URM Boost Question Forum

[tooswolle]

Like many people, before I came on to this site I had no idea that a boost existed for minorities in law school admissions. I wanted to inquire if anybody has an idea of how much of a boost one can see on their application. From what I've seen on this site AA males tend to be the most coveted could that be extrapolated to apply to male Mexican Americans? Furthermore, would a boost if any be increased if the URM was socio-economically disadvantaged growing up?

I fully understand that the issue of affirmative action is a divisive one and I'm not trying to create tension. I'm honestly curious of how it works and I'm sure others would appreciate the information as well.

[hiromoto45]

In this thread, people still do not understand the meaning of URM and Affirmative Action. Highly disappointing for a pool of future lawyers who are supposed to be fundamentally sound with logical, comprehension and reasoning skills.

First of all, racism DOES exist and anybody who refuses to acknowledge this is a buffoon. While it's not in-your-face, it's still there as it has become more institutional and systematic.

URM=Under-represented Minorities
-not who's most disadvantaged
-not who's "more black"
-not who suffers the most at the hands of "whitey"

So, considering this, a "rich" black person is no different from a "poor" black person in the eyes of Adcomm members because both are still under-represented minorities. Those who try to say that a bourgie (or well-off) black person doesn't deserve to be considered for admission with respect to AA (like many posters in this thread) are mistaken and don't understand the concept of URMs/AA.

The main reason URMs (blacks, Latinos, Native Americans) are sought out by Admission Committees is because of what they are: under represented minorities. Schools, for varying reasons, seek to have as many URMs as possible to at least appear to have a diverse student body. In order to do this, schools go out of their ways to find URMs. This is where AA comes into play. Affirmative Action, in school, seeks to level the playing field in the sense of having plausible, attainable racial/ethnic representation in college and graduate schools. AA achieves when as many QUALIFIED URMs as possible are given opportunities to succeed academically. While there will most likely never be as many blacks/Latinos/Native Americans as whites in institutions of higher learning, given the racial composition of the American population, AA seeks to provide access to premier academic institutions by enabling Adcomms with the ability and desire to give extra consideration to URM applicants. Also, AA doesn't take seats away from "more qualified" (code for: white applicants) and, if anything, increases the level of competition for admission amongst URMs. And while schools may not openly admit to this, there is a quota for URMs that matches the American population, more or less. So, AA doesn't take seats away from whites.

When it comes to the preferences of Adcomms, we can be sure that URMs who have demonstrated achievement in the face of adversity (ie-a latino kid from the barrio who succeeded academically in high school and college in the face of drug dealers, murder, etc.) are generally favored. However, as many people seemingly fail to grasp, when it comes to URMs especially, it's quality over quantity in the eyes of adcomms, even though they would like to have as many URMs as possible. Schools, for the most part, would rather have 20 URMs who seem to be competent of succeeding academically as opposed to having 200+ URMS, some of whom would undeniably struggle. That is why some "rich" black kid who may have attended the best schools and grow up in a relatively affluent neighborhood could be considered more favorably by certain Adcomms than a "poor" black kid who performed at a high level academically in the public education system. It would be less of a risk in terms of seeing their students fail, much less URMs. At the end of the day, education is still a business and schools are still going to want the best and brightest, even in the face of conscious efforts to attain as many URMs as possible.

There it is.

Use the search button. This is asked too many times on here. This is one of the better answers to your question on TLS.

[tooswolle]

Thanks for the help. Just trying to find out more about the URM boost to help me decide on where to apply. I have two subsequent questions if anyone can answer. I hear the law school predictor isn't that good at predicting URM acceptances what would be the rule of thumb for applying to law schools. Before I knew about the boost I would have only applied to schools where my numbers are within range, can one with slightly lower numbers then the lower 25th numbers still apply with a reasonable shot? Second question does say being Hispanic and applying to Wisconsin or Virginia (areas with lower Hispanic populations) help any boost give have a bigger impact?

