Law School Discussion

Specific Groups => Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students => Topic started by: Jennaye on February 03, 2005, 09:00:56 PM

Title: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 03, 2005, 09:00:56 PM
So I've been looking over the GPA/LSAT charts of applicants/acceptances (for Berkeley and UCLA, specifically) and despite my crappy LSAT score (160), some people in my LSAT/GPA range (3.84 GPA) and even those below my LSAT range were in fact accepted to each school.  (about 15% with my stats, in fact).

Are those who were accepted all URMs?

Why would they accept people with lower LSAT scores while rejecting people with 170+?  I'd like to think it's because they've got outstanding recommendations, extracurriculars, and academic honors (like I do) but I'm still not holding out hope.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Infoolio on February 03, 2005, 09:39:08 PM
So I've been looking over the GPA/LSAT charts of applicants/acceptances (for Berkeley and UCLA, specifically) and despite my crappy LSAT score (160), some people in my LSAT/GPA range (3.84 GPA) and even those below my LSAT range were in fact accepted to each school.  (about 15% with my stats, in fact).

Are those who were accepted all URMs?

Why would they accept people with lower LSAT scores while rejecting people with 170+?  I'd like to think it's because they've got outstanding recommendations, extracurriculars, and academic honors (like I do) but I'm still not holding out hope.

Because schools have another hundred non-URM applicants with the same numbers (diversity is important to all schools)

As for rejecting people with 170+, what were the other factors? Berkeley for one likes to be diverse, and you'll see they don't have an autoadmit range like others do. A lot of them (including being URM) DO have outstanding EC/LOR/WE history, like working in the field where a lot of 170+ are rich kids straight out of a parents-paid-for Ivy undergrad.

I'd say you have a decent shot at either of those schools. Both like GPA a lot and are willing to forgive LSAT to an extent.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 03, 2005, 09:53:15 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Infoolio on February 03, 2005, 09:56:43 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.

It's easy to think of it that way, though incorrect. When you look at the fact that you are clumped with a hundred other non-URMs with the same numbers, extra curriculars, letters of recommendation, work experience, et cetera, and the admit is given to the URM it's rather unfair to say they 'stole' your spot.  Odds are heavily against you getting the spot anyway, since you'd probably lose it to a non-URM.

2c
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 03, 2005, 09:58:57 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.

It's easy to think of it that way, though incorrect. When you look at the fact that you are clumped with a hundred other non-URMs with the same numbers, extra curriculars, letters of recommendation, work experience, et cetera, and the admit is given to the URM it's rather unfair to say they 'stole' your spot.  Odds are heavily against you getting the spot anyway, since you'd probably lose it to a non-URM.


I never said that a URM 'stole' my spot.  I just said that I wish my mom'd married a Mexican.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Javert on February 03, 2005, 10:00:39 PM
Quote
(for Berkeley and UCLA, specifically)

Jenny-- For UCLA and Boalt it's a moot point. By law, they don't use race-based AA in any case. As a rough proxy, they use socio-economic disadvantage-based AA. [And mods: How about moving this to the AA board? We all know where this thread is headed......]
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: TLFKARG on February 03, 2005, 10:02:04 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.

It's easy to think of it that way, though incorrect. When you look at the fact that you are clumped with a hundred other non-URMs with the same numbers, extra curriculars, letters of recommendation, work experience, et cetera, and the admit is given to the URM it's rather unfair to say they 'stole' your spot.  Odds are heavily against you getting the spot anyway, since you'd probably lose it to a non-URM.


I never said that a URM 'stole' my spot.  I just said that I wish my mom'd married a Mexican.

As a non-URM who got into Boalt with a sub-160 LSAT, allow me to advise that this sort of mentality will not help your admissions chances.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 03, 2005, 10:02:57 PM
Quote
(for Berkeley and UCLA, specifically)

Jenny-- For UCLA and Boalt it's a moot point. By law, they don't use race-based AA in any case. As a rough proxy, they use socio-economic disadvantage-based AA. [And mods: How about moving this to the AA board? We all know where this thread is headed......]

Javert,

Are UC Davis and Hastings like this as well?  I am not too up to date on my California schools I guess.

BTW, I never had the chance to congratualte you, but you've got some awesome choices there!  Congrats!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: wildcataz2004 on February 03, 2005, 10:04:47 PM
So I've been looking over the GPA/LSAT charts of applicants/acceptances (for Berkeley and UCLA, specifically) and despite my crappy LSAT score (160), some people in my LSAT/GPA range (3.84 GPA) and even those below my LSAT range were in fact accepted to each school.  (about 15% with my stats, in fact).

Are those who were accepted all URMs?

Why would they accept people with lower LSAT scores while rejecting people with 170+?  I'd like to think it's because they've got outstanding recommendations, extracurriculars, and academic honors (like I do) but I'm still not holding out hope.


How ignorant
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whiteytighty on February 03, 2005, 10:07:05 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.


Instead of just screwing the gardener when Dad's out of town?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: TLFKARG on February 03, 2005, 10:07:13 PM
Quote
(for Berkeley and UCLA, specifically)

Jenny-- For UCLA and Boalt it's a moot point. By law, they don't use race-based AA in any case. As a rough proxy, they use socio-economic disadvantage-based AA. [And mods: How about moving this to the AA board? We all know where this thread is headed......]

Javert,

Are UC Davis and Hastings like this as well?  I am not too up to date on my California schools I guess.

BTW, I never had the chance to congratualte you, but you've got some awesome choices there!  Congrats!

All the UC system schools are bound by the Prop 209 prohibition of race-based admissions policies.  However, Hastings has been most successful in skirting that requirement with the LEOP program.  As Javert pointed out, at least on paper, they focus on socio-economic disadvantage, which nets them a healthy number of the URM's they wouldn't be able to admit strictly based on race/ethnicity.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: NYKnicks on February 03, 2005, 10:09:12 PM
A "low" score is a "URM" in itself if it is out of the school's normal range.

Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.

No you don't.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Infoolio on February 03, 2005, 10:13:19 PM
Moderator please move topic!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 03, 2005, 10:19:39 PM
All the UC system schools are bound by the Prop 209 prohibition of race-based admissions policies.  However, Hastings has been most successful in skirting that requirement with the LEOP program.  As Javert pointed out, at least on paper, they focus on socio-economic disadvantage, which nets them a healthy number of the URM's they wouldn't be able to admit strictly based on race/ethnicity.

Very helpful, as usual Ruskie.  Thanks!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 03, 2005, 10:29:13 PM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: TLFKARG on February 03, 2005, 10:31:43 PM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?

Perhaps my life experience, perhaps my unique cultural perspective...but who really knows?  I am not going to presume that the admission committee values the same things that I may value.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: TUNA on February 03, 2005, 10:36:30 PM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?

Perhaps my life experience, perhaps my unique cultural perspective...but who really knows?  I am not going to presume that the admission committee values the same things that I may value.

Spare the BS. It's because you're a URM (Russian immigrant). This is obvious to everyone except you.

FLAME ON ROOSKIE! YELL YELL YELL AT ME BECAUSE TUNA DOESNT CARE
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 03, 2005, 10:41:48 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.


Instead of just screwing the gardener when Dad's out of town?

I wish.. then I'd at least have a hermano or hermana menor
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: TLFKARG on February 03, 2005, 10:45:01 PM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?

Perhaps my life experience, perhaps my unique cultural perspective...but who really knows?  I am not going to presume that the admission committee values the same things that I may value.

Spare the BS. It's because you're a URM (Russian immigrant). This is obvious to everyone except you.

FLAME ON ROOSKIE! YELL YELL YELL AT ME BECAUSE TUNA DOESNT CARE

I could be wrong, but it appears that in this instance it is you who is flaming.  HTH.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: 'lit on February 03, 2005, 10:55:38 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.


Instead of just screwing the gardener when Dad's out of town?

ahahahaha
i can see the personal statement now-- "i was raised white, but i don't much resemble my dad. the truth is i'm pretty sure my mom was having a thing with the poolboy. one of my first memories is daddy storming out of the house and throwing his gin and tonic at jose and telling him to take his pool-net and chlorine kit and his speedo and never set foot on our estate again. mum has a couple of pictures of jose, though, and when i ask how come i have dark hair she says something about my grandmother but she gets really PO'd when i press her with more questions. that's why i checked URM on my application."
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ScurvyWench on February 03, 2005, 11:00:46 PM
OP, I got rejected at UC Hastings yesterday. That should make you feel better. The world is still in tact and a low LSAT is still a low LSAT. Enjoy.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 08:13:54 AM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.


Instead of just screwing the gardener when Dad's out of town?

ahahahaha
i can see the personal statement now-- "i was raised white, but i don't much resemble my dad. the truth is i'm pretty sure my mom was having a thing with the poolboy. one of my first memories is daddy storming out of the house and throwing his gin and tonic at jose and telling him to take his pool-net and chlorine kit and his speedo and never set foot on our estate again. mum has a couple of pictures of jose, though, and when i ask how come i have dark hair she says something about my grandmother but she gets really PO'd when i press her with more questions. that's why i checked URM on my application."

LOL :)
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: puma on February 04, 2005, 08:30:00 AM
---> Non-URM. 

I know, IUB and Tulane aren't exactly Stanford, but for me it was really sweet getting those letters.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 08:49:16 AM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?

The "wish my mom had married a Mexican" comment was quite uncalled for, but I think she has a valid point. What can a plain old white American from the middle/lower middle class do to get in with a lower LSAT/GPA? What kind of extracurriculars, etc. are necessary to make up for lower scores? I have noticed as well that most of the people getting into the top schools without the high scores are URM (not passing any judgment on whether this is right or wrong here). If there are non URMs who are getting in with those scores, I would like to know what it was that sets them apart and makes up for the lower numbers.

Ruskie, I know that you are white, but you aren't a regular white applicant, being from another country. That's not something a person can do for their application. You either have it or you don't.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 04, 2005, 09:47:15 AM
The "wish my mom had married a Mexican" comment was quite uncalled for, but I think she has a valid point. What can a plain old white American from the middle/lower middle class do to get in with a lower LSAT/GPA? What kind of extracurriculars, etc. are necessary to make up for lower scores? I have noticed as well that most of the people getting into the top schools without the high scores are URM (not passing any judgment on whether this is right or wrong here). If there are non URMs who are getting in with those scores, I would like to know what it was that sets them apart and makes up for the lower numbers.

Ruskie, I know that you are white, but you aren't a regular white applicant, being from another country. That's not something a person can do for their application. You either have it or you don't.

well said.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 09:57:29 AM
The "wish my mom had married a Mexican" comment was quite uncalled for, but I think she has a valid point. What can a plain old white American from the middle/lower middle class do to get in with a lower LSAT/GPA? What kind of extracurriculars, etc. are necessary to make up for lower scores? I have noticed as well that most of the people getting into the top schools without the high scores are URM (not passing any judgment on whether this is right or wrong here). If there are non URMs who are getting in with those scores, I would like to know what it was that sets them apart and makes up for the lower numbers.

Ruskie, I know that you are white, but you aren't a regular white applicant, being from another country. That's not something a person can do for their application. You either have it or you don't.

Being poor and writing a SES addendum helps, I feel, but again .. that's nothing that one can do. Include some interesting WE (PeaceCorps, for example, is said to really help) & lots of EC (stellar internships, activism, involvement/editor in journals). Master's may possibly help (here I'm thinking of Lexy), as does writing a spectacular/unique personal statement (also thinking of lexy here).
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 10:04:44 AM
I feel like the whole URM thing is blown out of porportion.  Honestly I think a school would be silly to admit any student with scores well out of their standard range, regardless of their background.  Those students might be totally fine and just test poorly, or they might not be able to keep up with the same rigors of the rest of their class.  The adcomms have to weigh that point with any applicant they accept below their own standards.  That being said, it is important to remember that people with different backgrounds do not have the same scores on average on a standardized test like the LSAT.  Both the SAT and the LSAT have been rightly criticized for not being more inclusive to these types of applicants.  Most people that write the tests are white males, so those are the people that score the best on the test, sometimes because of skill, sometimes because they generally have more access to study aids (like Kaplan, Princeton Review, etc. type courses or books). Considering that the average LSAT scores for some groups are lower, it does not seem unreasonable to have separate standards.  Are there people who are URMs, have lots of money, went to stellar schools and could afford test prep?  Of course there are.  Do these people deserve different standards?  Absolutely.  Would anyone be considering this profession if they didn't have someone who had already come before them to prove it was possible?  Think about how women felt when Sandra Day O'Connor became a Supreme Court Justice.  Think about how Hispanics feel about Gonzales as the head of the Justice Department.  We need role models for our children, people who can prove that you can be different and still succeed.  Until we can create a testing process that truly treats everyone equally, adcomms will have to adapt their standards depending on the applicants.  Besides, admitting students with diverse racial and socio-economic backgrounds leads to a richer discussion forum.  Who wants to go to law school where everyone looks the same and agrees?  How would you learn anything?  There would be no dynamic discussion.  URMs are vital to a legal community because they bring new ideas and perspectives sorely lacking in our current system.  Law schools must strive to correct the deficiencies of these qualified people or the legal system will continue to work against URMs.  Sometimes it's not just about needing to look PC, it's about actually trying to affect societal change. 

