Quote from: maricutie on February 23, 2005, 03:02:16 PMHey, I somehow missed the columbia money. Or maybe I just temporarily forgot. But that sure muddies up your ability to make a decision, I'd imagine ... !It does, largely because i talked to the dean of columbia on the phone and he went on and on about the long history of columbia grads at the NAACP LDF and the number of NAACP LDF people now on the Columbia faculty. He said the 8 magic letters for someone interested in civil rights law =] On the other hand, with the LRAP programs at Stanford and Yale, the financial difference between those schools and a full tuition scholarship is not quite as great as it seems. For example, if I were to get a public interest job paying $50k/year right out of law school, Stanford and Yale's LRAP programs would each provide approximately $70k over ten years. So it's a difference of $50k, not $120k.
Hey, I somehow missed the columbia money. Or maybe I just temporarily forgot. But that sure muddies up your ability to make a decision, I'd imagine ... !
(4) the big issue with sander's article is the story he draws from these numbers. he argues that the low gpas and bar passage rates of black law students are a result of a "mismatch" between black law students and the schools they attend. however, there is a compelling counter argument that there are features of the educational climate at law schools themselves that play a role in the lowering of gpas and bar passage rates. if this is true, then the effects of the "mismatch" are either reduced or nonexistent.
also, his argument that low gpas RESULT in low bar passage rates is based on a theory that is highly contestable. the low bar passage rates may be related to problems with the bar exam or with the climate at US law schools rather than to the low gpas of black law students. he has to spin a pretty complex theory in order to explain how a student who will not pass the bar with affirmative action in place WILL pass the bar if, in the absence of affirmative action, he or she attends a lower ranked school and attains a higher gpa.
many argue that the drastic reduction in black law students at the top schools would have an effect throughout the world of legal education and could dramatically impact the willing of young black men and women to even apply to law school.
according to a number of law professors, there is empirical evidence that black law students with the same UGPA and LSAT scores at the same institutions do somewhat worse than their white counterparts.
when we control for the LSATand UGPA variables, none of the “race” variables (or the gender variable) iseven close to being statistically significant (all the p-values are well above .05).This means that when we control for academic credentials, blacks, whites,Hispanics, and Asians all get pretty much the same grades.174In other words, the collectively poor performance of black students at eliteschools does not seem to be due to their being “black” (or any other individualcharacteristic, like weaker educational background, that might be correlatedwith race). The poor performance seems to be simply a function of disparateentering credentials,
Couldn't one learn the same amount or more in a challening academic environment while one's grades nonetheless suffered due to the strength of one's peers? I would argue that grades are not always/usually directly related to the amount one learns.