Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
wert3813
Posts: 1408
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby wert3813 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:32 pm

uconjak wrote:
RSterling wrote:
uconjak wrote:I am going to start a little rant on the thread. Most Top law schools (T-14's), tend to like top rank UG schools. Yes in know they pick some special snowflakes from "Slippery Rock University" who have very high LSAT/GPA scores or who are URM's. I believe that all things being equal they will pick someone from an IVy vs someone went to a state school in the midwest. This was as much said by the dean of Boalt. He said most of the students accepted were from the "ivies". I think this bias is more prevasive in T-14 schools. When I visited Berkley last fall with my parents. my parents and i were separated and I overheard some student talking about my dad. He had a red Polo shirt on with U of Nebraska football logo above the pocket. these students made some rather rude comments about him being from the "Fly OVer Zone" of the country. I sat and listened for a minute then I spoke to them saying you know he also has a USMC tatoo on his arm. They said, figures probably one of those "baby killers" from VIetnam. and they laughed. Had a similar experience at Yale when I was touring their for UG. My dad just smiled at the Yale tour guide and asked him these questions.
1. have you every had someone you love die in your arms.
2. Have you ever saved someones life who you didn't know.
3. have you ever had to kill someone, so close, you could smell what they had for breakfast on their last breath.

the guide, who was about ready to Pee his pants...studdered, said no.


my dad just smiled and said, i thought so. Until you have had to do those things, you have no right to judge me.

Just a little rant. sorry everyone.


So you're saying that two people on seperate campuses, one a tour guide, called your father a murderer for being in Vietnam? I went to a state school at least as liberal as Berkeley and I've never heard anyone speak poorly of individuals in the military, let alone call them a "baby-killer."

I mean no disrespect, but it's really hard for me to believe that a tour guide actually ragged on your father for being a vet.

If this is true, then that's awful and I'm really sorry, but I wouldn't use that as a basis for a big generalization that T-14 schools look down on people who did not go to an Ivy. And this is coming from someone from a non-prestigious state school.

Edit: I wanted to add that while I don't think the school themselves look down on people who did not go to an ivy, that doesn't mean that those types of places don't attract more assholes than usual (though, honestly, I don't really put Berkeley in that category. Yale, definitely).



1. The kids at Berkley, I don't believe they ment it. but it was the attitude (Baby killer comment). hard to put into words here. I was just being a little provacative, to see what they would say.
2. the guide at Yale made a comment about the war in iraq and said made some bad remarks about both Presidents named Bush. which i thought was in poor taste. He also made a comment to my dad that made my dad tense up, I didn't here what he said, only my dads reply. My dad would not talk about it.

3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.

My dad is a quiet soft spoken guy, but when upset, gives you that LOOK, talks to you in a low voice that freezes you in place and speaking from experience scares the hell out of you.

Just letting my frustration out is all....i knew going in that stanford was a longshot. just pissed at some of the others down the line.


Where you headed?

User avatar
ssanonymous
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:27 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby ssanonymous » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:37 pm

uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

User avatar
uconjak
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:20 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby uconjak » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:38 pm

probably UCLA/USC. I am very debt adverse. I have listened to Dave Ramsey to much. LOL. I would have paid sticker at Stanford, or will pay it at columbia (hold). I doubt I will get in at either place. I am Part Native and Could have used it if I would have gone to the trouble to run down all the proof and get a tribal card. But my family would have been upset by that move. They don't believe in preferences, period. I know it sounds stupid, but their it is.
Going to the National Mock Trial meet in DC this weekend. Am told I have a shot a All American Attorney. We will see. Good luck to everyone didn't want to get anyone's shorts in a knot!

mambar
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:11 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby mambar » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:40 pm

ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby sinfiery » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:43 pm

mambar wrote:I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation

they are

their professors also write the textbooks most state schools use


but I'd imagine it would be more difficult regardless

User avatar
ssanonymous
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:27 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby ssanonymous » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:44 pm

mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


Sure but that's because you have people who are high achievers and are producing A quality work most of the time. Again, most of these students can get 4.0s at other less competitive schools. As for grade inflation, at least at my school, it means that you have to do pretty poorly (in non-STEM fields) to get a B-/C+, but A-s and As are still hard to come by. There's a lot of strategic planning that happens when you pick out your classes.

