Abstract:The health sciences have a public calling to provide socially responsive health care for all of society, particularly those most in need. This call is reverberating in universities and has particular relevance for health science professions. Despite universities' public mission, admissions practices in the health sciences exhibit a fundamental tension between excellence and access, with excellence defined by rankings and research productivity, and access defined by broader public access both to universities themselves and to the knowledge created there. Health science programs' popularity among students intensifies the exclusivity of admissions processes, at the expense of access. This paper presents both a psychometric and social justice critique of existing admissions criteria and processes. A psychometric perspective demonstrates that admissions processes have inherent bias and fairness issues not limited to reliance on standardized test scores, but extending to measures such as interviews, grade point averages, personal statements, recommendation letters, and CVs. Evaluating admissions criteria using a social justice lens focuses attention on procedural, background, and stake fairness, as well as practices that tend to exclude underrepresented groups. Potential improvements to admissions include applying promising practices from holistic approaches, reducing applicants' financial burden, instituting admissions criteria that more broadly represent all groups, involving underrepresented groups in adjudicating candidate applications, implementing equitable educational strategies, and evaluating the degree to which programs' climate and theoretical underpinnings are conducive to recruiting from underrepresented groups. Finally, to fulfill our public call for social responsiveness, it is essential to frame admissions to health science programs in terms of serving the public good by training candidates from underrepresented groups and by positioning excellence as access.

Test-Optional Admissions

Test-optional Policies: Overcoming Strategic Behavior and Informational Gaps

Dropping Standardized Testing for Admissions Trades Off Information and Access

Algorithms for College Admissions Decision Support: Impacts of Policy Change and Inherent Variability

Best vs. All: Equity and Accuracy of Standardized Test Score Reporting

Holistic versus test-only admission

Comparing School Choice and College Admission Mechanisms By Their Immunity to Strategic Admissions

Assessing the Potential Impact of a Nationwide Class-Based Affirmative Action System

A Survey of International Practice in University Admissions Testing

Why test? Talent loss and enrollment loss

Towards Data-Driven Affirmative Action Policies under Uncertainty

The Disparate Impacts of College Admissions Policies on Asian American Applicants

The Effect of a National Education Policy on Language Test Performance: a Fairness Perspective

A survey of medical school aspirant perceptions of an unexpected lottery-facilitated admissions adaptation

Excellence, access, and the public good: Building socially responsive admissions practices for health science programs

Misalignment between Test Scores and Colleges' Preferences: Chinese College Admission Reconsidered

The Black-White Test Score Gap

Opt-out testing for stigmatized diseases: A social psychological approach to understanding the potential effect of recommendations for routine HIV testing.

Bias Analysis of AI Models for Undergraduate Student Admissions

More Than Inconvenienced: The Unique Needs of U.S. College Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic