You were considered a"Deny" by LSP but actually got in!!! Forum

[zonto]

So I can't make the observation that lsp is strictly numbers while urm admissions isn't without" inciting flames"? Im sorry didn't know people were that sensitive.

It's not that I am particularly sensitive, it's just that occasionally discussions along this line turn sour quickly.

I wish I was a URM.

I wish I had the socio economic advantages of being white.

You mean a middle class upbringing with a dad that works two jobs and working to put yourself through college completely on your own? I can see how that's a huge socio-economic advantage. Enjoy Yale.

[CalGuy89]

U Penn, 170 and 3.34

[unc0mm0n1]

It's not that I am particularly sensitive, it's just that occasionally discussions along this line turn sour quickly.

I wish I was a URM.

I wish I had the socio economic advantages of being white.

You mean a middle class upbringing with a dad that works two jobs and working to put yourself through college completely on your own? I can see how that's a huge socio-economic advantage. Enjoy Yale.

You almost got me. I was two paragraphs into the difference of growing up black and white in this country but I stopped myself. No matter what you're going to have your opinions. Anyway have a good night and enjoy where you're going to law school at.

[Bearlegdairy]

You mean a middle class upbringing with a dad that works two jobs and working to put yourself through college completely on your own? I can see how that's a huge socio-economic advantage. Enjoy Yale.

[zonto]

You mean a middle class upbringing with a dad that works two jobs and working to put yourself through college completely on your own? I can see how that's a huge socio-economic advantage. Enjoy Yale.

To be fair, as a white woman you can pull of the cute ironic-poncho look. URMs would just look ridiculous in one of those. I mean unless you're a white man, in which case I guess you have a point.

Exactly. I usually don't post unless I have a point.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that there aren't racial issues in our country. But trust me, after living in South Africa for a couple years and seeing what real discrimination looks like (and feeling some of that as a white boy in the black townships), the discrimination talked about by minorities in our country doesn't have the same effect. One of the biggest reasons I think it still persists is because it's easier to revert to calling discrimination then address people's personal responsibility for their own well-being and destiny.

[Bearlegdairy]

[quote="zonto"]

Exactly. I usually don't post unless I have a point.

[FiveSermon]

Exactly. I usually don't post unless I have a point.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that there aren't racial issues in our country. But trust me, after living in South Africa for a couple years and seeing what real discrimination looks like (and feeling some of that as a white boy in the black townships), the discrimination talked about by minorities in our country is utter nonsense. One of the biggest reasons I think it still persists is because it's easier to revert to calling discrimination then address people's personal responsibility for their own well-being and destiny.

Well I live in an area that's kinda half-city half-country and almost exclusively white. For the last 9 months I've been volunteering at the local animal shelter and I don't know what it is that attracts them, but every day we get legions of poor white trash with 5 or 6 poor white trash kids in tow. When you look at those kids and compare them to, say, a poor black child from the inner city, they have about the same chance of attending college: 0. Now I realize that for many, many years the socio-economic advantages into high-paying jobs, excellent schools, etc. which were it not for white supremacist ideology would have gone to qualified individuals of different races.

Of course racism does still exist, but the advantages enjoyed by whites today have been diminished significantly. Nevertheless, there are a large number of white families that are still enjoying the benefits of their ancestors' exploitation of minorities, especially blacks. The problem with the URM program emerges when one takes into consideration the equally large number of white families whose ancestors did NOT take advantage of this and who are just as poor as they were 50, 100, or 200 years ago and whose children are being born into families with no money, no education, and, often times, no real familial or communal support. Those children, just like the poor black child, have virtually no chance of any real social mobility.

So while I don't have a problem with the idea of the URM program, the way it is implemented is, to me, all wrong. I knew quite a few individuals who would fall under the URM category who were from middle or upper class backgrounds and who enjoyed far more social privilege than both the poor black child and the poor white child, and while they were on largely equal ground with the black child, they had a decided advantage over the white one. One's upbringing and social status, of which race is often a part, is far more important in determining one's social privilege than simply their race and, in my opinion, the URM program should be changed accordingly or scrapped entirely in favor of a more "holistic" evaluation.

