T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
lawyeredup
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:34 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawyeredup » Tue Sep 29, 2009 2:24 am

touche CPT, touche

User avatar
lawdog
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawdog » Thu Oct 01, 2009 11:39 am

A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.

User avatar
chewdak
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:54 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby chewdak » Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:15 pm

lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


This sentence is poorly constructed.

User avatar
lawlover829
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 9:40 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawlover829 » Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:17 pm

chewdak wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


This sentence is poorly constructed.


lol

lewis louis
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lewis louis » Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:25 pm

As an AA male, I can say there is validity in just about every comment made (including the nonthreatening bit).

User avatar
lawdog
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawdog » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:07 pm

lawlover829 wrote:
chewdak wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


This sentence is poorly constructed.


lol



LOL. Well I was writting it during lecture.

User avatar
groundkontrol
Posts: 244
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:25 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby groundkontrol » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:25 pm

Off course there are black URM males that score between 150-160 and get into T14 schools. I know someone who scored a 160 and got into Yale this past cycle. But in no way whatsoever should this be treated as the norm. As a black URM male who wants to go to a T14 I want to score between 160-165. I don't think I scored above 160 in September so I will be taking again in December (and hopefully scoring above 160) so that I can make T14 a reality.

User avatar
redsox
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby redsox » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:43 pm

lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.


Prep tests cost $8, not $1200.

User avatar
lawdog
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawdog » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:47 pm

I should have said prep test tutoring classes. Test doesn't help if you can't deconstruct a problem.

Personally, Im a black male with w/e and Im shooting for 170+
Last edited by lawdog on Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
redsox
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby redsox » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:48 pm

Drake014 wrote:Just like with any group there's going to be variation. I'm a URM who did a significant amount of prep for the LSAT and scored much higher than I needed. Likewise, I've heard another URM talk about how they only needed to score so high to get into the grad program they wanted. I've also heard a rich white kid say he doesn't have to worry about his grades or his test scores because his father is alumni and a major donor. I find the latter scenario to be the most disturbing even though its the least talked about.


You find the fact that we live in a society where there are rich people who get an advantage from their wealth more disturbing than the fact that there is a huge segment of our population that is so poor, unemployed, incarcerated, and uneducated that they need a massive boost in admissions to try to create some semblance of equality?

User avatar
kurama20
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby kurama20 » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:54 pm

redsox wrote:You find the fact that we live in a society where there are rich people who get an advantage from their wealth more disturbing than the fact that there is a huge segment of our population that is so poor, unemployed, incarcerated, and uneducated that they need a massive boost in admissions to try to create some semblance of equality?


Just so you know---this post strenghtened the exact opposite viewpoint that you intended it to.

User avatar
kurama20
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby kurama20 » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:56 pm

redsox wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.


Prep tests cost $8, not $1200.


If you think self prep for someone who is not naturally talented at standardized testing is going to have even remotely the same effect as a high quality prep course you are being unfairly pompous. Believe it or not when you don't understand something, trying to teach it to your self is not a good idea.

User avatar
kurama20
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby kurama20 » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:57 pm

Kohinoor wrote:A 170 is great but doesn't make you a lock. If your GPA is terrible, top schools will take a 3.8/164 URM over your 2.7/176. hth!


Please stop speaking the truth. Some of us can't handle it. :(

HawksJetsFalcons
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 10:22 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby HawksJetsFalcons » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:00 pm

So does this mean a 140-150 LSAT= t100?


I don't know about that.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby rayiner » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:08 pm

lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


Yeah, this is logic fail.

User avatar
Gaius
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:47 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby Gaius » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:16 pm

rayiner wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


Yeah, this is logic fail.


Its not his fault, he couldn't afford a logic course.

Though less access to test prep materials probably contributes to some of the scoring difference. The LSAT is a very learnable test, and people with access to study prep materials will do significantly better. But I doubt it accounts for the entire difference, or even a large fraction.

User avatar
Jay-Electronica
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:39 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby Jay-Electronica » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:30 pm

Gaius wrote:
rayiner wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


Yeah, this is logic fail.