Ok enough out of me.  I'm sure I will get bumped or humped or flamed or just generally mocked, but I've said my piece and I'm sticking to it.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 10:08:58 AM
I feel like the whole URM thing is blown out of porportion.  Honestly I think a school would be silly to admit any student with scores well out of their standard range, regardless of their background.  Those students might be totally fine and just test poorly, or they might not be able to keep up with the same rigors of the rest of their class.  The adcomms have to weigh that point with any applicant they accept below their own standards.  That being said, it is important to remember that people with different backgrounds do not have the same scores on average on a standardized test like the LSAT.  Both the SAT and the LSAT have been rightly criticized for not being more inclusive to these types of applicants.  Most people that write the tests are white males, so those are the people that score the best on the test, sometimes because of skill, sometimes because they generally have more access to study aids (like Kaplan, Princeton Review, etc. type courses or books). Considering that the average LSAT scores for some groups are lower, it does not seem unreasonable to have separate standards.  Are there people who are URMs, have lots of money, went to stellar schools and could afford test prep?  Of course there are.  Do these people deserve different standards?  Absolutely.  Would anyone be considering this profession if they didn't have someone who had already come before them to prove it was possible?  Think about how women felt when Sandra Day O'Connor became a Supreme Court Justice.  Think about how Hispanics feel about Gonzales as the head of the Justice Department.  We need role models for our children, people who can prove that you can be different and still succeed.  Until we can create a testing process that truly treats everyone equally, adcomms will have to adapt their standards depending on the applicants.  Besides, admitting students with diverse racial and socio-economic backgrounds leads to a richer discussion forum.  Who wants to go to law school where everyone looks the same and agrees?  How would you learn anything?  There would be no dynamic discussion.  URMs are vital to a legal community because they bring new ideas and perspectives sorely lacking in our current system.  Law schools must strive to correct the deficiencies of these qualified people or the legal system will continue to work against URMs.  Sometimes it's not just about needing to look PC, it's about actually trying to affect societal change. 

Ok enough out of me.  I'm sure I will get bumped or humped or flamed or just generally mocked, but I've said my piece and I'm sticking to it.

OK, but that's not what we're talking about here. You can't deny that it's easier for an URM with lower scores to get in than a nonURM with lower scores. That's the way it is. Whether that's right or wrong is another thread (and entire topic).

What I'm wanting to know is how to compensate for having an average background/race (which is not something a person can help). It seems that ECs are the only way to go if you're coming straight out of undergrad, or having some really interesting WE if you're not. I admit I'm a bit hazy on the whole PS as well because I don't really understand what they're looking for. I'm not sure that having a stellar essay will make up for not having a 175/3.9/being poor/being URM.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 10:17:52 AM
I think it's a very school specific thing (improving your application)  some schools seem to really put a lot of stock in the personal statement (as evidenced by notes people are getting in their acceptance letters) while others have complicated formulas based on UGPA and LSAT.  I don't think there's any one factor, although I have heard from several adcomms that community service is a big plus.  I mean if you're very committed to helping others, that could certainly help, perhaps more than other ECs.  I don't think it matters particularly what type of community service, but that in general seems to be a bonus to most adcomms.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 10:33:34 AM
I'm not offended, I just think it's almost fruitless to try to make yourself "more diverse" about all you can manage is to have interesting experiences and try to highlight them in a PS or on your resume.  Like if you lived or worked abroad, did signficant volunteer work or worked with at an interesting place.  Some adcomms like diversity in undergrad majors so that's something if you're not otherwise "diverse"  I mean you dont have to be "diverse" to bring different perspectives.  Maybe geographic diversity can help, some smaller schools might not get many applicants from some parts of the country, that could help your application as well.  Unfortunately, almost none of these things can be like "quick fixes" if you're already applying to school.  At that point, I'm not sure what else you can do.  Stellar LORs?  Persistnet communication with adcomms?  Amazing PS?  If you are concerned about not "standing out" with your scores, you've got to start early to improve other things, like adding community involvement, travel or off the wall crazy weird/good thing to write your PS about.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 10:46:09 AM
Thanks guys, for the good discussion and realization (for most of you) that this post wasn't supposed to be a debate on AA.  Amarain hit the nail on the head.  

Based on pure numbers, I would have a 15% chance or so of getting accepted to UC-Berkeley or UCLA (my top choices).  but the numbers don't tell everything, and I'm wondering if my chances are better or worse than 15%, i.e. were the people who were admitted with my numbers mostly URMs (which I'm not) or were they applicants with great LORs, extracurriculars, political activism, etc., which would give me hope.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 10:49:19 AM
At that point, I'm not sure what else you can do.  Stellar LORs?  Persistnet communication with adcomms?  Amazing PS?  If you are concerned about not "standing out" with your scores, you've got to start early to improve other things, like adding community involvement, travel or off the wall crazy weird/good thing to write your PS about.

To go off on a tangent... what's this about persistent communication with adcomms?  In all the correspondence I've recieved from schools, they make it sound like I'll be shot on site if I contact the admissions office for a non-urgent matter.  What could I do to call?  I'm really trying to get into Berkeley, because I applied to their joint JD/PhD in Jurisprudence and Social Policy program (which I'm pretty sure I'll get into, got LORs from profs with personal friends over there), and think it'd be perfect for me.   Do people call just to chat with adcomms?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: vkschicago on February 04, 2005, 10:49:35 AM
bump
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 04, 2005, 10:51:44 AM
you're the only one here complaining and talking about blaming others.  dont denigrate this thread ok?

I have an idea. Rather than complaining that your low score is more disfavorable than another person's low score, why not just get a higher score?  ???

It's a test of your reading speed of comprehension and logical acuity. Both of these things are learnable and in your control. Unlike your and the rest of the applicant pool's genetics or upbringing--and once you're out of school your GPA and those ECs are basically in cement, too.

I just don't have a lot of sympathy for people who blame other applicants' backgrounds for weaknesses in their own applications. You should be focused on becoming the best applicant you can be in all respects and forget about the things you can't influence.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 10:52:36 AM
Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.

Especially if you, as a white Anglo, are straight out of undergrad.

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: underwhelm on February 04, 2005, 10:59:52 AM
Forgive me, I'm feeling cranky.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 11:14:59 AM
bump

sorry you're right; i did.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: WoeIsMe on February 04, 2005, 11:40:14 AM
yea, i agree... consideration of race as part of SES is a point most people would be fine with.  'Race-based admission' regardless of background is what people object to.  The former is objective, the latter is ridiculous.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 11:42:09 AM
Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.

Especially if you, as a white Anglo, are straight out of undergrad.
You don't have to write about being an URM to get that advantage, although it certainly helps. You also don't have to be bilingual or bicultural (?) to be an URM. And no one said anything about being passed up for an URM. Get off your defensiveness. All that was said was that it is easier for a URM with lower scores than a non-URM with lower scores. Not that all URMs with lower scores get in, not that no non-URM with lower scores don't. Calm down.

What exactly is "cultural capital" anyway?

At any rate, I think there have been some good suggestions here. It seems that you have to just make yourself 'diverse' if you didn't happen to be born that way. So, take an unusual job after undergrad, do lots of ECs, find something unique to write your PS about (much easier said than done!).
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: A.J on February 04, 2005, 11:47:09 AM
Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.

Especially if you, as a white Anglo, are straight out of undergrad.



wha?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: mivida2k on February 04, 2005, 11:49:50 AM
I feel like the whole URM thing is blown out of porportion.  Honestly I think a school would be silly to admit any student with scores well out of their standard range, regardless of their background.  Those students might be totally fine and just test poorly, or they might not be able to keep up with the same rigors of the rest of their class.  The adcomms have to weigh that point with any applicant they accept below their own standards.  That being said, it is important to remember that people with different backgrounds do not have the same scores on average on a standardized test like the LSAT.  Both the SAT and the LSAT have been rightly criticized for not being more inclusive to these types of applicants.  Most people that write the tests are white males, so those are the people that score the best on the test, sometimes because of skill, sometimes because they generally have more access to study aids (like Kaplan, Princeton Review, etc. type courses or books). Considering that the average LSAT scores for some groups are lower, it does not seem unreasonable to have separate standards.  Are there people who are URMs, have lots of money, went to stellar schools and could afford test prep?  Of course there are.  Do these people deserve different standards?  Absolutely.  Would anyone be considering this profession if they didn't have someone who had already come before them to prove it was possible?  Think about how women felt when Sandra Day O'Connor became a Supreme Court Justice.  Think about how Hispanics feel about Gonzales as the head of the Justice Department.  We need role models for our children, people who can prove that you can be different and still succeed.  Until we can create a testing process that truly treats everyone equally, adcomms will have to adapt their standards depending on the applicants.  Besides, admitting students with diverse racial and socio-economic backgrounds leads to a richer discussion forum.  Who wants to go to law school where everyone looks the same and agrees?  How would you learn anything?  There would be no dynamic discussion.  URMs are vital to a legal community because they bring new ideas and perspectives sorely lacking in our current system.  Law schools must strive to correct the deficiencies of these qualified people or the legal system will continue to work against URMs.  Sometimes it's not just about needing to look PC, it's about actually trying to affect societal change. 

Ok enough out of me.  I'm sure I will get bumped or humped or flamed or just generally mocked, but I've said my piece and I'm sticking to it.

OK, but that's not what we're talking about here. You can't deny that it's easier for an URM with lower scores to get in than a nonURM with lower scores. That's the way it is. Whether that's right or wrong is another thread (and entire topic).

What I'm wanting to know is how to compensate for having an average background/race (which is not something a person can help). It seems that ECs are the only way to go if you're coming straight out of undergrad, or having some really interesting WE if you're not. I admit I'm a bit hazy on the whole PS as well because I don't really understand what they're looking for. I'm not sure that having a stellar essay will make up for not having a 175/3.9/being poor/being URM.


Not it is not.  The rate is higher for whites with low scores.  Before you speak do your research.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: txgirl on February 04, 2005, 11:50:29 AM
Quote
What I'm wanting to know is how to compensate for having an average background/race (which is not something a person can help). It seems that ECs are the only way to go if you're coming straight out of undergrad, or having some really interesting WE if you're not. I admit I'm a bit hazy on the whole PS as well because I don't really understand what they're looking for.

I don't think you have to be an URM or have some sob story in order to convince adcomms that you are unique and can add diversity to the class.  Think about your life experiences.  We've all had our own challenges to overcome, they may not be as dramatic as some people's but that doesn't make it less important.  If an event had an impact on you, write about it.  Write about something that will show adcomms who you are and where you are coming from.  Don't worry about what other people are doing so much.  Sitting here wishing you had some kind of disadvantage is a waste of time.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: A.J on February 04, 2005, 11:51:47 AM



Not it is not. The rate is higher for whites with low scores. Before you speak do your research.

Would you mind presenting your research?  I'd actually like to know if this is in fact a myth.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 11:55:35 AM



Not it is not. The rate is higher for whites with low scores. Before you speak do your research.

Would you mind presenting your research?  I'd actually like to know if this is in fact a myth.

Yes, I would like to know this too. I'm going on what I see on LSN, for example. I know that's not a representative sample, but it does show a particular trend. However, if you can show me data that contradicts this, I will reconsider.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Chitown Man on February 04, 2005, 11:56:11 AM
Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.

Especially if you, as a white Anglo, are straight out of undergrad.



I'm not supporting or denying what you say in this post.  But it is obvious that you do not know the meaning/definition of cultural capital.  If you do not correct your misuse of this term, it will be impossible to decipher precisely what your point is.     
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: WoeIsMe on February 04, 2005, 11:57:10 AM
very likely the source of the problem is not URMs, or the admissions offices, but the legal profession.  Because the profession are prestige whores, mainly recruit from the top schools or top 10% of lower schools, the number of available prestige-driven law jobs is very limited.  Look at the selectivity for reasonable firms, federal clerkships, and professorships... from this perspective, the numbers on the exit side are very small.  Those URMs getting in tier1 25+, tier 2,3 schools probably have no advantage as non-URMs.. they're all equally screwed, so it makes sense to really concetrate on the top 25 schools where the graduates will gain meaningful employment... the total number of all candidates at the 3+ std deviation level are already small and statistically the probability of finding a meaningful numbers of a small subset is even smaller... that's why the numbers of some URM getting in top schools seem so out of whack.

someone did bring up an interesting point about the lsat favoring some groups over others.  I'm not alleging the lsat is racist, however it is good to note the metric used to judge the questions are the average of the entire population which mainly consists of white majority.  maybe they should intoduce something objective like math, so i'll quit bitching on the AA threads.  as a tangential point it seems like a computer-adaptive test would exacerbate this problem even more.

ok, i was suppose to stay off this board until the feb-lsat, so i better end it here.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whiteytighty on February 04, 2005, 11:57:45 AM

What exactly is "cultural capital" anyway?



It's just another way of honoring diversity at an institution of higher learning.

You ensure that kind of diversity by hiring:

a queer latina marxist

a disabled marxist

an Israel-denouncing jewish marxist

an african american marxist

a transgendered marxist

a curious-bi mr. sensitive white guy marxist

an asian-p-a marxist

It's actually pretty easy to make certain that a rainbow of heritages are honored at your institution.  As long as the faculty is similarly diverse, the students will fall in line, and you can see the results of that 'education' right here on LSD.

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 11:58:02 AM
Quote
What I'm wanting to know is how to compensate for having an average background/race (which is not something a person can help). It seems that ECs are the only way to go if you're coming straight out of undergrad, or having some really interesting WE if you're not. I admit I'm a bit hazy on the whole PS as well because I don't really understand what they're looking for.

I don't think you have to be an URM or have some sob story in order to convince adcomms that you are unique and can add diversity to the class.  Think about your life experiences.  We've all had our own challenges to overcome, they may not be as dramatic as some people's but that doesn't make it less important.  If an event had an impact on you, write about it.  Write about something that will show adcomms who you are and where you are coming from.  Don't worry about what other people are doing so much.  Sitting here wishing you had some kind of disadvantage is a waste of time.

I don't think anyone is sitting around wishing they had a disadvantage (wishing they had an advantage may be another story, though, and whether or not being an URM is a disadvantage is an entirely different subject).

Unfortunately, if you're going through a very competitive process, you have to worry about what other people are doing.

The other thing I wonder is, do you have to have overcome a challenge in order to get in, or to do well in law school? Isn't there anything else to write a personal statement about?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: vkschicago on February 04, 2005, 11:58:49 AM
I don't think you have to be an URM or have some sob story in order to convince adcomms that you are unique and can add diversity to the class.  Think about your life experiences.  We've all had our own challenges to overcome, they may not be as dramatic as some people's but that doesn't make it less important.  If an event had an impact on you, write about it.  Write about something that will show adcomms who you are and where you are coming from.  Don't worry about what other people are doing so much.  Sitting here wishing you had some kind of disadvantage is a waste of time.
Quote

In my personal statement, I wrote about what it was like to be an American living in an Arab/Iraq neighborhood of London during pre-war political pressures (i.e. Fall 2002) and how this changed my previously somewhat sheltured outlook (i.e. average white small town background).  Was this a poor idea perhaps? (maybe wrong thread for this post. sorry guys)

This was to explain my interest in international law
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: txgirl on February 04, 2005, 12:05:44 PM
Quote
I don't think anyone is sitting around wishing they had a disadvantage (wishing they had an advantage may be another story, though, and whether or not being an URM is a disadvantage is an entirely different subject).

I didn't mean a disadvantage in applying, but in life.

Quote
Unfortunately, if you're going through a very competitive process, you have to worry about what other people are doing.


What does worrying about it do for you?  Give you stress.  You can be a competitive applicant, and a happier one, if you focused on showcasing yourself instead of thinking how others are faring.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 12:07:09 PM
Quote
I don't think anyone is sitting around wishing they had a disadvantage (wishing they had an advantage may be another story, though, and whether or not being an URM is a disadvantage is an entirely different subject).
I didn't mean a disadvantage in applying, but in life.

I know, I was referring to both. Nobody wishes they had a disadvantage in life, but no one is going to pass up an advantage in the admissions process either.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Chitown Man on February 04, 2005, 12:12:45 PM

What exactly is "cultural capital" anyway?



It's just another way of honoring diversity at an institution of higher learning.

You ensure that kind of diversity by hiring:

a queer latina marxist

a disabled marxist

an Israel-denouncing jewish marxist

an african american marxist

a transgendered marxist

a curious-bi mr. sensitive white guy marxist

an asian-p-a marxist

It's actually pretty easy to make certain that a rainbow of heritages are honored at your institution.  As long as the faculty is similarly diverse, the students will fall in line, and you can see the results of that 'education' right here on LSD.



Cultural capital is not 'just another way of honoring diversity...' The term 'cultural capital' is a social phenomenon that has been researched and written about by a broad range of economists, philosophers, sociologists, political scientists, etc.  There is a wealth of knowledge about this topic and describing it in such an overly-simplistic and superficial way like the above poster did fails to do the concept justice. 
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: blk_reign on February 04, 2005, 12:16:23 PM
I agree with txgirl. How about we stop worrying about what adcomms are doing to judge people other than ourselves? Just get accepted to the school that you desire to go to. If you thought that it was a long shot to get accepted then you shouldn't have applied...Simple.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: TLFKARG on February 04, 2005, 12:17:07 PM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?

The "wish my mom had married a Mexican" comment was quite uncalled for, but I think she has a valid point. What can a plain old white American from the middle/lower middle class do to get in with a lower LSAT/GPA? What kind of extracurriculars, etc. are necessary to make up for lower scores? I have noticed as well that most of the people getting into the top schools without the high scores are URM (not passing any judgment on whether this is right or wrong here). If there are non URMs who are getting in with those scores, I would like to know what it was that sets them apart and makes up for the lower numbers.

Ruskie, I know that you are white, but you aren't a regular white applicant, being from another country. That's not something a person can do for their application. You either have it or you don't.

Perhaps my particular admission is attributable to my status as an immigrant.  However, it ought to be noted that plenty of other immigrants with lower LSAT scores are rejected each year, while many white Americans are admitted.  Clearly, being one of the other will neither make you an auto-admit nor will send you directly to the rejection pile; the applicant must have more than just a national heritage to offer.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 12:21:03 PM
Perhaps my particular admission is attributable to my status as an immigrant.  However, it ought to be noted that plenty of other immigrants with lower LSAT scores are rejected each year, while many white Americans are admitted.  Clearly, being one of the other will neither make you an auto-admit nor will send you directly to the rejection pile; the applicant must have more than just a national heritage to offer.

Right. As I said before, no one is saying that your particular status, either as an URM or as an immigrant or as SES is necessarily going to get you in, or that not having it will necessarily keep you out. It's just that having that makes it easier to get in (how much easier is of course debatable), and if you don't have that particular thing, you definitely need something else that's just as good.

I'm still waiting for mivida to offer some evidence as to what was discussed earlier.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Perversely on February 04, 2005, 12:25:49 PM
Thanks for the info all; this wasn't intended to be a question about/attack on AA; I was just curious what people thought were the reasons why people with scores similar to mine would be offered admission.  My best guess was that they're URMs.  But I think that's just my pessimism setting in...

Ruskie girl.. what do you think set your application apart from the rest?

Perhaps my life experience, perhaps my unique cultural perspective...but who really knows?  I am not going to presume that the admission committee values the same things that I may value.

Spare the BS. It's because you're a URM (Russian immigrant). This is obvious to everyone except you.

FLAME ON ROOSKIE! YELL YELL YELL AT ME BECAUSE TUNA DOESNT CARE

i can see you burning the crosses.  it's people like you that fuels neo naxi behavior.  believe me, i understand you have a right to feel the way that you do, but understand this:  time is working against you & all those that think the way you do.  

i'm proud to be an American.  this is a melting pot and possibilities and dreams come true here.  too bad if you think it's "going all to the underdeserving"...you wouldn't be in position you're in life if America wasn't what is today.

Good luck Tuna, you're going to need it.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: 'lit on February 04, 2005, 12:26:18 PM
Based on pure numbers, I would have a 15% chance or so of getting accepted to UC-Berkeley or UCLA (my top choices).  but the numbers don't tell everything, and I'm wondering if my chances are better or worse than 15%, i.e. were the people who were admitted with my numbers mostly URMs (which I'm not) or were they applicants with great LORs, extracurriculars, political activism, etc., which would give me hope.

UCLA gives you space on the application to write very specifically about one field, class, journal, or activity in which you hope to participate shuold you gain acceptance. i think any applicant would be foolish not to use that field and try to add something not covered in your PS. i attached a paragraph or two answering the question seriously, which might be why i was so quickly accepted there (one of the first on LSN, i think)
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 12:26:45 PM
Tuna is just a troll, ignore him.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: 'lit on February 04, 2005, 12:42:24 PM
The other thing I wonder is, do you have to have overcome a challenge in order to get in, or to do well in law school? Isn't there anything else to write a personal statement about?

i didn't have any hardships or challenges to write about, if that helps. haven't had too tough a time.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 12:45:27 PM
The other thing I wonder is, do you have to have overcome a challenge in order to get in, or to do well in law school? Isn't there anything else to write a personal statement about?

i didn't have any hardships or challenges to write about, if that helps. haven't had too tough a time.

Do you mind telling what your PS was about? I know it's been talked about on here before.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 12:45:37 PM
UCLA gives you space on the application to write very specifically about one field, class, journal, or activity in which you hope to participate shuold you gain acceptance. i think any applicant would be foolish not to use that field and try to add something not covered in your PS. i attached a paragraph or two answering the question seriously, which might be why i was so quickly accepted there (one of the first on LSN, i think)

UM, was I stoned when I filled out that app, or did my application NOT have a section like that?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: 'lit on February 04, 2005, 01:02:35 PM
UM, was I stoned when I filled out that app, or did my application NOT have a section like that?

i coudl be confusing with usc, but i don't think so. anyone remember? they only gave 3-5 lines to fill in, so it would have been up to us to add more

(i mentioned elsewhere writing a long optional essay for cornell, and other people didn't remember seeing it-- maybe b/c they also only provided a couple of lines on the app)
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whiteytighty on February 04, 2005, 01:13:11 PM

What exactly is "cultural capital" anyway?



It's just another way of honoring diversity at an institution of higher learning.

You ensure that kind of diversity by hiring:

a queer latina marxist

a disabled marxist

an Israel-denouncing jewish marxist

an african american marxist

a transgendered marxist

a curious-bi mr. sensitive white guy marxist

an asian-p-a marxist

It's actually pretty easy to make certain that a rainbow of heritages are honored at your institution.  As long as the faculty is similarly diverse, the students will fall in line, and you can see the results of that 'education' right here on LSD.



Cultural capital is not 'just another way of honoring diversity...' The term 'cultural capital' is a social phenomenon that has been researched and written about by a broad range of economists, philosophers, sociologists, political scientists, etc.  There is a wealth of knowledge about this topic and describing it in such an overly-simplistic and superficial way like the above poster did fails to do the concept justice. 

Appeal to authority?  Bravo!

