URM Boost Forum

[mcds]

Well to quote Powerscore:

A+ ---> Study
Not the other way around

Thank you for conceding this point! That's one of the things i've been trying to say! Just because blacks (or anyone else) study hard does NOT mean they will get a good lsat score. Up until this post you were saying that it was sufficient and that it was the only reason that blacks do not score as high. That's simply not true, there are other more complex reasons. A lot of people on TLS attribute blacks underscoring to what is an essentially a reversal of that simple powerscore reasoning rule. I don't understand why they want to apply these rules to everything except this issue.

I never said that! There are myriad reasons why blacks don't score high. One of them is that they don't need to score as high and study accordingly. But that is only one of many reasons. I concede that you brought up many of the others, I just wish you'd acknowledge that I brought up one as well!

[kurama20]

I never said that! There are myriad reasons why blacks don't score high. One of them is that they don't need to score as high and study accordingly. But that is only one of many reasons. I concede that you brought up many of the others, I just wish you'd acknowledge that I brought up one as well!

After reading your response to the guy who just posted I am more clear as to whay you're saying. You are saying that your hypothesis is part of the reason. You did bring up a valid point, it just seemed like you were attributing the low scores solely to that point. Initially it just seemed like you were saying that there were no other causes. You have to understand that the reason I jumped on it was because far too many anti aa (and anti black) posters/people in general attribute blacks issues in higher education to "laziness". As a black man this just infuriates me; so I hopped on the issue and probably came across as somewhat harsh. I agree that your argument has some validity, I just don't want this to turn into another "If blacks would just get their acts together they'd be fine" conversation. Believe me, a lot of posters/people feel that way. Some of them are reading this right now...

[Helmholtz]

[lollypotter]

Wow,

I agree that it's all black people's fault. I know that the reason black people don't make partner in law firms is because they are lazy too. I mean I was walking down the street the other day and I saw a homeless black guy on the street, then I saw a white guy in a suit. It's only an anecdote but it tells the truth. That black guy could be in a suit if he wasn't so lazy.

I think they should do reverse affirmative action and make it harder for black people to achieve success. Make them work twice as hard. Because that worked so well for 100+ years. I mean, look how well African Americans are doing now. jim crow + lynching = ultimate motivation to get a 170+ lsat score.

[summertimechi]

I never said that is the sole reason

If that's true, then that's fine. Like I said, I do see your point in it being a factor, though we'd probably have to agree to disagree on just how large of a factor it is. I just read this...

it's simply expectations. if you knew that you can get in with lower numbers, you'll get lower numbers. this accounts for the above poster's comment about variations in test scores along racial lines. culture and expectation is a huge factor

Hit the nail on the head.

..And assumed that you meant it was the largest if not the sole determining factor, and that's what I objected to. I feel like on nearly every one of these touchy URM threads, therein lies the catalyst for lengthy heated discussions...One person gives a single possible reason for a phenomenon for which there is no single reason, another person takes it to mean that the aforementioned person thinks it's the sole reason and then boom...multiple pages of heated TLS URM/AA discussion.

[summertimechi]

I never said that! There are myriad reasons why blacks don't score high. One of them is that they don't need to score as high and study accordingly. But that is only one of many reasons. I concede that you brought up many of the others, I just wish you'd acknowledge that I brought up one as well!

After reading your response to the guy who just posted I am more clear as to whay you're saying. You are saying that your hypothesis is part of the reason. You did bring up a valid point, it just seemed like you were attributing the low scores solely to that point. Initially it just seemed like you were saying that there were no other causes. You have to understand that the reason I jumped on it was because far too many anti aa (and anti black) posters/people in general attribute blacks issues in higher education to "laziness". As a black man this just infuriates me; so I hopped on the issue and probably came across as somewhat harsh. I agree that your argument has some validity, I just don't want this to turn into another "If blacks would just get their acts together they'd be fine" conversation. Believe me, a lot of posters/people feel that way. Some of them are reading this right now...

kurama, are you inside my head today? took the words right out of my mouth...and put them more eloquently, I think Oh except for the, "as a black man" part, for which I do not qualify.

[Nemorino]

I never said that! There are myriad reasons why blacks don't score high. One of them is that they don't need to score as high and study accordingly. But that is only one of many reasons. I concede that you brought up many of the others, I just wish you'd acknowledge that I brought up one as well!

After reading your response to the guy who just posted I am more clear as to whay you're saying. You are saying that your hypothesis is part of the reason. You did bring up a valid point, it just seemed like you were attributing the low scores solely to that point. Initially it just seemed like you were saying that there were no other causes. You have to understand that the reason I jumped on it was because far too many anti aa (and anti black) posters/people in general attribute blacks issues in higher education to "laziness". As a black man this just infuriates me; so I hopped on the issue and probably came across as somewhat harsh. I agree that your argument has some validity, I just don't want this to turn into another "If blacks would just get their acts together they'd be fine" conversation. Believe me, a lot of posters/people feel that way. Some of them are reading this right now...