Now before I'm accused of being a bitter white person, I grew up in a very healthy family and had my entire undergraduate education paid for, so I'm not complaining as this relates to me. I was accepted to a decent law school and probably could have gotten a 170+ had I worked hard enough, but I didn't so I didn't. Things are alright though.

But as I said earlier, I understand where you're coming from.

URM boost isn't because of racism. If that was the case most minorities would get the boost. There's so much racism these days against Middle Eastern people, you don't see them getting any boosts.

URM boost is because there is an unexplained standardized test score difference between the scores of URM's and everyone else. Without URM boosts it would be hilarious how many URMs got into top law schools which would reflect badly on law schools when there is a 2% black population.

Get it straight. The URM boost exists because it's an expedient way of making the law schools look good while also addressing at least in part the lower scores of URMs on tests such as the LSAT.

[denisea]

Exactly. I usually don't post unless I have a point.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that there aren't racial issues in our country. But trust me, after living in South Africa for a couple years and seeing what real discrimination looks like (and feeling some of that as a white boy in the black townships), the discrimination talked about by minorities in our country is utter nonsense. One of the biggest reasons I think it still persists is because it's easier to revert to calling discrimination then address people's personal responsibility for their own well-being and destiny.

Well I live in an area that's kinda half-city half-country and almost exclusively white. For the last 9 months I've been volunteering at the local animal shelter and I don't know what it is that attracts them, but every day we get legions of poor white trash with 5 or 6 poor white trash kids in tow. When you look at those kids and compare them to, say, a poor black child from the inner city, they have about the same chance of attending college: 0. Now I realize that for many, many years the socio-economic advantages into high-paying jobs, excellent schools, etc. which were it not for white supremacist ideology would have gone to qualified individuals of different races.

Of course racism does still exist, but the advantages enjoyed by whites today have been diminished significantly. Nevertheless, there are a large number of white families that are still enjoying the benefits of their ancestors' exploitation of minorities, especially blacks. The problem with the URM program emerges when one takes into consideration the equally large number of white families whose ancestors did NOT take advantage of this and who are just as poor as they were 50, 100, or 200 years ago and whose children are being born into families with no money, no education, and, often times, no real familial or communal support. Those children, just like the poor black child, have virtually no chance of any real social mobility.

So while I don't have a problem with the idea of the URM program, the way it is implemented is, to me, all wrong. I knew quite a few individuals who would fall under the URM category who were from middle or upper class backgrounds and who enjoyed far more social privilege than both the poor black child and the poor white child, and while they were on largely equal ground with the black child, they had a decided advantage over the white one. One's upbringing and social status, of which race is often a part, is far more important in determining one's social privilege than simply their race and, in my opinion, the URM program should be changed accordingly or scrapped entirely in favor of a more "holistic" evaluation.

Now before I'm accused of being a bitter white person, I grew up in a very healthy family and had my entire undergraduate education paid for, so I'm not complaining as this relates to me. I was accepted to a decent law school and probably could have gotten a 170+ had I worked hard enough, but I didn't so I didn't. Things are alright though.

But as I said earlier, I understand where you're coming from.

1st of all, there must be better things for you two to do than come on here to a thread that's meant to UPLIFT people instead of harping about not getting into a law school b/c some URM got it over you.
2nd of all, my boyfriend is Nigerian and has experienced MORE discrimination in the U.S than in Nigeria and as a black woman who studied in Ghana, I have experienced racism, there and here. Trying to compare levels of discrimination is crazy. Racism is racism.
3rd of all, if you knew anything, admissions last year for URM's were DECLINING so all this crap about stealing your spots is BS. Maybe you should worry about making your own application stronger or devoting your time to helping others instead of tearing people down.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/education/07law.html
4th of all, its so easy to get on a thread and talk mess but I'm pretty sure IF you do get to law school and see URM's in your class, you'll be all fake smiles in their faces and no mention of the complaints you've lodged here.
Needless to say, I'm tired of people saying I got into ANY law school based on being URM. NO. Myself and others got in because we are AMAZING people who worked hard to get here and that goes for all who got in, URM's, white, men, women, lower class or rich.
You can reply, whatever, get mad. I don't care. I'm GOING to top tier law school and so are other URM's so say what you want. We're IN and there' s nothing you're complaining will do about that.