Actually, my pious friend, I am quite certain that armies of marxist economists, philosophers, et al. have come up with any number of crackpot 'intellectual' schemes to justify their laughable yet pernicious social engineering, of which race preferences are the only the most visible example.  Others include the idea that the reason there are far fewer women in the hard sciences is entirely due to social construction, or that little boys should be discouraged from playing with violent toys.

It all comes down to yet another project in the never-ending struggle to fortify the academic left's endless moral vanity, with little serious thought for what effect it has on the purported beneficiaries.  

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Regal_Muse on February 04, 2005, 01:20:40 PM
I'M BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AND I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Carry on Trolls!  ;D
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 01:26:19 PM
You are also WAY smart, you have incredible stats!  Congratulations! What the hell was Penn thinking?  They seem to be waitlisting the most qualified people....sorry about the way this thread has denegrated into a discussion of race (partially my own fault admittedly) but I don't think everyone on here is trolling, most are just frustrated not to have stats like yours. I will admit I'm way jealous of your 173  :)
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 01:26:58 PM
I'M BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AND I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Carry on Trolls!  ;D

That was definitely a helpful addition to this thread. As was the preceding equally pointless attack on academia.

can we please just discuss the topic?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 04, 2005, 01:32:14 PM
I'M BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AND I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Carry on Trolls!  ;D

pathetic.  this is the second or third time someone has tried to debase the entire discussion by acting as if everyone discussing how to help a non-urm with non-outstanding #'s stand out is trying to attack urm's or bash AA when none of that is being discussed.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: mivida2k on February 04, 2005, 01:34:19 PM



Not it is not. The rate is higher for whites with low scores. Before you speak do your research.

Would you mind presenting your research?  I'd actually like to know if this is in fact a myth.

Yes, I would like to know this too. I'm going on what I see on LSN, for example. I know that's not a representative sample, but it does show a particular trend. However, if you can show me data that contradicts this, I will reconsider.

What trends have you found in LSN that have led you to this conclusion.  If you check out the BLSD you will notice that everyone has high GPAs and LSAT scores.  
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 04, 2005, 01:39:35 PM
What trends have you found in LSN that have led you to this conclusion.  If you check out the BLSD you will notice that everyone has high GPAs and LSAT scores. 

is that supposed to be your research for where you came to the conclusion below?  if not, just tell us where your research is, we'd love to see it (i mean that, not sarcastically).

Not it is not.  The rate is higher for whites with low scores.  Before you speak do your research.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 01:40:16 PM



Not it is not. The rate is higher for whites with low scores. Before you speak do your research.

Would you mind presenting your research?  I'd actually like to know if this is in fact a myth.

Yes, I would like to know this too. I'm going on what I see on LSN, for example. I know that's not a representative sample, but it does show a particular trend. However, if you can show me data that contradicts this, I will reconsider.

What trends have you found in LSN that have led you to this conclusion.  If you check out the BLSD you will notice that everyone has high GPAs and LSAT scores.  

What I have found is that if you take a school (I am thinking right now of NYU), then have it list by descending LSAT scores, for example, when you get to the low end of the range - say, 165 and under - every single person who has been accepted with a 165 or less is an URM. I'm not saying that this is a scientific method, just a trend that I noticed. As I said, if you have data to contradict this, I would be very interested in seeing it.

I don't see what the LSAT/GPAs of the students on the BLSD have to do with this. ???
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 04, 2005, 01:45:49 PM
also, it certainly doesnt show for any and every school, but someone posted a study on the schools in virginia, showing acceptance rate for URM's and non-urms with lower gpa's and lsat scores.  also another item someone posted regarding the #'s for urm's at michigan.

anyway, i think this really is not supposed to be the issue of this thread and if not for a bunch of people who always seem to attack anyone dsicussing any issue that has the statement "urm's gain admittance with lower scores" then this thread could be discussing something rather productive.  how to stand out with low #'s, outside if being a urm.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 01:47:01 PM
also, it certainly doesnt show for any and every school, but someone posted a study on the schools in virginia, showing acceptance rate for URM's and non-urms with lower gpa's and lsat scores.  also another item someone posted regarding the #'s for urm's at michigan.

anyway, i think this really is not supposed to be the issue of this thread and if not for a bunch of people who always seem to attack anyone dsicussing any issue that has the statement "urm's gain admittance with lower scores" then this thread could be discussing something rather productive.  how to stand out with low #'s, outside if being a urm.

Exactly, thank you.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Chitown Man on February 04, 2005, 01:48:06 PM

What exactly is "cultural capital" anyway?



It's just another way of honoring diversity at an institution of higher learning.

You ensure that kind of diversity by hiring:

a queer latina marxist

a disabled marxist

an Israel-denouncing jewish marxist

an african american marxist

a transgendered marxist

a curious-bi mr. sensitive white guy marxist

an asian-p-a marxist

It's actually pretty easy to make certain that a rainbow of heritages are honored at your institution.  As long as the faculty is similarly diverse, the students will fall in line, and you can see the results of that 'education' right here on LSD.



Cultural capital is not 'just another way of honoring diversity...' The term 'cultural capital' is a social phenomenon that has been researched and written about by a broad range of economists, philosophers, sociologists, political scientists, etc.  There is a wealth of knowledge about this topic and describing it in such an overly-simplistic and superficial way like the above poster did fails to do the concept justice. 

Appeal to authority?  Bravo!

Actually, my pious friend, I am quite certain that armies of marxist economists, philosophers, et al. have come up with any number of crackpot 'intellectual' schemes to justify their laughable yet pernicious social engineering, of which race preferences are the only the most visible example.  Others include the idea that the reason there are far fewer women in the hard sciences is entirely due to social construction, or that little boys should be discouraged from playing with violent toys.

It all comes down to yet another project in the never-ending struggle to fortify the academic left's endless moral vanity, with little serious thought for what effect it has on the purported beneficiaries.   



Yes, because all theorists of cultural capital are Marxists and none of them are 'right-wing.'  They all have a politically motivated agenda (which is always left-wing and Marxist) for which they construct their theories.  And theorists of social capital always support race and gender preferences.  Cultural capital is nothing more than a pernicious Marxist agenda in disguise.  Your attempt at debasing an entire social science concept truly illustrates your intellectual prowess and 'their' hidden attempt at social engineering.     

BTW, your use of crackpot certainly lends credence to your otherwise incoherent response to my post.  Your reckless style of argumentation will surely serve you well in law school and beyond. 

HTH
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: A.J on February 04, 2005, 01:51:39 PM


What trends have you found in LSN that have led you to this conclusion.  If you check out the BLSD you will notice that everyone has high GPAs and LSAT scores. 

Can you explain the relavence of this statement?  It seems as though you have taken this topic as an afront on the capacity for the URM to gain merit based entry. 

Also, do you have evidence to support the assertion that the rate of exceptance for whites with lower-than-normal numbers is greater then it is for a URM?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:05:30 PM
don't turn up your nose at me with your snooty lecture on the definition of 'cultural capital" you ignorant whitie. Nice try diverting the discussion from the REAL ISSUES: Like I was saying, just because you lack cultural capital and therefore would be a relatively boring addition to a law school class dynamic, doesn't mean you should poo-pooh the adcomms. In case you still don't get it, LS are looking for unique individuals who contribute culturally, in the broad meaning of the term, and hence the cultural capital they bring to the table is of the utmost value. Blacks and HIspanics as well as others do that to a higher degree than your usual run-of-the-mill Anglo whitie. They bring fresh perspectives, critical points of view to bear regarding traditional legal postures, and the all-important diversity factor.

Stop hating on URMs cause of your own inadquacies and boring profiles.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 02:07:16 PM
don't turn up your nose at me with your snooty lecture on the definition of 'cultural capital" you ignorant whitie. Nice try diverting the discussion from the REAL ISSUES: Like I was saying, just because you lack cultural capital and therefore would be a relatively boring addition to a law school class dynamic, doesn't mean you should poo-pooh the adcomms. In case you still don't get it, LS are looking for unique individuals who contribute culturally, in the broad meaning of the term, and hence the cultural capital they bring to the table is of the utmost value. Blacks and HIspanics as well as others do that to a higher degree than your usual run-of-the-mill Anglo whitie. They bring fresh perspectives, critical points of view to bear regarding traditional legal postures, and the all-important diversity factor.

Stop hating on URMs cause of your own inadquacies and boring profiles.


Defensive much?

No one was hating on URMs here. And I fail to see how your being Latino automatically means that you are a better addition to a law school class than someone who's white. Not all white people think the same, ya know.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 04, 2005, 02:10:23 PM
don't turn up your nose at me with your snooty lecture on the definition of 'cultural capital" you ignorant whitie. Nice try diverting the discussion from the REAL ISSUES: Like I was saying, just because you lack cultural capital and therefore would be a relatively boring addition to a law school class dynamic, doesn't mean you should poo-pooh the adcomms. In case you still don't get it, LS are looking for unique individuals who contribute culturally, in the broad meaning of the term, and hence the cultural capital they bring to the table is of the utmost value. Blacks and HIspanics as well as others do that to a higher degree than your usual run-of-the-mill Anglo whitie. They bring fresh perspectives, critical points of view to bear regarding traditional legal postures, and the all-important diversity factor.

Stop hating on URMs cause of your own inadquacies and boring profiles.


it's unfortunate that place everyone with light colored skin in a monolithic "run-of-the-mill Anglo whitie" group.  your understanding of diversity appears to go no further than skin deep.

EDIT: but again, i'd wish this whole aspect of the thread would just end so i'll stop commenting on these types of posts no matter how much they annoy me (or at least i'll try to stop;)).
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 02:11:06 PM
What I have found is that if you take a school (I am thinking right now of NYU), then have it list by descending LSAT scores, for example, when you get to the low end of the range - say, 165 and under - every single person who has been accepted with a 165 or less is an URM. I'm not saying that this is a scientific method, just a trend that I noticed. As I said, if you have data to contradict this, I would be very interested in seeing it.


Are you talking about trends on LSN?  I've found the same thing (for Berkeley and UCLA)... which is why I started to freak out and convince myself that my chances of admission were far less than the numbers suggested. but then again, LSN is a very non-representative sample...
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 02:11:51 PM
Ok, this is getting ridiculous. To keep things simple, do a search for the lowest index number acceptance at Cornell: there's one 3.2, and a couple of 3.3s. All are black.

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/search_schools.php?action=search&cycle=0405&code=2098&status=Accepted&sort=index&order=d&edea=all&ftpt=both

Same thing for Columbia: there's a 4 (me!), a couple 4.1s, and more 4.2s.

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/search_schools.php?action=search&cycle=0405&code=2163&status=Accepted&sort=index&order=d&edea=all&ftpt=both

Of theses all, there are only TWO URMs. Me, and esquire. Out of more than ten.

Repeat for rest of t-14.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

Different schools, different policies.   

And BigLatino, I think Whitey's just trying to get on people's nerves. Don't let him get to you.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:13:34 PM
I consider it an assault, just like the assault on AA. Ignorance is the root of it. So I will defend, AND by any means necessary. So that means if I top up against you in LS, I would hide law books, steal your notes, or otherwise sabotage your success in any way I can.

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 02:14:44 PM
Jennaye, that is what I'm talking about - I looked up my preferred schools on LSN and that's essentially what I found. Of course it's not representative, and I would be genuinely interested in seeing some statistics that are representative.

Of course different schools have different policies, but that's not much consolation if you want to go to a school whose policy favors people not of your race/background.


Wow, now I have no idea what BigLatino is talking about.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 02:16:14 PM
I consider it an assault, just like the assault on AA. Ignorance is the root of it. So I will defend, AND by any means necessary. So that means if I top up against you in LS, I would hide law books, steal your notes, or otherwise sabotage your success in any way I can.



Lol.  I've heard of hiding books but stealing someone's notes?  That's a new one!

Edit: I wouldn't have responded but I did so earlier in this thread and am sick of seeing it in my unreads.  I'll say this, everyone is dealt a certain hand, you have no choice but to play with that hand.  Deal with it and let everything else fall into place.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:17:07 PM
I consider it an assault, just like the assault on AA. Ignorance is the root of it. So I will defend, AND by any means necessary. So that means if I top up against you in LS, I would hide law books, steal your notes, or otherwise sabotage your success in any way I can.

