False Hopes

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
User avatar
tooswolle
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:48 am

False Hopes

Postby tooswolle » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:23 pm

Does anyone in this forum feel that schools that claim to care about diversity are really just doing it for the pr and nothing more? Alot of the articles I read talk about urms (specifically AA's and MA's) getting shut out of higher education. Yet the "gate keepers" don't seem to take action to correct the inequities in our system which is frankly it's up setting to say the least!

User avatar
spacepenguin
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:17 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby spacepenguin » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:25 pm

tooswolle wrote:Does anyone in this forum feel that schools that claim to care about diversity are really just doing it for the pr and nothing more? Alot of the articles I read talk about urms (specifically AA's and MA's) getting shut out of higher education. Yet the "gate keepers" don't seem to take action to correct the inequities in our system which is frankly it's up setting to say the least!



Are you specifically referring to law schools? If that's the case, I don't really get that impression--care to elaborate?

User avatar
calilaw
Posts: 149
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 10:29 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby calilaw » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:26 pm

I think it's very clear that some URMs do get a boost...

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

Re: False Hopes

Postby tooswolle » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:32 pm

Although the numbers on lsn give an indication of a urm boost many of the candidates already have stellar numbers or at least reasonable numbers. My point was a retort on the current lack of diversity that is found in education most notably law schools which are controlled by rankings and numerical indexes which systematically exclude people. Personally my view isif you say things and pride yourself on them you better do it and frankly the number of minorities in law school shows that schools don't go out of their way to recruit students. Some may argue that it's not their role but in a society like ours it seems abhorrent to allow some groups the ability of upward mobility while others aren't.

User avatar
LAWLAW09
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:09 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby LAWLAW09 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:35 pm

tooswolle wrote:Does anyone in this forum feel that schools that claim to care about diversity are really just doing it for the pr and nothing more? Alot of the articles I read talk about urms (specifically AA's and MA's) getting shut out of higher education. Yet the "gate keepers" don't seem to take action to correct the inequities in our system which is frankly it's up setting to say the least!



The schools claim to to care about diversity. They don't claim to be trying to correct the inequities in our system, the system, or a system. Even if they did, you know better than to believe them.

Good luck.

User avatar
spacepenguin
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:17 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby spacepenguin » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:37 pm

Well, we're URMs for a reason. If we were represented relatively to what our demographic populations suggest--then we would cease to be URMs and thus no URM boost.

The boost in general is a flawed attempt at addressing the structural problems faced by URMs. It's a, 'sorry that you had less opportunity to succeed at a young age...here's a 5 point LSAT buffer...have fun succeeding at law school with below par numbers!"

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby ResolutePear » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:42 pm

There is always a law school that'll be willing to take you. If you really want to do law, that is.

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

Re: False Hopes

Postby tooswolle » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:47 pm

Although law schools don't state that their diversity goals are to create equity in our system. As Justice O'Connor stated in the opinion to Grutter that they serve as gate keepers as lawyers become politicians, write the laws which we are all subject to (not word for word but the idea of it and the reason why diversity is important). I mean I'm realistic I don't expect them to change the world I just wish they tried harder. For me the thing that made me think about this was working a new job in a freight forwarding company. As someone who is in upper management you have to train everywhere and right now I'm working in the wherehouse. I see and work with only urms many who do backbreaking labor for minimum wage who didn't receive an adequate education and it makes me feel bad that there are others who can benefit and many who don't and some of those had decent numbers and stories of over coming adversity yet schools don't give them a shot. At some point I wish schools in general specially law schools stopped caring about rankings and focus on doing the morally right thing; giving people who wouldn't be there a chance. In the end I understand that urms by the sake of being unrepresented get the boost but is it really a boost when many who get in would have already gotten in?

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby seespotrun » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:50 pm

tooswolle wrote:Although the numbers on lsn give an indication of a urm boost many of the candidates already have stellar numbers or at least reasonable numbers. My point was a retort on the current lack of diversity that is found in education most notably law schools which are controlled by rankings and numerical indexes which systematically exclude people. Personally my view isif you say things and pride yourself on them you better do it and frankly the number of minorities in law school shows that schools don't go out of their way to recruit students. Some may argue that it's not their role but in a society like ours it seems abhorrent to allow some groups the ability of upward mobility while others aren't.


