Law School Discussion

Quote from: A_guy on November 11, 2004, 11:48:26 AM

175?

People rate posts by using lsat score.  Someone writes something really funny: 180; someone writes something inane, stupid, annoying: 131.

thanks!
learn something new everyday

people always site strict numbers when talking about AA. and always make the assumption that underqualified minorities are being selected over qualified minorities and in many cases thats false.  when talking about numbers u have to look at the entire picture.  saying only 29 were blk with a certain GPA and score means relatively little if u don't look at the total number of blks taking the LSAT in the first place.

true, law schools look at numbers, but they also look at other variables such as trends in grades, hardships, rigor of study, etc.  we ALL know this and if we didn't think it mattered we wouldn't ALL be trying to spin ourselves trying to show how unique we are or writing addendums to explain our numbers and hardships.

people say base everything on numbers, but thats not fair considering the gaps in education.  urban schools serving minority populations can not compete with suburban schools and schools in more affluent neighborhoods.  its not b/c the students in the poor neighbor hoods aren't intellectually capable, its b/c they don't have access to the same resources and thats a fact.  people in these schools start with a disadvantage and spend most of their education playing catch up.  so if a student from this situation can go to college, many are still trying to master things that most have already learned so of course it will be harder for this person to produce a 4.0.

i am not trying to justify lower gpas and scores, but i am trying to provide an alternative way of looking at it.

someone here said something about it being insulting to say "thats pretty good for an African-American"  i don't always think that and realize that scoring a 155 with a 3.0 is good for anyone that doesn't have access to certain resouces and lived in a certain enviroment.  it just so happens that peopel in these situations are minorities.

before u get into the "white people have those experiences too" argument, I don't deny that fact, but poor white people are still white and have access to the privilege that comes from being white in America.

ok, this is kinda long and probably doesn't make sense, but oh well.  i will find out soon enough.

there are a few people on this board i don't like, but who really cares.  i am never gonna see these people and if i do i than as an adult i can be civil to, or work effectively with them.

don't take this board so seriously and take all of these posts with a grain of salt.  a lot of people are just talking and blowing smoke up everyone's ass.

think of it this way, no one here is real until u meet them face to face.  thats the beauty of and screwed up part about the internet.  u can be anything u want: a harvard graduate, a person that scored 180, or whatever.

I don't understand why this is true:

Quote from: Saint Willy on November 10, 2004, 12:52:19 PM

if things WERE equal, then that urm probably wouldn't have a 2.8 GPA. That is the whole point...
.

I graduated with a 4.0 from a high school that was 95% African American.  Could I argue that I was discriminated against because I was White?  Why not?

Your education is what you make of it.  If a black guy only comes out with a 3.2 and I come out of the same university with a 3.6, why should he get special treatment?

your education is what u make of it.  but explain how prepared u will be when u r using outdated text books, have no computers in the classroom, an administration that would rather label u as a special ed student than look at ur situation and realize u can't concentrate b/c ur hungry.  how can u make the most of that?  people from poor areas are will always be at a disadvantage and spend more time playing catch up in college if they can get there.  had that person had the same tools as a white person with access to more resources they might have been able to get that 3.6 or higher.

in the end maybe AA should focus on economic background but then again i see that as being pointless.  even though affirmative action could be based on economic disadvantage it would not provide for accurate representation in schools and the workforce.  

in a society that has excluded minorities for so long, it would not be surprising to see many more poor white people in colleges and jobs, than blks, latinos and whatever.  if we are gonna talk about AA we need to be honest.  if poor whites fall under AA and the people making decisions are white they will be more likely to pick the white guy over the minority and feel good about it b/c they are following affirmative action.  studies have shown that we chose people based on our perceptions and comfort levels.  so the impact of basing AA on socio-economic background could lead to a situation where minorities will be exluded on the same levels or greater levels than in the past.

and just for the record i am not racist one of my closets friends is white

so whats funny and obnoxious about that email again?