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:19:53 PM
If you don understand it, you need to bone up on  your RC,  hon
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 02:20:37 PM
Wow, now I have no idea what BigLatino is talking about.

Yeah, me neither. I thought he was answering back at you, but maybe it was directed to me. Someone hasn't mastered the quote function yet ...

getting back to the original topic -- I still think it depends on the school as to their admissions. Some schools might have the bottom 25% of their class solely reserved for minorities, while other might have the bottom 25% be for "diversity" candidates (minorities, rhodes scholars, LGBT activists, SES-applicants, legacies, etc). My advice would be  to make a ROCKIN personal statement, AWESOME LORs, get some WE under your belt, etc ... anything to distinguish you from the rest of the "right out of undergrad, white person from the 'burbs, 3.5+/165+, standard ECs" crowd.   
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Regal_Muse on February 04, 2005, 02:21:51 PM
Hey, I just acknowledged that I like being black. Geez....

Honestly, unless we decide to work in admissions, none of us will ever know what goes through the heads of the people making decisions on who to accept and who to reject from law school. Even if we did, each school is different. Every year they are looking for different characteristics to make up the law schoolís incoming class. Granted there is a trend of URM getting into law schools with lower stats, we must also take into consideration that there is a lot less of "us" in law school and in the legal field in general.  I believe LSAC reported that minorities make up less than 5% of lawyers. On the same note, I know tons of non-URM at my school alone who have gotten accepted to T-14s with stats below the schoolís 25%.

 My advice is to not go off on a tangent about how unfair the system is or make generalizations about an URM applicant. I was waitlisted at U Penn; I donít understand why, but  frankly Iím over the disappointment. Based on the literature floating around concerning law school, I should have been their ideal application. I have high scores, add ďdiversityĒ to the school, and I think Iím a pretty interesting and well rounded individual. But hey, something in my application turned them off. Was I upset? Of course I was, but eventually the shock wore off and I moved on. Youíll drive yourself crazy trying to figure out the inside secrets to admissions in law school because there are none. Then again, do you. If being Mexican or a man from mars might have changed someoneís chances of getting into a particular law school, then so be it.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 02:24:17 PM
Youíll drive yourself crazy trying to figure out the inside secrets to admissions in law school because there are none.

Here, folks, is the best thing I've heard someone say.  So true.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: vkschicago on February 04, 2005, 02:25:03 PM
it's unfortunate that place everyone with light colored skin in a monolithic "run-of-the-mill Anglo whitie" group.  your understanding of diversity appears to go no further than skin deep.

EDIT: but again, i'd wish this whole aspect of the thread would just end so i'll stop commenting on these types of posts no matter how much they annoy me (or at least i'll try to stop;)).
Quote

I am a white, non-URM.  I do not think, however, that this means I am not diverse.  My grandparent were Jewish Ukrainian immigrants.  I also do not think I have a boring profile.  I lived in an Arabic neighborhood of London for several months last year.  This taught me an enormous amount about culture and diversity.  Does the fact that I am a white women mean that I know nothing about racial hardship and/or culture?

I am also disapointed that this thread has become a diversity thread (although, yes I am contributing to it right now, apologies).  I am low LSAT high GPA  (158, 3.911) and would really like some honest comments about experiences in terms of a standout application.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 02:25:32 PM
I'll say this, everyone is dealt a certain hand, you have no choice but to play with that hand.  Deal with it and let everything else fall into place.

This is very true. At a certain point, there's not much more you can do except rely on what you've built up for your application.

I'm actually not all that worried about my own application, since I think I have enough to set me apart - a master's degree, work experience, and by the time I apply, some somewhat unusual volunteer work, plus I don't even know what my LSAT is going to be yet. I was just interested in what others in this situation (non URM or SES) are doing to stand out despite their apparent lack of contribution to 'diversity', particularly those who have done it successfully.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:30:29 PM
Quote
My advice would be  to make a ROCKIN personal statement, AWESOME LORs, get some WE under your belt, etc ... anything to distinguish you from the rest of the "right out of undergrad, white person from the 'burbs, 3.5+/165+, standard ECs" crowd.

There, happy??? stop diverting. Back to the real issues, once more.

You need to accep t the fact that cultural capital will be more heavily invested in blacks/Latinos who offer multiculturalism and bilingualism, actually growing up bilingual, not merely aquisition of a second language (orthird, etc.) it is not the same thing.

Just get over it that  you don't offer as much to the classroom dynamic and someone who TENDS (not automatically, by any means) to offer more in this vein.

NOW, do you understand me??

If not you need to get punched in the face.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 02:32:08 PM
Quote
My advice would be  to make a ROCKIN personal statement, AWESOME LORs, get some WE under your belt, etc ... anything to distinguish you from the rest of the "right out of undergrad, white person from the 'burbs, 3.5+/165+, standard ECs" crowd.

There, happy??? stop diverting. Back to the real issues, once more.

You need to accep t the fact that cultural capital will be more heavily invested in blacks/Latinos who offer multiculturalism and bilingualism, actually growing up bilingual, not merely aquisition of a second language (orthird, etc.) it is not the same thing.

Just get over it that  you don't offer as much to the classroom dynamic and someone who TENDS (not automatically, by any means) to offer more in this vein.

NOW, do you understand me??

If not you need to get punched in the face.


Oh I understand you. But you're wrong.

HTH.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 02:34:09 PM
Quote
My advice would be  to make a ROCKIN personal statement, AWESOME LORs, get some WE under your belt, etc ... anything to distinguish you from the rest of the "right out of undergrad, white person from the 'burbs, 3.5+/165+, standard ECs" crowd.

There, happy??? stop diverting. Back to the real issues, once more.

You need to accep t the fact that cultural capital will be more heavily invested in blacks/Latinos who offer multiculturalism and bilingualism, actually growing up bilingual, not merely aquisition of a second language (orthird, etc.) it is not the same thing.

Just get over it that  you don't offer as much to the classroom dynamic and someone who TENDS (not automatically, by any means) to offer more in this vein.

NOW, do you understand me??

If not you need to get punched in the face.


Wait .. who is this directed to? You quoted me, but I wasn't aware that we were in a personal dialogue.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 02:34:50 PM
For me at least, I've found it helpful to display a passion for something and run with it.  For me it's music.  I've involved myself in several musical activities and written about it in both my undergrad and law school PSes, hey it's worked on Georgetown twice now so it can't be all bad right?  I think adcomms all have their own way of thinking and clearly their own critera for what makes someone "different" or "unique"  If you can show that you have a deep interest in something, even if it's not the law, perhaps the adcomms will see that can translate into your success in a legal career.  Just a thought, not an expert, don't have any stats to back up anything that I'm saying.

PS just because I'm not an URM doesn't mean that I have spent my entire life surrounded by whites only has the previous poster vaguely implies.  It is possible for me too to learn from those around me and bring some understanding to the table, even if it is perhaps not the ideal perspective
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:38:02 PM
Quote
PS just because I'm not an URM doesn't mean that I have spent my entire life surrounded by whites only has the previous poster vaguely implies.  It is possible for me too to learn from those around me and bring some understanding to the table, even if it is perhaps not the ideal perspective
 

Geez...I hop e  you didn't put that in your PS. Every other whitie says dat!!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 02:38:14 PM
For me at least, I've found it helpful to display a passion for something and run with it.  For me it's music.  I've involved myself in several musical activities and written about it in both my undergrad and law school PSes, hey it's worked on Georgetown twice now so it can't be all bad right?  I think adcomms all have their own way of thinking and clearly their own critera for what makes someone "different" or "unique"  If you can show that you have a deep interest in something, even if it's not the law, perhaps the adcomms will see that can translate into your success in a legal career.  Just a thought, not an expert, don't have any stats to back up anything that I'm saying.

That's a really good point, too.

This is only sort of related, but here's a question - I was a serious musician through college, so my ECs are primarily about 4 different musical groups, plus music classes, etc. However, after I graduated, I started working full time and doing my master's full time. That barely leaves time to sleep, let alone keep up my music. So I'm afraid that if I write my PS about music, they'll wonder why I haven't done anything with it since UG (after 3 years). Do you think this matters? Should I write about what my MA is in, since it's more recent and more relevant to law school, even if I don't love it as much?

p.s. anyone else think BigLatino isn't even really Latino?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 02:42:02 PM

Geez...I hop e  you didn't put that in your PS. Every other whitie says dat!!

(sigh)  No I didn't put that in my PS, I'm not a moron nor do I think that I am culturally superior to you  or anyone of your race.  Seriously I'm not trying to put you down, if you read up a little in this thread I posted a LOT defending the use of AA. I think you are right about the strong need to include different races and classes in law schools.  My point is that just as you're upset that we're bunching all URMs together, you're bunching all WHITEYS together.  If you're so much better than us, why don't you act better than us and not stoop to pettiness.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 02:43:23 PM
p.s. anyone else think BigLatino isn't even really Latino?

I sure hope not. Representing quite badly, if I do say so myself.

I think you have a potentially good topic with the music. No need to exclude your master's field, but the music one I like. Different.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:44:11 PM
Quote
My point is that just as you're upset that we're bunching all URMs together, you're bunching all WHITEYS together

You started it.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 02:45:53 PM

This is only sort of related, but here's a question - I was a serious musician through college, so my ECs are primarily about 4 different musical groups, plus music classes, etc. However, after I graduated, I started working full time and doing my master's full time. That barely leaves time to sleep, let alone keep up my music. So I'm afraid that if I write my PS about music, they'll wonder why I haven't done anything with it since UG (after 3 years). Do you think this matters? Should I write about what my MA is in, since it's more recent and more relevant to law school, even if I don't love it as much?


I wrote mine about a specific perfmance I was involved in and how that affected both my undergraduate experience and like my perspective on some things, but yeah I totally know what you mean.  However, just because you aren't in a group, doesn't mean that you aren't playing  ;)  I tried to join a few adult groups around here but most of them have waiting lists!  So far I'm only in at one school, so I can't really say yet whether it's helped, but so far it's not hurting!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Chitown Man on February 04, 2005, 02:49:35 PM

Geez...I hop e  you didn't put that in your PS. Every other whitie says dat!!

(sigh)  No I didn't put that in my PS, I'm not a moron nor do I think that I am culturally superior to you  or anyone of your race.  Seriously I'm not trying to put you down, if you read up a little in this thread I posted a LOT defending the use of AA. I think you are right about the strong need to include different races and classes in law schools.  My point is that just as you're upset that we're bunching all URMs together, you're bunching all WHITEYS together.  If you're so much better than us, why don't you act better than us and not stoop to pettiness.

Exactly.

I also defend the use of AA, I just don't believe AA should be solely based on race. 

Saying that a non-white person naturally has more cultural capital than a white person is problematic.  I'm sure, Big Latino, that you do not like anyone making broad generalizations about Latinos.     
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 02:51:32 PM
Quote
My point is that just as you're upset that we're bunching all URMs together, you're bunching all WHITEYS together

You started it.

Fine.  BigLatino, on behalf of all of the terrible, horrible, awful, no good, very bad whiteys out there I would like to apologize for thousands of years of cultural repression.  I would like to apologize for offending your senses with our paleness and utter lack of common sense, decency and intelligence.  I will have my tubes tied tomorrow so as to stop the spread of whiteness in the world. Clearly we have nothing to offer in this world and should just give up and stop trying to improve ourselves and our chances of getting into decent law schools.  Sorry it took me so long to realize how right you are and how so wrong I am.  Does that make you feel better?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:51:47 PM
I'm latino. Shouldn't be a shocker to ya. There are more and more coming across the border each day. My cousin crossed over late last year,shortly before Xmas, he entered through Arizona. Now he's installed in a battery factory in Georgia.

And, if I'm "representing badly", I'm sorry to  hear that you focus on race when you hear ideas, instead of the ideas themselves, me explico?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 02:56:56 PM
Quote
My point is that just as you're upset that we're bunching all URMs together, you're bunching all WHITEYS together

You started it.

Fine.  BigLatino, on behalf of all of the terrible, horrible, awful, no good, very bad whiteys out there I would like to apologize for thousands of years of cultural repression.  I would like to apologize for offending your senses with our paleness and utter lack of common sense, decency and intelligence.  I will have my tubes tied tomorrow so as to stop the spread of whiteness in the world. Clearly we have nothing to offer in this world and should just give up and stop trying to improve ourselves and our chances of getting into decent law schools.  Sorry it took me so long to realize how right you are and how so wrong I am.  Does that make you feel better?

