Skip navigation links
Overview
Best Evidence Medical Education
Books for Medical Educators
Career Advising Program
Curriculum Content
Education Scholar Modules
Fast Facts About Osteopathic Medical Education
MedEd Update
Medical Education Journal Review
Medical Education Mini-Grants
National Academy of Osteopathic Medical Educators
Osteopathic Medical Education Research Institute
Reports from Medical Education Conferences
Society of Osteopathic Medical Educators
Scholars-in-Residence Program

Holistic Versus Actuarial Student Selection 

Willian McGaghie and Clarence Kreiter.

Teaching and Learning in Medicine
Winter 2005, Vol. 17, Issue #1, pg. 89-91.

Review by: Linda Heun, Ph.D. <lheun@aacom.org>

The authors review and critique professional and academic literature on the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2003 that, while affirmative action selection policies aimed at student diversity are constitutional, the policies must be holistic/individualized rather than mechanical. Mechanistic refers to a formulary approach that lead to a fixed number of underrepresented students that will be admitted. Holistic approaches, on the other hand, are subjective decisions that function on a case-by-case basis.

The authors posit that Supreme Court justices are schooled in constitutional law, not decision science and that their decision ignores research that actuarial decision-making methods are superior to holistic, subjective methods. They innumerate the reasons for the superiority of actuarial methods and support the call for research on the determinants of success in medical education.

For more information about this article and author(s), visit the Teaching and Learning in Medicine website.

Articles from Teaching and Learning in Medicine

Administrative Issues Articles

 
 

American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
5550 Friendship Boulevard, Suite 310, Chevy Chase, MD 20815-7231   P 301.968.4100  F 301.968.4101

© 2008-2010 AACOM. All rights reserved.