T14s accept 70-80 URMs per year? 50 URMs score >170? Forum

[BasketCaseBrief]

Most people who sit for the test, regardless of race, do not score above 170 now do they? Only ~2% (study or no study) of LSAT takers score this high so why is it always being discussed as a norm?

I'd guess that the few URM (particularly black) males scoring above 170 seem to be proportionate (control for black males only being some 6 percent of the general population) to how scarce they are to the small number of white people also scoring above 170. Heck, if a thousand black males take the test for every 16,000 whites taking the same test, it's certainly not a shocker that only about 20 of them, compared to about 320 whites, score so well. Those T14s had better clamor for that few and rare 20 black males; hell, throw in a few who only score in the mid-160's, too. I see no problem. The racial gap at top law schools has to be filled in somehow, lest they discouragingly appear too milky.

Or else, those T14 schools would be getting lacerated by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson all day every day.

[choculamaviva]

Most people who sit for the test, regardless of race, do not score above 170 now do they? Only ~2% (study or no study) of LSAT takers score this high so why is it always being discussed as a norm?

I'd guess that the few URM (particularly black) males scoring above 170 seem to be proportionate (control for black males only being some 6 percent of the general population) to how scarce they are to the small number of white people also scoring above 170. Heck, if a thousand black males take the test for every 16,000 whites taking the same test, it's certainly not a shocker that only about 20 of them, compared to about 320 whites, score so well. Those T14s had better clamor for that few and rare 20 black males; hell, throw in a few who only score in the mid-160's, too. I see no problem. The racial gap at top law schools has to be filled in somehow, lest they discouragingly appear too milky.

Or else, those T14 schools would be getting lacerated by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson all day every day.

The stats aren't even close. Please don't try to pretend that they are.

[vanwinkle]

Most people who sit for the test, regardless of race, do not score above 170 now do they? Only ~2% (study or no study) of LSAT takers score this high so why is it always being discussed as a norm?

I'd guess that the few URM (particularly black) males scoring above 170 seem to be proportionate (control for black males only being some 6 percent of the general population) to how scarce they are to the small number of white people also scoring above 170. Heck, if a thousand black males take the test for every 16,000 whites taking the same test, it's certainly not a shocker that only about 20 of them, compared to about 320 whites, score so well. Those T14s had better clamor for that few and rare 20 black males; hell, throw in a few who only score in the mid-160's, too. I see no problem. The racial gap at top law schools has to be filled in somehow, lest they discouragingly appear too milky.

Or else, those T14 schools would be getting lacerated by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson all day every day.

The median LSAT score for a white taker is 151; the median score for a black taker is 141. It's not just scarcity of test takers, it's also a difference in standardized testing results between the races as a measured whole.

[rGsgbJsl1]

Wow, only 40-50 black URMs score over 170 each year. That is quite shocking actually. Makes you wonder what the explanation is. Maybe it is just the fact, that as a URM, being aware that if you have a half decent GPA from a half decent college, something in the lower 160 will probably suffice to get you into a T20, if not T10 school. So consequently, URMs just take it easy on the LSAT.

This is not meant to start any controvesy (hell, if I could get into Chicago wih a 162, why would I study my ass off to get a 170?!? It's just human nature).

You are mistaking something: I don't think URMS will say, "I can get into law schools easier than the rest of the population... so I won't study!"

There is a statistically significant lagging in the scores of URMs (in MCATS/PCATS/LSATS). It's important to keep a socio-context when thinking about these things into consideration.

I think your explanation is valid for explaining why URM on average score lower on most standadized tests. But I don't think it can explain the fact that out of roughly 10000 black URM students taking the LSAT, only 40-50 get a 170. I think this cannot be explained by socioeconomic factors alone. Many URMs go to top colleges, so you can reasonably assume that these people should have the intellectual horsepower and the right academic environment to support them. Still, only 40 to 50 actually do so every year.

Can you guys do basic arithmetic operations?

If say 50 black URMs get a 170 or above, and if 10,000 black URMs take the LSAT, that means about 5% of black URMs score above a 170.

According to Wikipedia the 90th percentile is around 163 for EVERYBODY.
We could probably say that a 170 is the 93-94th percentile.