[blacklawboss]

156 3.3 URM red deny at cardozo in 84k scholly

[play2win]

I'm GOING to top tier law school and so are other URM's so say what you want. We're IN and there' s nothing you're complaining will do about that.

What a disgusting sentiment and frankly a disgrace to all URM's on this site.

[sch0123]

Exactly. I usually don't post unless I have a point.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that there aren't racial issues in our country. But trust me, after living in South Africa for a couple years and seeing what real discrimination looks like (and feeling some of that as a white boy in the black townships), the discrimination talked about by minorities in our country is utter nonsense. One of the biggest reasons I think it still persists is because it's easier to revert to calling discrimination then address people's personal responsibility for their own well-being and destiny.

Well I live in an area that's kinda half-city half-country and almost exclusively white. For the last 9 months I've been volunteering at the local animal shelter and I don't know what it is that attracts them, but every day we get legions of poor white trash with 5 or 6 poor white trash kids in tow. When you look at those kids and compare them to, say, a poor black child from the inner city, they have about the same chance of attending college: 0. Now I realize that for many, many years the socio-economic advantages into high-paying jobs, excellent schools, etc. which were it not for white supremacist ideology would have gone to qualified individuals of different races.

Of course racism does still exist, but the advantages enjoyed by whites today have been diminished significantly. Nevertheless, there are a large number of white families that are still enjoying the benefits of their ancestors' exploitation of minorities, especially blacks. The problem with the URM program emerges when one takes into consideration the equally large number of white families whose ancestors did NOT take advantage of this and who are just as poor as they were 50, 100, or 200 years ago and whose children are being born into families with no money, no education, and, often times, no real familial or communal support. Those children, just like the poor black child, have virtually no chance of any real social mobility.

So while I don't have a problem with the idea of the URM program, the way it is implemented is, to me, all wrong. I knew quite a few individuals who would fall under the URM category who were from middle or upper class backgrounds and who enjoyed far more social privilege than both the poor black child and the poor white child, and while they were on largely equal ground with the black child, they had a decided advantage over the white one. One's upbringing and social status, of which race is often a part, is far more important in determining one's social privilege than simply their race and, in my opinion, the URM program should be changed accordingly or scrapped entirely in favor of a more "holistic" evaluation.

Now before I'm accused of being a bitter white person, I grew up in a very healthy family and had my entire undergraduate education paid for, so I'm not complaining as this relates to me. I was accepted to a decent law school and probably could have gotten a 170+ had I worked hard enough, but I didn't so I didn't. Things are alright though.

But as I said earlier, I understand where you're coming from.

1st of all, there must be better things for you two to do than come on here to a thread that's meant to UPLIFT people instead of harping about not getting into a law school b/c some URM got it over you.
2nd of all, my boyfriend is Nigerian and has experienced MORE discrimination in the U.S than in Nigeria and as a black woman who studied in Ghana, I have experienced racism, there and here. Trying to compare levels of discrimination is crazy. Racism is racism.
3rd of all, if you knew anything, admissions last year for URM's were DECLINING so all this crap about stealing your spots is BS. Maybe you should worry about making your own application stronger or devoting your time to helping others instead of tearing people down.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/education/07law.html
4th of all, its so easy to get on a thread and talk mess but I'm pretty sure IF you do get to law school and see URM's in your class, you'll be all fake smiles in their faces and no mention of the complaints you've lodged here.
Needless to say, I'm tired of people saying I got into ANY law school based on being URM. NO. Myself and others got in because we are AMAZING people who worked hard to get here and that goes for all who got in, URM's, white, men, women, lower class or rich.
You can reply, whatever, get mad. I don't care. I'm GOING to top tier law school and so are other URM's so say what you want. We're IN and there' s nothing you're complaining will do about that.

Lol I love your "argument." No one is saying that you, or any URM, wouldn't get into Law school (period) without said status.

It's the fact that candidate A, white Jewish kid (who certainly experiences anti-semitism much in the same way an African-American encounters racism) with a 3.3 GPA and a 165 on his\her LSAT gets into schools ranked between 25-35 while candidate B, URM with a 3.3 GPA and a 165 gets into Vanderbilt, Cornell, UCLA, etc. I am not racist in the least, but that frankly just doesn't seem very fair.