[Kohinoor]

Thanks for the help. Just trying to find out more about the URM boost to help me decide on where to apply. I have two subsequent questions if anyone can answer. I hear the law school predictor isn't that good at predicting URM acceptances what would be the rule of thumb for applying to law schools. Before I knew about the boost I would have only applied to schools where my numbers are within range, can one with slightly lower numbers then the lower 25th numbers still apply with a reasonable shot? Second question does say being Hispanic and applying to Wisconsin or Virginia (areas with lower Hispanic populations) help any boost give have a bigger impact?

Nobody knows.

[ec2xs]

Thanks for the help. Just trying to find out more about the URM boost to help me decide on where to apply. I have two subsequent questions if anyone can answer. I hear the law school predictor isn't that good at predicting URM acceptances what would be the rule of thumb for applying to law schools. Before I knew about the boost I would have only applied to schools where my numbers are within range, can one with slightly lower numbers then the lower 25th numbers still apply with a reasonable shot? Second question does say being Hispanic and applying to Wisconsin or Virginia (areas with lower Hispanic populations) help any boost give have a bigger impact?

Nobody knows.

I agree, but magic 8 ball says all signs point to "yes".

[tooswolle]

Interesting stuff, kind of wish I knew a figure to gauge where to apply. I remember seeing statistics of LSAT averages does anyone believe that the adcoms realize this and adjust ones LSAT score. I know that were merely guessing but any insight on to the process would prove invaluable to those who had no idea about it; like I did once.

[vanwinkle]

Based on purely anecdotal evidence, I can say that applying to eastern and northern schools gives Mexican-Americans a bigger boost than TX and CA schools.

Writing a Diversity Statement about your socioeconomic disadvantages, coupled with your minority status, can be a real help. Schools are looking for reasons to "add diversity" to the classroom. Give them as much of a reason to take you that you can.

[tooswolle]

Thanks for the quick response. I was thinking that any boost might be impacted by applying out of state. How would softs play a factor? I've competed in competitive undergraduate moot court and have won numerous top orator awards even made nationals, I even have a presiding state court of appeals justice who personally knows me writing me a LOR. I also have five years work experience, most notably working at a law firm. Could those be a game changer if I were slightly lower then the 25th. This is more geared towards schools that are reaches. I plan to apply most to schools where my numbers can get me in. But I'm curious

Ps does anyone know if it helps your chances to get in to a school by getting a fee waiver with out asking? Sorry for all the questions, I just want to find out more about this process. Thanks

[vanwinkle]

Thanks for the quick response. I was thinking that any boost might be impacted by applying out of state. How would softs play a factor? I've competed in competitive undergraduate moot court and have won numerous top orator awards even made nationals, I even have a presiding state court of appeals justice who personally knows me writing me a LOR. I also have five years work experience, most notably working at a law firm. Could those be a game changer if I were slightly lower then the 25th. This is more geared towards schools that are reaches. I plan to apply most to schools where my numbers can get me in. But I'm curious

Ps does anyone know if it helps your chances to get in to a school by getting a fee waiver with out asking? Sorry for all the questions, I just want to find out more about this process. Thanks

Schools hand out fee waivers like candy to folks with high LSAT scores or URMs or whoever they feel like handing them out to. That said, the school I'm attending now (a T10 school) is one that I only applied to because I got a fee waiver and figured why not. So there's something to be said for fee waivers.

I think being Mexican-American, writing a DS about overcoming socioeconomic adversity, and the five years of WE are all very positive factors in your favor and make it make sense to apply above your LSAT to a number of schools.

What are your numbers? Much easier to give advice if I actually have them.

[tooswolle]

Right now I have a 3.3 gpa with one semester left. It's a bad gpa in my opinion. But I've had to work all through undergrad. The semesters I didn't work I got 4.0s 3.6's my grades are an upward trend. I started college unprepared by my high school and suffered, but fortunately I learned and then excelled. I don't have an LSAT but I've been getting between 160-165 on practice tests (untimed). I plan to write an addendum any advice how a gpa one would look like?

