To the moderator/whoever knows - how much does URM matter? Forum

[ck3]

A 161 is considerably above the 99th percentile for black applicants. Your score will open plenty of doors for you. I say apply to Columbia on down. MAYBE a few safeties in the 15-20 range, but I wouldn't at all be surprised by an acceptance w/ $ in the T10.

I know you're trying to be encouraging but think about what you're saying. You're making it sound like black people are effing retarded. I guarantee there's plenty of black folks with LSAT's above 161. If what you say is true a) I'm smarter than every Colin Powell, Condaleezza Rice, Barack Obama, Thurgood Marshall etc. out there and b) I could EASILY get into Yale if this is the best they are able to get. I'm not comfortable with either of those conclusions.

99% may be wrong, but your score is still very high for an African-American male (probably awfully darn close... 161 is about 85% for all applicants). You may be uncomfortable with that, but it is the truth.

You also seem to be uncomfortable with getting a huge URM boost because you are black but not poor or particularly disadvantaged. I can understand that sentiment, but I encourage you to look at it this way: the fact that so few African-Americans have GPA/LSAT numbers like you means that you offer more than your numbers. You offer diversity to a law school class. Hopefully someday we'll get to a point where affirmative action and URM boosts are not needed, but in the meantime, take the boost and don't look back.

I totally agree.

[bleu]

--ImageRemoved--

[lisjjen]

A 161 is considerably above the 99th percentile for black applicants. Your score will open plenty of doors for you. I say apply to Columbia on down. MAYBE a few safeties in the 15-20 range, but I wouldn't at all be surprised by an acceptance w/ $ in the T10.

I know you're trying to be encouraging but think about what you're saying. You're making it sound like black people are effing retarded. I guarantee there's plenty of black folks with LSAT's above 161. If what you say is true a) I'm smarter than every Colin Powell, Condaleezza Rice, Barack Obama, Thurgood Marshall etc. out there and b) I could EASILY get into Yale if this is the best they are able to get. I'm not comfortable with either of those conclusions.

99% may be wrong, but your score is still very high for an African-American male (probably awfully darn close... 161 is about 85% for all applicants). You may be uncomfortable with that, but it is the truth.

You also seem to be uncomfortable with getting a huge URM boost because you are black but not poor or particularly disadvantaged. I can understand that sentiment, but I encourage you to look at it this way: the fact that so few African-Americans have GPA/LSAT numbers like you means that you offer more than your numbers. You offer diversity to a law school class. Hopefully someday we'll get to a point where affirmative action and URM boosts are not needed, but in the meantime, take the boost and don't look back.

Well then. I guess I'll go ahead and blanket the bottom half of the T14. I'm still going to apply to a couple 70's as safeties just because I've gotten fee waivers and hey, Penn St wouldn't be that bad of a place to go for free.

--ImageRemoved--

+1.5

[094320]

..

[CryingMonkey]

The 99th percentile claim by the other poster was incorrect. Going off of 2004 data, the 99th percentile for black test takers is the top ~104 test takers, which needs an LSAT score of about 165+. A 161 is def. near there, but not quite. Anyway, URM cycles are completely unpredictable--so if I were you I would apply to the top of the T14 as well if you can afford it or get a fee waiver--try e-mailing the law schools in Sept.(include your LSAC GPA, LSAT score, and fact that you're an URM) and ask for fee waivers. Don't bank on the top of the T14, but you might get a pleasant surprise.

In 2004, 10,370 blacks took the LSAT examination. Only 29 blacks, or 0.3 percent of all LSAT test takers, scored 170 or above. In contrast, more than 1,900 white test takers scored 170 or above on the LSAT. They made up 3.1 percent of all white test takers. Thus whites were more than 10 times as likely as blacks to score 170 or above on the LSAT. There were 66 times as many whites as blacks who scored 170 or above on the test.

Even if we drop the scoring level to 165, a level equal to the mean score of students enrolling at law schools ranked in the top 10 nationwide but not at the very top, we still find very few blacks. There were 108 blacks scoring 165 or better on the LSAT in 2004. They made up 1 percent of all black test takers. For whites, there were 6,689 test takers who scored 165 or above. They made up 10.6 percent of all white students who took the LSAT examination.

Blah I'd just typed up a nice synopsis of all this data only to find I'd been beaten to the punch.

[Knock]

The 99th percentile claim by the other poster was incorrect. Going off of 2004 data, the 99th percentile for black test takers is the top ~104 test takers, which needs an LSAT score of about 165+. A 161 is def. near there, but not quite. Anyway, URM cycles are completely unpredictable--so if I were you I would apply to the top of the T14 as well if you can afford it or get a fee waiver--try e-mailing the law schools in Sept.(include your LSAC GPA, LSAT score, and fact that you're an URM) and ask for fee waivers. Don't bank on the top of the T14, but you might get a pleasant surprise.

