Why your app is being held if you're an AA Forum

[musharraf]

Imagine for a moment you're an African-American applying to law school this cycle - I know for some of us, that's not a large leap. You've scored a 165 on the LSAT, which places you in the respectable but not spectacular 90th percentile of all test takers. This is the position I'm in now, and since I both think I can do better AND have a shitty GPA, I'm doing a retake in December. But for those of you in better positions than mine, it's time to face the music: you're going to Harvard.

11,453 African Americans took the LSAT in the 2011-2012 cycle. The mean score was 141.84, with a standard deviation of 8.68. For perspective, that score is 8.82 points lower than the mean of the full population of 105,390 test takers (150.66).

If you scored decently like I did, congratulations: you are one of the top 46 black law school applicants of the cycle. We should start a club. If you manage to hit 170, well then, treat yourself to something nice, because you're in the top 8. If you add folks who got a 169, you can play full-court basketball.

I'm calculating this with the most recent data published by LSAC, available here: http://lsac.org/lsacresources/research/all/tr. The z table I'm using is here: http://www.resourcesystemsconsulting.com/blog/z-table/. I'm a shitty statistician so check my work if you think it feels off.

Every school wants decent African-American representation, and the numbers demonstrate why that's such a difficult task. It's even more difficult once you dive into the ABA data and look at Harvard's numbers: they have an AA percentage of 8.4, translating to - you guessed it - 46 1Ls. Every other top school is holding AA apps to judge just how hard they'll have to work to gobble up the stars that Harvard doesn't.

The bottom line of this is simply to confirm the advice offered everywhere else on TLS: If you're an AA with decent numbers, shotgun your applications. Assuming you're shooting for T-14, you are a fool if you don't. You still have to kick ass on your personal and diversity statements, hustle for those LORs, and write addenda and optional essays. Do not give schools a reason to disqualify you - just look at the URM graphs on lawschoolnumbers to see how low schools are willing to go after passing over applications who don't even try. But insofar as admissions is a numbers game, if you're an AA, this is your time to shine. Make the best of it.

[Mojosodope]

Imagine for a moment you're an African-American applying to law school this cycle - I know for some of us, that's not a large leap. You've scored a 165 on the LSAT, which places you in the respectable but not spectacular 90th percentile of all test takers. This is the position I'm in now, and since I both think I can do better AND have a shitty GPA, I'm doing a retake in December. But for those of you in better positions than mine, it's time to face the music: you're going to Harvard.

11,453 African Americans took the LSAT in the 2011-2012 cycle. The mean score was 141.84, with a standard deviation of 8.68. For perspective, that score is 8.82 points lower than the mean of the full population of 105,390 test takers (150.66).

If you scored decently like I did, congratulations: you are one of the top 46 black law school applicants of the cycle. We should start a club. If you manage to hit 170, well then, treat yourself to something nice, because you're in the top 8. If you add folks who got a 169, you can play full-court basketball.

I'm calculating this with the most recent data published by LSAC, available here: http://lsac.org/lsacresources/research/all/tr. The z table I'm using is here: http://www.resourcesystemsconsulting.com/blog/z-table/. I'm a shitty statistician so check my work if you think it feels off.

Every school wants decent African-American representation, and the numbers demonstrate why that's such a difficult task. It's even more difficult once you dive into the ABA data and look at Harvard's numbers: they have an AA percentage of 8.4, translating to - you guessed it - 46 1Ls. Every other top school is holding AA apps to judge just how hard they'll have to work to gobble up the stars that Harvard doesn't.

The bottom line of this is simply to confirm the advice offered everywhere else on TLS: If you're an AA with decent numbers, shotgun your applications. Assuming you're shooting for T-14, you are a fool if you don't. You still have to kick ass on your personal and diversity statements, hustle for those LORs, and write addenda and optional essays. Do not give schools a reason to disqualify you - just look at the URM graphs on lawschoolnumbers to see how low schools are willing to go after passing over applications who don't even try. But insofar as admissions is a numbers game, if you're an AA, this is your time to shine. Make the best of it.

Didn't you say you had a 174 before?

[MoMettaMonk]

Didn't you say you had a 174 before?

I don't think he contradicted himself there. He was just pointing out the generally round numbers that we tend to use as benchmarks around these parts in 165 and 170. Also if he really does have a 174, then statistically speaking either all or the vast majority of 173+ AAs have probably popped up on TLS this year. I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

[Mojosodope]

Imagine for a moment you're an African-American applying to law school this cycle - I know for some of us, that's not a large leap. You've scored a 165 on the LSAT, which places you in the respectable but not spectacular 90th percentile of all test takers. This is the position I'm in now, and since I both think I can do better AND have a shitty GPA, I'm doing a retake in December. But for those of you in better positions than mine, it's time to face the music: you're going to Harvard.

