Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex? MOD:PLEASE LOCK

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:10 pm

hiromoto45 wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.



Just another sneaky AA debate thread...


No, not really. Be a part of the solution not the problem.

User avatar
LLB2JD
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby LLB2JD » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:11 pm

hiromoto45 wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.



Just another sneaky AA debate thread...


+1

User avatar
hiromoto45
Posts: 881
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby hiromoto45 » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:11 pm

Horchata wrote:
hiromoto45 wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.



Just another sneaky AA debate thread...


No, not really. Be a part of the solution not the problem.


Dude you have 10 post. Just watch, it happens every time. :lol:

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:21 pm

hiromoto45 wrote:
Horchata wrote:
hiromoto45 wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.



Just another sneaky AA debate thread...


No, not really. Be a part of the solution not the problem.


Dude you have 10 post. Just watch, it happens every time. :lol:


I changed my name recently. I said in the original post that I was new so I could hopefully start a good discussion haha. Yeah, but your right though, that is normally the way it does turn out. Trying to steer it in the right direction.

This should be like a collaborate online social science thesis. So. I'm still on the belief that AA get a higher boost because of the discrepancy in law school and legal profession in comparison to ethnic demographics in addition to redress for Slavery. Neither one independently, but the two combined. If you were to take each reason on its own as a reason you would have to include some other group, i.e. Mexicans for the discrepancy argument or Japanese and Chinese Americans for past grievances. I think that is the only way it could be the highest boost.

hellokitty
Posts: 630
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:43 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby hellokitty » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:24 pm

Horchata wrote:
hiromoto45 wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.



Just another sneaky AA debate thread...


No, not really. Be a part of the solution not the problem.

I'm just not even sure what the point of this thread is. We can argue and try to figure out why all day long, but at the end of the day what will it change? Nothing. This is just another shitshow thread in the making honestly.

User avatar
merichard87
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby merichard87 » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:29 pm

Perhaps this is an awkward question but i have always wondered whether those statistics which list mexican-americans as 15% of the population are accounting for legal and illegal mexicans in this country. If not maybe that would account for the lesser boost MA get.

Oban
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Oban » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:32 pm

I don't know, someone should ask law school admissions people?

User avatar
Lawof_theLand
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:10 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Lawof_theLand » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:37 pm

Horchata wrote:Mexican Americans
Population: 10.3%
Law school students: 1.5%
Lawyers in profession: 2%


Wondering if this is because of MAs not getting in to schools, or if there just aren't enough MA applicants? Maybe, for whatever reason, there aren't that many MAs (relative to other groups) interested in going to law school. Maybe they have seen the job prospects and thought better of it.

User avatar
tooswolle
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:48 am

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby tooswolle » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:41 pm

To the poster who mentioned the Arizona law, I have to unequivocally agree that it is a demonstration of the lack of political power the Hispanic community has in America. However if I may be so blunt I believe that the exact issue and the protests behind them is showing to Adcomms that the Hispanic community is growing in "power" and may help stimulate their aggressive recruitment of Hispanic Americans. Also addressing the larger point of disadvantages I agree both are disadvantaged greatly from birth but let's be realistic there are more AA professionals then MA. I've interned at a court house in a large city and saw one Hispanic lawyer the rest were white, Asian and AA; most of the accused were Hispanics followed by AA. In my honest opinion it boggles the mind how there could be such a large difference in boost when in America both groups are the ones being screwed over the most. It seems to me that it's to save face; society as a whole hasn't begun to realize the power of the Hispanic community as consumers, people engaged in politics and therefore don't think about them as much as they do the minorities that are established ie the AA's however I will say that this is a good thread to explore even if it just serves as an intellectual discussion.

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:59 pm

merichard87 wrote:Perhaps this is an awkward question but i have always wondered whether those statistics which list mexican-americans as 15% of the population are accounting for legal and illegal mexicans in this country. If not maybe that would account for the lesser boost MA get.


That is a really good point. I think you almost cracked it.

Mexican Americans
Population: 10.3%
Law school students: 1.5%
Lawyers in profession: 2%

Ok, did some quick internet research and roughly 12 million illegal immigrants are here and counted with the Census (conservative estimate). 57% of illegal immigrants according to somewhere are Mexicans. So...this changes the discrepancy a bit, even if you don't believe children of illegal immigrants count toward a boost in law school admissions (I do not want to argue this). Ok, the general estimation I did is that 5.7% of Mexican Americans who are legally is the actual "Population" number. I have two points about this new number:

1. This is still a very large discrepancy in regards to the number of Mexican Americans in law school and the legal profession. Actually, still greater than for African Americans. So, it really doesn't change the original argument.