It ain't my fault if you've got a serious case of "white man's burden". Maybe you should see a psychiatrist.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 02:59:53 PM
I'm latino. Shouldn't be a shocker to ya. There are more and more coming across the border each day. My cousin crossed over late last year,shortly before Xmas, he entered through Arizona. Now he's installed in a battery factory in Georgia.

And, if I'm "representing badly", I'm sorry to  hear that you focus on race when you hear ideas, instead of the ideas themselves, me explico?

I mentioned that you were representing badly because of the apparent lack of logical cohesiveness in your responses. Your "ideas" seem much less than actual and honest attempts for intellectual debate, and more a proclivity towards antagonistic arguments.   
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amarain on February 04, 2005, 03:00:31 PM
Kind of sad that he joined LSD solely to post drivel like this.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 03:05:35 PM

It ain't my fault if you've got a serious case of "white man's burden". Maybe you should see a psychiatrist.

Yes I'm clearly the crazy one.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:06:21 PM
I'm latino. Shouldn't be a shocker to ya. There are more and more coming across the border each day. My cousin crossed over late last year,shortly before Xmas, he entered through Arizona. Now he's installed in a battery factory in Georgia.

And, if I'm "representing badly", I'm sorry to  hear that you focus on race when you hear ideas, instead of the ideas themselves, me explico?

I mentioned that you were representing badly because of the apparent lack of logical cohesiveness in your responses. Your "ideas" seem much less than actual and honest attempts for intellectual debate, and more a proclivity towards antagonistic arguments.   

After thead hominemattack you follow with a non-sequiter. Why do you insist on slighting my "logical cohesiveness in my responses" instead of specifically debating my points in open dialogue??

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:08:09 PM
Well, if you say so.



It ain't my fault if you've got a serious case of "white man's burden". Maybe you should see a psychiatrist.

Yes I'm clearly the crazy one.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 03:11:22 PM
I was just interested in what others in this situation (non URM or SES) are doing to stand out despite their apparent lack of contribution to 'diversity', particularly those who have done it successfully.

yes, very good question.  I tried to paint myself as an "intellectual-radical" -- i.e. research grants, study at Oxford-U, honors thesis, (plus very strong LORs), gov't internship etc. plus my anti-war and drug policy activism.  I tied this into my goal to do joint JD/PhD.  Who knows though, maybe I should have just focused on my activism.  But with a low LSAT score and high GPA, I wanted them to know that I'm capable despite low LSAT  :-\
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: WoeIsMe on February 04, 2005, 03:14:36 PM
Well, if you say so.



It ain't my fault if you've got a serious case of "white man's burden". Maybe you should see a psychiatrist.

Yes I'm clearly the crazy one.


Just ignore this troll..  It's obvious this person is a perfect example of the flaws in race-only based admissions and is not bringing anything in regards to diversity.  Unfortunate for those URM who should receive consideration
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:17:10 PM
yes, very good question.  I tried to paint myself as an "intellectual-radical" -- i.e. research grants, study at Oxford-U, honors thesis, (plus very strong LORs), gov't internship etc. plus my anti-war and drug policy activism.  I tied this into my goal to do joint JD/PhD.  Who knows though, maybe I should have just focused on my activism.  But with a low LSAT score and high GPA, I wanted them to know that I'm capable despite low LSAT

I'm very curious (as I am sure you are!) as to how this works out.  I'm not judging by any means, but one of the few things that every LS book out there says is to leave politics out of your application.  Curious if this is just another myth.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:17:24 PM
Quote
But if I espoused your opinions you'd welcome me to this board, yes??

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:19:03 PM
Quote
Just ignore this troll..  It's obvious this person is a perfect example of the flaws in race-only based admissions and is not bringing anything in regards to diversity.  Unfortunate for those URM who should receive consideration

But if I parroted what you want to hear, you'd welcome me here wouldnt you??
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 03:19:44 PM
Well this thread was supposed to be about helpful suggestions for people at a bit of a loss of how to improve their applications, you however are posting on a thread about how non-minorities have no culture or soul and should just get over themselves because they will never be as good as you.  We don't have to all agree, however we should at least all be discussing the same topic.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 03:20:38 PM
After thead hominemattack you follow with a non-sequiter. Why do you insist on slighting my "logical cohesiveness in my responses" instead of specifically debating my points in open dialogue??

Well, it would have been an ad hominem attack if we weren't already making it a personal argument. We're about three threads into that already. Likewise, a non sequitur refers to a statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it; given that I'm critiquing the logic of your given statements, this doesn't follow, either. I would love to debate in open dialogue, but it is, in fact, your adversarial responses that haven't made this possible.   

But, seriously, I'm going back to the original topic of this thread now.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: WoeIsMe on February 04, 2005, 03:23:59 PM
Well this thread was supposed to be about helpful suggestions for people at a bit of a loss of how to improve their applications, you however are posting on a thread about how non-minorities have no culture or soul and should just get over themselves because they will never be as good as you.  We don't have to all agree, however we should at least all be discussing the same topic.

I totally agree.. As a minority, I'd rather have more whiteys who value diversity than this dipshit who assumes everyone not agreeing with him/her is a bigot.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 03:25:19 PM
yes, very good question.  I tried to paint myself as an "intellectual-radical" -- i.e. research grants, study at Oxford-U, honors thesis, (plus very strong LORs), gov't internship etc. plus my anti-war and drug policy activism.  I tied this into my goal to do joint JD/PhD.  Who knows though, maybe I should have just focused on my activism.  But with a low LSAT score and high GPA, I wanted them to know that I'm capable despite low LSAT

I'm very curious (as I am sure you are!) as to how this works out.  I'm not judging by any means, but one of the few things that every LS book out there says is to leave politics out of your application.  Curious if this is just another myth.

Well, I didn't talk directly about my views, just discussing and reflecting upon my accomplishments as a political organizer/campus leader. I've heard/read that that's exactly what they do want.  Especially since it ties into my long-term goals...
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:25:31 PM
Quote
but it is, in fact, your adversarial responses that haven't made this possible.  

Of course I'm adversarial in my responses, as are most good lawyers. And...I'm still waiting for  your specific critique of the substance of what i"m saying...you have fingers that can go tap,tap, so I'm not making it impossible for  you to debate me.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 03:26:49 PM
Of course I'm adversarial in my responses, as are most good lawyers. And...I'm still waiting for  your specific critique of the substance of what i"m saying...you have fingers that can go tap,tap, so I'm not making it impossible for  you to debate me.

There's a difference between adversarial and menacing.  Don't think it would be too adventageous for you to start off your law career by stealing the opposing side's notes and destroying evidence.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:27:15 PM
Well, I didn't talk directly about my views, just discussing and reflecting upon my accomplishments as a political organizer/campus leader. I've heard/read that that's exactly what they do want.  Especially since it ties into my long-term goals...

Gotchya.  I thought you meant that you wrote about being anti-war, etc.  I'd definitely agree that they want to see the good leadership and organization skills you have.  My bad for misunderstanding!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 03:27:33 PM
Well this thread was supposed to be about helpful suggestions for people at a bit of a loss of how to improve their applications, you however are posting on a thread about how non-minorities have no culture or soul and should just get over themselves because they will never be as good as you.  We don't have to all agree, however we should at least all be discussing the same topic.

I totally agree.. As a minority, I'd rather have more whiteys who value diversity than this dipshit who assumes everyone not agreeing with him/her is a bigot.

Yup.

Of course I'm adversarial in my responses, as are most good lawyers. And...I'm still waiting for  your specific critique of the substance of what i"m saying...you have fingers that can go tap,tap, so I'm not making it impossible for  you to debate me.

No, you're not. You're just making it very distasteful.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 03:28:13 PM
Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them wrong, it means that you have opposing views.  It's your attitude towards people trying to move the discussion along that is irking the other posters.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:28:38 PM
Of course I'm adversarial in my responses, as are most good lawyers. And...I'm still waiting for  your specific critique of the substance of what i"m saying...you have fingers that can go tap,tap, so I'm not making it impossible for  you to debate me.

You've also advocated being unethical (hiding books) and stealing (others' notes).  Both of which will get you kicked out of the Bar.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:30:44 PM
Don't think it would be too adventageous for you to start off your law career by stealing the opposing side's notes and destroying evidence.

Well,you better get used to trial practice, if you going into litigation. Interrogatories and discovery frequently missing. Obstructionism by all sides is, unfortunately, the rule rather than the exception.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 04, 2005, 03:33:11 PM
there are legal tactics and then there's unethical behavior, knowingly stealing someone's notes and hiding their books because you don't like their race, is well unethical.  Litigation tactics have nothing to do with this discussion either, if you can't contribute to the discussion, stop littering this thread with your off-topic diatribe on why everyone can't be as good as you.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: blackseptember on February 04, 2005, 03:35:37 PM
Damn I wish my mom had married a Mexican.


Instead of just screwing the gardener when Dad's out of town?

ahahahaha
i can see the personal statement now-- "i was raised white, but i don't much resemble my dad. the truth is i'm pretty sure my mom was having a thing with the poolboy. one of my first memories is daddy storming out of the house and throwing his gin and tonic at jose and telling him to take his pool-net and chlorine kit and his speedo and never set foot on our estate again. mum has a couple of pictures of jose, though, and when i ask how come i have dark hair she says something about my grandmother but she gets really PO'd when i press her with more questions. that's why i checked URM on my application."

Nice how the only  "Mexican" mom must have access to is either a gardener or a poolman...Foucault is dead, god save Foucault.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:37:10 PM
Quote
No, you're not. You're just making it very distasteful.

Well, the OP is the distasteful one, and all who support the thesis, including yourself.

It appears that an argument is distasteful if you don't happen to agree with it.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 03:39:14 PM
Well, I didn't talk directly about my views, just discussing and reflecting upon my accomplishments as a political organizer/campus leader. I've heard/read that that's exactly what they do want.  Especially since it ties into my long-term goals...

Gotchya.  I thought you meant that you wrote about being anti-war, etc.  I'd definitely agree that they want to see the good leadership and organization skills you have.  My bad for misunderstanding!

Hey, no prob.  Say, what other schools did you apply to, fellow 160-er?  And why are you such a fan of Wash-U?  Yesterday I got word that they're offering me a spot in their PhD program.  Unfortunatley, I'm not a fan of cold winters or the midwest.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:41:07 PM
Quote
stop littering this thread with your off-topic diatribe on why everyone can't be as good as you.

??????????????
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:43:11 PM
Uber Reach - Michigan
Reaches - Wash U., BC, ND, GW, W&L, UC Davis, Hastings
Targets - IU, Pitt, OSU
Safety - DePaul

I almost went to Wash U. as a UG.  LOVE the campus.  And I visited this past week and fell in love with the law building.  I am also a big fan of St. Louis.  I've lived in Chicago, Indiana, the Netherlands, Cleveland, Hendersonville, NC and Switzerland in the last 3 years, so I am looking to return to the Midwest.  However, if one of my reaches comes thru, I will go there and figure things out from there.  :)

Where ahave you applied?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 04, 2005, 03:45:36 PM
Uber Reach - Michigan
Reaches - Wash U., BC, ND, GW, W&L, UC Davis, Hastings
Targets - IU, Pitt, OSU
Safety - DePaul

I almost went to Wash U. as a UG.  LOVE the campus. 

I a friend of mine went there as an undergrad, and he too loved the campus. All it needs is a moat to complete the castle look.

Actually, it just very well might have a moat, complete with alligators, and I just didn't see it.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:46:49 PM
For what's its worth, I cant be a bigot. I'm a minority. I'm a solution to the problem of lack of diversity and lily-white LS, not a problem. Don't paint me a bigot. Its a contradiction in terms.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:48:20 PM
I a friend of mine went there as an undergrad, and he too loved the campus. All it needs is a moat to complete the castle look.

Actually, it just very well might have a moat, complete with alligators, and I just didn't see it.


