Law School Discussion

Being a URM *PLEASE READ*

Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #10 on: August 05, 2008, 05:55:19 PM »
when you find the time to look for it, please let me know...thanks

meggo

  • ****
  • 583
    • View Profile
Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2008, 06:05:56 PM »
ah okay, found it. It's from Richard Montauk, as I said in my original post, page 163 and he says "...As a rough rule of thumb,African-Americans average 10 points below [a school's median], Hispanics 5 points below, and American-Indians 3 - 5 points below"

Maddie

  • ****
  • 398
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2008, 06:09:03 PM »
ah okay, found it. It's from Richard Montauk, as I said in my original post, page 163 and he says "...As a rough rule of thumb,African-Americans average 10 points below [a school's median], Hispanics 5 points below, and American-Indians 3 - 5 points below"

Wow, I'm surprised the boost for AI's is that low.

Matthies

  • ****
  • 3678
    • View Profile
    • Tell me where you are going to school and you get a cat!
Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #13 on: August 05, 2008, 06:25:11 PM »
PR's get a bigger boost than most hispanics.  Make a big deal about it in your PS, and pretend you were really poor/disadvantaged/shat on by whitey.  Adcoms eat this sh*t up.

A quick search on the internet under that subject line (not recommended) and it appears that this genre is very popular in German pornography. That being said I would not mention it in your PS or DS. I mean you could put “fan of German language scat films” on your resume under the “Activities” section. However, I don’t think this is the kind of diversity that would really add to a schools’ 1L class. Who knows though, I’m not an adcom thus I could be wrong.

mbw

  • ****
  • 2426
  • TTTundra Law 2012
    • View Profile
Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #14 on: August 05, 2008, 09:08:06 PM »
ah okay, found it. It's from Richard Montauk, as I said in my original post, page 163 and he says "...As a rough rule of thumb,African-Americans average 10 points below [a school's median], Hispanics 5 points below, and American-Indians 3 - 5 points below"

Wow, I'm surprised the boost for AI's is that low.

I suspect because that's an average, in which it's been factored the number of applicants who check the box due to some rumors of a Cherokee princess (TM) gr-gr-grandmother.  It's a lot easier to avoid real scrutiny when Indian box-checking than for AA or Latino/a, mainly because 1) there are so few of us who apply who might call an IiCO (Indian in Card Only) on it, and 2) Indianess is in fact a political, not racial/ethnic, identity, and thus there is no universal designation of what it means to actually "be" an Indian.  So adcomms have to really scrutinize an applicant's PS, DS and activities/work history to determine if there's cultural/tribal affiliation.  Since the colleges have to report all box-checking, the ones who get in on their numbers and not their diversity, i.e., not specifically culturally affiliated, actually dilute the "bump" that the truly culturally/tribally affiliated actually get.

Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2008, 09:28:16 PM »
just curious, what do you all think of the fact that URMs have this type of advantage?

Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2008, 09:46:20 PM »
ah okay, found it. It's from Richard Montauk, as I said in my original post, page 163 and he says "...As a rough rule of thumb,African-Americans average 10 points below [a school's median], Hispanics 5 points below, and American-Indians 3 - 5 points below"

I've got his 2001 edition and don't see that written on page 163 or anywhere else. What edition do you have?

meggo

  • ****
  • 583
    • View Profile
Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #17 on: August 05, 2008, 10:26:27 PM »
The most recent edition, the fourth edition. Was released a couple days ago I believe. You don't seem to believe me...not sure why I would lie about something like this??

That's interesting frybread. I come from a fairly heavily populated (per capita) region of First Nations people, and in my province at least (and I would say in Canada generally) there aren't very many people I can think of who could get away with 'faking' their First Nations past. Maybe it's more common than I realize but I've never really known anyone who wasn't First Nations to carry a card. But I imagine that's because our society is, unfortunately, heavily segregated

Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2008, 11:02:17 PM »
just curious, what do you all think of the fact that URMs have this type of advantage?

...no.  I do not think about it, ever.   ;D   

Besides, this board relegates that discussion to the Affirmative Action subforum for a reason. Here, let me advance to the conclusion:  You're a racist!  No, you're a racist!  The end.  AA is like the Godwin's Law of law school discussion boards.

So, Meg, is the Montauk book worth the money? 

ETA: Arrrgh...I hate double posts.   :-\

mbw

  • ****
  • 2426
  • TTTundra Law 2012
    • View Profile
Re: Being a URM *PLEASE READ*
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2008, 04:31:14 AM »
The most recent edition, the fourth edition. Was released a couple days ago I believe. You don't seem to believe me...not sure why I would lie about something like this??

That's interesting frybread. I come from a fairly heavily populated (per capita) region of First Nations people, and in my province at least (and I would say in Canada generally) there aren't very many people I can think of who could get away with 'faking' their First Nations past. Maybe it's more common than I realize but I've never really known anyone who wasn't First Nations to carry a card. But I imagine that's because our society is, unfortunately, heavily segregated

Meggo, since my tribe/nation has two of its reserves in Canada (Odanak and Wolinak, in PQ) I agree that, in Canada, all things Indian/FN are very different than they are in the US.  It would take a dissertation to probably describe the differences, but much of it relates back to the establishment of tribal sovereignty which developed during the Treaty Period in the US, and the way that tribes were "terminated" and then re-recognized (or put on a seemingly endless hold for such recognition.)  The second largest tribal nation in the US, the CNO, holds as its criterion for membership lineal descent from a single ancestor on the turn-of-the-19th-Century Dawes Rolls; this has resulted in over a 100,000 enrolled members having a BQ (blood quantum) of 1/64th to 1/256th.  Many other tribes also have lineal descent requirements, but stricter blood quantum rules (1/2 - 1/16th.)  However, I have friends who have no tribal affiliation whatsoever, and because they have a CNO enrollment card, would believe that "checking the box" would be completely valid - and there's no one in law school admissions to say it's not.  While it might muddy the process a bit for those of us with tribal affiliation, I think most adcomms have some level of clue as to how that card is sometimes played, and, if they're looking for true diversity and not just numbers to report to the ABA, adjust their admissions accordingly.

As Laura noted, AA discussions belong on a separate board, but far as how I feel about diversity programs, I think it's a good thing - the vast majority of Americans have probably never even met an NDN, and yet a large chunk of federal law has been written expressly to deal with the "domestic dependent" relationship between hundreds of sovereign nations and the federal government.  Maybe it would help those who are being trained to practice such law to be exposed to the perspectives of those who it impacts first hand.  Besides, fewer than 500 Indians apply to ABA accredited law schools each year, with fewer than 40 being accepted into the T20 - I don't see that we're much of a threat to the chances of most white applicants.