deleted

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
User avatar
hyperbolme
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:37 pm

deleted

Postby hyperbolme » Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:40 pm

.
Last edited by hyperbolme on Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:12 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
twenty
Posts: 3153
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby twenty » Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:04 pm

Figure that the 3.4 does not automatically lock you out of a school you would have been automatically locked out at otherwise as a non-URM. Definitely apply to H and S.

tiltedwindmill
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:28 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby tiltedwindmill » Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:06 pm

Blanket the T-14 for maximum $$$

User avatar
hyperbolme
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby hyperbolme » Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:24 pm

Thanks, guys. I am planning to blanket T14, but was hoping for statistics or analysis tools or something. Anyone?

daleearnhardt123
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:41 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby daleearnhardt123 » Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:39 pm

hyperbolme wrote:Thanks, guys. I am planning to blanket T14, but was hoping for statistics or analysis tools or something. Anyone?


You acknowledged yourself that there isnt any readily available precedents. So, statistics (or, the compilation of precedents really) would seem to be unavailable.

That said, I don't think anyone here would be surprised if you swept H-Y-S. I don't know that female URM gives you an added boost over male URM at admissions, but I have little doubt that it does with job offers. Reasoning back, then, I would assume the same can probably be said for admissions. At least if we can assume admissions officers are rational, self-interested beings who want their admitted students to place as well as possible post-graduation.

xmking07
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:57 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby xmking07 » Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:43 pm

There is a lack of statistics for your numbers as a urm, so basically you/we are going to have to rely heavily on speculation as to your chances. Given that, though, I would say a good chance at HYS and CCN with money. Just make sure your PS is up to par/exemplary and you'll be set.

User avatar
PrizeFighter
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 12:57 am

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby PrizeFighter » Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:00 pm

hyperbolme wrote:3) Any information on T14 schools more inclined toward MexA URMs?


I've been told that school also value geographic diversity, so I would think that T14 schools located in areas that have a smaller population of MexAm applicants nearby would find out of state URMs more desirable. For example, a relatively high percentage of MexAm applicants probably apply to California schools because many live near those schools. How many of them are willing to move to Virginia or Michigan?

This supposition may not hold with URMs that have elite LSAT scores who are probably better informed about the benefits of a T14 school v. the regional one. Thoughts?

User avatar
hyperbolme
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby hyperbolme » Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:55 pm

daleearnhardt123 wrote:
hyperbolme wrote:Thanks, guys. I am planning to blanket T14, but was hoping for statistics or analysis tools or something. Anyone?


You acknowledged yourself that there isnt any readily available precedents. So, statistics (or, the compilation of precedents really) would seem to be unavailable.

That said, I don't think anyone here would be surprised if you swept H-Y-S. I don't know that female URM gives you an added boost over male URM at admissions, but I have little doubt that it does with job offers. Reasoning back, then, I would assume the same can probably be said for admissions. At least if we can assume admissions officers are rational, self-interested beings who want their admitted students to place as well as possible post-graduation.


Interesting point, and one I hadn't yet considered. Thanks for the additional perspective.

User avatar
hyperbolme
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:37 pm

.

Postby hyperbolme » Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:59 pm

.
Last edited by hyperbolme on Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Iroh
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:20 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby Iroh » Sat Feb 15, 2014 12:10 am

Male Mex. URM here. 3.6x GPA, 171 LSAT.

So far this cycle:

Accepted: Stanford, Virginia, Duke

Waitlisted: Penn, UCLA

Rejected: None (so far)

It's difficult to predict your cycle when you're a splitter URM. My understanding is that black males are valued over black females for admissions purposes. I would assume (but have no evidence to support) that the same holds for other URMs.

I'm not sure how to determine which schools "favor" Mexicans beyond the typical boost. Demographics only tell you so much. I thought Penn was going to accept me. I also thought, regardless of URM status, that UCLA would accept me as well. I thought I had absolutely no shot at Stanford, Harvard, or Chicago, and yet I've been accepted to Stanford and have had interviews with the other two. :|

So is this evidence that GPA-centric schools will give a break to URMs? It certainly seems so. But I think it also shows that admissions decisions, even though they seem predictable, can surprise you.

daleearnhardt123
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:41 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby daleearnhardt123 » Sat Feb 15, 2014 12:40 am

Iroh wrote:Male Mex. URM here. 3.6x GPA, 171 LSAT.

So far this cycle:

Accepted: Stanford, Virginia, Duke

Waitlisted: Penn, UCLA

Rejected: None (so far)

It's difficult to predict your cycle when you're a splitter URM. My understanding is that black males are valued over black females for admissions purposes. I would assume (but have no evidence to support) that the same holds for other URMs.

I'm not sure how to determine which schools "favor" Mexicans beyond the typical boost. Demographics only tell you so much. I thought Penn was going to accept me. I also thought, regardless of URM status, that UCLA would accept me as well. I thought I had absolutely no shot at Stanford, Harvard, or Chicago, and yet I've been accepted to Stanford and have had interviews with the other two. :|

So is this evidence that GPA-centric schools will give a break to URMs? It certainly seems so. But I think it also shows that admissions decisions, even though they seem predictable, can surprise you.


UCLA is YPing you, that's not a useful data point. Strange that you're not in a Penn though... maybe this admissions cycle has already yielded them a lot of MexAs?

User avatar
aboutmydaylight
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:50 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby aboutmydaylight » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:01 pm

hyperbolme wrote:Brand new here, but I did do my research before making a thread. Unfortunately, LSN boasts exactly ZERO female URMs in my stat range, so here I am. I'm hoping for some anecdotal information or helpful links I may have missed. I have decent softs and my 3.4 GPA was earned while working three jobs attending a rigorous liberal arts school, but I'm concerned about how it could affect my T14 chances.

My questions:
1) Does being a female URM affect my chances at all? I've found data available on male URMs, but I'm finding little info on female URMs, so it would be good to know if being a woman even matters. This may be a non-issue; in any event, I'm curious.

2) Does being a URM affect my chances at a T14 school that gives greater weight to GPA in their considerations?

3) Any information on T14 schools more inclined toward MexA URMs?

Thanks!


1) It probably matters slightly. Males outperform females on the LSAT in every single race except AA if I remember correctly. Its probably a negligible boost if any at all.

2) Data seems to suggest that the URM boost is more forgiving for LSAT scores, not GPA. This is likely because the performance gap in LSAT is clearly documented, while its much harder to measure for undergrad GPA. 3.4 is under every T14's 25th, but 176 is at or above every school's 75th. I think you might under perform slightly at more holistic/GPA oriented schools (YSB) but it wouldn't surprise anyone if you get in everywhere. 176 is likely among top 5 LSAT scores for MAs in any given cycle, and I don't think a 3.4 is low enough for admissions officers to disregard it.

3) I remember looking at data before and I believe Stanford and Berkeley have the highest MA% among T14 schools for whatever that's worth. Chicago is 3rd I believe. However, some schools report Hispanics as a whole and don't specify Mexican and other Hispanics so you can't be completely sure. For example I remember Penn and Harvard have a high % of Hispanics though not Mexicans.

User avatar
aboutmydaylight
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:50 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby aboutmydaylight » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:07 pm

daleearnhardt123 wrote:
Iroh wrote:Male Mex. URM here. 3.6x GPA, 171 LSAT.

So far this cycle:

Accepted: Stanford, Virginia, Duke

Waitlisted: Penn, UCLA

Rejected: None (so far)

It's difficult to predict your cycle when you're a splitter URM. My understanding is that black males are valued over black females for admissions purposes. I would assume (but have no evidence to support) that the same holds for other URMs.

I'm not sure how to determine which schools "favor" Mexicans beyond the typical boost. Demographics only tell you so much. I thought Penn was going to accept me. I also thought, regardless of URM status, that UCLA would accept me as well. I thought I had absolutely no shot at Stanford, Harvard, or Chicago, and yet I've been accepted to Stanford and have had interviews with the other two. :|

So is this evidence that GPA-centric schools will give a break to URMs? It certainly seems so. But I think it also shows that admissions decisions, even though they seem predictable, can surprise you.


UCLA is YPing you, that's not a useful data point. Strange that you're not in a Penn though... maybe this admissions cycle has already yielded them a lot of MexAs?


Not sure about UCLA YP. I got in this cycle with a 3.9x/173 MA URM, plus their admissions charts seem to suggest they don't really YP as much as other schools.

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby Nova » Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:11 pm

hyperbolme wrote:1) Does being a female URM affect my chances at all? I've found data available on male URMs, but I'm finding little info on female URMs, so it would be good to know if being a woman even matters. This may be a non-issue; in any event, I'm curious.


