+1, +2, +3, +4

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
raferna3
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:04 am

+1, +2, +3, +4

Postby raferna3 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:26 pm

I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.

User avatar
francesfarmer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:52 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby francesfarmer » Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:48 pm

That's not how softs work.

Softs that actually matter: military and curing cancer/etc.

Softs don't add points to any numerical aspect of your application. I would say the above softs matter because they are positively correlated with applicants outperforming their numbers (or performing well for their numbers), from my experience stalking LSN forever.

I don't know if I would consider URM a soft--but URM status (NA>AA>hispanic [PR and chicano only]) has a real impact on admissions.

Check out lawschoolnumbers.com.

User avatar
raferna3
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:04 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby raferna3 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:57 pm

francesfarmer wrote:That's not how softs work.

Softs that actually matter: military and curing cancer/etc.

Softs don't add points to any numerical aspect of your application. I would say the above softs matter because they are positively correlated with applicants outperforming their numbers (or performing well for their numbers), from my experience stalking LSN forever.

I don't know if I would consider URM a soft--but URM status (NA>AA>hispanic [PR and chicano only]) has a real impact on admissions.

Check out lawschoolnumbers.com.


Would a Cuban / Puerto Rican be considered a URM?

Also, yeah, I suppose minority isnt a soft. But I have seen charts that say +'#' for certain attributes, like business owner, veteran, etc. and I was just wondering what this +'#' was attributed to exactly.

User avatar
hoos89
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby hoos89 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:58 pm

/
Last edited by hoos89 on Fri Jul 04, 2014 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CyanIdes Of March
Posts: 743
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby CyanIdes Of March » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:02 pm

hoos89 wrote:PR = Puerto Rican, so yes. As for Cuban, no I don't think so.


I wonder, if PR became the 51st state... would Puerto Ricans still get to be called URMs? Hawaiians, Alaskans, Floridians, Texans none of those are considered URM, even if it adds a bit of uniqueness to an app (Maybe not Florida and Texas).

mr.hands
Posts: 892
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:23 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby mr.hands » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:04 pm

Cuban is not URM. PR is but much less beneficial than AA.

Also, schools aren't supposed to mechanically add points for being a minority. It's supposed to be a black box. That's why no one can give you a definite answer. In other words, this +2/+3 thing is purely illustrative

User avatar
raferna3
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:04 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby raferna3 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:10 pm

mr.hands wrote:Cuban is not URM. PR is but much less beneficial than AA.

Also, schools aren't supposed to mechanically add points for being a minority. It's supposed to be a black box. That's why no one can give you a definite answer. In other words, this +2/+3 thing is purely illustrative


Okay, that makes sense... As for the Cuban / PR thing. Would being 50/50 hurt me? Should I perhaps not mention the Cuban half of me and leave my LSAC profile as only reflecting PR? Lol.


ETA: My mother came here as a political refugee from Cuba, while my Puerto Rican dad was born in Brooklyn... Seems like the URM status should be the other way around. Lol.

User avatar
francesfarmer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:52 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby francesfarmer » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:12 pm

raferna3 wrote:
mr.hands wrote:Cuban is not URM. PR is but much less beneficial than AA.

Also, schools aren't supposed to mechanically add points for being a minority. It's supposed to be a black box. That's why no one can give you a definite answer. In other words, this +2/+3 thing is purely illustrative


Okay, that makes sense... As for the Cuban / PR thing. Would being 50/50 hurt me? Should I perhaps not mention the Cuban half of me and leave my LSAC profile as only reflecting PR? Lol.


ETA: My mother came here as a political refugee from Cuba, while my Puerto Rican dad was born in Brooklyn... Seems like the URM status should be the other way around. Lol.

Half PR counts as PR. Law schools only care about your minority status to the extent that they can report it in their class profile.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:37 pm

raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3

User avatar
CyanIdes Of March
Posts: 743
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby CyanIdes Of March » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:55 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3


Do you think the +3 Military Service applies at all schools equally? It seems, from what I've seen, to be less beneficial at some schools than others.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:56 pm

CyanIdes Of March wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3


Do you think the +3 Military Service applies at all schools equally? It seems, from what I've seen, to be less beneficial at some schools than others.