It's so unique.  And the law building is only 7 years old so it is pretty high tech.  Wireless throughout, including the outside courtyard.  Weather protected plugs outside.  A reading room where laptops are not allowed.  A fantastic moot court room where a couple of the circuit courts actually hold a day of real court every semester.  Most profs give their students the day off to attend.  You are guaranteed a clinic.  And of course they have a free beer happy hour every Friday.  ;D
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: 'lit on February 04, 2005, 03:48:45 PM
Nice how the only  "Mexican" mom must have access to is either a gardener or a poolman...Foucault is dead, god save Foucault.

that, my friend, was a parody. hello?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 03:49:32 PM
Uber Reach - Michigan
Reaches - Wash U., BC, ND, GW, W&L, UC Davis, Hastings
Targets - IU, Pitt, OSU
Safety - DePaul

I almost went to Wash U. as a UG.  LOVE the campus.  And I visited this past week and fell in love with the law building.  I am also a big fan of St. Louis.  I've lived in Chicago, Indiana, the Netherlands, Cleveland, Hendersonville, NC and Switzerland in the last 3 years, so I am looking to return to the Midwest.  However, if one of my reaches comes thru, I will go there and figure things out from there.  :)

Where ahave you applied?

Yeah I've heard the campus is beautiful...

I applied to one safety - U-Maryland - all uber-reaches: Georgetown, UC-Berkeley, and UCLA. After I got a 160, I focused my energy more on grad school apps, where I'm hoping for Berkeley or Stanford.  I figure since I want to go to grad school anyway, I can go for a year, re-take the LSAT and re-apply if (or should I say when) I don't get into my top choices.  

Good luck with all your picks!!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:49:43 PM
For what's its worth, I cant be a bigot. I'm a minority. I'm a solution to the problem of lack of diversity and lily-white LS, not a problem. Don't paint me a bigot. Its a contradiction in terms.

My last response to this troll:

bigot

n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 03:53:20 PM
Good luck with all your picks!!

Thanks!  Same to you.  My buddy just got into Stanford MBA and is so stoked about it.  That's a beautiful place and a great school.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 03:57:32 PM

And here's mine:

racist

For what's its worth, I cant be a bigot. I'm a minority. I'm a solution to the problem of lack of diversity and lily-white LS, not a problem. Don't paint me a bigot. Its a contradiction in terms.

My last response to this troll:

bigot

n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Regal_Muse on February 04, 2005, 04:12:17 PM
I'm Black and I'm proud!    ;D
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 04:16:21 PM
Thank you R.M., for having the courage to be proud of who you are and the intrinsic worth of all that you have to offer LS and society, in spite of what all the BIGOTS and RACISTS ON THIS BOARD may think.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BIG H2001 on February 04, 2005, 04:25:13 PM
For what's its worth, I cant be a bigot. I'm a minority. I'm a solution to the problem of lack of diversity and lily-white LS, not a problem. Don't paint me a bigot. Its a contradiction in terms.

You are a solution to no problems.  In fact, I think you are a huge mistake in life.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: IrishGuyJay on February 04, 2005, 04:32:27 PM
I'm latino. Shouldn't be a shocker to ya. There are more and more coming across the border each day. My cousin crossed over late last year,shortly before Xmas, he entered through Arizona. Now he's installed in a battery factory in Georgia.

And, if I'm "representing badly", I'm sorry to  hear that you focus on race when you hear ideas, instead of the ideas themselves, me explico?

I mentioned that you were representing badly because of the apparent lack of logical cohesiveness in your responses. Your "ideas" seem much less than actual and honest attempts for intellectual debate, and more a proclivity towards antagonistic arguments.   

After thead hominemattack you follow with a non-sequiter. Why do you insist on slighting my "logical cohesiveness in my responses" instead of specifically debating my points in open dialogue??



That's because you make no points worth debating.

HTH

P.S.  It's spelled non sequitur.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 04:49:02 PM
I'm Black and I'm proud!    ;D

Alright, I was trying to stay on-topic (since I started the topic in the first place) and not take the bait, but this one intrigues me.  Why are you proud of something you have no control over?  Should I be proud because I'm white?  Attractive?  How about because I've got a neat birthmark on my back?  It's silly!  In my opinion, we should all be proud of our accomplishments, qualities that we have developed, and things we have control over.  Not silly things like which family, race or country you were born in/into.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 04:53:04 PM
Alright, I was trying to stay on-topic (since I started the topic in the first place) and not take the bait, but this one intrigues me.  Why are you proud of something you have no control over?  Should I be proud because I'm white?  Attractive?  How about because I've got a neat birthmark on my back?  It's silly!  In my opinion, we should all be proud of our accomplishments, qualities that we have developed, and things we have control over.  Not silly things like which family, race or country you were born in/into.

I think I see where you are coming from, but I do not necessarily agree.  I am not black, in fact I am quite white.  However, I am proud of my history.  How my grandpas both fought in the war.  How my great-grandparents escaped Hungary during the 1950's.  It's something I cannot control, but it's something I am very proud of.  One day, when I go back to Europe, I plan to spend a couple weeks in Hungary where my family came from.  To many, it's very important to know where you came from. 
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: MizzouJunior on February 04, 2005, 04:56:13 PM
I have no control over getting accepted into Yale, but if I do, should I not be proud of it.  Just kiddin',
This entire thread is ridiculous

SJ
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Regal_Muse on February 04, 2005, 04:56:48 PM
Oh honey, you have so much to learn.

I'm proud of being black b/c my history is so rich and I have a lot of strength that runs through my blood. I'm quite proud of my African and Caribbean roots. There is nothing wrong with having pride in one's culture. Although I didnít choose to be black, I canít imagine being anything else.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 04:59:21 PM
I think I see where you are coming from, but I do not necessarily agree.  I am not black, in fact I am quite white.  However, I am proud of my history.  How my grandpas both fought in the war.  How my great-grandparents escaped Hungary during the 1950's.  It's something I cannot control, but it's something I am very proud of.  One day, when I go back to Europe, I plan to spend a couple weeks in Hungary where my family came from.  To many, it's very important to know where you came from. 

Hrmm... I guess I see where you're coming from as well, but I just don't "get" this line of thinking.  I don't understand how somebody could (or why they should) be proud of something they have absolutley no control over.  I can see why they'd be [interested in, pleased about, etc.] their heritage, but I just don't get pride.  Why would you be any more "proud" of your grandparent's accomplishments than other people's grandparents who fought in the war?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 05:01:54 PM
Why would you be any more "proud" of your grandparent's accomplishments than other people's grandparents who fought in the war?

Oh, I'm not at all.  I am proud of everyone.  Maybe proud is the wrong word?  But I guess it's kind of like this: let's say you get into that Stanford Grad program.  Wouldn't your relatives be proud of you?  They couldn't control you getting in, but they are, none the less, very proud of you.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 05:16:17 PM
Oh, I'm not at all.  I am proud of everyone.  Maybe proud is the wrong word?  But I guess it's kind of like this: let's say you get into that Stanford Grad program.  Wouldn't your relatives be proud of you?  They couldn't control you getting in, but they are, none the less, very proud of you.

Ok, that makes sense... I agree that maybe "proud" is being used differently in this sense.  Still, I cringe when people say that they are "proud" of their country, race, etc.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 05:56:10 PM

Oh honey, you have so much to learn.

I'm proud of being black b/c my history is so rich and I have a lot of strength that runs through my blood. I'm quite proud of my African and Caribbean roots. There is nothing wrong with having pride in one's culture. Although I didnít choose to be black, I canít imagine being anything else.


Amen.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: BigLatinoNYC on February 04, 2005, 06:03:37 PM
Quote
Still, I cringe when people say that they are "proud" of their country, race, etc.

Maybe its because  your ethnicity/heritage (or language) hasn't really struggled against lack of prestige or marginalization by the dominant group. Thus there are very few struggles of which you can be proud. Your bland PS may indeed reflect that.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: IrishGuyJay on February 04, 2005, 06:28:43 PM
Quote
Still, I cringe when people say that they are "proud" of their country, race, etc.

Maybe its because  your ethnicity/heritage (or language) hasn't really struggled against lack of prestige or marginalization by the dominant group. Thus there are very few struggles of which you can be proud. Your bland PS may indeed reflect that.


Try opening up a European history book.  I'm a mixture of two ethnicities, both of which have been oppressed.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 06:42:46 PM
Quote
Still, I cringe when people say that they are "proud" of their country, race, etc.

Maybe its because  your ethnicity/heritage (or language) hasn't really struggled against lack of prestige or marginalization by the dominant group. Thus there are very few struggles of which you can be proud. Your bland PS may indeed reflect that.

Wow, you're so off-base.  You think that the only people who have been oppressed are non-whites?  Maybe history should be a section of the LSAT...

But regardless of my heritage, I still am not proud of anyone's accomplishments but my own.  My ancestors faced plenty of oppression/genocide/etc. but what does that matter?  If they were criminals and murderes, I wouldn't feel one ounce of guilt or shame.  They're responsible for their actions, and I'm responsible for mine. 
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 04, 2005, 06:45:33 PM
Quote
Still, I cringe when people say that they are "proud" of their country, race, etc.

Maybe its because  your ethnicity/heritage (or language) hasn't really struggled against lack of prestige or marginalization by the dominant group. Thus there are very few struggles of which you can be proud. Your bland PS may indeed reflect that.

Oh, and furthermore, I think that my personal statement talking about my accomplishments as a leader in a political movement is likely to be FAR less bland than some BS diversity statement.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 04, 2005, 06:54:12 PM
Jennaye,

A small word of advice.  This guy is simply doing this to get under your skin.  Just ignore it.  The rest of us can have meaningful discussions without his presence.  BTW, I am sure your PS was not bland at all!
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 05, 2005, 06:27:33 PM
Wow, what a dumb move to put this in the AA board.  This question originally had nothing (or, almost nothing) to do with AA.  I was just using URM status as an example/conjecture as to who the lower stat admits are. 

How did these people get such high scores on the LSAT?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: williamwallace50 on February 05, 2005, 06:37:22 PM
Wow, what a dumb move to put this in the AA board.  This question originally had nothing (or, almost nothing) to do with AA.  I was just using URM status as an example/conjecture as to who the lower stat admits are. 

How did these people get such high scores on the LSAT?

I actually understand your question Jennaye b/c I have wondered the same thing when I look at the admit gpa/lsat numbers for schools. I question whether I should even consider the lower end  numbers since I am not a minority. Anyway, I think thats what you're saying anyway. As far as an answer to that question, hell if I know.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: ilsox7 on February 05, 2005, 06:44:04 PM
Wow, what a dumb move to put this in the AA board.  This question originally had nothing (or, almost nothing) to do with AA.  I was just using URM status as an example/conjecture as to who the lower stat admits are. 

How did these people get such high scores on the LSAT?

But sadly it evolved into an AA discussion.  Hence its move.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: InVinoVeritas on February 05, 2005, 06:49:11 PM
in this day and age, posing the question asked in the thread's title is inherently initiating an AA discussion. 
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 05, 2005, 06:58:38 PM

I actually understand your question Jennaye b/c I have wondered the same thing when I look at the admit gpa/lsat numbers for schools. I question whether I should even consider the lower end  numbers since I am not a minority. Anyway, I think thats what you're saying anyway. As far as an answer to that question, hell if I know.

Yup yup, exactly my question.  As for an answer, the consensus seems to be 'hell if I know' as well.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: waiterlawyer on February 13, 2005, 12:19:26 AM
This discussion is kind of embarassing.  Everyone needs to calm down and not try and judge every little sentence. 

By the way, everyone has missed the original point of this topic, which was a question about lsat scores and affirmative action.  This could have been helpful to some students to better understand the point of affirmative action as well as minorities as reference in helping them apply to law school.  But the original question was lost in all of this.

I guess it's just as well though since any response would probably be speculation.  There are probably a ton of factors that admissions committees consider so who knows why people with low lsat scores or gpa's got in.  I'd like to think they are admitting individuals and not index scores.  But of course they are guys, if it was all about index scores, there would probably be 20 or 30 schools with just students with 174's and 3.9's.  Obviously not all of the variations from those scores are minorities so there are many other factors at play.