I was referring to the bolded above MoMetta. He says that is the position he is in now, and he's going to retake in December.

Either way its no big deal. I think Athlone already has a thread up stating this info

[MoMettaMonk]

Imagine for a moment you're an African-American applying to law school this cycle - I know for some of us, that's not a large leap. You've scored a 165 on the LSAT, which places you in the respectable but not spectacular 90th percentile of all test takers. This is the position I'm in now, and since I both think I can do better AND have a shitty GPA, I'm doing a retake in December. But for those of you in better positions than mine, it's time to face the music: you're going to Harvard.

I was referring to the bolded above MoMetta. He says that is the position he is in now, and he's going to retake in December.

Either way its no big deal. I think Athlone already has a thread up stating this info

Man my RC skills have really dropped since I stopped studying for the LSAT. That is a curious discrepancy. I still stand by the rest of my "most/all of the 173+ AAs are on TLS this year" statement.

[musharraf]

Didn't you say you had a 174 before?

I don't think he contradicted himself there. He was just pointing out the generally round numbers that we tend to use as benchmarks around these parts in 165 and 170. Also if he really does have a 174, then statistically speaking either all or the vast majority of 173+ AAs have probably popped up on TLS this year. I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

MoMettaMonk gets at what I was aiming for - I think 165 and 170 are good benchmarks for this subject. But on my own score, I was using 174 as the average for my practice exams before I took the October test (which I choked on). I updated my profile on LSN when those scores came out to reflect that.

[Mojosodope]

And like I said, Athlone put together a pretty good thread that goes a little more in depth on the point you were trying to make.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=195443

But your conclusion is correct.

[bizzybone1313]

Your post is great OP. But there is already an oversaturation of information about AA's and admissions practices at the T-14. When you are bored, how about the same exact info as it pertains Latinos? Native Americans?

[MoMettaMonk]

I think I understand your intent for putting this large wall of text into the borg, i.e. it is generally inspirational and meant to soothe a lot of the freaking out that's going on around these parts around this time. And that is a noble ambition.

However, I would say that because Athlone's thread (which Mojo linked in the post above this one) is so detailed and so well done and STILL not stickied, any similar posts really should be made in that thread in order to make sure that it perennially stays near the top of the front page where new people to the site can find it.

[Mojosodope]

Your post is great OP. But there is already an oversaturation of information about AA's and admissions practices at the T-14. When you are bored, how about the same exact info as it pertains Latinos? Native Americans?

You can get the same data by using a distribution calculator and the information provided by the LSAC.

[MoMettaMonk]

Your post is great OP. But there is already an oversaturation of information about AA's and admissions practices at the T-14. When you are bored, how about the same exact info as it pertains Latinos? Native Americans?

You can get the same data by using a distribution calculator and the information provided by the LSAC.

In fact, I just linked TPM's distribution calc post into Athlone's post so that it's back on the front page.

[Mojosodope]

Your post is great OP. But there is already an oversaturation of information about AA's and admissions practices at the T-14. When you are bored, how about the same exact info as it pertains Latinos? Native Americans?

You can get the same data by using a distribution calculator and the information provided by the LSAC.

In fact, I just linked TPM's distribution calc post into Athlone's post so that it's back on the front page.

Metta 4 Mod

[musharraf]

Your post is great OP. But there is already an oversaturation of information about AA's and admissions practices at the T-14. When you are bored, how about the same exact info as it pertains Latinos? Native Americans?

You can get the same data by using a distribution calculator and the information provided by the LSAC.

In fact, I just linked TPM's distribution calc post into Athlone's post so that it's back on the front page.

This is a great find - I wish I had seen it earlier! I wrote this basically to give a lot of folks wondering if their numbers will hold up some encouragement. Like I said, I'm a shitty statistician and Athlone breaks things down well.

[teampeeta]

I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

Jesus. Who are these people? I've only counted midnight_circus. And I know there's a guy on LSN with a 178. I believe his alias is chance88.

Also there is so little data on AAs who score above 170 on the LSAT. It makes things kind of difficult to predict, no? Like, isn't the person with a 4.0/164 going to have an equal or better chance than I am?

[MoMettaMonk]

I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

Jesus. Who are these people? I've only counted midnight_circus. And I know there's a guy on LSN with a 178. I believe his alias is chance88.

Also there is so little data on AAs who score above 170 on the LSAT. It makes things kind of difficult to predict, no? Like, isn't the person with a 4.0/164 going to have an equal or better chance than I am?