Its not his fault, he couldn't afford a logic course.

Though less access to test prep materials probably contributes to some of the scoring difference. The LSAT is a very learnable test, and people with access to study prep materials will do significantly better. But I doubt it accounts for the entire difference, or even a large fraction.


I think that it plays a larger role than you may give credit for. I started off with no idea whatsoever about the process of applying let alone the LSAT. I thought that all you did was take the test, and from my understanding a lot of people have this same misinformed mindset.

I started off at a 147 I couldnt even do a basic linear game. I thought it was a diff language. My last PT was a 161 and I have pretty much perfected the games section and the RC section.

IMHO, I believe that lack of prep plays a huge role. I think anyone with the right amount of motivation and diligence can prep their way to an honest score. I'm so happy I decided to prep, had I not law school wouldnt even be an option for me.

User avatar
chewdak
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:54 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby chewdak » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:35 pm

Thank you Rand M. for the http://www.jbhe.com/news_views/51_gradu ... _test.html link.
The LSAT scores are useful to select applicants from within a certain pool, but there are different pools and the scores are not a predictor of future success.
M. Gladwell's 'Outliers' refers to the study of the U of Michigan Law graduates which found that the minorities were just as successful in their profession as anyone else. I guess the adcoms can figure out who will likely do well in school and beyond whatever their LSAT scores are.
According to the link above, the 165 score, the 92 percentile overall, is the 89 percentile among the whites. I can temper my expectations now.
Also, could someone check this calculation from the same link: "In 1998 the mean score of white students taking the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) was 151.96. (The LSAT is graded on a scoring scale of 120 to 180.) The mean score for black students taking the test that year was 141.80, about 17 percent lower than the mean score of whites."?
Subtracting 120 from the score, the means are 32 for whites and 22 for blacks. Isn't the difference closer to 30% rather than 17%?

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby rayiner » Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:38 pm

Gaius wrote:
rayiner wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


Yeah, this is logic fail.


Its not his fault, he couldn't afford a logic course.

Though less access to test prep materials probably contributes to some of the scoring difference. The LSAT is a very learnable test, and people with access to study prep materials will do significantly better. But I doubt it accounts for the entire difference, or even a large fraction.


LSAC actually did a study about this: http://lsacnet.lsac.org/Research/tr/Sum ... 7-2008.pdf

Table 4 shows that the mean LSAT for African-Americans was just about 10 points lower than for Caucasians, and for Puerto-Ricans was almost 14 points lower.

Table 7 shows that African-Americans and Caucasians used broadly similar preparation methods. 32% of African-Americans used a commercial test-prep program, while 37% of Caucasians did. Only 22% of Peurto-Ricans did. About 2% for African-Americans and Caucasians reported no prep, while 11% of Puerto-Ricans did.

User avatar
lawdog
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawdog » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:00 pm

Obviously you guys missed the joke, however in a effort to pad your lil ego's you did the fox news job of picking on the messenger and not the message.

Hundreds, upon hundreds of applicants every year do not prep for SAT's, GRE's, ACT's, LSAT, etc. Most of out the ignorance of knowing what material is available. Now, I know this isn't your fault, however since you are obviously in a URM thread and most are not URM's it seems to be a concern.

From the previous post admissions overwhelming 60% of ANY race does not use commercial prep material. Yet these people are more than likely taking the test, and overwhelming coming up with lower scores.

To the second point, those who can afford prepping, they do prep, however it is very expensive to get tutoring. $1000 to do anything for almost any college student is a lot of money.

I would say the amount of students who can walk in cold, take the lsat and score 90% is very low. Regardless of the race. Add in any socio-economical factors, ignorance factor, and general life lessons not learn and its not hard to figure out why the disparity in scores.

The lsat is a logic test and logic can be learned. Like the previous poster stated, its like a foreign language upon first sight. Especially for those who have never seen it before.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby rayiner » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:03 pm

lawdog wrote:Obviously you guys missed the joke, however in a effort to pad your lil ego's you did the fox news job of picking on the messenger and not the message.