And you say that non-URMs should stop complaining and work to strengthen their applications - are you genuinely suggesting that URMs just have such superior personal statements, LORs, resumes? Of course not. There is a boost associated with URM status and it allows you to be considered by higher ranked schools when you would otherwise be an auto-reject..

BTW - the previous post you quoted and responded to wasn't intended to "tear anyone down," it was actually a well thought out analysis of the URM program and an individuals opinion on why it is rather unfair. I don't know why you got yourself all worked up, unless you personally feel like you have to justify your acceptances...

[BrightLine]

There are going to be some people that the current system screws, but there is no reason to be angry at anyone that the systems favors. They are not the ones that rejected your application.

[socraticmethodman]

I hate that these threads always turn into affirmative action/urm boost debates.

[subtle]

I hate that these threads always turn into affirmative action/urm boost debates.

+1

[blacklawboss]

There are going to be some people that the current system screws, but there is no reason to be angry at anyone that the systems favors. They are not the ones that rejected your application.

+1

[wizard]

With a 153 and 2.9 gpa, I got into Seattle U full-time through the access admission program, I got into William Mitchell Full-time and I was waitlisted at Temple, Chapman and the University of Denver. According to LSP, which is not very accurate in my opinion given my cycle, I am a deny at all of these.

I am a white guy with good softs 1 year out of undergrad. My good softs are accompanied by criminal convictions but this hasnt seemed to prevent me from getting into many good schools

[Bearlegdairy]

[quote="denisea"]

[anthropologieaddict]

.

[BrightLine]

1st of all, there must be better things for you two to do than come on here to a thread that's meant to UPLIFT people instead of harping about not getting into a law school b/c some URM got it over you.
2nd of all, my boyfriend is Nigerian and has experienced MORE discrimination in the U.S than in Nigeria and as a black woman who studied in Ghana, I have experienced racism, there and here. Trying to compare levels of discrimination is crazy. Racism is racism.
3rd of all, if you knew anything, admissions last year for URM's were DECLINING so all this crap about stealing your spots is BS. Maybe you should worry about making your own application stronger or devoting your time to helping others instead of tearing people down.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/education/07law.html
4th of all, its so easy to get on a thread and talk mess but I'm pretty sure IF you do get to law school and see URM's in your class, you'll be all fake smiles in their faces and no mention of the complaints you've lodged here.
Needless to say, I'm tired of people saying I got into ANY law school based on being URM. NO. Myself and others got in because we are AMAZING people who worked hard to get here and that goes for all who got in, URM's, white, men, women, lower class or rich.
You can reply, whatever, get mad. I don't care. I'm GOING to top tier law school and so are other URM's so say what you want. We're IN and there' s nothing you're complaining will do about that.

Well, I'm not entirely sure if the thread was meant to uplift as much as simply a "Yay! I didn't expect this!" "Uplift," implies that there is something inspiring or a lesson to be learned, usually about human dignity or perseverance or some such thing. Most of the posts I saw were not of that nature. But let's not quibble over over semantics.

In no way was this discussion intended to "tear you down." You have decent numbers and earned your place in a law school. None of us have an issue with that. Did your URM status help your application and your chances of getting in? Most likely. It would be intellectually dishonest to suggest otherwise. But given what you've indicated in your post, it SHOULD factor into the decision of whether or not to admit you.

The effects racism can have on a population really don't need to be described at length. I'm sure most of us are Americans and are all conscious of our nation's history of slavery, segregation, discrimination against women, Asians, Latinos, etc. Every American is aware of the fact that the federal, state, and local governments, public schools, private industry, virtually every level of society has at some point in our history contributed to the oppression of women, LGBTs, and ethnic and religious minorities, and any example of this, no matter how small, is indefensible.

But societies change over time and our institutions, law schools included, must change with them. The URM program and "affirmative action" as a whole, are examples of necessary change. In the 1960s, one would be hard pressed to find a black child in the North that had not been target of overt racial prejudice, to say nothing of the Deep South. Generations of blacks had been enslaved and been given no access to even the most rudimentary means of education. Lifting up a race of people from so many years of oppression would be a daunting task, to say the least, which was one of the reasons that affirmative action policies were put into place.