Besides NAs, there are significantly fewer URM males taking the lsat. see Nik1's post (third to last on page 1) ITT:
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=195443


Unfortunately the direct data source we need to look at is on a broken link :x http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/

I found another source here --LinkRemoved--

roughly 33% more female "Hispanics" take the lsat than male "Hispanics"

roughly 46% more female PRs take the lsat than male PRs

roughly 75% more female AAs take the lsat than male AAs

essentially NA is even between male and female test takers

Although its true that Hispanic/PR males score 2 points higher on average than Hispanic/PR females, Hispanic/PR males likely have a slight advantage over their female counterparts with equal LSAT scores because of the raw number of them with the particular scores.

For the purposes of estimating your chances, the slight advantage is probably insignificant enough to disregard.


This is where the LSAT statistics get very specific. The numbers below represent the number of female testers in each ethnicity. How do your LSAT scores seem to compare to those with a similar genetic and gender background?

•American Indian or Alaskan Native:
Number of Testers: 232
Mean: 144.32
Standard Deviation: 9.53

•Asian:
Number of Testers: 4,120
Mean: 152.33
Standard Deviation: 10.23

•Black or African American:
Number of Testers: 7,236
Mean: 141.43
Standard Deviation: 8.41

•Canadian Aboriginal:
Number of Testers: 9
Mean: 146.67
Standard Deviation: 10.45

•Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander:
Number of Testers: 93
Mean: 144.51
Standard Deviation:8.68

•Hispanic or Latino:
Number of Testers: 4,105
Mean: 145.37
Standard Deviation: 9.07

•Puerto Rican:
Number of Testers: 1,110
Mean: 137.41
Standard Deviation: 9.71

•White or Caucasian:
Number of Testers: 25,299
Mean: 151.98
Standard Deviation: 9.19

•Multiple Ethnicities:
Number of Testers: 3,549
Mean: 148.35
Standard Deviation: 9.85

•No Response:
Number of Testers: 530
Mean: 155.05
Standard Deviation: 9.81

Average LSAT Scores By Male Gender And Ethnicity

And here is the counterpart which represents the male testers in each ethnicity.

•American Indian or Alaskan Native:
Number of Testers: 242
Mean: 147.03
Standard Deviation: 8.67

•Asian:
Number of Testers: 3,388
Mean: 153.10
Standard Deviation: 10.85

•Black or African American:
Number of Testers: 4,217
Mean: 142.54
Standard Deviation: 9.09

•Canadian Aboriginal:
Number of Testers: 8
Mean: 151.75
Standard Deviation: 9.36

•Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander:
Number of Testers: 54
Mean: 149.32
Standard Deviation: 10.41

•Hispanic or Latino:
Number of Testers: 3,108
Mean: 147.57
Standard Deviation: 9.34

•Puerto Rican:
Number of Testers: 750
Mean: 138.99
Standard Deviation: 9.57

•White or Caucasian:
Number of Testers: 31,629
Mean: 153.44
Standard Deviation: 9.27

•Multiple Ethnicities:
Number of Testers: 2,929
Mean: 151.22
Standard Deviation: 9.67

•No Response:
Number of Testers: 854
Mean: 155.93
Standard Deviation: 9.34

User avatar
Dr.Zer0
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:11 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby Dr.Zer0 » Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:48 am

Is this the link you are looking for Nova?

http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source ... -resources)/tr-12-03.pdf

User avatar
teampeeta
Posts: 422
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:36 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby teampeeta » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:09 am

I imagine you'll do really well. I'd predict at least one and probably two of HYS. YLS is going to be a harder sell because of your GPA, but it's still worth applying there. Otherwise I think you're looking at big money throughout the T14. I'm less familiar with the MA boost, but I don't think things like the Darrow (Michigan), the Butler (1/2 at Columbia), and the Rubenstein (full at Chicago) scholarships are off the table.

Just make sure to apply early and present the strongest possible application (essays, resume, etc.) that you can.

Best of luck. Let us know how it turns out!

User avatar
hyperbolme
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby hyperbolme » Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:00 pm

Thanks, everyone! I appreciate all the statistics and stories. I would LOVE to get YHS, and it looks like my chances there are at least slightly better than the GPA auto-reject I expected. :lol:

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Female MexA, 3.4/176

Postby Nova » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:46 pm

Dr.Zer0 wrote:Is this the link you are looking for Nova?

http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source/research- (lsac-resources)/tr-12-03.pdf

Yes.

Nice!




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: PresidentIJohnson and 7 guests