2. The original 10% probably should stay because the illegal immigrants who are in the U.S. are effectively part of society. They still go to court - criminal, immigration, civil (?). They still are represented and interact with society. As well as the fact when, not if :) (we like babies), they have children they become citizens. So, the 10% might be the number to use because of the actual effect, not strict statistical analysis. Those kids will maybe want to go to law school some day and they will certainly need legal representation. Not to say Asians, AA, and Caucasiuns can't do it. But how many can speak Spanish, let alone understand some of their issues?

User avatar
Always Credited
Posts: 2509
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 1:31 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Always Credited » Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:04 pm

--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:16 pm

Lawof_theLand wrote:
Horchata wrote:Mexican Americans
Population: 10.3%
Law school students: 1.5%
Lawyers in profession: 2%


Wondering if this is because of MAs not getting in to schools, or if there just aren't enough MA applicants? Maybe, for whatever reason, there aren't that many MAs (relative to other groups) interested in going to law school. Maybe they have seen the job prospects and thought better of it.


I doubt it is the jobs: http://www.10news.com/news/23492434/detail.html <---post this because I'm an unemployed Latino from SD

This is also a thought that has a lot of merit. I think one factor might be educational attainment by MAs. Look at some stats: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16 There are a lot of crazy stats about this one: http://pewhispanic.org/factsheets/facts ... sheetID=58 I think you might be right in terms of the population of available and qualified applicants.

So, maybe in reality the boost given to Mexican Americans might be a type of reward for making it thus far in the education ladder. Kind of like AA applicants. A disparity between law schools students/lawyer in comparison in addition to another external reason is the reason for a boost.

Ok, but why would AA still get a higher boost? Although they have a relatively small discrepancy in the legal profession, is their external cause (i.e. slavery) a major overriding factor, so much greater than what it is for MA (who have a higher discrepancy)? I'm starting to think so.

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:19 pm

tooswolle wrote:To the poster who mentioned the Arizona law, I have to unequivocally agree that it is a demonstration of the lack of political power the Hispanic community has in America. However if I may be so blunt I believe that the exact issue and the protests behind them is showing to Adcomms that the Hispanic community is growing in "power" and may help stimulate their aggressive recruitment of Hispanic Americans. Also addressing the larger point of disadvantages I agree both are disadvantaged greatly from birth but let's be realistic there are more AA professionals then MA. I've interned at a court house in a large city and saw one Hispanic lawyer the rest were white, Asian and AA; most of the accused were Hispanics followed by AA. In my honest opinion it boggles the mind how there could be such a large difference in boost when in America both groups are the ones being screwed over the most. It seems to me that it's to save face; society as a whole hasn't begun to realize the power of the Hispanic community as consumers, people engaged in politics and therefore don't think about them as much as they do the minorities that are established ie the AA's however I will say that this is a good thread to explore even if it just serves as an intellectual discussion.


I've been on this wavelength for a long time. Things are going to be very different in a few years.

kmarks
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby kmarks » Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:51 pm

"there are probably other groups that similarly unrepresented and equally disadvantaged that do not receive significant URM bumps."

i'd add people with disabilities (PWDs) to this "unrepresented and equally disadvantaged" group......except they're not even considered URMs - can't quite figure that one out and i'd definitely argue PWDs are unrepresented and more disadvantaged than many other minorities. but, i guess the "M" in URM is not truly about minority status but race.


I know that PWDs (and others who fit in the "undereprsented but not considered URM" group, ie. socioeconomic disadvantages) don't get flat out AA, but doesn't a bomb-ass essay about what you've had to overcome and a sweet diversity make up for not checking the Black/Latino box?

User avatar
freelancer
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:46 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby freelancer » Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:09 pm

kmarks wrote:
"there are probably other groups that similarly unrepresented and equally disadvantaged that do not receive significant URM bumps."

i'd add people with disabilities (PWDs) to this "unrepresented and equally disadvantaged" group......except they're not even considered URMs - can't quite figure that one out and i'd definitely argue PWDs are unrepresented and more disadvantaged than many other minorities. but, i guess the "M" in URM is not truly about minority status but race.