User avatar
smdpnp
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:49 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby smdpnp » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:46 pm

uconjak wrote:Just letting my frustration out is all....i knew going in that stanford was a longshot. just pissed at some of the others down the line.

Lol, you're such a dick.

User avatar
siredwrdross
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:57 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby siredwrdross » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:47 pm

uconjak wrote:probably UCLA/USC. I am very debt adverse. I have listened to Dave Ramsey to much. LOL. I would have paid sticker at Stanford, or will pay it at columbia (hold). I doubt I will get in at either place. I am Part Native and Could have used it if I would have gone to the trouble to run down all the proof and get a tribal card. But my family would have been upset by that move. They don't believe in preferences, period. I know it sounds stupid, but their it is.
Going to the National Mock Trial meet in DC this weekend. Am told I have a shot a All American Attorney. We will see. Good luck to everyone didn't want to get anyone's shorts in a knot!


Good luck this weekend at mock trial nationals!

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby beepboopbeep » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:47 pm

mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


I know this is just being glib, but to give a real answer:

My top-10/faux-ivy/whatever you want to call it (okay, it's Chicago) is notorious for fighting grade inflation, so GPAs above 3.6/3.7 are really an accomplishment. At the same time, there was what felt to me like a GPA floor around 3.3-3.4. You had to really try to get below that, which I know because I did try, and even then barely succeeded. At, er, "failing". I've heard similar things about its peer institutions.

Of course, this is all in the humanities. Sciences are another story.

amonthofsundays
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:36 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby amonthofsundays » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:50 pm

uconjak wrote:
RSterling wrote:
uconjak wrote:I am going to start a little rant on the thread. Most Top law schools (T-14's), tend to like top rank UG schools. Yes in know they pick some special snowflakes from "Slippery Rock University" who have very high LSAT/GPA scores or who are URM's. I believe that all things being equal they will pick someone from an IVy vs someone went to a state school in the midwest. This was as much said by the dean of Boalt. He said most of the students accepted were from the "ivies". I think this bias is more prevasive in T-14 schools. When I visited Berkley last fall with my parents. my parents and i were separated and I overheard some student talking about my dad. He had a red Polo shirt on with U of Nebraska football logo above the pocket. these students made some rather rude comments about him being from the "Fly OVer Zone" of the country. I sat and listened for a minute then I spoke to them saying you know he also has a USMC tatoo on his arm. They said, figures probably one of those "baby killers" from VIetnam. and they laughed. Had a similar experience at Yale when I was touring their for UG. My dad just smiled at the Yale tour guide and asked him these questions.
1. have you every had someone you love die in your arms.
2. Have you ever saved someones life who you didn't know.
3. have you ever had to kill someone, so close, you could smell what they had for breakfast on their last breath.

the guide, who was about ready to Pee his pants...studdered, said no.


my dad just smiled and said, i thought so. Until you have had to do those things, you have no right to judge me.

Just a little rant. sorry everyone.


So you're saying that two people on seperate campuses, one a tour guide, called your father a murderer for being in Vietnam? I went to a state school at least as liberal as Berkeley and I've never heard anyone speak poorly of individuals in the military, let alone call them a "baby-killer."

I mean no disrespect, but it's really hard for me to believe that a tour guide actually ragged on your father for being a vet.

If this is true, then that's awful and I'm really sorry, but I wouldn't use that as a basis for a big generalization that T-14 schools look down on people who did not go to an Ivy. And this is coming from someone from a non-prestigious state school.

Edit: I wanted to add that while I don't think the school themselves look down on people who did not go to an ivy, that doesn't mean that those types of places don't attract more assholes than usual (though, honestly, I don't really put Berkeley in that category. Yale, definitely).



1. The kids at Berkley, I don't believe they ment it. but it was the attitude (Baby killer comment). hard to put into words here. I was just being a little provacative, to see what they would say.
2. the guide at Yale made a comment about the war in iraq and said made some bad remarks about both Presidents named Bush. which i thought was in poor taste. He also made a comment to my dad that made my dad tense up, I didn't here what he said, only my dads reply. My dad would not talk about it.

3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.

My dad is a quiet soft spoken guy, but when upset, gives you that LOOK, talks to you in a low voice that freezes you in place and speaking from experience scares the hell out of you.