[Insert commas]

User avatar
NZA
Posts: 1285
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:01 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby NZA » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:51 pm

tooswolle wrote:Although law schools don't state that their diversity goals are to create equity in our system. As Justice O'Connor stated in the opinion to Grutter that they serve as gate keepers as lawyers become politicians, write the laws which we are all subject to (not word for word but the idea of it and the reason why diversity is important). I mean I'm realistic I don't expect them to change the world I just wish they tried harder. For me the thing that made me think about this was working a new job in a freight forwarding company. As someone who is in upper management you have to train everywhere and right now I'm working in the wherehouse. I see and work with only urms many who do backbreaking labor for minimum wage who didn't receive an adequate education and it makes me feel bad that there are others who can benefit and many who don't and some of those had decent numbers and stories of over coming adversity yet schools don't give them a shot. At some point I wish schools in general specially law schools stopped caring about rankings and focus on doing the morally right thing; giving people who wouldn't be there a chance. In the end I understand that urms by the sake of being unrepresented get the boost but is it really a boost when many who get in would have already gotten in?


I'm sympathetic to your general perspective, but I don't really understand your argument here. :?

User avatar
Doritos
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:24 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby Doritos » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:54 pm

tooswolle wrote:In the end I understand that urms by the sake of being unrepresented get the boost but is it really a boost when many who get in would have already gotten in?


I can see this thread going dark, dark places...

Fact: life is unfair and somebody is going to get screwed.

You can decide, (1)the non-URM who loses a seat to a URM or (2)the URM who had the misfortune of being born into an ethic group that has been systematically disadvantaged for quite some time. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. There is no quick, easy answer to fixing racial disparity and law schools have decided that the "boost" is the best way to achieve diversity, fix the achievement gap, etc.

From what I understand AA debates are frowned upon in these parts so this discussion is pointless and will be short lived.

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

Re: False Hopes

Postby tooswolle » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:56 pm

It's not necessarily an argument. It's more of a question of whether people feel that law schools say one thing but do another when it comes to diversity My previous post was the reasoning behind my feelings. So back to the issue, doesn't anyone feel the same way?

Edit this isn't a debate about the issue of urm status this is a question of the views of fellow urms on the process which is perfectly valid.

rundoxierun
Posts: 1893
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:46 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby rundoxierun » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:57 pm

tooswolle wrote:Although law schools don't state that their diversity goals are to create equity in our system. As Justice O'Connor stated in the opinion to Grutter that they serve as gate keepers as lawyers become politicians, write the laws which we are all subject to (not word for word but the idea of it and the reason why diversity is important). I mean I'm realistic I don't expect them to change the world I just wish they tried harder. For me the thing that made me think about this was working a new job in a freight forwarding company. As someone who is in upper management you have to train everywhere and right now I'm working in the wherehouse. I see and work with only urms many who do backbreaking labor for minimum wage who didn't receive an adequate education and it makes me feel bad that there are others who can benefit and many who don't and some of those had decent numbers and stories of over coming adversity yet schools don't give them a shot. At some point I wish schools in general specially law schools stopped caring about rankings and focus on doing the morally right thing; giving people who wouldn't be there a chance. In the end I understand that urms by the sake of being unrepresented get the boost but is it really a boost when many who get in would have already gotten in?


Are you saying let unqualified ppl in just b/c they are URMs?? Because if thats what you are saying... thats not a good idea. I already know some URM kids getting into schools where they have no chance of being especially successful(im talking 149 LSAT). Doesnt do them any good b/c they just end up at the bottom of the class or dropping out.

rundoxierun
Posts: 1893
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:46 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby rundoxierun » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:57 pm

tooswolle wrote:It's not necessarily an argument. It's more of a question of whether people feel that law schools say one thing but do another when it comes to diversity My previous post was the reasoning behind my feelings. So back to the issue, doesn't anyone feel the same way?

Edit this isn't a debate about the issue of urm status this is a question of the views of fellow urms on the process which is perfectly valid.


Well in that case... No.

