Meiji, I appreciate your words of encouragement. I admit that I have a lame sense of humor, and I like bay area music a lil too much.
As for Trollik, he really overstates things, and fails to support his overreaching claims. He has yet to support his claim that “non-URMs will have better qualifications for success than URMs at any individual school given identical measured numbers,” except by stating it is a given due to AA. Next, he gives weight to what he calls “unmeasured credentials.” So, we don’t know how to measure these credentials but we do know that nonURMs have more of them by virtue of AA. For that matter, if these credentials are incalculable how do we know if they lead to success?
I will concede that URMs generally have lower LSATs and/or GPAs to their nonURM counterparts by virtue of AA, but it stops there. There has been no evidence that has lead me to believe that nonURMs possess a monopoly on “unmeasured credentials.” Thus, Trollik’s assumption that when nonURMs are admitted to a school with lower numbers that it means that they have credentials so impressive that their “qualifications for success” are greater than URMs with similar numbers… is really just that, an assumption, not a irrefutable fact. However, Trollik treats his claim as if it were fact.