I know that PWDs (and others who fit in the "undereprsented but not considered URM" group, ie. socioeconomic disadvantages) don't get flat out AA, but doesn't a bomb-ass essay about what you've had to overcome and a sweet diversity make up for not checking the Black/Latino box?


it's not a reportable item in their stats so it doesn't make up for it in that it doesn't carry nearly the same weight as checking the Black/Latino box. but, as a soft factor, a bomb-ass essay helps (i would think).

bomb-ass essay <---- i like that 8) and i think/hope i've got one after a gazillion drafts LOL

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby acrossthelake » Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:13 pm

I'm going to guess it has more to do with the # applying in the first place.

The largest percentage of test takers have been Caucasian. African American test takers and Asian American
test takers, respectively, have been the next largest groups in terms of percentages.


In 07-08:
African Americans 12,152
Hispanic 6,299
Mexican American 1,765

--LinkRemoved--

el jefe
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:00 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby el jefe » Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:31 pm

12AngryMen wrote:We get more of a boost cause we are more oppressed. I think it's a good thing to me when I see fellow AA's getting into prestigious schools with low numbers on LSN. On what I see on LSN, I don't think this URM booste gos for MexAmericans cause slavery never happened to the Mexicans. My ancestors broke their backs in cotton feilds and the US is taking a step to show appreciation to us and help me through affirmitive action better my race in its society.


Jeeessssssus Christ!

User avatar
Emma.
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Emma. » Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:35 pm

kazu wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.

GWdawg
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:34 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby GWdawg » Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:52 pm

They probably don't, but if they did, I imagine it was because of a stronger lobbying force behind African/Native Americans. There are a lot more Negro/Native American College fund type organizations than there are such organizations for Hispanics.

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:57 pm

hellokitty wrote:
Horchata wrote:
hiromoto45 wrote:
hellokitty wrote:This won't go anywhere good.



Just another sneaky AA debate thread...


No, not really. Be a part of the solution not the problem.

I'm just not even sure what the point of this thread is. We can argue and try to figure out why all day long, but at the end of the day what will it change? Nothing. This is just another shitshow thread in the making honestly.


Well, it would be nice to know why AA get a higher boost than other URMs. The TLS article posted originally thinks appears to have nailed it on the head and most people in this forum think they know why, but no one really does - just competing theories. One of the reasons I started this thread was to show that no one knows exactly, so we should stop pretending like we do. We have a rough estimate. This post:

hiromoto45 wrote:
3 Stripes wrote:
In this thread, people still do not understand the meaning of URM and Affirmative Action. Highly disappointing for a pool of future lawyers who are supposed to be fundamentally sound with logical, comprehension and reasoning skills.

First of all, racism DOES exist and anybody who refuses to acknowledge this is a buffoon. While it's not in-your-face, it's still there as it has become more institutional and systematic.

URM=Under-represented Minorities
-not who's most disadvantaged
-not who's "more black"
-not who suffers the most at the hands of "whitey"

So, considering this, a "rich" black person is no different from a "poor" black person in the eyes of Adcomm members because both are still under-represented minorities. Those who try to say that a bourgie (or well-off) black person doesn't deserve to be considered for admission with respect to AA (like many posters in this thread) are mistaken and don't understand the concept of URMs/AA.

The main reason URMs (blacks, Latinos, Native Americans) are sought out by Admission Committees is because of what they are: under represented minorities. Schools, for varying reasons, seek to have as many URMs as possible to at least appear to have a diverse student body. In order to do this, schools go out of their ways to find URMs. This is where AA comes into play. Affirmative Action, in school, seeks to level the playing field in the sense of having plausible, attainable racial/ethnic representation in college and graduate schools. AA achieves when as many QUALIFIED URMs as possible are given opportunities to succeed academically. While there will most likely never be as many blacks/Latinos/Native Americans as whites in institutions of higher learning, given the racial composition of the American population, AA seeks to provide access to premier academic institutions by enabling Adcomms with the ability and desire to give extra consideration to URM applicants. Also, AA doesn't take seats away from "more qualified" (code for: white applicants) and, if anything, increases the level of competition for admission amongst URMs. And while schools may not openly admit to this, there is a quota for URMs that matches the American population, more or less. So, AA doesn't take seats away from whites.