Hundreds, upon hundreds of applicants every year do not prep for SAT's, GRE's, ACT's, LSAT, etc. Most of out the ignorance of knowing what material is available. Now, I know this isn't your fault, however since you are obviously in a URM thread and most are not URM's it seems to be a concern.

From the previous post admissions overwhelming 60% of ANY race does not use commercial prep material. Yet these people are more than likely taking the test, and overwhelming coming up with lower scores.

To the second point, those who can afford prepping, they do prep, however it is very expensive to get tutoring. $1000 to do anything for almost any college student is a lot of money.

I would say the amount of students who can walk in cold, take the lsat and score 90% is very low. Regardless of the race. Add in any socio-economical factors, ignorance factor, and general life lessons not learn and its not hard to figure out why the disparity in scores.

The lsat is a logic test and logic can be learned. Like the previous poster stated, its like a foreign language upon first sight. Especially for those who have never seen it before.


The study also shows that commercial prep isn't any more effective in general than self-study.

As for your comment (bolded) I don't see how it follows at all.

User avatar
Gaius
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:47 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby Gaius » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:04 pm

IDILL_E wrote:
Gaius wrote:
rayiner wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.

If you do not prep, you have to be genius to deconstruct a logic sentence, or you was probably a philosophy major.

So you can probably infer, most minorities do not have the 1200 for prep testing & most minorities probably do not go to college for philosophy degrees. Therefore minorities score lower on the lsat.


Yeah, this is logic fail.


Its not his fault, he couldn't afford a logic course.

Though less access to test prep materials probably contributes to some of the scoring difference. The LSAT is a very learnable test, and people with access to study prep materials will do significantly better. But I doubt it accounts for the entire difference, or even a large fraction.


I think that it plays a larger role than you may give credit for. I started off with no idea whatsoever about the process of applying let alone the LSAT. I thought that all you did was take the test, and from my understanding a lot of people have this same misinformed mindset.

I started off at a 147 I couldnt even do a basic linear game. I thought it was a diff language. My last PT was a 161 and I have pretty much perfected the games section and the RC section.

IMHO, I believe that lack of prep plays a huge role. I think anyone with the right amount of motivation and diligence can prep their way to an honest score. I'm so happy I decided to prep, had I not law school wouldnt even be an option for me.


I'm not saying lack of prep doesn't hurt, I'm saying the degree to which URM are unable to prep compared to the majority isn't significant enough to make up the entire difference. Its not like the bookstore has a white's only policy on buying prep books. They are just less likely to afford it.

User avatar
lawdog
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby lawdog » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:06 pm

Well we was arguing that it can't be lack of "just" prep that accounted for the disparity in scores also right?

User avatar
chewdak
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:54 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby chewdak » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:25 pm

Congratulations if you are happy with your LSAT scores.
It seems to me that schools reserve certain number of seats for certain minority groups. If you are not part of that group, you will not get into one of those seats even if you have a perfect score.

User avatar
redsox
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170?

Postby redsox » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:25 pm

kurama20 wrote:
redsox wrote:
lawdog wrote:A lot of applicants (not just black) do not understand studying/prepping for the LSAT. I don't know a lot of people of ANY race who can shell out 1200 for a prep test.


Prep tests cost $8, not $1200.


If you think self prep for someone who is not naturally talented at standardized testing is going to have even remotely the same effect as a high quality prep course you are being unfairly pompous. Believe it or not when you don't understand something, trying to teach it to your self is not a good idea.


Actually, I was just pointing out that when he said "shell out 1200 for a prep test," he was very, very mistaken.

kurama20 wrote:
redsox wrote:You find the fact that we live in a society where there are rich people who get an advantage from their wealth more disturbing than the fact that there is a huge segment of our population that is so poor, unemployed, incarcerated, and uneducated that they need a massive boost in admissions to try to create some semblance of equality?


Just so you know---this post strenghtened the exact opposite viewpoint that you intended it to.


What viewpoint do you think I intended to strengthen?




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests