ktatl14 wrote: If you'd like to offer a detailed critique to my hypothetical, I'd appreciate it.
ktatl14 wrote:I reflected earlier, and was interested in what people on here though about this. Disclaimer: this doesn't represent what I believe, necessarily, but it's purpose is to spark discussion.
The times I lurk on this forum, all I hear is the talk about HYS and other t-14's. In fact, it is all I hear from most law school hopefuls. While there is no doubt our passion to attend t-14 schools are no different from our non-URM counterparts (job prospects), our job outlook is similar to the boost that we receive in law school admission.
...if we attend quality schools.
It appears that we, including myself, pursue t-14's because saying "I went to Harvard Law" creates the illusion that we are "better than" others, particularly people in our community.
No, not really. I just want a high-paying job that will help me kick off a successful and lucrative legal career. Harvard is good for that, as are other T-14s. Howard is not so good.
What happened to Howard?
I dunno. Who cares?
Though we can still act as the talented tenth in whatever school we attend, why is Howard's median LSAT a 153?
Because those with better scores tend to have better options and rarely choose to attend Howard.
The jobs prospects are nearly the same as a t-14 schools.
I know some will argue about the quality of education compared to Yale or Stanford, but, would you agree that the quality of the school is determined by the quality of the student body and alum?
In part and to a degree.
Note, I haven't applied to Howard, nor am I saying that we should lower our standards to attend a school like Howard, but I'm asking, why would we consider a school like Howard to be of "lower standard?"
...because it is?
I agree with the stats and job prospects argument. However, I'd like to offer a hypothetical. Let's say the LSAT determines how well you do in law school,
Skip to 15:00 in that video. 16% of one's law school GPA is attributable (read: can be predicted by) the test. The other 80% comes down to work ethic, fit, persona, discipline, etc.
Thus, you're right to note that we can say that the LSAT determines how well you do in law school...but only up to a certain extent.
which eventually correlates to how well you do on the bar,
Maybe...to an extent.
if URM's with a 165 or higher attended HU, would it not increase the overall job prospects of HU?
Those students would not come unless the caliber of HU as an institution of learning increased substantially (read: better teaching, better administration, superior financial aid, better placement, etc). The decision of 165+ AAs not to attend HU is not the root cause of HU's poor overall job prospects. Those prospects are primarily the product of HU's relatively sub-par quality as an institution of learning (relative to T-14 and quite a few Tier One schools).
Even if said students did come, you must keep in mind what I mentioned above: only 16% of one's law school GPA is predicted by the LSAT. The rest comes down to other factors. Some of these factors are tied to the caliber of the institution itself: how good is the instruction? How strong is the curriculum? How good is job placement and fin. aid (read: how stressed are students about their ability to make a living after law school and avoid debt)?
Howard pales in comparison to elite Law schools when it comes to these factors, and that could blunt the performance of any high scoring URMs who chose to attend. They'd be exposed to inferior instruction at Howard relative to the T-14/T20 they could be attending and may not reach their full potential, which isn't a good outcome for anyone.
Let's look at the stats. Only 64% of HU grads pass the bar the first time and their overall employment rate is 47.7 percent. I'm not a statistician, but compared to those who bass the bar (96 students) nearly 80% of HU grads (71 students) who pass the bar have a job.
The fact is that the school can't get two-thirds of its graduates to pass the bar. You might try to make HU look better by telling me that 80% of their grads who do pass get jobs, but that's meaningless to me when I can attend a T-14 where 85-90% of ALL grads find gainful employment.
HU is strong for a Third Tier school, but that's it. Your stats say nothing more than that.
Moreover, nearly 13% (19 students) of HU grads are hired in the NLJ250, which compared to the 65% (96 students) who pass the bar, which is a little over 20% of students, which doesn't necessarily compare to the 40% at HYS, but it isn't a bad stat.
It is good for a Tier Three school.
This goes to say, if those with higher LSAT scores attending Howard, more HU students will pass the bar, the credibility of a HU law degree would increase, and so would recruitment from the NLJ250. I know this is super hypothetical, but consider it.
I don't see the point of the hypothetical. Rational higher caliber students with relatively high LSAT scores aren't going to attend Howard until the credibility of its degree increases, and that won't happen until it improves as an institution of learning and can match better schools in terms of instructor quality, job placement, financial aid, etc, etc.
Any scenario in which said students begin attending Howard en masse before
its credibility rises is too implausible to consider. High-scoring URMs simply aren't that daft. Incentives drive behavior, and there is no incentive right now for these high scoring URMs to consider Howard ahead of the multiple T-14s and T20s they have to choose from.