But 50 years later, things have changed considerably. Everyone here has likely had a black professor; we have had black generals, cabinet secretaries, Supreme Court justices, and, of course, a black president. While many, if not most, blacks are still subject to discrimination on a daily basis, a significant number have attained a degree of equity with whites, and it is when this happens that questions must be raised. The poor black child who grew up in the inner city has obviously experienced great hardships and, however well he or she may have done in school or on the LSAT, those numbers likely would have been better had the same brain been placed in the body of a middle-class white child. In these cases, allowing them the competitive advantage of URM status is absolutely appropriate.

When we are considering the child of, for example, a black doctor and a black attorney, who went to a good school and grew up in a loving family, things become more complicated. Does that child have a competitive disadvantage against, say, an impoverished white child in a single-parent household? That's up for debate. The fact that people are asking questions about the legitimacy of applying URM status based solely on the race of an individual and what of what percentage of the community that race compromises is not an indicator of racial prejudice or anger about one's own denial from a law school, but rather a sign of the advancement of a minority group in society and whether or not that group NEEDS the competitive advantage that comes with URM status.

You've probably noticed that many applicants have emphasized their LGBT status, and that is absolutely appropriate in 2011. But given the social progress we have witnessed over even the last 10 years or so, will that still matter in, say, 50 years? 100? Or will sexual preference simply no longer be the subject of controversy by that time?

These discussions have nothing to do with you or any other URM applicant posting on this forum. The politics of race remains extremely complicated to this day and will likely remain so. You've earned your spot in a law school. You should be proud of that and no one begrudges you for your admission. These discussions are merely an extension of the dialogue which will and should occur about the continued relevance of the application of the URM label. Hopefully some day it will no longer be necessary. Obviously that day has not come, but we would do ourselves a disservice by not bestowing the URM label only on those who need it to ensure that the admissions process is as fair as it can possibly be.

And, believe it or not, I don't have anything better to do than arguing on the internet.

No law school claims that they are giving a URM preferrential treatment to "even the playing field" or to "remedy discrimination".

[sterl1002]

There are going to be some people that the current system screws, but there is no reason to be angry at anyone that the systems favors. They are not the ones that rejected your application.

+1

Example? My school does not give out + and - grades therefore some grades that would have been higher (A- for example) in my LSAC GPA calculation ended up being a B because the typical A- range in many other schools gets rounded down to a B on my transcript therefore counts as a B in my LSAC GPA. Do I think that's fair? No. But I don't get bent out of shape about it. Life's not fair sometimes.

[Bearlegdairy]

No law school claims that they are giving a URM preferrential treatment to "even the playing field" or to "remedy discrimination".

[BrightLine]

It may not be the stated purpose of the URM program, which, from what I understand, is to ensure that percentage of lawyers who come from various minority groups is proportional to their representation in the American population. But isn't the URM inherently linked to issues of racism and discrimination?

No, wrong on all accounts.

[Bearlegdairy]

It may not be the stated purpose of the URM program, which, from what I understand, is to ensure that percentage of lawyers who come from various minority groups is proportional to their representation in the American population. But isn't the URM inherently linked to issues of racism and discrimination?

No, wrong on all accounts.

Explain please.

[lawandi]

The URM boost is great in that it increases diversity in law schools. Affirmative action, not the URM boost, aims to correct the wrongs of society that come from past racial discrimination.

I learned about an interesting analogy in a sociology lecture once regarding affirmative action. First, assume that racial profiling is unacceptable (or at least to some), because it treats a person of one race as a criminal solely because some other members of his/her race are criminals. Now, realize that affirmative action makes a similar generalization, but about disadvantage rather than criminality. Not all black applicants have been disadvantaged by socioeconomic status. Many black applicants grow up in wealthy or middle-class diverse communities. Thus, it's not acceptable to treat someone as disadvantaged (and treat them preferentially) just because other members of their race may be disadvantaged.

I'm not sure I agree with this, because of course the socioeconomic disadvantages of some African Americans are a huge problem, and maybe we should do something about it. I don't necessarily think that all affirmative action programs are narrowly tailored enough, though (using narrowly tailored in layman's terms).

[lawandi]

Sorry for indulging, though. This topic is not supposed to be about affirmative action at all...