edit Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:26 pm
- D Brooks
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 1:02 pm
- Bildungsroman
- Posts: 5529
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
D Brooks wrote:Ran here.
Seriously, though, there's no quantifiable boost coming from URM status. Schools treat it differently and don't just uniformly "add to the LSAT" (I've never seen any evidence that any school deals with URM status by just adding to the applicant's numbers).
Why? The average LSAT score for a Native American is about 4 points lower than for a Caucasian, while African-Americans, Mexicans, and Puerto Ricans all have lower average scores than Native Americans (in the case of African-Americans and Puerto Ricans, by a substantial margin), which means that Native Americans are less disadvantaged in law school applications by the LSAT than those other URM groupsWouldn't common sense lead you to think that NA would be typically larger?
Also, the point of URM boosts is to bring law student racial/ethnic demographics into proportion with the US racial/ethnic demographics. Native Americans only make up 0.8% of the US population, meaning it takes fewer of them to bring a law school's population into proportion as far as Native American students go. Native Americans account for a little over 0.8% of all LSAT takers, while African-Americans and Hispanics account for smaller percentages of LSAT takers than they do of the total population. So, law schools need about 0.8% Native American students to make them proportionally represented, and a little over 0.8% of LSAT takers are Native American, which makes it easier for law schools to be selective because they have enough to choose from. Compare that to African-Americans and Hispanics, who account for a much smaller percentage of test takers than they do for total US population, and you see that Law Schools have to go even lower within the test-taking populations of these races/ethnicities to fill their ranks, meaning they have to give them a larger boost in the admissions process.
Source (LinkRemoved)
Source
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:26 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
edit
Last edited by xmrmckenziex on Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Core
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:09 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
It depends on each school. There is no uniform point-based rule for every school. However, AA seem to get substantial boosts, while MX/PR/NA get more modest but still solid boosts. People also get boosts for being LGBT or for being Cuban, DR, etc. These boosts tend not to be as large as the traditional URM boosts, though.
- Mickey Quicknumbers
- Posts: 2168
- Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
Not trueCore wrote:It depends on each school. There is no uniform point-based rule for every school. However, AA seem to get substantial boosts, while MX/PR/NA get more modest but still solid boosts. People also get boosts for being LGBT or for being Cuban, DR, etc. These boosts tend not to be as large as the traditional URM boosts, though.
- Core
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:09 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
Even if they can show they're bringing diversity & overcame hardship? Idk.delBarco wrote:Not trueCore wrote:It depends on each school. There is no uniform point-based rule for every school. However, AA seem to get substantial boosts, while MX/PR/NA get more modest but still solid boosts. People also get boosts for being LGBT or for being Cuban, DR, etc. These boosts tend not to be as large as the traditional URM boosts, though.
- hiromoto45
- Posts: 690
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:05 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
IBTL...usually how these threads end.
- angiej
- Posts: 796
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:25 am
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
Average test score for Puerto Ricans 138!Bildungsroman wrote:D Brooks wrote:Ran here.
Seriously, though, there's no quantifiable boost coming from URM status. Schools treat it differently and don't just uniformly "add to the LSAT" (I've never seen any evidence that any school deals with URM status by just adding to the applicant's numbers).Why? The average LSAT score for a Native American is about 4 points lower than for a Caucasian, while African-Americans, Mexicans, and Puerto Ricans all have lower average scores than Native Americans (in the case of African-Americans and Puerto Ricans, by a substantial margin), which means that Native Americans are less disadvantaged in law school applications by the LSAT than those other URM groupsWouldn't common sense lead you to think that NA would be typically larger?
Also, the point of URM boosts is to bring law student racial/ethnic demographics into proportion with the US racial/ethnic demographics. Native Americans only make up 0.8% of the US population, meaning it takes fewer of them to bring a law school's population into proportion as far as Native American students go. Native Americans account for a little over 0.8% of all LSAT takers, while African-Americans and Hispanics account for smaller percentages of LSAT takers than they do of the total population. So, law schools need about 0.8% Native American students to make them proportionally represented, and a little over 0.8% of LSAT takers are Native American, which makes it easier for law schools to be selective because they have enough to choose from. Compare that to African-Americans and Hispanics, who account for a much smaller percentage of test takers than they do for total US population, and you see that Law Schools have to go even lower within the test-taking populations of these races/ethnicities to fill their ranks, meaning they have to give them a larger boost in the admissions process.
Source (LinkRemoved)
Source
- Moxie
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 3:27 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
This. (Although I sometimes hear that NA gets the biggest boost because it's the "rarest" form of LS applicant URM?)Core wrote:It depends on each school. There is no uniform point-based rule for every school. However, AA seem to get substantial boosts, while MX/PR/NA get more modest but still solid boosts.
- mfeller2
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:34 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
Not too knowledgeable on the topic, but wouldn't it make sense to give a larger boost to whatever groups are less 'represented' in the law profession or law schools. Or is it based on how 'represented' a group is in the number of test takers compared to general demographic info? idk
- jeremydc
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:13 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
What about Native Hawaiians, how rare are we? I have still yet to meet any on here or anywhere
- mfeller2
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 2:34 pm
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
Yea, i think native hawaiians are under-underrepresented. You should get at least a 30 pt lsat bump. Does it count if i kind of look hawaiian? lol
-
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:27 am
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
what is LGBT?
- vanwinkle
- Posts: 8953
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
Lesbian, Gay, Bi, & Transgendered. People who are LGBT may see a diversity boost at some schools, but are not considered URMs, since URM is a specific legal construct with referring to certain racial groups.getitdone wrote:what is LGBT?
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:36 am
Re: Perspectives on Differing URM "boosts"
OP-
I just came across this passage as well- the author's name rhymes with Schmontauk right?
Anyway, I guess according to the LSAC data about URM's and the national trend of our LSAT scores, this "curve" would be about right. If Caucasians average a 152, Mexicans a 147 (although at 147.96 it's probably best to round up to 148), and AA ~142, the author of this book assumes that law school admissions officers simply tack on the +5 for Mexican Americans and a +10 for AA.
Whether or not that actually happens- who knows. Seems unlikely though.
I just came across this passage as well- the author's name rhymes with Schmontauk right?
Anyway, I guess according to the LSAC data about URM's and the national trend of our LSAT scores, this "curve" would be about right. If Caucasians average a 152, Mexicans a 147 (although at 147.96 it's probably best to round up to 148), and AA ~142, the author of this book assumes that law school admissions officers simply tack on the +5 for Mexican Americans and a +10 for AA.
Whether or not that actually happens- who knows. Seems unlikely though.