{"id":198629,"date":"2026-07-01T16:00:12","date_gmt":"2026-07-01T14:00:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=198629"},"modified":"2026-07-01T16:00:17","modified_gmt":"2026-07-01T14:00:17","slug":"indirecte-discriminatie-vijf-opleidingen-geneeskunde-kennen-de-kritiek-maar-blijven-selecteren-aan-de-poort","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2026\/07\/01\/indirecte-discriminatie-vijf-opleidingen-geneeskunde-kennen-de-kritiek-maar-blijven-selecteren-aan-de-poort\/","title":{"rendered":"Indirect discrimination? Five medical degree programmes know the criticism but continue to select at the gate"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Three medical degree programmes have switched entirely to lottery admission because certain groups otherwise systematically have less chance. The other programmes are aware of the problem but are not acting on it. \u201cA lawsuit is certainly not without prospects.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tEva Gomb\u00e1r-Krishnan<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Hundreds of 17-year-old pupils applying for medical school must demonstrate that they have what it takes to become a doctor and answer a range of multiple-choice questions. For example: \u201cTogether with a number of students you are working on an assignment and each of you writes part of the report. You are not satisfied with the quality of what the others have written and feel it could be improved. What do you do?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\t

\n\t\t

This article in one minute<\/strong><\/p>\n

– Five medical degree programmes select students; four of them use a personality test.<\/p>\n

– Experts strongly criticise this approach. The programmes do not substantiate their selection methods.<\/p>\n

– Selection at the gate of degree programmes harms equal opportunity.<\/p>\n

– This amounts to indirect discrimination.<\/p>\n

– Lawyers and the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights suspect this is prohibited.<\/p>\n

– The Education Inspectorate does not intervene.<\/p>\n\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Candidates can choose from four answers: A) You offer to do the final edit and spend a lot of time improving the others\u2019 sections. B) You say nothing. You are all assessed individually for this assignment anyway. C) You discuss it with your fellow students and explain where you think it could be improved. D) You complain about it and make sure that next time you are placed in a group with other students.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Which answer does the programme want? With which answer do you become a better doctor in about seven years\u2019 time? Should future doctors be allowed to complain or not?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Admission<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Selection at the gate in higher education has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years. The Education Inspectorate has issued strong criticism: selection procedures lead to inequality of opportunity and the criteria are often poorly substantiated<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Medical degrees are also familiar with this criticism. Three of the eight programmes have now switched to lottery admission instead of selection. At the University of Groningen and the University of Amsterdam, applicants can enrol and it then comes down to luck whether they are allowed to start. At Radboud University Nijmegen, candidates must first read some information about the medical profession and the programme. Anyone who has done so may enter the lottery. Whether you are a student with average grades or top marks, everyone with the right subject combination has an equal chance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Utrecht University uses a hybrid model. There, the medical programme admits 238 first-year students via lottery \u2013 80 per cent of the total. The remaining 59 are selected on the basis of knowledge, motivation and a personality test (a so-called \u2018non-cognitive\u2019 test).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The other four programmes therefore do not use a lottery. All four test candidates\u2019 cognitive abilities, for example by offering study material and lectures on which candidates then sit an exam. Erasmus University Rotterdam stops there. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Maastricht University and Leiden University also aim (like Utrecht) to assess candidates\u2019 personality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perso<\/strong>nality<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

What are the selective programmes looking for? Vrije Universiteit wants to know what makes a candidate stand out: do you do voluntary work, play the violin well, build your own robot, or have a part-time job at a GP practice scheduling appointments? Delivering pizzas does not count, it explicitly states. A job as a team leader in a supermarket also does not help. On top of this comes a test of \u2018social insight\u2019, in other words a personality test. The multiple-choice question at the start of this article, about teamwork, comes from VU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maastricht also wants to know candidates\u2019 \u2018distinctive qualities\u2019. The Limburg programme not only wants to know whether candidates are sufficiently capable, but also whether they have \u2018adequate (inter)personal qualities\u2019. Maastricht does not, when asked, refer to it as a personality test, because: \u201cIn our view, there is no unambiguous answer to the question of what the ideal personality for a doctor is.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Utrecht, motivation plays a role in selection. The programme also wants prospective students to have an aptitude for competences \u2018relevant to the professional attitude of a future doctor\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, Leiden looks for students who are \u2018capable, caring and curious\u2019. In the first round, candidates take a \u2018study skills test\u2019, previously referred to as a personality test, which, according to the information provided, cannot be prepared for: \u201cIt is about who you are and how you respond to certain study situations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mapping character?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