I don't see what the big deal is, the numbers are very similar

[D. H2Oman]

Wow, only 40-50 black URMs score over 170 each year. That is quite shocking actually. Makes you wonder what the explanation is. Maybe it is just the fact, that as a URM, being aware that if you have a half decent GPA from a half decent college, something in the lower 160 will probably suffice to get you into a T20, if not T10 school. So consequently, URMs just take it easy on the LSAT.

This is not meant to start any controvesy (hell, if I could get into Chicago wih a 162, why would I study my ass off to get a 170?!? It's just human nature).

You are mistaking something: I don't think URMS will say, "I can get into law schools easier than the rest of the population... so I won't study!"

There is a statistically significant lagging in the scores of URMs (in MCATS/PCATS/LSATS). It's important to keep a socio-context when thinking about these things into consideration.

I think your explanation is valid for explaining why URM on average score lower on most standadized tests. But I don't think it can explain the fact that out of roughly 10000 black URM students taking the LSAT, only 40-50 get a 170. I think this cannot be explained by socioeconomic factors alone. Many URMs go to top colleges, so you can reasonably assume that these people should have the intellectual horsepower and the right academic environment to support them. Still, only 40 to 50 actually do so every year.

Can you guys do basic arithmetic operations?

If say 50 black URMs get a 170 or above, and if 10,000 black URMs take the LSAT, that means about 5% of black URMs score above a 170.

According to Wikipedia the 90th percentile is around 163 for EVERYBODY.
We could probably say that a 170 is the 93-94th percentile.

I don't see what the big deal is, the numbers are very similar

I'd do that math again, bro.....

[Kohinoor]

Can you guys do basic arithmetic operations?

If say 50 black URMs get a 170 or above, and if 10,000 black URMs take the LSAT, that means about 5% of black URMs score above a 170.

According to Wikipedia the 90th percentile is around 163 for EVERYBODY.
We could probably say that a 170 is the 93-94th percentile.

I don't see what the big deal is, the numbers are very similar

This is too perfect to not be flame.

[kurama20]

Can I do basic arithmetic operations?

If say 50 black URMs get a 170 or above, and if 10,000 black URMs take the LSAT, that means about 5% of black URMs score above a 170.

According to Wikipedia the 90th percentile is around 163 for EVERYBODY.
We could probably say that a 170 is the 93-94th percentile.

I don't see what the big deal is, the numbers are very similar

No.

[rGsgbJsl1]

It's not fair, all you guys are regulars...

[APimpNamedSlickback]

Kohinoor is clearly smart, but i think i'm going to add him to my foes list. his dose of reality posts are like a torrential downpour on the parade i've been on since l first saw these lsat demographic numbers.

[kurama20]

Kohinoor is clearly smart, but i think i'm going to add him to my foes list. his dose of reality posts are like a torrential downpour on the parade i've been on since l first saw these lsat demographic numbers.

Hell no! I just realized where and what your avatar is from!!!

[APimpNamedSlickback]

Kohinoor is clearly smart, but i think i'm going to add him to my foes list. his dose of reality posts are like a torrential downpour on the parade i've been on since l first saw these lsat demographic numbers.

Hell no! I just realized where and what your avatar is from!!!

i'm the first poster in the history of message boards to have coupled talib kweli with a patrick bateman avatar. i'm an innovator. or just weird.

[Kant]

I have a hard time believing that only 50 blacks score a 170+

[Kohinoor]

Kohinoor is clearly smart, but i think i'm going to add him to my foes list. his dose of reality posts are like a torrential downpour on the parade i've been on since l first saw these lsat demographic numbers.

I feel that I'm an outlier. My application was poorly executed independently of my numbers. You'll get in everywhere you apply.

[rGsgbJsl1]

Kohinoor is clearly smart, but i think i'm going to add him to my foes list. his dose of reality posts are like a torrential downpour on the parade i've been on since l first saw these lsat demographic numbers.

Hell no! I just realized where and what your avatar is from!!!

i'm the first poster in the history of message boards to have coupled talib kweli with a patrick bateman avatar. i'm an innovator. or just weird.

Neither, I'm surprised I haven't seen more of him around here. TLS and a hobo killing yuppie seem like a perfect combination.

[Kant]

Can you guys do basic arithmetic operations?

If say 50 black URMs get a 170 or above, and if 10,000 black URMs take the LSAT, that means about 5% of black URMs score above a 170.

According to Wikipedia the 90th percentile is around 163 for EVERYBODY.
We could probably say that a 170 is the 93-94th percentile.

I don't see what the big deal is, the numbers are very similar

I'd do that math again, bro.....

