null Forum
- TaipeiMort
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
Male or Female? With a 169 and F, you may be able to get money at NYU and maybe Chicago (they have extra money to give out with the Rubenstien inflow).
- AreJay711
- Posts: 3406
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
I don't think that is the case. There is no female bonus.TaipeiMort wrote:Male or Female? With a 169 and F, you may be able to get money at NYU and maybe Chicago (they have extra money to give out with the Rubenstien inflow).
- TaipeiMort
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
I used to think so too, but we had a lunch tallk at uChicago on affirmative action where one of the profs made it clear that the distribution curves of male and female lsat takers are different. Male had larger tails, meaning more low scores and elite scores. Based upon this distribution, there are naturally fewer female very high LSAT scores. Therefore, the mean scores for women and men are different at top schools, who try to achieve roughly equal groups of men and women.AreJay711 wrote:I don't think that is the case. There is no female bonus.TaipeiMort wrote:Male or Female? With a 169 and F, you may be able to get money at NYU and maybe Chicago (they have extra money to give out with the Rubenstien inflow).
- Bildungsroman
- Posts: 5529
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
Did the UChicago professor explicitly say that Chicago gives a tangible boost to female applicants or is that a conclusion you came to on your own?TaipeiMort wrote:I used to think so too, but we had a lunch tallk at uChicago on affirmative action where one of the profs made it clear that the distribution curves of male and female lsat takers are different. Male had larger tails, meaning more low scores and elite scores. Based upon this distribution, there are naturally fewer female very high LSAT scores. Therefore, the mean scores for women and men are different at top schools, who try to achieve roughly equal groups of men and women.AreJay711 wrote:I don't think that is the case. There is no female bonus.TaipeiMort wrote:Male or Female? With a 169 and F, you may be able to get money at NYU and maybe Chicago (they have extra money to give out with the Rubenstien inflow).
- kulshan
- Posts: 413
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:59 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
This is an interesting topic. Anyone else heard anything like this?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- TaipeiMort
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
He did not provide any hard data or first-hand experience, as he isn't on the admissions committee. Rather, he just presented the two different LSAT (and IQ) distributions of men and women and made the comment that because of this situation, the reality is that there are less high LSAT for uChicago to take among men than women, so the administration had to be more flexible with men than women to achieve equal numbers.Bildungsroman wrote:Did the UChicago professor explicitly say that Chicago gives a tangible boost to female applicants or is that a conclusion you came to on your own?TaipeiMort wrote:I used to think so too, but we had a lunch tallk at uChicago on affirmative action where one of the profs made it clear that the distribution curves of male and female lsat takers are different. Male had larger tails, meaning more low scores and elite scores. Based upon this distribution, there are naturally fewer female very high LSAT scores. Therefore, the mean scores for women and men are different at top schools, who try to achieve roughly equal groups of men and women.AreJay711 wrote:I don't think that is the case. There is no female bonus.TaipeiMort wrote:Male or Female? With a 169 and F, you may be able to get money at NYU and maybe Chicago (they have extra money to give out with the Rubenstien inflow).
He also made the comment that uChicago is the last of t6 schools to not apply affirmative action to law review make up.
In terms of my class though, I did not notice any type of difference in male/female intelligence. In fact, I'd say that 70% of the gunners and the majority of writing award winners were female.
- Bildungsroman
- Posts: 5529
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
Except they don't achieve equal numbers. Chicago's class is about 55% men/45% women (LinkRemoved), despite roughly equal amounts of men and women taking the LSAT.TaipeiMort wrote:He did not provide any hard data or first-hand experience, as he isn't on the admissions committee. Rather, he just presented the two different LSAT (and IQ) distributions of men and women and made the comment that because of this situation, the reality is that there are less high LSAT for uChicago to take among men than women, so the administration had to be more flexible with men than women to achieve equal numbers.Bildungsroman wrote: Did the UChicago professor explicitly say that Chicago gives a tangible boost to female applicants or is that a conclusion you came to on your own?
-
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 8:56 pm
Re: 169, 4.0, Macaulay Honors... chances?
Thanks for all the help everyone, and btw I am a male. I think I'm leaning toward nyu Ed... What do you realistically think my chances are with that?
Thanks!
Thanks!