I know this is kind of obnoxious, but perhaps now's a good time to reflect on your own prejudice and preconceived notions about a specific group of people.

At the end of the day, most debates about affirmative action are pointless brawls between two groups of people whose interests are in conflict. No more, no less. Anyone who's actually interested in figuring out a solution to the problem would not take an extremist stance such as the one you describe.

[kurama20]

I know this is kind of obnoxious, but perhaps now's a good time to reflect on your own prejudice and preconceived notions about a specific group of people.

At the end of the day, most debates about affirmative action are pointless brawls between two groups of people whose interests are in conflict. No more, no less. Anyone who's actually interested in figuring out a solution to the problem would not take an extremist stance such as the one you describe.

My statements about how a lot of posters/people take the stance that black people are lazy and that this is the catalyst of their problems is not even close to prejudice, it's a fact. Spend some time on this website and you will see what I mean. Many of the anti aa posters on this website use the "black people are just lazy" stance as the basis of their arguments. Really I would say most, but I'm trying to be generous. Hell, there was a survey of the US caucasian population in USA Today a few weeks ago that found that a large portion of caucasians think that most of blacks problems stem from a "lack of work ethic". I'm afraid to say that this idea is far from uncommon. I'm not saying that you feel this way, but unfortunately most arguements against aa are basically just an elaborate version of these feelings. I mean really, check out tls and see how many anti aa posters use arguments that are very different. Most of them aren't truly concerned with finding a solution either; they just want aa to stop so they can have a higher shot at getting into Harvard. This may sound harsh, but let's be real here.

kurama, are you inside my head today? took the words right out of my mouth...and put them more eloquently, I think Oh except for the, "as a black man" part, for which I do not qualify.

Thank you, I think ....and woman can just as easily be substituted for men! This "blacks have problems because their so damn lazy thing just irritates me to no end....it's usually followed by a "look at asians, they should be more like them" how annoying...

[Nemorino]

My statements about how a lot of posters/people take the stance that black people are lazy and that this is the catalyst of their problems is not even close to prejudice, it's a fact. Spend some time on this website and you will see what I mean. Many of the anti aa posters on this website use the "black people are just lazy" stance as the basis of their arguments.

Just because someone asserts that there exists a systematic disincentive to perform well for certain minority groups, it doesn't mean that he/she believes it to be the only reason for their lackluster performance. Besides, "lack of incentive" has a very different connotation from "inherent laziness." You should give them the benefit of the doubt. I think your pride (and something akin to a persecution complex) is clouding your judgment. After all, you completely misunderstood mcds. After reading his(her?) post, it was pretty clear to me that he's neither anti-AA nor someone who believes that "black people are lazy."

Most of them aren't truly concerned with finding a solution either; they just want aa to stop so they can have a higher shot at getting into Harvard. This may sound harsh, but let's be real here.

Don't forget the other side of the equation. Some of the fiercest defenders of AA are simply trying to protect their own interests.

[kurama20]

After all, you completely misunderstood mcds. After reading his(her?) post, it was pretty clear to me that he's neither anti-AA nor someone who believes that "black people are lazy."

Did I say he was anti aa? I know he's not, and if it was "pretty clear" why did multiple other posters get the same meaning from it?????? He did clarify what he meant later though so that's a moot point.

You should give them the benefit of the doubt. I think your pride (and something akin to a persecution complex) is clouding your judgment.

Are you serious? Have you even read/heard the majority of anti aa arguments, especially the one's on TLS? As far as a "complex' you're damn right I have one. It says " I'm tired of hearing bullshit comments about how blacks are lazy and that's the root of their problems and people need to stop saying that bullshit like it's a fact complex" ; I have a full blown case of it actually.
I love it when people jump on blacks who don't succumb to laziness or any of the other issues that are supposedly holding us back and then call them "proud" aka "uppity". Barack's having to deal with this issue right now. This thread needs to end though, so I'm finished.

[Tex_Mex13]

This thread certainly took a leap.

[ramblinwreck]

LOL. Anything written about the URM Boost always seems to start a heated debate.

[ramblinwreck]

No. Perhaps I should have. I wrote "Why Penn?" and "Why Michigan?" Not sure why I didn't do "Why Duke?"

It might have been relatively easy to change a few words from a general "Why ____" statement and just submit it.

[Skadden Stairs]

Something to chew on...

I know how everyone likes to talk about "socio-economic factors" and their relation to LSAT Scores. I have a friend who literally spent like $5.00 prepping for the LSAT. He got prep books from the library, downloaded PTs and other prep materials (illegally, therefore I am not endorsing his decision), took all the free practice LSATs the local Kaplan office offered on Saturdays, and ended up with a 178. The $5 was for a public library card and late fees. Granted, he had no social life for the entire spring semester leading up to the June test, but still, if you make the concerted effort, doing well on the LSAT has nothing to do with money. You don't need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on testmasters or kaplan or powerscore or PR. Five bucks, kids.

