I have some interesting stats for Michigan and URMs

[Achilles]

My question is, how many T14s use this practice to this extent.

100% ... the percentage of African-American, Hispanic, and Native American applicants admitted in 2000 with grade point averages between 3.00 and 3.24 (B) and LSAT scores between 156-158 (between the 70th and 80th percentiles nationally)

50% ... the likelihood an African-American, Hispanic, or Native American applicant with an LSAT score lower than 159 (about the 80th percentile nationally) would be admitted in 2000

51% ... the likelihood an African-American, Hispanic, or Native American applicant with a grade point average between 3.00 and 3.24 (B) and an LSAT score above the 40th percentile nationally (148) would be admitted in 2000

[RN123]

What is your source?

Very interesting regardless.

[florentino ariza]

so what you're saying that in 2000 more than 1 out of every 2 URM applicant with above a 3.00 and above a 148 would get into michigan, and every single one with a 3.00 and a 158 got in.

source it, list the number of samples, and give a proper cite, or shut up.

51% of trolls post meaningless statistics without citing them or realizing that it should go on the affirmative action board.

(ps, for a 51% rate, you're looking at at least 100 applicants. you know that, right? so you're saying michigan had 100 URM applicants meeting the statistical criteria of being a 3.00-3.24 and  and accepted 51 of them. which, hypothetically speaking and according to your data, doesn't mean that they had to accept a single one below a 156. which means you could have just tossed in that extra lemma to outrage people. whee trolls.)

[The Poster]

so what you're saying that in 2000 more than 1 out of every 2 URM applicant with above a 3.00 and above a 148 would get into michigan, and every single one with a 3.00 and a 158 got in.

source it, list the number of samples, and give a proper cite, or shut up.

51% of trolls post meaningless statistics without citing them or realizing that it should go on the affirmative action board.

(ps, for a 51% rate, you're looking at at least 100 applicants. you know that, right? so you're saying michigan had 100 URM applicants meeting the statistical criteria of being a 3.00-3.24 and  and accepted 51 of them. which, hypothetically speaking and according to your data, doesn't mean that they had to accept a single one below a 156. which means you could have just tossed in that extra lemma to outrage people. whee trolls.)

I bow down to your awesomeness.

[Achilles]

so what you're saying that in 2000 more than 1 out of every 2 URM applicant with above a 3.00 and above a 148 would get into michigan, and every single one with a 3.00 and a 158 got in.

source it, list the number of samples, and give a proper cite, or shut up.

51% of trolls post meaningless statistics without citing them or realizing that it should go on the affirmative action board.

(ps, for a 51% rate, you're looking at at least 100 applicants. you know that, right? so you're saying michigan had 100 URM applicants meeting the statistical criteria of being a 3.00-3.24 and  and accepted 51 of them. which, hypothetically speaking and according to your data, doesn't mean that they had to accept a single one below a 156. which means you could have just tossed in that extra lemma to outrage people. whee trolls.)

calm down . No need for hysterics. I didn't post these statistics to "outrage" people. I happened to run into them. And why the hell would you feel outrage in seeing these numbers?

Before I disclose my source (which coincidentally happens to be an anti-affirmative action site (this is the only place I could find these kind of figures)) let me address your play with statistics. I'm not sure why you're assuming that 100 applicants are needed to reach a 51% rate. There are no figures provided on how many applicants there were with these kind of stats nor the number of samples.

In any case here is the source: The Center for Individual Freedom (www.cfif.org) Let me search for the direct link again.

p.s. troll ? lol what the hell is that?

[kruddler]

These numbers prove that minorities are unqualified for law school and therefore incapable of succeeding. When minorities are let in with these numbers, it comes at the expense of better-qualified white applicants.

[reldduk]

These numbers prove that minorities are unqualified for law school and therefore incapable of succeeding. When minorities are let in with these numbers, it comes at the expense of better-qualified white applicants.

These numbers show how our educational system has failed minorities. We must take that into account. We have an educational system that is unequal and that provides a different quality that is differentiated along lines of socioeconomic status and race. By allowing minorities with lower numbers in, it acknowledges this disadvantage along with the unique perspective minorities bring to the table.

[kruddler]

These numbers prove that minorities are unqualified for law school and therefore incapable of succeeding. When minorities are let in with these numbers, it comes at the expense of better-qualified white applicants.

These numbers show how our educational system has failed minorities. We must take that into account. We have an educational system that is unequal and that provides a different quality that is differentiated along lines of socioeconomic status and race. By allowing minorities with lower numbers in, it acknowledges this disadvantage along with the unique perspective minorities bring to the table.

The reason why minorities don't achieve at the same level of whites is because they don't choose to bring themselves out of poverty and they don't encourage success among themselves. We shouldn't reward laziness and ineptitude with preferential treatment in law school admissions.

[john83]

The reason why minorities don't achieve at the same level of whites is because they don't choose to bring themselves out of poverty and they don't encourage success among themselves. We shouldn't reward laziness and ineptitude with preferential treatment in law school admissions.

i think you're going to start a fight. 

and i think this is the wrong board for this discussion.

[Achilles]

what the hell ? The education system in the US has pretty much failed blacks-you cannot blame lower gpas, lsat scores on "laziness." I think I might move this thread to the affirmative action section.