But is it actually possible? Can the personality of 17-year-old pupils be measured through a test in such a way that you can say who will become a good doctor and who will not?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Leiden medical programme has little to say about it. \u201cMany candidates ask questions about the reliability of the personality test,\u201d reads a standard email sent to rejected applicants, seen by the HOP press agency. \u201cWe can be brief about this: it is reliably sound. It is not possible to give socially desirable answers or to present yourself as better than you are.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not everyone finds this convincing. Doctors and psychologists consulted on the matter raise their eyebrows when hearing about personality tests. They have immediate doubts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Handbook for selection in higher education<\/a>, referenced by<\/a> the association of universities UNL, is also not enthusiastic: \u201cThe reliability and validity of personality questionnaires is not favourable in the context of a selection procedure.\u201d Moreover, they may undermine the \u2018diversity of different types of students\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

History<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In the past, medicine used a weighted lottery system: higher exam grades gave you a better chance, but otherwise admission was a matter of luck. Later, pupils with an average grade of eight or higher were automatically admitted, but a national lottery still applied for the rest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That lottery sometimes felt unfair. Should motivation and aptitude not play a role? Who would you want at your bedside: someone who always wanted to become a doctor, or someone who simply happened to be selected by chance? It is also a waste if a weaker student drops out after a year, while a more suitable candidate never even gets the chance to start.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That is why programmes were given the opportunity to select students themselves. First this was allowed for half of all students (2000\/2001), later the lottery was abolished entirely and they had to select all prospective students (2017\/2018). They were, in principle, free to decide how, as long as they used at least two criteria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pudding<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

But can you meaningfully select on personality? Klaas Visser doubts it. He was for many years an expert on study success at the Faculty of Psychology of the University of Amsterdam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t'The prospective student only thinks one thing: what do they want to hear?'\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n

As an external expert, Visser once commented on a personality test used by Vrije Universiteit. It included a question about a (fictional) lecturer who says something unpleasant to students: how would you respond? Visser: \u201cThe \u2018correct\u2019 answer sounded socially appropriate, but there was also an answer that was quite assertive. At the time, VU advertised that it wanted to recruit assertive students, but the test designer apparently felt they should not be too assertive. I said: this is all pudding.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Visser considers such selection tests a waste of time and money, he says. And you do not get honest answers. \u201cThe prospective student is not thinking: this is what I would do. They are thinking only one thing: what do they want to hear from me?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He is not only critical of personality tests, but also of knowledge and reasoning tests. The main problem is that you can prepare for them, he says. And some candidates therefore have a greater chance than others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

People from more privileged backgrounds, in his view, always have an advantage. \u201cA colleague professor once told me that he and his wife, who is also a professor, drilled their granddaughter for a week to prepare her for such a selection test. Then I thought: not everyone has grandparents who know this material inside out.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do you end up with better doctors? Visser thinks not: \u201cYou select a lot of high achievers, people who try extremely hard to get in. I have heard doctors say this leads to students who are more prone to burnout. Do we want that? Shouldn\u2019t we have a more diverse population? And that is not only about background, but also about interests. Imagine if all medical students wanted to become paediatricians, while we actually need more geriatric specialists.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Visser: \u201cI once went to the Ministry of Education and gave a passionate plea that they should at least ask these programmes: what is your method based on?\u201d But institutions are not required to account for this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

Een lijst met artikelen<\/h2>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t