Article

U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2006 and 2007 entering classes.

Center for Educational Policy and Research, American Dental Education Association, Washington, DC 20005, USA.
Journal of dental education (Impact Factor: 1.04). 12/2008; 72(11):1350-91.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The number of applicants to dental schools in the United States continues to rise at a double-digit rate, 12 percent from 2005 to 2006 and 14 percent from 2006 to 2007. The number of applicants to the 2006 and 2007 years' entering classes of U.S. dental schools was 12,500 and 13,700, respectively. The number of first-time enrollees (4,600) in 2007 was the highest recorded since 1989. Men continue to comprise the majority of all applicants, 55 percent in 2006 and 53 percent in 2007. However, the percentage of women applicants to each school ranged from a third to more than half. Underrepresented minority (URM) applicants comprised 12 percent of the applicant pools in both 2006 and 2007. For the 2007 entering class, URM enrollees comprised 13 percent of enrollees. As in previous years, in 2007, the largest number of applicants and enrollees came from states that are among the largest in population in the United States: California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Grade point average and Dental Admission Test scores were the highest in more than a decade. More than three out of four of the 2007 first-time, first-year enrollees earned a baccalaureate degree either in biological/life or physical sciences or in health. Regardless of major field of study, the percent rates of enrollment generally exceeded 30 percent, though there were exceptions (e.g., engineering and education). The majority of enrollees to the 2007 entering classes were twenty-two or twenty-three years of age.

0 Followers
 · 
86 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The dental workforce refers to the number, distribution, and characteristics of dentists, dental auxiliaries, and other support staff involved in the provision of oral health care. This article reviews the changes in the dental workforce that have taken place, especially during the last 50 years, the present status of the workforce, and projections about the adequacy and composition of the dental workforce in the coming years.
    Dental clinics of North America 08/2009; 53(3):435-49. DOI:10.1016/j.cden.2009.03.012
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the 1910 Flexner Report recommended the closure of a large number of operating medical schools, its impact was disproportionately felt on minority schools. The report's recommendations resulted in the closure of five out of seven predominantly black medical schools. Also noteworthy about the report was Flexner's utilitarian argument that black physicians should serve as sanitarians and hygienists for black communities in villages and plantations. A century later, despite decades of targeted programs and advocacy, minorities are still vastly underrepresented among medical students, physicians, and medical school faculty of all ranks. Today's arguments about the need for diversity in medicine in many ways echo Flexner's words. They continue to focus on benefits to minority populations, service in underserved areas, and minorities' role in the primary care workforce. These are valid, in fact laudable aspirations, but when made in isolation, they circumscribe the value of minority medical professionals. Minorities in the medical sciences provide immeasurable services to the entire nation, enhancing educational outcomes, expanding and improving the quality of health care provided, and contributing to the breadth and depth of medical research. This article presents how the Flexner Report shaped medical education and created a culture of medical research leading to narrow performance standards that fail to properly reward teaching activities, patient care, and health promotion. Efforts to achieve diversity in medical education should not end at graduation but should be extended to provide minorities opportunities to excel and to lead.
    Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 02/2010; 85(2):246-53. DOI:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c88145 · 3.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this chapter we describe the institutional and policy-level strategies that dental schools in the Pipeline, Profession, and Practice: Community-Based Dental Education program used to modify their admissions practices to increase the diversity of their student bodies. Schools developed and used clear statements recognizing the value of diversity. They incorporated recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings regarding educational diversity into their revised admissions practices; these rulings cited diversity as both a "compelling interest" and its use in only "narrowly tailored" circumstances. We make a case for admissions decisions based on a comprehensive evaluation that balances the quantitative and qualitative qualities of a candidate. It refutes the practice of overreliance on standardized tests by detailing the whole-file review process to measure merit and professional promise. Also described is a range of noncognitive variables (e.g., leadership, ability to sustain academic achievement with competing priorities, volunteerism, communication, social background, and disadvantaged status) that schools can take into consideration in admissions decisions. Admissions committees can tie this comprehensive review of candidates into the case for promoting cross-cultural understanding and enhanced competence to provide care to patients from diverse backgrounds. In addition, the chapter reviews the challenges schools face in developing admissions policies and procedures that reflect the university's mission for diversity. It addresses the importance of a diverse composition of the admissions committee. It also describes how tailored workshops and technical assistance for admissions committees can help schools improve their student diversity and how admissions committees can engage in a process of periodic review of their diversity objectives in relationship to the school's mission.
    Journal of dental education 10/2010; 74(10 Suppl):S87-97. · 1.04 Impact Factor
Show more

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from