User avatar
NZA
Posts: 1285
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:01 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby NZA » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:58 pm

tooswolle wrote:It's not necessarily an argument. It's more of a question of whether people feel that law schools say one thing but do another when it comes to diversity My previous post was the reasoning behind my feelings. So back to the issue, doesn't anyone feel the same way?

Edit this isn't a debate about the issue of urm status this is a question of the views of fellow urms on the process which is perfectly valid.


Frankly...no, I don't feel the same way. :? Sorry.

Pneumatic
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 3:41 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby Pneumatic » Fri Jan 14, 2011 2:11 am

tooswolle wrote:It's not necessarily an argument. It's more of a question of whether people feel that law schools say one thing but do another when it comes to diversity My previous post was the reasoning behind my feelings. So back to the issue, doesn't anyone feel the same way?

Edit this isn't a debate about the issue of urm status this is a question of the views of fellow urms on the process which is perfectly valid.


I think law schools definitely give URM's a boost. I think I have read the articles you mentioned or similar ones. The facts are that statistically some URM's, especially blacks, get into law school at a lower rate despite AA. Huh? That's what I thought too. If 10 whites and 10 blacks apply, something like 6 or 7 of the whites will get in and only 3 or 4 blacks. However, just because the rates are lower doesn't mean blacks aren't getting a major bust; they definitely are.

The logical explanation is that the qualifications of blacks are still well below whites, even with the boost. While I am for affirmative action to some extent (probably because I'm a URM), really, unless an URM is disadvantaged because of his race, the boost really isn't justified from a qualification standpoint, at which point complaining about not getting a boost is just whining. So, yes URM's are getting substantial boosts and no they shouldn't unless they can demonstrate how there race disadvantaged them. I guess the main argument that could be made is that a person is automatically disadvantaged if their a minority (pay etc.) and this is a good reason for AA, but still this distorts the fact that an "advantaged" URM should have an advantage over a white or even a "disadvantaged" white for that matter. Really, I think the government should be putting more money into disadvantaged communities, with enough work this AA crap could go away.

User avatar
Doritos
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:24 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby Doritos » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:56 am

oh god, this is turning into an AA v. no AA debate.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby ResolutePear » Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:17 am

Let's not discuss the reasons whether AA/URM is deserved or not.

TLS Modisprudence has stated that this is a bannable offense.

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

Re: False Hopes

Postby tooswolle » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:11 pm

I agree with this not going in to a debate about the merits of AA. My question dealt with the perceptions of minority students on schools and whether they live up to their "comitment to diversity" anecdotally I've seen schools list from 16-24% minority enrollment which are comprised of groups which are not traditionally considered urms (like Asians etc.) so in those respect this is to get a general feel. Frankly my view is that they don't do enough when they say they do. If this question doesn't follow the forum rules it should be closed, but from what I've seen it doesn't so let's just keep things to the original question.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: False Hopes

Postby Renzo » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:13 pm

Doritos wrote:oh god, this is turning into an AA v. no AA debate.


I'd like to steer it towards a punctuation/sentence structure v. no punctuation/sentence structure debate. I am for it; it appears the OP is against it.

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

Re: False Hopes

Postby tooswolle » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:19 pm

Why don't you go bother someone else if you have nothing to say or contribute? Punctuation matters, but that's not the purpose of this conversation.

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby AreJay711 » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:27 pm

I think they do take meaningful measures to ensure diversity. A large part of it might be for PR but you you also have to take into consideration that 1/2 of law school applicants don't go to law school. Some of those choose not to go but others are just shut out.

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby Kohinoor » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:13 pm

tooswolle wrote:Although law schools don't state that their diversity goals are to create equity in our system.

link?

User avatar
NZA
Posts: 1285
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:01 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby NZA » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:21 pm

Kohinoor wrote:
tooswolle wrote:Although law schools don't state that their diversity goals are to create equity in our system.

link?


Why would you ask someone for a link to something that they claim doesn't exist?

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: False Hopes

Postby Kohinoor » Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:25 pm

NZA wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:
tooswolle wrote:Although law schools don't state that their diversity goals are to create equity in our system.

link?


Why would you ask someone for a link to something that they claim doesn't exist?

He didn't say it doesn't exist. He said they don't state it.




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: drs36 and 2 guests