Nope it does not, you nailed it. Indeed I almost typed that exact thing but since it is really hard to know which schools I just based on the three I've worked at. For some I think it is +0.

RodneyRuxin
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby RodneyRuxin » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:02 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3



You really think someone who started a business and served in the military gets the same boost as a URM?

Really?

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:07 pm

RodneyRuxin wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3



You really think someone who started a business and served in the military gets the same boost as a URM?

Really?


Since that is exactly the opposite of what i said, the answer is no.

User avatar
francesfarmer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:52 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby francesfarmer » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:10 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
RodneyRuxin wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3



You really think someone who started a business and served in the military gets the same boost as a URM?

Really?


Since that is exactly the opposite of what i said, the answer is no.

Combined, that is what you're saying.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:15 pm

francesfarmer wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:
RodneyRuxin wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3



You really think someone who started a business and served in the military gets the same boost as a URM?

Really?


Since that is exactly the opposite of what i said, the answer is no.

Combined, that is what you're saying.


If "and" means aggregate, it isn't stackable like that. Indeed none of this quite works like I, or anyone, laid it out -- but in a effort to help the OP I figured I'd give a reference point, which I will be the first to admit is inexact. The bump, or "elevating factor" as we refer to it in admissions for URM is real and almost categorical. The other two depend on numerous other factors.

User avatar
francesfarmer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:52 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby francesfarmer » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:19 pm

That's the issue with trying to quantify soft boosts. I don't think OP knows enough about law school admissions to understand what you mean.

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

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby Nova » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:27 pm

I dont really buy the whole +X thing.

Too many variables to be even close to an exact science.

Just look at the baylor data dump to see how all over the place the URM bump could be.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/the-bayl ... olarships/

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:29 pm

francesfarmer wrote:That's the issue with trying to quantify soft boosts. I don't think OP knows enough about law school admissions to understand what you mean.


Yep, I regret even doing what i did, particular as I just now read the thread in full. For very good reason admissions offices never answer questions like this, and I got way too jumpy in doing so.

That said, if you want to say "+" to LSAT score (which is also tough to do) I'll refine my answer:

URM +8-15
Military: +?
Start business: +?

There, that is utterly unhelpful but more accurate

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:31 pm

Nova wrote:I dont really buy the whole +X thing.

Too many variables to be even close to an exact science.

Just look at the baylor data dump to see how all over the place the URM bump could be.

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/the-bayl ... olarships/


BAHAHA at Baylor, I don't believe I saw that last year. I believe this has happened once before but I can't remember which school.

The more common egregious mistake is the mass email admitting the entire applicant pool. This is much worse.

User avatar
raferna3
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:04 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby raferna3 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:32 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3


I see what you're getting at, but just for the record, I was not handicapping the above based on my view of their point spreads. I was just trying to illustrate an example of a list I saw(which was much longer than the 3 I listed). The numbers I plugged in are completely arbitrary.

I would think owning a company would count more than military service(unless you were comparing an officer to the owner of a taco stand), but I suppose it is in the eye of the beerholder :wink:

User avatar
raferna3
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:04 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby raferna3 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:33 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
francesfarmer wrote:That's the issue with trying to quantify soft boosts. I don't think OP knows enough about law school admissions to understand what you mean.


Yep, I regret even doing what i did, particular as I just now read the thread in full. For very good reason admissions offices never answer questions like this, and I got way too jumpy in doing so.

That said, if you want to say "+" to LSAT score (which is also tough to do) I'll refine my answer:

URM +8-15
Military: +?
Start business: +?

There, that is utterly unhelpful but more accurate


Well, hell. I scored a 161. If being a URM puts me in the 169-176 window why the heck am I retaking in October?! Lol.

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2617
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby MikeSpivey » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:36 pm

raferna3 wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3


I see what you're getting at, but just for the record, I was not handicapping the above based on my view of their point spreads. I was just trying to illustrate an example of a list I saw(which was much longer than the 3 I listed). The numbers I plugged in are completely arbitrary.

I would think owning a company would count more than military service(unless you were comparing an officer to the owner of a taco stand), but I suppose it is in the eye of the beerholder :wink:


Well, let me give the best advice I can possibly offer you and then bow out of this thread, which is mucking me up. If you are going to be a lawyer you need to be MUCH more precise with your terminology,

"owning" and "starting" are not the same thing, nor is "minority" and "under-represented minority". Just an fyi, I realize this sounds critical but I am simply trying to be helpful.

regardless, there is a huge continuum on what starting a company might entail, whereas military experience is much more standard (albeit variable in the eyes of different admissions officers)

User avatar
francesfarmer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:52 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby francesfarmer » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:38 pm

raferna3 wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3


I see what you're getting at, but just for the record, I was not handicapping the above based on my view of their point spreads. I was just trying to illustrate an example of a list I saw(which was much longer than the 3 I listed). The numbers I plugged in are completely arbitrary.

I would think owning a company would count more than military service(unless you were comparing an officer to the owner of a taco stand), but I suppose it is in the eye of the beerholder :wink:

I don't think anyone has ever calculated the effect of owning a business on law school admissions, but the military boost is generally considered real and significant (depending on the school).

Um, being in the military is a bigger deal than starting a business. Last time I checked, starting a business doesn't put you at risk of being killed/maimed.

User avatar
raferna3
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:04 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby raferna3 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:40 pm

MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:
MikeSpivey wrote:
raferna3 wrote:I'm a noob, so please forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, but I have seen these +1, +2, +3, etc. numbers up, not only on these threads, but on some sites in reference to soft factors' impact on admissions decisions.

IE:
Minority: +2
Started a business: +3
Military Service: +3
etc, etc.

Now, my question is, what exactly are these plus-numbers added to? LSAT score? Clearly, I know they are not added to your OFFICIAL LSAT score, but are these points added to what you have and that is the number considered by adcomms, or is it in reference to some kind of numeric school applicant ranking system? I was under the impression that the adding of points to an applicant due to minority status was struck down by SCOTUS in Grutter v. Michigan.

Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows a reliable chart which reflects how adcomms look at softs please provide a link, as I have seen many which seem to vary quite a bit.


Here is how I would handicap the categories you just gave:

UNDERREPRESENTED Minority: +5
Started a business: +2
Military Service: +3


I see what you're getting at, but just for the record, I was not handicapping the above based on my view of their point spreads. I was just trying to illustrate an example of a list I saw(which was much longer than the 3 I listed). The numbers I plugged in are completely arbitrary.

I would think owning a company would count more than military service(unless you were comparing an officer to the owner of a taco stand), but I suppose it is in the eye of the beerholder :wink:


Well, let me give the best advice I can possibly offer you and then bow out of this thread, which is mucking me up. If you are going to be a lawyer you need to be MUCH more precise with your terminology,

"owning" and "starting" are not the same thing, nor is "minority" and "under-represented minority". Just an fyi, I realize this sounds critical but I am simply trying to be helpful.

regardless, there is a huge continuum on what starting a company might entail, whereas military experience is much more standard (albeit variable in the eyes of different admissions officers)


I see your point, and do agree. Fair enough... Coincidentally, I did start and currently own a company(not a taco stand :wink: ) So I suppose I am grouping the two together when I should not based on my personal experience.

User avatar
francesfarmer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:52 am

Re: +1, +2, +3, +4

Postby francesfarmer » Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:40 pm

raferna3 wrote:Well, hell. I scored a 161. If being a URM puts me in the 169-176 window why the heck am I retaking in October?! Lol.

You're being way too optimistic. Your GPA is way, WAY too low for you to be admitted to pretty much any school worth going to, especially for the amount of money you would have to pay. You are not a splitter (because that indicates you have a high LSAT, which you do not), but splitters/folks with low GPAs don't tend to get too much scholarship money.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: oliviaj_j and 6 guests