Edit: This is not some rich kid. He went to undergrad on a full ride and is now at YLS.

And I definitely support AA for undergrad admissions. The differences in public schools in this country is staggering. There are too many factors a minor should not be expected to control. But I think once you're an adult in college, you decide what you're going to do with your time. You can choose to start going to the library and studying for the LSAT freshman year if that's what it takes. Or you can choose to do kegstands on Thirsty Thursdays. Life's all about the choices we make, and we're responsible for those choices at 18.

[KP429]

Something to chew on...

I know how everyone likes to talk about "socio-economic factors" and their relation to LSAT Scores. I have a friend who literally spent like $5.00 prepping for the LSAT. He got prep books from the library, downloaded PTs and other prep materials (illegally, therefore I am not endorsing his decision), took all the free practice LSATs the local Kaplan office offered on Saturdays, and ended up with a 178. The $5 was for a public library card and late fees. Granted, he had no social life for the entire spring semester leading up to the June test, but still, if you make the concerted effort, doing well on the LSAT has nothing to do with money. You don't need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on testmasters or kaplan or powerscore or PR. Five bucks, kids.

Edit: This is not some rich kid. He went to undergrad on a full ride and is now at YLS.

And I definitely support AA for undergrad admissions. The differences in public schools in this country is staggering. There are too many factors a minor should not be expected to control. But I think once you're an adult in college, you decide what you're going to do with your time. You can choose to start going to the library and studying for the LSAT freshman year if that's what it takes. Or you can choose to do kegstands on Thirsty Thursdays. Life's all about the choices we make, and we're responsible for those choices at 18.

I like how you assume people either study for the LSAT or do kegstands on Thursday. Some of us "disadvantaged" folk have to work upwards of 40 hours a week to help pay for our education. Sometimes studying non-stop for the LSAT is just impractical and it has everything to do with socioeconomic standing.

[bwv812]

.

[Skadden Stairs]

...

[lz06]

Couldn't it just be that minorities are at a disadvantage in life leading up to the LSAT? Maybe that four months of intense studying cannot make up for 20 years of handicap? Minorities statistically go to poor public schools, have lower incomes, and have less stable home environments.

....Can't white people have had disadvantages in life too? And maybe even have gone too poor public schools? hmm.

[on_ne_sait_jamais]

African-American males get closer to a 15 point boost, they're the most coveted (and underrepresented) of the lot. Basically the correlation between GPA/LSAT for Black Men I think is at the 3.5/165 median. The further you go in one direction, the further you have to go in the other, with a bit more wiggle room with the LSAT.

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read in the forum... and that's saying a lot. For you to think that AA males get a 15pt boost, you are seriously smoking something. Seriously...

[bwv812]

.

[markakis]

I like how you assume people either study for the LSAT or do kegstands on Thursday. Some of us "disadvantaged" folk have to work upwards of 40 hours a week to help pay for our education. Sometimes studying non-stop for the LSAT is just impractical and it has everything to do with socioeconomic standing.

But he knows one guy who did it! That means anyone can, and if they don't, it's only because they're lazy! Nevermind that those from the upper economic quartile are something like six times more likely to score over 1500 on their SATs than those in the bottom economic quartile.

This type of reasoning will fetch you a -12 on your LR sections

[Skadden Stairs]

...

[FuturehoyaLawya]

Well in Anna Ivey's book, she claims that schools may give as much as a 10 point boost in the LSAT score to URMs, however she doesn't indicated any difference between AA, NA, or Hispanic. I've heard some people say that the boost is different, depending on which URM you are, however this may just be conjecture, as I have yet to see any empirical evidence of this...but of course I'm not sure either way. I've heard of and met a few people (in real life, not on these boards) that got accepted to HLS with LSAT scores in the upper 150s, all of whom were AA. Honestly, I really haven't personally met any other hispanics that are going to law school, so I'm not sure if there is a difference in the boost hispanics get vs AA vs NA.

Wow really? I've never heard of anyone getting into HLS with below a 160

yeah i think this was years ago, this is not the case anymore. especially these days with all the prep....and access to materials.

[bwv812]

.

[markakis]

I like how you assume people either study for the LSAT or do kegstands on Thursday. Some of us "disadvantaged" folk have to work upwards of 40 hours a week to help pay for our education. Sometimes studying non-stop for the LSAT is just impractical and it has everything to do with socioeconomic standing.

But he knows one guy who did it! That means anyone can, and if they don't, it's only because they're lazy! Nevermind that those from the upper economic quartile are something like six times more likely to score over 1500 on their SATs than those in the bottom economic quartile.

This type of reasoning will fetch you a -12 on your LR sections

And what did you score, again?

And this reasoning too.