In 2004, 10,370 blacks took the LSAT examination. Only 29 blacks, or 0.3 percent of all LSAT test takers, scored 170 or above. In contrast, more than 1,900 white test takers scored 170 or above on the LSAT. They made up 3.1 percent of all white test takers. Thus whites were more than 10 times as likely as blacks to score 170 or above on the LSAT. There were 66 times as many whites as blacks who scored 170 or above on the test.

Even if we drop the scoring level to 165, a level equal to the mean score of students enrolling at law schools ranked in the top 10 nationwide but not at the very top, we still find very few blacks. There were 108 blacks scoring 165 or better on the LSAT in 2004. They made up 1 percent of all black test takers. For whites, there were 6,689 test takers who scored 165 or above. They made up 10.6 percent of all white students who took the LSAT examination.

Blah I'd just typed up a nice synopsis of all this data only to find I'd been beaten to the punch.

Faaaaaaaaaail. Enjoy Cooley .

[Total Litigator]

I think the good advice from this thread is apply from Penn (7) to Georgetown (14), a couple safeties (T2's), maybe three in the T15 to T50 range, and apply for fee waivers to all. I think you should get the waivers, as it is in law schools' best interests to be able to choose between a variety of URM's.

And earlier I didn't mean to say that your numbers would exclude you from the T1 as a non-URM, just that they are median for some T2 schools.

While I am a little jealous of you, I do think its really cool that you have the chance to go to these great schools, as more diversity in the BAR is needed.

Best of luck in the application process.

[romothesavior]

OP, seriously, apply to CCN on down. Ask for fee waivers.

And yeah you could go to Penn State for free or close to it, but you can get that kind of money at WAY better schools. If your application is solid, you'll be looking at around 100k at WUSTL, ~50k at Cornell, 50-75k at Vanderbilt. And you'll probably be looking at a full ride or close to it just about anywhere outside of T20. So do NOT settle for Penn State.

Spend some more time on TLS and you'll be well convinced of that.

[thechee]

A 161 is considerably above the 99th percentile for black applicants. Your score will open plenty of doors for you. I say apply to Columbia on down. MAYBE a few safeties in the 15-20 range, but I wouldn't at all be surprised by an acceptance w/ $ in the T10.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I am curious where you got this figure.

I do disagree.. this number was pulled out of the air.

Actually I didn't pull it out of the air. It's from LSAC: --LinkRemoved-- (see page 19)

The standard deviation for black applicants is 8.4 points, with a mean of 142.15 for all black applicants. So, 2 SDs is a 159. which would be the 98th percentile. Given that a mere 17 points on the LSAT represent the range from the 50th to the 98th percentile, it's not unreasonable to assume that an additional 2 points would be the 99th, at 161. I concede, it's hyperbole to say considerably above, but a 161 is likely the 99.X percentile for black applicants.

[thechee]

I wonder if one adjusts for percentile, if that helps explains the URM LSAT boost to some extent. That is, is it possible that adcoms treat a 159 (98th percentile for black applicants) the same way they would a 171 (98th for white/asian folks) when evaluating applicants of different races?

[thechee]

The 99th percentile claim by the other poster was incorrect. Going off of 2004 data, the 99th percentile for black test takers is the top ~104 test takers, which needs an LSAT score of about 165+. A 161 is def. near there, but not quite. Anyway, URM cycles are completely unpredictable--so if I were you I would apply to the top of the T14 as well if you can afford it or get a fee waiver--try e-mailing the law schools in Sept.(include your LSAC GPA, LSAT score, and fact that you're an URM) and ask for fee waivers. Don't bank on the top of the T14, but you might get a pleasant surprise.

In 2004, 10,370 blacks took the LSAT examination. Only 29 blacks, or 0.3 percent of all LSAT test takers, scored 170 or above. In contrast, more than 1,900 white test takers scored 170 or above on the LSAT. They made up 3.1 percent of all white test takers. Thus whites were more than 10 times as likely as blacks to score 170 or above on the LSAT. There were 66 times as many whites as blacks who scored 170 or above on the test.

Even if we drop the scoring level to 165, a level equal to the mean score of students enrolling at law schools ranked in the top 10 nationwide but not at the very top, we still find very few blacks. There were 108 blacks scoring 165 or better on the LSAT in 2004. They made up 1 percent of all black test takers. For whites, there were 6,689 test takers who scored 165 or above. They made up 10.6 percent of all white students who took the LSAT examination.

This contradicts the data from LSAC, no?

[Sell Manilla]

Try lawschoolnumbers.com and sort by URM. It's a huge bump.

