U Texas Ding

[ElizaB]

they are doing that student an injustice because they are not setting that student up to be successful. 

Funny that the adcomms at UT haven't figured this out. Yet a 0L with one Hispanic acquaintance has all the answers. (Yea, yea, I know. You have friends who are Black and Hispanic, etc. ad nauseam.)

It could be argued that the state of Texas is doing you an injustice by not letting you compete equally in getting admitted with out-of-staters who have superior numbers. Do you think a judge and a jury are going to give your arguments a "few extra points" because you come from Texas? AA is cool when it helps you. Seems hypocritical. Just think of the Asians with superior numbers who are denied admission to professional schools to meet an unspoken quota in order to let you in.

You missed the entire point of my argument.  My argument was not about AA.  I have to wonder if you even read the entire post or if you just cut and pasted one line.  And speaking of which - Please don't take a single line from one of my posts and use it out of context.  When did I specifically make reference to UT or to AA in this post?  I was talking about one guy who happened to have attend UT in the previous post but my general comment was not even about UT.  I specifically stated that anytime (not just in the case of URM status or AA) that a non-competitive student was admitted to a school, the school is doing them an injustice.  This is not just my opinion...do a little research into this phenomenon or spend a little time teaching in a public school and you will find that my assertion is true.  This is the entire purpose of the Head Start & PPCD programs in our public schools!  To allow students who are behind their peers to catch up before they have to start competing with them.  If you would like I can give you the name of one my graduate education professors who has spent the past 55 years studying the phenomenon of (as he jokingly termed it) "them that has gets."  

Furthermore-not that this has anything to do with the argument other than that the one guy that I mentioned as an example of getting into law school with sub-par numbers happened to be Hispanic-but I grew up in Laredo (where I was literally the only white child in my school) & now live in San Antonio, so I do know more than one Hispanic person.  If you have ever been to South Texas or spent any time in some of the bordertowns you of course know that people of Hispanic ethnicities are not "under-represented" in the general population or in any field in this part of the country.  (And I am in no way implying that this is a bad thing)  

And by the way, I don't appreciate your round about way of implying that I got into UT based solely or even primarily on my in-state status.  My LSAT score is above the average for both in-state (25/75 #'s are 160/166) and out-of-state (25/75 #'s are 161/167) admitted students at UT.  I don't know where you are from - I suspect you are not from Texas - but there are several thousand Texas residents who apply to UT Law school every year who do not gain admission.  Texas is a huge state - 26 million residents - and quite a few of them apply to law school every year!  And ask almost any Texan wanting to go to LS and they will tell you that UT is either their top choice or, at least, very high up on their list!

At any rate, that is all I am going to say about that.  I will not argue on the point any longer because I do not have the time or inclination.  You have the right to believe what you want to believe concerning education...and I have the right to believe in what experience has taught me!

[ElizaB]

Abitrary or non-arbitrary preferences have nothing to do with my point. Qualifying only serves to obfuscate. My point is that she is hypocritical to not recognize that she too benefits from some sort of favoritism, which by her own definition is an injustice. Instead of pitying Blacks and Hispanics, some self-pity is called for.

Asian quotas are anecdotal and probably don't apply to a state like Texas, but her statement triggered a visceral reaction.

Do you resort to calling everyone who holds a different opinion than you a hypocrite?  Or insulting their academic performance as you did in the last post???  You know nothing about me.  You know nothing about my life experiences, my work experiences or the reasons that I was accepted to UT Law!  Beyond my UGPA, I also have a 4.0 in a Masters Program. I also had the highest GPA in my major and graduated from my schools Honors Program...not all 3.5's are egual! I was also named the Most Outstanding Student Leader at my undergraduate university out of 14,000 students!   I also have 5+ years of significant work experience working in a field related to the type of law that I want to practice.  I will spare the details of the rest of my resume but maybe my out-of-the classroom experiences have something to do with why I was admitted to UT!  Who knows?  I don't...but neither do you!  And you have no right to imply that I would not have been admitted had I been out-of-state!  If you spend any time on this board you will notice many people who have been admitted to schools where they have at least one number below the median...Lexy at Yale, BigTex at Michigan, and Ruskie at Boalt.     

Listen, dude, I have no beef with you concerning AA or Asians ot Hispanics or UT or anything.  And I have not said one single thing to personally attack you.  I even allowed you the right to your own opinion!  So why are you personally attacking me?

[midjeep]

Abitrary or non-arbitrary preferences have nothing to do with my point. Qualifying only serves to obfuscate. My point is that she is hypocritical to not recognize that she too benefits from some sort of favoritism, which by her own definition is an injustice. Instead of pitying Blacks and Hispanics, some self-pity is called for.

Asian quotas are anecdotal and probably don't apply to a state like Texas, but her statement triggered a visceral reaction.

