Letter: Should dental schools admit more women applicants?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Misty Mountain Kent, WA
    Dec. 24, 2017 9:38 a.m.

    Reading the 21 comments to the December 10th article, I was struck by the themes of fear and loss. And this letter, which criticizes the university's effort to increase the percentage of female dentists, implies that the new female graduates will somehow be less competent than male grads would have been.

    Did the writer really read the first article?

    The standards which are in place now are reasonably predictive of professional success. When there are 700 applicants--60 of them female-- who meet the qualifications standard, the chance is excellent that most would make equally good dentists. If an SAT score of, say 1350, is the cutoff for "qualified", it is because they have found out that most admitted applicants who score at least 1350 with that score will complete the program. But they haven't found that someone scoring 1450 would be more likely than someone with 1375 to complete the program, let alone become a more competent or more ethical or more conscientious dentist. If next year's class were 100% female, there would be no difference in the quality or competency of the graduates compared to this year's.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    Dec. 23, 2017 6:57 p.m.

    Amen.

    Select based on ability and record, not on race, gender, or anything else.

    Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and his followers were considered radical in the 60s for wanting society to judge people based on the content of their character rather than on external traits like skin color.

    What a shame that 50 years later, such desires are still considered radical and unfashionable.

    Equality of opportunity should not be mistaken for equality of outcomes.

    Like the author, I select professional service providers based on ability, not gender, race, religion, politics, national origin, etc.

    I am offended at the very notion that a more qualified applicant might not get admitted while a less qualified person is given a seat based on race, gender, or any attribute.

    I would be thrilled to have 100% of admissions go to liberal, black, homosexual, atheist women if that is who has the best scores in a blind admission process. I would be offended to have a single conservative, white, heterosexual, Mormon man admitted to fill some diversity quota.

    Since Utah tax payers fund the U, some preference to Utah residents may make sense. But otherwise, ability and scores only.