Just letting my frustration out is all....i knew going in that stanford was a longshot. just pissed at some of the others down the line.


I think people who are that abrasive with their political views do a HUGE disservice to their cause. I have nothing but respect for our veterans no matter what the war and no matter who the president. Vets like your dad didn't make the choice to go to war he just signed up to protect the country. I would never make them feel ashamed of it.

User avatar
ssanonymous
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:27 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby ssanonymous » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:51 pm

beepboopbeep wrote:
mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


I know this is just being glib, but to give a real answer:

My top-10/faux-ivy/whatever you want to call it (okay, it's Chicago) is notorious for fighting grade inflation, so GPAs above 3.6/3.7 are really an accomplishment. At the same time, there was what felt to me like a GPA floor around 3.3-3.4. You had to really try to get below that, which I know because I did try, and even then barely succeeded. At, er, "failing". I've heard similar things about its peer institutions.

Of course, this is all in the humanities. Sciences are another story.


hmmm, interesting. I'd say our floor is like a 3.0. Definitely far from failing though.

whereskyle
Posts: 713
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:37 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby whereskyle » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:54 pm

No grades! Pass or fail!

volp
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:35 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby volp » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:55 pm

.
Last edited by volp on Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby sinfiery » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:56 pm

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... tZ1E#gid=0

UChi is better than ivies but compared to the average State U, they all inflate unless you assume grades are determined by quality of work and not on a scale.

If you make that assumption along with the assumption that they all teach from the same textbooks, I find it hard to give any real distinct advantage to a 3.6 from an Ivy vs a 3.6 from State U.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9641
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby jbagelboy » Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:56 pm

mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


grade inflation does not equate to easier coursework. it simply means that students used to fail more often. these institutions demand more rigor, but also its more difficult to fall below B- than it is at a large public, where there's very little safety net -- top schools do not like their students dropping or flunking out. So the "inflation" is mostly on the lower end. Effectively, it does not really apply in this situation since the difference between a 3.6 and 3.8 is the B+/A range.

ssanonymous is correct with the 4 course per semester model (occasionally 5 for those who don't value their social lives). papers are longer and more numerous, research is more likely to be graduate level, ect. I know people at state schools who still got multiple choice exams and extra credit opportunities. this would be unheard of at my college

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby beepboopbeep » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:00 pm

jbagelboy wrote:
mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


grade inflation does not equate to easier coursework. it simply means that students used to fail more often. these institutions demand more rigor, but also its more difficult to fall below B- than it is at a large public, where there's very little safety net -- top schools do not like their students dropping or flunking out. So the "inflation" is mostly on the lower end. Effectively, it does not really apply in this situation since the difference between a 3.6 and 3.8 is the B+/A range.

ssanonymous is correct with the 4 course per semester model (occasionally 5 for those who don't value their social lives). papers are longer and more numerous, research is more likely to be graduate level, ect. I know people at state schools who still got multiple choice exams and extra credit opportunities. this would be unheard of at my college


+1. Though there's a lot of variation. I wouldn't charge a place like UM Ann Arbor with a lack of rigor, state school or not.

angflos
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 9:22 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby angflos » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:01 pm

Just my 2 cents as URM (on AA).

I would agree that poor whites are screwed in the current system, but only to a certain degree. I believe a poor white student who attended an elite UG (as someone posted earlier) would have a competitive advantage over a rich student from the same UG. This would probably come out in the personal statement or diversity statement and set these students apart. I think the biggest issue is that while you can change your socio-economic status, you cannot change your race (Henry Louis Gates being arrested in Cambridge comes to mind). Just because you are a low income white student, does not mean you no longer access white privilege and are on the same footing as a low income minority student. I think that as long as race is such a deciding factor in outcomes in the United States then AA must be primarily racially based (just look up income disparities, prison rates, and even scholarship grants). The danger of an AA system that is primarily income based means you could end up with institutions having much smaller numbers of minority students (since there are plenty of low income whites in the U.S.) than they currently have because of AA.

coldweather
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:43 am

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby coldweather » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:02 pm

mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:
uconjak wrote:3. I just think it is a bias that gives those who went the the Top UG schools the get "nod", if all things being equal. especially if you are a competing with an IVY and both are boarderline canadates. IMHO.