Let me revise my original statement, I've counted 1 179, 1 178/179 (who popped up in the what are my chances forum briefly), and 1 174.

[KingJamesLBJ]

I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

Jesus. Who are these people? I've only counted midnight_circus. And I know there's a guy on LSN with a 178. I believe his alias is chance88.

Also there is so little data on AAs who score above 170 on the LSAT. It makes things kind of difficult to predict, no? Like, isn't the person with a 4.0/164 going to have an equal or better chance than I am?

Let me revise my original statement, I've counted 1 179, 1 178/179 (who popped up in the what are my chances forum briefly), and 1 174 who I pmed to ask his numbers.

There is a 173 or 174 aa female as well. She was debating a retake because she wanted to guarantee harvard or yale

[applelover]

I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

Jesus. Who are these people? I've only counted midnight_circus. And I know there's a guy on LSN with a 178. I believe his alias is chance88.

Also there is so little data on AAs who score above 170 on the LSAT. It makes things kind of difficult to predict, no? Like, isn't the person with a 4.0/164 going to have an equal or better chance than I am?

Let me revise my original statement, I've counted 1 179, 1 178/179 (who popped up in the what are my chances forum briefly), and 1 174 who I pmed to ask his numbers.

Peeta has a 173 I believe. BTW congrats on that! and the OP has a 174 right? John Rizzy Rawls has something pretty high too, but I can't remember.

[applelover]

I've counted 2 179s and 2 174s so far.

Jesus. Who are these people? I've only counted midnight_circus. And I know there's a guy on LSN with a 178. I believe his alias is chance88.

Also there is so little data on AAs who score above 170 on the LSAT. It makes things kind of difficult to predict, no? Like, isn't the person with a 4.0/164 going to have an equal or better chance than I am?

Let me revise my original statement, I've counted 1 179, 1 178/179 (who popped up in the what are my chances forum briefly), and 1 174 who I pmed to ask his numbers.

There is a 173 or 174 aa female as well. She was debating a retake because she wanted to guarantee harvard or yale

I believe you're referring to Peeta, if I remember correctly.

[KingJamesLBJ]

There is a 173 or 174 aa female as well. She was debating a retake because she wanted to guarantee harvard or yale

I believe you're referring to Peeta, if I remember correctly.[/quote][/quote]

Yea i think thats her, it was recent

[teampeeta]

There is a 173 or 174 aa female as well. She was debating a retake because she wanted to guarantee harvard or yale

I believe you're referring to Peeta, if I remember correctly.

Yea i think thats her, it was recent

I do have a 173 and am still mulling a December retake. Still haven't signed up so I have about 11 hrs to decide on that. I am a dude, fwiw.

There is also another poster, mac2013, who is my numbers twin but an AA female. I don't know if that's the person MoMetta PM'd and said had a 174 or not.

[applelover]

There is a 173 or 174 aa female as well. She was debating a retake because she wanted to guarantee harvard or yale

I believe you're referring to Peeta, if I remember correctly.

Yea i think thats her, it was recent

I do have a 173 and am still mulling a December retake. Still haven't signed up so I have about 11 hrs to decide on that. I am a dude, fwiw.

There is also another poster, mac2013, who is my numbers twin but an AA female. I don't know if that's the person MoMetta PM'd and said had a 174 or not.

Sorry about the gender mix up.

[teampeeta]

There is a 173 or 174 aa female as well. She was debating a retake because she wanted to guarantee harvard or yale

I believe you're referring to Peeta, if I remember correctly.

Yea i think thats her, it was recent

I do have a 173 and am still mulling a December retake. Still haven't signed up so I have about 11 hrs to decide on that. I am a dude, fwiw.

There is also another poster, mac2013, who is my numbers twin but an AA female. I don't know if that's the person MoMetta PM'd and said had a 174 or not.

Sorry about the gender mix up.

No worries. I know there's a proliferation of AAs with high LSAT scores on these boards, but I wanted to suss out who was who to satisfy my curiosity.

[MoMettaMonk]

So to compile what everyone's said in the last few posts we know of at least:

1 179
1 178/79
1 174 (Musharraf said that he actually has a 165 and is retaking to hit his PT average)
2 173

and these are only people who have posted on TLS.

[midnight_circus]

Well I feel special.
I will say though that mac2013, the 178, & I are are all 1/2 AA. I have no idea if they checked another box in addition to AA, but I did. Which means, according to twenty's info on Althone's thread, we won't being counted in these AA statistics, which might partially explain the seemingly-misrepresentative proliferation.

[applelover]

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/sakuraelectra

There's another 174 this cycle.

Idk if she checked AA on her app, but yea.