I am just trying to be diplomatic here.  I wish these discussions didn't have to turn into flame wars.  It's not useful to anyone on either side of the issue.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whatfoster on February 13, 2005, 01:46:29 PM
...
But of course they are guys, if it was all about index scores, there would probably be 20 or 30 schools with just students with 174's and 3.9's.  Obviously not all of the variations from those scores are minorities so there are many other factors at play.
...


sorry, but this is just plain wrong.
there are roughly 150,000 administrations of the LSAT every year; many of these are retakes.  the number of people who have an LSAT above 174 is approximately 500.
that's right, 500.
of those 500, i'm sure a plurality have a GPA of 3.5+, though i certainly don't (3.18/178).  so, to be fair, let's say that there are 250 of these 175/3.5+ candidates.  unfortunately, that wouldn't fill up 20-30 schools.  it would be closer to 1-2 schools.
people always spout this line about 4.0/180 candidates--that YHSCCN could fill their classes up with those people 'if they really wanted to.'  no, they couldn't: there are approximately 100 people who make it past 178 every year, and you can be sure that they don't all have a 3.5+.
nothing like a good gedanken experiment, right?  let's say that law schools take people based solely on their LSAT, and that applicants always go to the highest ranked schools to which they're accepted, and that they never defer an acceptance...
yale's class of ~200 would take everybody who scored 177 or higher.
harvard's class of ~550 would take the second cut limited to those between 173 and 176...
...
so that intimidating pool of 4.0/180s that allegedly floods the T14 just doesn't exist.
YT
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 13, 2005, 02:03:17 PM
sorry, but this is just plain wrong.
there are roughly 150,000 administrations of the LSAT every year; many of these are retakes.  the number of people who have an LSAT above 174 is approximately 500.
that's right, 500.
of those 500, i'm sure a plurality have a GPA of 3.5+, though i certainly don't (3.18/178).  so, to be fair, let's say that there are 250 of these 175/3.5+ candidates.  unfortunately, that wouldn't fill up 20-30 schools.  it would be closer to 1-2 schools.
people always spout this line about 4.0/180 candidates--that YHSCCN could fill their classes up with those people 'if they really wanted to.'  no, they couldn't: there are approximately 100 people who make it past 178 every year, and you can be sure that they don't all have a 3.5+.
nothing like a good gedanken experiment, right?  let's say that law schools take people based solely on their LSAT, and that applicants always go to the highest ranked schools to which they're accepted, and that they never defer an acceptance...
yale's class of ~200 would take everybody who scored 177 or higher.
harvard's class of ~550 would take the second cut limited to those between 173 and 176...
...
so that intimidating pool of 4.0/180s that allegedly floods the T14 just doesn't exist.
YT
Graham

i believe approx 100k ppl took the lsat last year.  a 172 and higher is the top 1%.  doesnt each point from there go up around 1/10th a %?  if it does then for each score between 172 and 180 there are roughly 110 people.  so...

"there are approximately 100 people who make it past 178 every year"

it would actually be around 220 who have a 179 or 180.

"let's say that law schools take people based solely on their LSAT, and that applicants always go to the highest ranked schools to which they're accepted, and that they never defer an acceptance...
yale's class of ~200 would take everybody who scored 177 or higher.
harvard's class of ~550 would take the second cut limited to those between 173 and 176..."

yale's class would be those with a 179 or 180
stanford's class would be a 177 or 178
harvards class would be those with a score of 172 to 176.

i also dont think most people believe there are that many 4.0/180's floating around.  still, you're probably right that people dont realize just how few people have a score in the high 170's (add in a good gpa and the field becomes even smaller).
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whatfoster on February 13, 2005, 02:30:20 PM

i believe approx 100k ppl took the lsat last year.


LSAC reports just under 150k for last year--it's on their site.


"there are approximately 100 people who make it past 178 every year"


go to

http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/help/scale.htm

here's an outtake:
score/percentile
180     99.98
179     99.96
178     99.91
177     99.86
176     99.78
175     99.67
...         ...

since 1/10 of one percent represents approximately 10-15 people, the top 200 scores encompass 177-180.

YT
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Jennaye on February 13, 2005, 08:17:12 PM
This discussion is kind of embarassing.  Everyone needs to calm down and not try and judge every little sentence. 

By the way, everyone has missed the original point of this topic, which was a question about lsat scores and affirmative action.  This could have been helpful to some students to better understand the point of affirmative action as well as minorities as reference in helping them apply to law school.  But the original question was lost in all of this.

I guess it's just as well though since any response would probably be speculation.  There are probably a ton of factors that admissions committees consider so who knows why people with low lsat scores or gpa's got in.  I'd like to think they are admitting individuals and not index scores.  But of course they are guys, if it was all about index scores, there would probably be 20 or 30 schools with just students with 174's and 3.9's.  Obviously not all of the variations from those scores are minorities so there are many other factors at play.

I am just trying to be diplomatic here.  I wish these discussions didn't have to turn into flame wars.  It's not useful to anyone on either side of the issue.


No, this original post wasn't about LSAT scores and affirmative action, as I have tried to point out numerous times in this thread.   Read back.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: amelus on February 13, 2005, 10:51:51 PM
i believe approx 100k ppl took the lsat last year.


LSAC reports just under 150k for last year--it's on their site.

no, that's how many tests were administered (many take the test 2 times, some 3).  elsewhere on their site you can see how many people took the test, it is around 100k.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: power on February 23, 2005, 11:51:34 PM
The LSAT is based on a normal curve, so it is not accurate to say that above the 99th percentile, there are an equal number of scorers from the 174-180 range.  There are approximately the same number of test-takers that get 179 or 180, but the pool starts widening (you can think of this reflecting the fact that the area under the line of the normal curve begins to rise).

This is why scoring a 180 is pretty nice.  It means that you literally scored within the top 10 (that is, top ten individuals) out of that test date, and well within the top ~25 out of all of the applicants that year.  Couple this to the fact that 1) many people retest and 2) that not every person that scores 177+ will actually apply to law school, and you have a super-limited pool at the very top (and also, at the very bottom).

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: billyflynn on February 28, 2005, 12:16:41 PM
I wonder...do Whites generally assume that the people with the lower LSAT scores are blacks.  Do they assume that
most of the blacks/URMs in their classes are only there because of AA.  Do they think that those at the bottom tier
of their acceptance class are mostly or only blacks/URMs?

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whatfoster on February 28, 2005, 01:56:34 PM
from what i gather, the general opinion is that minorities would occupy far fewer seats at top law schools were the admissions process color blind.  most schools openly admit that such is the case, but are vague and obstructionist when the actual impact of race in admissions is questioned.
the UC system had its records made public via court action, and UMich had its AA 'boost' outed, although i forget how.  at both of these schools, it turned out that very different standards applied to two groups; caucasians, asians, and non-declareds (NDs) were given a negative racial 'handicap' while african americans, hispanics, and native americans were given a racial 'boost.'  i can't remember how other minorites were treated.  the effect was that, while a handful of URMs would have remained competitive with respect to the general applicant pool, the number of admitted URMs would've likely been much lower.
check http://www.lsacnet.org/lsac/data/National-Applicant-Trends.pdf for actual data.
google 'affirmative action' and 'law school' and you'll have more material than you can stand to sit through.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: Your Mom on February 28, 2005, 02:25:20 PM
(http://www.goenglish.com/GoEnglish_com_BeatADeadHorse.gif)

The dead horse has been beaten, please let this thread die along with it....
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 28, 2005, 02:27:44 PM
Is there any actual data on LSAT breakdown by race?  I'm mostly curious for myself.  But how many of each URM and non-URM category actually score 170+ or 160-170?

So look for the stats in the Mich case. I posted the link somewhere before, but now I'm too lazy. Something like 26 af-ams have an lsat of 165+ and a gpa of 3.5+ ... no info for other groups, though, and one would imagine that this number would have changed in the recent years.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: blk_reign on February 28, 2005, 02:40:55 PM
Is there any actual data on LSAT breakdown by race?  I'm mostly curious for myself.  But how many of each URM and non-URM category actually score 170+ or 160-170?

don't know but perhaps you can contact the census bureau and ask them to add that to their list of questions..
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: blk_reign on February 28, 2005, 02:41:45 PM
Is there any actual data on LSAT breakdown by race?  I'm mostly curious for myself.  But how many of each URM and non-URM category actually score 170+ or 160-170?

So look for the stats in the Mich case. I posted the link somewhere before, but now I'm too lazy. Something like 26 af-ams have an lsat of 165+ and a gpa of 3.5+ ... no info for other groups, though, and one would imagine that this number would have changed in the recent years.

Isn't it interesting that NO other minority groups have info available?
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: WoeIsMe on February 28, 2005, 02:53:24 PM

Isn't it interesting that NO other minority groups have info available?


not really.. here you go

http://www.ceousa.org/pdfs/VALaw.pdf

Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: whatfoster on February 28, 2005, 03:04:52 PM
that was some clutch clipart ;-).
let's hope that this isn't a dead horse, because the correlation between ethnicity and performance on standardized exams, in ugrad, and in the application process leads to several uncomfortable propositions.  statistical and/or ethical debates notwithstanding, law schools are currently either justified or not justified in judging people of different ethnicity by different standards; if they are--which i happen to believe, in the lack of equality of opportunity--the question as to why they are should not be taboo,  nor should the question of how the problem--institutional disadvantages for most non-asian minorities and non-traditional or low-SES students, etc--is approached be considered a dead issue.
granted, too many threads are dedicated to what generally becomes flamebait, but i find it interesting to talk to a population whom AA actually affects.
if you want me to can it, write penn a letter telling them how wonderful i am so they'll accept me and i can run circles around my house and cheer at the top of my lungs ;-).
YT
...
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: maricutie on February 28, 2005, 03:32:22 PM
not really.. here you go

http://www.ceousa.org/pdfs/VALaw.pdf

Wait a second ... is this telling me that at UVa Blacks and Asians have a better shot at admission than whites and/or hispanics? So it really is plausible to suggest some form of AA for asians ...

Interesting.
Title: Re: are people accepted with low LSAT scores mostly URMs?
Post by: inla on February 28, 2005, 04:05:54 PM
not really.. here you go

http://www.ceousa.org/pdfs/VALaw.pdf

Wait a second ... is this telling me that at UVa Blacks and Asians have a better shot at admission than whites and/or hispanics? So it really is plausible to suggest some form of AA for asians ...

Interesting.


This is from the Asian American Legal Defense Fund Website:


AALDEF Applauds Affirmative Action Decision

New York, NY ó The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), a New York-based civil rights organization, praised the United States Supreme Court decision on June 23rd in Grutter v. Bollinger, which upheld the race-conscious affirmative action policy of Michigan Law School. (read the decision)

"This decision is a great victory for civil rights," said AALDEF Executive Director Margaret Fung. "Although the Court rejected the particular program adopted by the University of Michigan in Gratz v. Bollinger, it recognized that affirmative action is an important tool to promote equal opportunity and racial diversity in higher education."

"One misconception about affirmative action is that Asians and South Asians are not under-represented in academic institutions, do not face discrimination and have no need for programs that take into account a wide range of factors that circumscribe opportunity," said Chandra Bhatnagar, AALDEF staff attorney and Director of the South Asian WorkersĻ Project for Human Rights. He cited a recent national survey which found that 13% of Asian/South Asian females, 4.5 times the rate for white females, completed only an 8th grade education or less. In fact, Asians are underrepresented in numerous fields, such as history (2.2%), sociology (2.2%), English/literature (2.1%), philosophy (1.8%), education (1.6%), psychology (1.4%), political science (1.3%), and law (0.9%).

In addition, affirmative action programs greatly assist many Asian and South Asian families struggling to overcome discrimination. Immigrants and refugees from Southeast Asia have the lowest educational achievement levels of any immigrant group ó two out of three Cambodian, Hmong and Laotian Americans do not complete high school.

Justice O'Connor, writing for a 5-4 majority in the Grutter case, affirmed that race was properly considered as one of many factors in the admissions process: "Student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify the use of race in university admissions." She continued, "In order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity."

"Affirmative action not only benefits Asian Americans and other communities of color that have faced past discrimination ó it benefits all Americans," said AALDEF executive director Fung. "The Court has reaffirmed our nation's commitment to securing diversity in higher education."


http://www.aaldef.org/press.html