[vanwinkle]

Right now I have a 3.3 gpa with one semester left. It's a bad gpa in my opinion. But I've had to work all through undergrad. The semesters I didn't work I got 4.0s 3.6's my grades are an upward trend. I started college unprepared by my high school and suffered, but fortunately I learned and then excelled. I don't have an LSAT but I've been getting between 160-165 on practice tests (untimed). I plan to write an addendum any advice how a gpa one would look like?

As it happens, I've written a guide to addendum writing, which you can read here:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 22&t=86526

I recommend you study as hard as possible for the LSAT. With a low GPA you'll be much more reliant on getting a high LSAT score to get in places. However, a 166+ will probably open a lot of doors for you, and 170+ will get you into T14 dream schools and probably with money. Work on your LSAT as much as humanly possible, take a course if you have to. Your LSAT score is critical.

[tooswolle]

Thanks for the advice man, it really helps alot. I'll definitely focus on doing good on the LSAT. This may sound like a dumb question but I'll ask it, if you have the ability to score a 165 untimed does that mean you have mastery of the questions to get to that level once you conditioned yourself to the time restraints (ps on practice tests I miss questions where I second guess myself to the point that they stop me from scoring 170's untimed) any suggestions on how to get to scoring high time because I think the time factor will really get to me. Thanks

[Kohinoor]

Thanks for the advice man, it really helps alot. I'll definitely focus on doing good on the LSAT. This may sound like a dumb question but I'll ask it, if you have the ability to score a 165 untimed does that mean you have mastery of the questions to get to that level once you conditioned yourself to the time restraints (ps on practice tests I miss questions where I second guess myself to the point that they stop me from scoring 170's untimed) any suggestions on how to get to scoring high time because I think the time factor will really get to me. Thanks

Seems like it would depend on how much time your untimed is.

[tooswolle]

I'd say it takes me 40 at most to get through a section with my accuracy for lr and reading comp (not so much RC I'm good at that from the get go) games 45 at the most when they're hard but most around 40. My thing is keeping precision while adding time. What do you guys advise?

[vanwinkle]

I'd advise heavy, heavy studying. Consider taking an LSAT class if you can come up with the money. Coming up with the money is also something you should do, if you want to go to law school; $1k or so to improve your LSAT score can end up resulting in potentially millions of dollars of difference in pay over the course of the next 30 years. That's one of the best returns on investment you'll ever see.

[masterthearts]

this site says URM for Hispanic is only mexican and puerto rican and NOT (other hispanic).
I am "other Hispanic" and in the end, if the law schools/colleges can't get enough qualified Mexicans and puerto ricans, they will give a boost to "other hispanic" to be able to say that they have enough of a diverse population. This is my opinion, and I felt it was the case when I applied to college. Law school is an even smaller, more select group of people than the college applicant pool.
I got into an ivy for college in the Regular Decision pool, My SAT score was exactly in the median range for the ivy I ultimately got accepted to (and where i presently attend). I believe my LOR were stellar. I really feel that being "other hispanic" gave me a boost and I would bet it will be the same for law school.
If there aren't enough qualified Mexian and Puerto Rican Americans for top colleges, then how will there all of a sudden be enough for law school?

[D Brooks]

Do you think you deserve a boost?


::scurries away to the lounge::

[tooswolle]

Do you think you deserve a boost?


::scurries away to the lounge::

I don't think it's so much as one deserving a boost just because a boost exist. I believe its just one of those things law schools do for public relations. My personal opinion on the matter is that yes cultural/ethnic backgrounds should be considered but the best way to gauge who should get a boost or how much of a boost if any is by looking at the applicants socio-economic status or at least past socio-economic disadvantages. I believe applying such a boost in this fashion creates some equity in the system because lets face it someone who is poor and has to work 30-50 hours in a week is going to be seriously disadvantaged when it comes to the amount of time they have to dedicate to school, as well as being disadvantaged in the resources available to prepare for the LSAT which are the two most important factors in admissions.