When it comes to the preferences of Adcomms, we can be sure that URMs who have demonstrated achievement in the face of adversity (ie-a latino kid from the barrio who succeeded academically in high school and college in the face of drug dealers, murder, etc.) are generally favored. However, as many people seemingly fail to grasp, when it comes to URMs especially, it's quality over quantity in the eyes of adcomms, even though they would like to have as many URMs as possible. Schools, for the most part, would rather have 20 URMs who seem to be competent of succeeding academically as opposed to having 200+ URMS, some of whom would undeniably struggle. That is why some "rich" black kid who may have attended the best schools and grow up in a relatively affluent neighborhood could be considered more favorably by certain Adcomms than a "poor" black kid who performed at a high level academically in the public education system. It would be less of a risk in terms of seeing their students fail, much less URMs. At the end of the day, education is still a business and schools are still going to want the best and brightest, even in the face of conscious efforts to attain as many URMs as possible.

There it is.


does not address why AA receive a higher boost, only why Mexican and Puerto Rican Americans, Native Americans, and African Americans receive a general boost. It's treated like the holy grail, but it's only a rough guess. Yeah, sure the law schools say one thing, but is applying in January the same as applying in September....some law schools say "yes".

User avatar
SuichiKurama
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby SuichiKurama » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:09 am

OP this isn't necessarily the answer you want to hear but it really is because of the history of Blacks in the United States. People will try to come up with all sorts of other complex reasons based on the definition etc. but that's what it comes down to. Also keep in mind that the history of Blacks and the American legal system is especially tumultuous. At least with fields like medicine it's somewhat neutral.

User avatar
MrKappus
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 am

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby MrKappus » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:29 am

Nightrunner wrote:Image


This is an on-topic thread. Please keep your posts relevant to the OP or responses thereto.

Edit: To take my own advice, my input is: do we know they get a bigger boost? Is it empirically verifiable that they do? I'm not sure it's useful to debate discuss this in the first place, but it seems especially silly to debate discuss it if the overall premise for the discussion isn't a sure thing.

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:40 am

SuichiKurama wrote:OP this isn't necessarily the answer you want to hear but it really is because of the history of Blacks in the United States. People will try to come up with all sorts of other complex reasons based on the definition etc. but that's what it comes down to. Also keep in mind that the history of Blacks and the American legal system is especially tumultuous. At least with fields like medicine it's somewhat neutral.


Nah, I don't mind hearing it at all. That is kind of what I figured. I also think it is justified. It just seems kind of retarded to me that as smart as people are on these forums they still perpetuate a line of reasoning that does not hold up under close review - i.e. law schools like diversity because it should be reflection of the ethnic demographics of the U.S. I think you are right and that is what we should be saying instead of lying to ourselves and the rest of society. Maybe deep down we all believe this but refuse to say it is the case.

But again we come to this point in the circle again: do law schools give preference to every group that has had a tough past in the U.S.? Or only the ones that have the strongest lobbies in Washington - Hispanics and Blacks? Or the ones who make it into our history books? Who judges? It's weird because I do think there should be redress for past wrongs. These same past wrongs have an effect on people's lives today. It's just applying the rubric that is difficult.

User avatar
Horchata
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:09 pm

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby Horchata » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:42 am

MrKappus wrote:
Nightrunner wrote:Image


This is an on-topic thread. Please keep your posts relevant to the OP or responses thereto.

Edit: To take my own advice, my input is: do we know they get a bigger boost? Is it empirically verifiable that they do? I'm not sure it's useful to debate discuss this in the first place, but it seems especially silly to debate discuss it if the overall premise for the discussion isn't a sure thing.


I would have to argue, based on the observation on posters in this forum and my own experiences, they do get a bigger boost. I think the premise is a lot stronger than you suggest. Just my .2$

User avatar
MrKappus
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 am

Re: Why do AAs receive higher boosts than Mex.Am.?

Postby MrKappus » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:46 am

Horchata wrote:I would have to argue, based on the observation on posters in this forum and my own experiences, they do get a bigger boost. I think the premise is a lot stronger than you suggest. Just my .2$


Sorry, you might've misunderstood me (or I wasn't clear). I didn't mean to suggest the difference isn't there. I was just asking if there is data/patterns to suggest it is. To anyone who's more familiar w/ the data/evidence than I (i.e., probably most ppl), I def defer. Edit: I think I owe you $0.18. :)




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests