the questions. In most cases gender was very apparent from the answers applicants gave, and from their name. Believe me, that was the last thing I was focusing on when assessing the essays.

[Guest A guy]

Gucio93 Are you going to be marking essays next year?

 

The tone and type of your answers make me feel that you are fairly nit picky and kind of glass is half empty outlook (vs glass is half full) with applicants.

 

Its unfortunate that more male Mac students (the 25% in the class) roll up their sleeves and get involved. Guys have a tendency to be more understanding and evaluating the overall picture they get wheras girls tend to be alot more judgemental and harsh. (Just watch those blind dating shows where the guys always find good things to say about the girl and the date wheras the girls can't stop focusing on the most irrelevant little details.

 

A friend of mine who marked essays this year said a number of her fellow female markers (I believe each group got 30 essays) just cut the crap out of the essays and when they told her about the stuff they found so terrible, she said when you think about it they were just being neurotic.

 

Please take it easy on people, and try and look at the big picture.

[Guest UWOMED2005]

We had an exactly 50:50 split last year (59 m, 59 f) but it was completely by chance and the administration made a very concious effort to point out that it was completely coincidence.

 

It's interesting how all of the schools tend to balance to roughly 50:50 across the country. Sure Mac (and I believe Sherbrooke as well) tend to have more females, but then there's other schools using more traditional criteria (ie MCAT) that tend to have more males (when I was applying last year, I believe U of T, UWO and Queen's all had something like 60m:40f ratios.) It all works out in the end (especially for the guy at mack, er I mean Mac. . . I'm so jealous )

[Guest medicator007]

I was wondering why it is that Sherbrooke also tends to have more females than males? I admit that even though i am a Quebec resident, i really dont know much about that medical school other than the fact that I understand the vast majority of their students come in straight from CEGEP.

 

Medicator

 

PS. that "mack" comment was classic... very funny

[Guest UWOMED2005]

I don't really know that much about Sherbrooke either, but I remember an 80:20 ratio being posted on Delphi last year and not being disputed by a Sherbrooke student. And us Western students (well, the guys noticed at least ) noticed there seemed to be a lot of women in the Sherbrooke contingent at FSS so I figured it was true.

[Guest medicator007]

I know this isn't on topic, but could you maybe explain what FSS is. I've been hearing alot about this event and was wondering what its all about.

 

Medicator

 

PS. is it true that it is going to be held in montreal this year?

[Guest MAR]

has it occurred to those worried about Mac discouraging men that maybe Mac's views on what it takes to train a doctor, the type of programme and characteristics needed to be a doctor might be more appealing to woman who are not applying to other places rather than discouraging men? After all more people apply to mac than any of the other schools so 30% of 3000 is the same as 50% of 1800. If more apply, chance says that more will get in.

 

As to men vs woman evaluators, according to those in the mac admissions office, the 3 scores for the essays tend to be very similar so unless all three are men or all three are woman there does not seem to be a bias.

[Guest KG]

You wouldn't expect them to say that the scores vary widely among different evaluators of a given essay, even if it was true. That would just be inviting even more rants and criticism about their admissions process.

[Guest gucio93]

To: A Guy

I would appreciate if you did not make unfounded remarks about how I do or do not mark essays. I invite you to make comments on facts, but please do not make empty inferences that add nothing to the debate. In all fairness, you cannot propose that you know a person from a few written comments posted on the internet. Just because I stated that I do not believe there needs to be a conscious effort to keep the ratio at 50:50, does not mean that I have anything against the male population (quite the opposite actually) .

 

To: KG

I do not think that the admissions committee is trying to fabricate facts in order to appease "the disgruntled public." It is precisely because so much more is made explicit about the application process at Mac that there is so much more to criticize. In support of the statement that scores are usually pretty close between the three assessors, I can give you the example of the team I was part of during the interviews. We would write out our evaluations of the candidate, and after these were handed in, we would compare notes. Our scores usually varied by one or two points at the most. Somehow we were able to form very similar impressions even though we differed in age, gender, and professional background. If this happens during the interview, why wouldn't it happen when marking essays? Furthermore, during the workshop on how to mark essays, we were told explicitly that if the three scores differed significantly, they would be re-assessed by an independent party who would contact the three assessors and seek validation for why they scored a certain way.

[Guest KG]

Gucio, I am not trying to accuse the admissions committee of hiding anything, as I don't know what they are doing (or not doing).

 

However, there are quite a few examples of people's autobiographical submission percentile scores changing drastically in different years, even though the questions stayed the same and they used the same essay. And there are those whose percentile score dropped even though they acquired some significant new life experience, or had their essays critiqued by Mac students the second time around. This means that either the two groups of evaluators (in the different years) gave widely differing scores, or the applicant pool has changed greatly. Given that about 3000 people apply each year, I'd like to think that any variation in the quality of applicants would not be exceedingly large. At least, certainly not enough to justify a non-academic score dropping from 90th percentile to the 65th percentile. Obviously, this does not happen in most cases - but still, there seems to be enough examples of it occuring for them to at least consider looking into how it can be improved, given the resources that they have.

[Guest Eddie]

Gucio can I ask you for your honest opinion about something. I stress honest

 

 

When your team was interviewing did older applicants perform more poorly? Were the older applicants less competitive (ie similar candidates for job interviews, often you hear of older people getting rejected over a younger person).

 

So were older applicants veiwed as not being as competitive whether overtly or inovertly by the interview teams?

 

You see I need an honest answer because at 29, I have just completed my first year of University with very high marks (after high school I took a year to do missionary work but that year turned out to be 8!) but I will continue with my studies if I know there is a realistic chance that when I apply to medicine at age 33 I will not be looked down upon, or judged not as competitive.

 

I heard from med students that officially nobody may say that age is a factor but unofficially people like to get young students with longer practice lives and better cohesion for the class.

 

Please shed light on this honestly without talking about what the school would want you to say.

 

Thank you very much

[Guest 2006 med]

Yes, I'm also curious to know whether age actually plays a factor in the decision making. The medical schools of course do not advertise discrimination based on age. However, given the huge cost and time required to actually train a physician, do they ever think "hey, this guy's almost 40.. after med school and at least 2 years of residency, he'll be 46 and only have ~20 "productive" years left in him. Perhaps we'll give the spot to someone younger - someone who, after all their years of training, will be able to give back to the medical community for a longer period of time".

[Guest Red Pear]

Dear Eddie,

 

I am 30 and was accepted at Mac for this fall after my fist try. A good friend of mine, 33 yrs, was also accepted this year after the first try. I can't say what goes on in the heads of the admission people, but I can say that there is definitely hope for you and that you should pursue your dreams.

 

Best of luck.

 

Red Pear