The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


Here is a good article regarding quality of education. http://www.ftpress.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1244758. Notice the reference to Stanford's Thomas Sowell. (It is a Stanford thread after all)

In regards to grade deflation/ inflation. Uchicago is notorious for grade deflation and to a lesser extent Princeton grade deflates. The rest (I'm looking at you Columbia) inflate inflate inflate.
Last edited by coldweather on Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9641
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby jbagelboy » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:02 pm

beepboopbeep wrote:
jbagelboy wrote:
mambar wrote:
ssanonymous wrote:The reason for this is because MANY of the 3.6+ students in top UGs can probably easily get a 4.0 from other schools. I know I sometimes get frustrated with my school's tough grading because I know I could've gotten a 4.0+ at a less competitive school. It's not that those who go to less competitive schools aren't smart, but I believe there is some difference in the academic rigor of the UG institutions. At my first school I was able to take 6-7 classes a semester, work 40 hrs, and get involved on campus. There's no way in hell I could've pulled that off at my UG now. 4 classes and maybe 1 or 2 clubs what most students can handle here.

I thought Ivies were notorious for grade inflation


grade inflation does not equate to easier coursework. it simply means that students used to fail more often. these institutions demand more rigor, but also its more difficult to fall below B- than it is at a large public, where there's very little safety net -- top schools do not like their students dropping or flunking out. So the "inflation" is mostly on the lower end. Effectively, it does not really apply in this situation since the difference between a 3.6 and 3.8 is the B+/A range.

ssanonymous is correct with the 4 course per semester model (occasionally 5 for those who don't value their social lives). papers are longer and more numerous, research is more likely to be graduate level, ect. I know people at state schools who still got multiple choice exams and extra credit opportunities. this would be unheard of at my college


+1. Though there's a lot of variation. I wouldn't charge a place like UM Ann Arbor with a lack of rigor, state school or not.


true, of course, its a grey area not a strict public/private dividing line. did not mean to imply cal, umich, uva, ect. are easy by any means

User avatar
ssanonymous
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:27 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby ssanonymous » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:12 pm

angflos wrote:Just my 2 cents as URM (on AA).

I would agree that poor whites are screwed in the current system, but only to a certain degree. I believe a poor white student who attended an elite UG (as someone posted earlier) would have a competitive advantage over a rich student from the same UG. This would probably come out in the personal statement or diversity statement and set these students apart. I think the biggest issue is that while you can change your socio-economic status, you cannot change your race (Henry Louis Gates being arrested in Cambridge comes to mind). Just because you are a low income white student, does not mean you no longer access white privilege and are on the same footing as a low income minority student. I think that as long as race is such a deciding factor in outcomes in the United States then AA must be primarily racially based (just look up income disparities, prison rates, and even scholarship grants). The danger of an AA system that is primarily income based means you could end up with institutions having much smaller numbers of minority students (since there are plenty of low income whites in the U.S.) than they currently have because of AA.


Fair enough but we're saying you should still be a factor. I agree that a low income non-URM can access white privilege once they get into an elite institution more than a low income URM, but it's still a longer journey than say a very wealthy URM. I think you need both at an institution, but low income students definitely have a disadvantage. But, yes, I agree, racial diversity still matters.

User avatar
helix23
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:18 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby helix23 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:19 pm

I miss dat status checker talk :cry:

User avatar
wert3813
Posts: 1408
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby wert3813 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:22 pm

helix23 wrote:I miss dat status checker talk :cry:


Yeah things being espoused here without any real data.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162- ... st-grades/

Big Dog
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby Big Dog » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:23 pm

My top-10/faux-ivy/whatever you want to call it (okay, it's Chicago) is notorious for fighting grade inflation, so GPAs above 3.6/3.7 are really an accomplishment.


sorry to burst your (faux) rigor bubble, but Chicago's mean GPA (3.35) is not much lower than Northwestern's (3.4); indeed, it is right about the mean of many private colleges.

But carry-on.

matrim
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby matrim » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:24 pm

So are there a bunch of OCT/NOV completes still in here? At this point are we looking WL/Ding only?

User avatar
beepboopbeep
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Stanford C/O 2016 Applicants Thread

Postby beepboopbeep » Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:25 pm

.

deleted because troll.
Last edited by beepboopbeep on Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”