Do you resort to calling everyone who holds a different opinion than you a hypocrite?  Or insulting their academic performance as you did in the last post???  You know nothing about me.  You know nothing about my life experiences, my work experiences or the reasons that I was accepted to UT Law!  Beyond my UGPA, I also have a 4.0 in a Masters Program. I also had the highest GPA in my major and graduated from my schools Honors Program...not all 3.5's are egual! I was also named the Most Outstanding Student Leader at my undergraduate university out of 14,000 students!   I also have 5+ years of significant work experience working in a field related to the type of law that I want to practice.  I will spare the details of the rest of my resume but maybe my out-of-the classroom experiences have something to do with why I was admitted to UT!  Who knows?  I don't...but neither do you!  And you have no right to imply that I would not have been admitted had I been out-of-state!  If you spend any time on this board you will notice many people who have been admitted to schools where they have at least one number below the median...Lexy at Yale, BigTex at Michigan, and Ruskie at Boalt.     

Listen, dude, I have no beef with you concerning AA or Asians ot Hispanics or UT or anything.  And I have not said one single thing to personally attack you.  I even allowed you the right to your own opinion!  So why are you personally attacking me?

He/She is just jealous that you got into UT. We all know that you are qualified and deserve to go (regardless of residency). 

[ElizaB]

Thank you very much Midjeep!  That means alot!

[RobinHood]

Dude, there is no question Eliza deserved to get into UT...She is more than qualified enough, and probably more qualified than plenty out-of-staters who're gonna get in... 

[midjeep]

I have been trying to be as clear as possible. I think your statements are hypocritical because you denounce admitting applicants with sub-par numbers, which includes many minorities. Yet, my thesis is that your numbers are below par when compared to those applicants from out of state. I'm not surprised you can't see this. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. Maybe you should think I'm just jealous of you.

I'm not saying this in-state favoritism is a bad thing or that you're a bad person. If you want to see this as a personal attack, then feel free. But I believe no one, including myself, is beyond criticism. Try to think of this as feedback.

Eliza is not in denial about perk or extra star she might have received on her application, but to say that her in-state residency was the sole or majority reason for getting admitted is retarded. Now if everyone who scored a 180 and had a 4.0 with a ton of extras were getting rejected because they were out of state, then yes, I and even Eliza would agree that she benefited from some form of AA. However, her numbers alone are strong enough to get into UT alone, regardless of residency. Out of state applicants who had a bit above her stats that were rejected probably didn't bring much else with their application.

The point that Eliza was making is that many schools are doing students a disservice by admitting them when their stats are soooo far below the median and even bottom 25%, and I agree (but if I do get into UT I really don't mind eating these words right now ). After going through this application process, I realize that a lot of these posters can get a bit "elitist" when they discuss the merits of an applicant's numbers versus their rights at a top law school, but for the most part I agree. Though I do get disappointed when I get rejected to a reach school, I now sit back thinking "I really don't belong." As much as I hate agreeing with many on this board, the LSAT combined with the GPA should really determine your law school placement. By admitting a student based on race to simply spice up your admissions pool (especially when the numbers are waaay below the median or even the average). Now we all know that being a Texas resident is not going to hurt your chances at getting into UT, but to say that someone who happens to be Texan, got admitted to a school where his or her numbers are above or at the median for both instate and out-of-state candidates isn't really valid. If you disagree with Eliza, thats one thing, but to attack her application and acceptance into UT for the sake of "pointing out that she is being hypocritical," is quite another. If you remember from the LSAT, ad honemin attacks are considered flaws in the argument.

[Anastasia]

ElizaB,

Your numbers and soft factors make you an excellent candidate for UT regardless of in state/out state or what others have said.  Congrats to you! Be happy with the acceptance and don't let it get you down.

As long as Midjeep is pointing out LSAT flaws though I will say there, if I am interpreting what you stated correctly, there seems to be a little correlation/causation confusion between

THIS
“I do think that the students who are admitted to a particular school with significantly sub-par numbers will have a harder time succeding at that law school....so maybe UT (or any school for that matter) isn't really doing these students a favor.”

AND

THIS
“My point is that when a school takes a student who is not functioning on the same academic level as the majority of the rest of their students, regardless of the reason, they are doing that student an injustice because they are not setting that student up to be successful. 

I had a professor in a graduate education class that used the term "them that has gets" in reference to this phenomenon.  Students that start out with better study skills, more knowledge or more intellegience learn and achieve exponentially more than the students who start out deficient in any of these areas. “

Someone can have better study skills, more knowledge/intelligence and still for a variety of reasons end up with lower numbers in the GPA/LSAT department.  Those students may not necessarily have a more difficult time at law school.  As far as admissions are concerned though, the greatest indicator they can rely on is GPA & LSAT which is why those factors do carry such a great weight, but these indicators are not always correct in every case.