I'm gonna do it for him......


(50/10,000)*100% = .5% Approx. 1.6% of all test takers score above a 170. This is why i believe that more than 50 black do the same.

[rGsgbJsl1]

I have a hard time believing that only 50 blacks score a 170+

What's so hard to believe?
The data is right in front of you (second link).

That Harvard number is referring to black people only.

http://www.nalplawschoolsonline.org/ndl ... 03&yr=2009

Each year the number of black people attending is between 60 and 70, so one must assume that the number admitted is a bit higher. So yes, that means that even Harvard is having to reach past the test takers scoring 170, so one can only imagine the effect this has on school like NYU and Columbia once all of those score are gone. This is why black males with mid 150s scores get into Cornell every year. An important thing to keep in mind is that black males are severely underrepresented in any achieving group. Any score numbers about black people probably mean that 3/4 of them are females.


The 170 scorers number is also pertaining solely to blacks and may be a little lower than the one you've quoted. I have heard that the number is around 40 now. It is also around 40 for black people with both a 3.5+ and a 165+.

http://www.jbhe.com/news_views/51_gradu ... _test.html

That link discusses black performance on the lsat and lists the figure for 2004 which was really not that long ago. You've got to keep in mind that most of the 160's=the top 1% for black test takers.

Hope that helps.

[Kant]

I have a hard time believing that only 50 blacks score a 170+

What's so hard to believe?
The data is right in front of you (second link).

Now that we have established that...the next question is why....and that is bad question to ask....

[rGsgbJsl1]

I have a hard time believing that only 50 blacks score a 170+

What's so hard to believe?
The data is right in front of you (second link).

Now that we have established that...the next question is why....and that is bad question to ask....

Why is it a bad question?
Just because race is involved it doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it. Hell, if an answer is found, maybe LSAC could create a Law School admission process where everybody is equal and we don't have to rely on URM boosts to make up for unequal education opportunities.

[Kohinoor]

I have a hard time believing that only 50 blacks score a 170+

What's so hard to believe?
The data is right in front of you (second link).

Now that we have established that...the next question is why....and that is bad question to ask....

Why is it a bad question?
Just because race is involved it doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it. Hell, if an answer is found, maybe LSAC could create a Law School admission process where everybody is equal and we don't have to rely on URM boosts to make up for unequal education opportunities.

If we are to talk, let us begin from a position of truth. LSAC doesn't require anything of law schools with regard to minority admission rates. The programs are conceived and operated by the individual law schools.

[Kant]

Because if you are on one side you are instantly labeled as a racist by TLS crowd.

[rGsgbJsl1]

If we are to talk, let us begin from a position of truth. LSAC doesn't require anything of law schools with regard to minority admission rates. The programs are conceived and operated by the individual law schools.

What do you suggest then?

[Kant]

If we are to talk, let us begin from a position of truth. LSAC doesn't require anything of law schools with regard to minority admission rates. The programs are conceived and operated by the individual law schools.

What do you suggest then?

This will get interesting.

[Kohinoor]

If we are to talk, let us begin from a position of truth. LSAC doesn't require anything of law schools with regard to minority admission rates. The programs are conceived and operated by the individual law schools.

What do you suggest then?

Nothing. You're the one who doesn't like the system, not me. I'm just saying that if you want to discuss this, let's not have the misconception that law schools are being forced by some governing authority to admit more minorities than they would otherwise prefer to.

[Kant]

If we are to talk, let us begin from a position of truth. LSAC doesn't require anything of law schools with regard to minority admission rates. The programs are conceived and operated by the individual law schools.

What do you suggest then?

Nothing. You're the one who doesn't like the system, not me. I'm just saying that if you want to discuss this, let's not have the misconception that law schools are being forced by some governing authority to admit more minorities than they would otherwise prefer to.

It should be illegal for all schools that get the public dollar.

[rGsgbJsl1]

Nothing. You're the one who doesn't like the system, not me. I'm just saying that if you want to discuss this, let's not have the misconception that law schools are being forced by some governing authority to admit more minorities than they would otherwise prefer to.

I do think though, that in a way they are forced to evaluate URM candidates differently from non-URMs. If LSAT scores didn't deviate so much across races, there would be no need to weigh a 170 non-URM from a 170 URM. I don't really know if the nature of the LSAT is what accounts for such deviations, but if it does, then LSAC should change it so those deviations are minimized.