Top Law Schools

I'm Puerto Rican (well, 50%, I guess - Dad is PR and Mom is WASP) and solidly middle class. Will I get a URM boost or are law school adcomms more interested in impoverished URMs, first generation college etc, ? Said another way, are law schools really just looking to increase their minority enrollment numbers or are they really looking to attract underprivileged students. I certainly have the impression that at the undergrad level, it's more about universities hitting their URM targets - they are more than anxious to give upper or upper middle class minorities a boost. Are law schools any different?

o'kane wrote:I'm Puerto Rican (well, 50%, I guess - Dad is PR and Mom is WASP) and solidly middle class. Will I get a URM boost

Yes.

Thank you for your response. I guess you are answering the question on the subject line. Any nuances to this answer? Any thoughts on the value of URM status in terms of LSAT score or GPA?

Little bit of both but IMO it's mostly hitting the targets. The #1 goal is to enroll students who'll become successful in the future. Biglaw is also interested in hitting targets and looking "diverse" so they also hire URMs from law schools. However, at least according to a research by a leading professor in the field that I had a class with, this URM advantage only appears in hiring. Once they're in, career advancement is nowhere near the non-URM crowd. So while biglaw takes in a good number of URMs and women, only a tiny number make equity partner, which means URMs may not have the same long-term career opportunities as non-URMs, i.e. they won't be giving back as much to the school, which is why schools may not be too eager to take more than they need to hit their numbers.

...

o'kane wrote:Thank you for your response. I guess you are answering the question on the subject line. Any nuances to this answer? Any thoughts on the value of URM status in terms of LSAT score or GPA?

Socioeconmic status doesnt really matter.

URMs at/above the LSAT median are super valuable.

gottago wrote:

Hattori Hanzo wrote:Little bit of both but IMO it's mostly hitting the targets. The #1 goal is to enroll students who'll become successful in the future. Biglaw is also interested in hitting targets and looking "diverse" so they also hire URMs from law schools. However, at least according to a research by a leading professor in the field that I had a class with, this URM advantage only appears in hiring. Once they're in, career advancement is nowhere near the non-URM crowd. So while biglaw takes in a good number of URMs and women, only a tiny number make equity partner, which means URMs may not have the same long-term career opportunities as non-URMs, i.e. they won't be giving back as much to the school, which is why schools may not be too eager to take more than they need to hit their numbers.

What are their #s?

Different for each school. Total "students of color" is usually 30-40% for top schools but the composition within that varies quite a bit. I was reading a paper on correlation between black students and peer review ranking of law schools and the % of class for T14 schools were 3%-12%. Harvard and Stanford for example get more AAs than Yale.