+1
OP, if you also want to see how much of a bump it is, search by schools normally. Virtually every outlier data point is a URM, the only exceptions being the occasional legacy or obscenely amazing softs.

[lisjjen]

I think the good advice from this thread is apply from Penn (7) to Georgetown (14), a couple safeties (T2's), maybe three in the T15 to T50 range, and apply for fee waivers to all. I think you should get the waivers, as it is in law schools' best interests to be able to choose between a variety of URM's.

And earlier I didn't mean to say that your numbers would exclude you from the T1 as a non-URM, just that they are median for some T2 schools.

While I am a little jealous of you, I do think its really cool that you have the chance to go to these great schools, as more diversity in the BAR is needed.

Best of luck in the application process.

Thanks. I feel a little awkward having such a huge bump. I should barely be getting into University of Washington in Seattle with these numbers. Instead, I'm looking at the Ivy League.

OP, seriously, apply to CCN on down. Ask for fee waivers.

And yeah you could go to Penn State for free or close to it, but you can get that kind of money at WAY better schools. If your application is solid, you'll be looking at around 100k at WUSTL, ~50k at Cornell, 50-75k at Vanderbilt. And you'll probably be looking at a full ride or close to it just about anywhere outside of T20. So do NOT settle for Penn State.

Spend some more time on TLS and you'll be well convinced of that.

Would it be worth my time to apply to Harvard? I was thinking just give it a shot right? $100 is a small price to pay to never have to ask "what if?"

[r2b2ct]

Would it be worth my time to apply to Harvard? I was thinking just give it a shot right? $100 is a small price to pay to never have to ask "what if?"

I think applying to Harvard is worth it. Odds definitely aren't good, but it's not completely out of the question. The point is that AA cycles are very unpredictable, so if I were in your position I would apply anywhere that I would like to attend. Ask for fee waivers first to soften the blow to your wallet.

Looking at LSN, Harvard tends to waitlist most AAs with a 3.X and 16X. Who knows you might get WL->IN. (Not saying this is likely but it's impossible if you don't try. )

If I were in your position I would retake the LSAT and push for 165+ in October. If that's not possible you will probably still get a lower T14.

Good luck. I'm really kicking myself right now for letting my UG GPA drop so much.

[hiromoto45]

Well then. I guess I'll go ahead and blanket the bottom half of the T14. I'm still going to apply to a couple 70's as safeties just because I've gotten fee waivers and hey, Penn St wouldn't be that bad of a place to go for free.

Some of postings make me think you are a flame. But if you aren't, I wouldn't recommend anyone to go to a Top 70 school. Unless you have ties or a desire to stay in the region. Have you considered Howard? Retake if you are feeling uncomfortable about your chances.

[lisjjen]

Well then. I guess I'll go ahead and blanket the bottom half of the T14. I'm still going to apply to a couple 70's as safeties just because I've gotten fee waivers and hey, Penn St wouldn't be that bad of a place to go for free.

Some of postings make me think you are a flame. But if you aren't, I wouldn't recommend anyone to go to a Top 70 school. Unless you have ties or a desire to stay in the region. Have you considered Howard? Retake if you are feeling uncomfortable about your chances.

Kinda don't know what is more of an insult. Me being a flame or going to Howard. I'm uncomfortable enough playing one race card, if I went to Howard, that's all I'd have in my hand. How did we go from talking about solid schools like University of Minnesota to Tier 3? I never want to go to Howard, ever - I don't care what their income stats look like.

Besides, why not a top 70? Now you're starting to sound like a flame.

[MartianManhunter]

Just want to reiterate the advice to retake the LSAT for about 3-4 points higher. An increased LSAT and an upward trending GPA would put you in the running for HS, I think.

[094320]

..

[Knock]

@OP: Yeah go ahead and apply to Harvard if you want. Also, meh, I wouldn't worry about the "black" card. Play it, enjoy its benefits, and apply yourself in law school.

Actually I didn't pull it out of the air. It's from LSAC: --LinkRemoved-- (see page 19)
The standard deviation for black applicants is 8.4 points, with a mean of 142.15 for all black applicants. So, 2 SDs is a 159. which would be the 98th percentile. Given that a mere 17 points on the LSAT represent the range from the 50th to the 98th percentile, it's not unreasonable to assume that an additional 2 points would be the 99th, at 161. I concede, it's hyperbole to say considerably above, but a 161 is likely the 99.X percentile for black applicants.

[In response to another post of mine I didn't quote]
This contradicts the data from LSAC, no?

No, it's consistent. The numbers aren't identical, but it's close enough that they both illustrate the same point. I would guess that 161 isn't quite 99th percentile, probably more 163-165. You make the assumption that since 17 pts represent the move from the 50th to 98th percentile on the LSAT for all applicants overrall that this applies to the black population, no? This might not be the case(the graph on pg 22 doesn't support the assumption), thus,close, though not quite. It doesn't really matter, though, 98th or 99th percentile is still pretty high.

I wonder if one adjusts for percentile, if that helps explains the URM LSAT boost to some extent. That is, is it possible that adcoms treat a 159 (98th percentile for black applicants) the same way they would a 171 (98th for white/asian folks) when evaluating applicants of different races?

Hmmm.....no, I think it's just affirmative action.

Have you been able to find any data on other types of URMs? I'd be interested in taking a look at it.

[LAWLAW09]

Kinda don't know what is more of an insult. Me being a flame or going to Howard. I'm uncomfortable enough playing one race card, if I went to Howard, that's all I'd have in my hand. How did we go from talking about solid schools like University of Minnesota to Tier 3? I never want to go to Howard, ever - I don't care what their income stats look like.

Besides, why not a top 70? Now you're starting to sound like a flame.

If your goal is to get into Harvard, my suggestion (which means only so much, if anything) would be for you to be careful with how "uncomfortable" you come across in your application. The reality is Harvard accepts Black males and other applicants that have LSATs around 160. When they reject a 166+ Black male and admit a 160 Black male, do you really think that 160 didn't articulate or demonstrate a connection to his Blackness? My guess (not that it's a guess) is that the applicants that get into H with "lower" numbers do so b/c they thoughtfully explain why being Black or another minority is an advantage. They're not shy or uncomfortable. In terms that can't be confused, they're saying "my worldview is influenced by and is made more meaningful b/c I'm Black. Here is why that has been the case throughout my life and why that will continue to be the case once I have a law degree. My Blackness will be a benefit to Harvard, the field of law I commit myself to, and those communities that will be affected by my work."

Side note: The diversity essay that simply says, "I get along with everyone" is not original. More importantly, it's not a reason to admit an applicant with "lower" numbers.

It's no coincidence that Harvard routinely admits applicants with lower numbers from Morehouse, Spelman, and Howard. Students that stand out at those institutions and other HBCUs have always offered more to an employer and this country than just "the race card." Harvard - more so than any other school - understands that, even if high scoring Black applicants that get rejected don't.

I sincerely wish you the best.


EDIT: P.S. Writing a diversity statement that describes one's struggles/progression with how they understand their identity and its relationship to certain experiences or the world is not the same as coming off as "uncomfortable."

[094320]

..

[hiromoto45]

Well then. I guess I'll go ahead and blanket the bottom half of the T14. I'm still going to apply to a couple 70's as safeties just because I've gotten fee waivers and hey, Penn St wouldn't be that bad of a place to go for free.

Some of postings make me think you are a flame. But if you aren't, I wouldn't recommend anyone to go to a Top 70 school. Unless you have ties or a desire to stay in the region. Have you considered Howard? Retake if you are feeling uncomfortable about your chances.

Kinda don't know what is more of an insult. Me being a flame or going to Howard. I'm uncomfortable enough playing one race card, if I went to Howard, that's all I'd have in my hand. How did we go from talking about solid schools like University of Minnesota to Tier 3? I never want to go to Howard, ever - I don't care what their income stats look like.

Besides, why not a top 70? Now you're starting to sound like a flame.

Flame...

[r2b2ct]

Well then. I guess I'll go ahead and blanket the bottom half of the T14. I'm still going to apply to a couple 70's as safeties just because I've gotten fee waivers and hey, Penn St wouldn't be that bad of a place to go for free.

Some of postings make me think you are a flame. But if you aren't, I wouldn't recommend anyone to go to a Top 70 school. Unless you have ties or a desire to stay in the region. Have you considered Howard? Retake if you are feeling uncomfortable about your chances.

Kinda don't know what is more of an insult. Me being a flame or going to Howard. I'm uncomfortable enough playing one race card, if I went to Howard, that's all I'd have in my hand. How did we go from talking about solid schools like University of Minnesota to Tier 3? I never want to go to Howard, ever - I don't care what their income stats look like.

Besides, why not a top 70? Now you're starting to sound like a flame.

OK seriously wtf are you talking about?

[lisjjen]

So the Howard race card thing came off pretty strong. I just personally don't have any reason to go to Howard other than it being a HBC. If I was to go to a Tier 3, it would be my dad's alma mater.

Uncomfortable may be the wrong word. It's just awkward explaining to my white friends that scored higher than me why I'm able to go to a better law school than them. I get the logic behind it.

[Total Litigator]

Yeah, if you tell an AA with a 161/3.45 that he should go to Howard, it will come off as racist/offensive because Howard is a historically black law school with an average LSAT of 153 and an average GPA of 3.2.

You don't have to be a genius to figure out why.