deleted
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:40 pm
.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=224627
You acknowledged yourself that there isnt any readily available precedents. So, statistics (or, the compilation of precedents really) would seem to be unavailable.hyperbolme wrote:Thanks, guys. I am planning to blanket T14, but was hoping for statistics or analysis tools or something. Anyone?
I've been told that school also value geographic diversity, so I would think that T14 schools located in areas that have a smaller population of MexAm applicants nearby would find out of state URMs more desirable. For example, a relatively high percentage of MexAm applicants probably apply to California schools because many live near those schools. How many of them are willing to move to Virginia or Michigan?hyperbolme wrote: 3) Any information on T14 schools more inclined toward MexA URMs?
Interesting point, and one I hadn't yet considered. Thanks for the additional perspective.daleearnhardt123 wrote:You acknowledged yourself that there isnt any readily available precedents. So, statistics (or, the compilation of precedents really) would seem to be unavailable.hyperbolme wrote:Thanks, guys. I am planning to blanket T14, but was hoping for statistics or analysis tools or something. Anyone?
That said, I don't think anyone here would be surprised if you swept H-Y-S. I don't know that female URM gives you an added boost over male URM at admissions, but I have little doubt that it does with job offers. Reasoning back, then, I would assume the same can probably be said for admissions. At least if we can assume admissions officers are rational, self-interested beings who want their admitted students to place as well as possible post-graduation.
UCLA is YPing you, that's not a useful data point. Strange that you're not in a Penn though... maybe this admissions cycle has already yielded them a lot of MexAs?Iroh wrote:Male Mex. URM here. 3.6x GPA, 171 LSAT.
So far this cycle:
Accepted: Stanford, Virginia, Duke
Waitlisted: Penn, UCLA
Rejected: None (so far)
It's difficult to predict your cycle when you're a splitter URM. My understanding is that black males are valued over black females for admissions purposes. I would assume (but have no evidence to support) that the same holds for other URMs.
I'm not sure how to determine which schools "favor" Mexicans beyond the typical boost. Demographics only tell you so much. I thought Penn was going to accept me. I also thought, regardless of URM status, that UCLA would accept me as well. I thought I had absolutely no shot at Stanford, Harvard, or Chicago, and yet I've been accepted to Stanford and have had interviews with the other two.![]()
So is this evidence that GPA-centric schools will give a break to URMs? It certainly seems so. But I think it also shows that admissions decisions, even though they seem predictable, can surprise you.
1) It probably matters slightly. Males outperform females on the LSAT in every single race except AA if I remember correctly. Its probably a negligible boost if any at all.hyperbolme wrote:Brand new here, but I did do my research before making a thread. Unfortunately, LSN boasts exactly ZERO female URMs in my stat range, so here I am. I'm hoping for some anecdotal information or helpful links I may have missed. I have decent softs and my 3.4 GPA was earned while working three jobs attending a rigorous liberal arts school, but I'm concerned about how it could affect my T14 chances.
My questions:
1) Does being a female URM affect my chances at all? I've found data available on male URMs, but I'm finding little info on female URMs, so it would be good to know if being a woman even matters. This may be a non-issue; in any event, I'm curious.
2) Does being a URM affect my chances at a T14 school that gives greater weight to GPA in their considerations?
3) Any information on T14 schools more inclined toward MexA URMs?
Thanks!
Not sure about UCLA YP. I got in this cycle with a 3.9x/173 MA URM, plus their admissions charts seem to suggest they don't really YP as much as other schools.daleearnhardt123 wrote:UCLA is YPing you, that's not a useful data point. Strange that you're not in a Penn though... maybe this admissions cycle has already yielded them a lot of MexAs?Iroh wrote:Male Mex. URM here. 3.6x GPA, 171 LSAT.
So far this cycle:
Accepted: Stanford, Virginia, Duke
Waitlisted: Penn, UCLA
Rejected: None (so far)
It's difficult to predict your cycle when you're a splitter URM. My understanding is that black males are valued over black females for admissions purposes. I would assume (but have no evidence to support) that the same holds for other URMs.
I'm not sure how to determine which schools "favor" Mexicans beyond the typical boost. Demographics only tell you so much. I thought Penn was going to accept me. I also thought, regardless of URM status, that UCLA would accept me as well. I thought I had absolutely no shot at Stanford, Harvard, or Chicago, and yet I've been accepted to Stanford and have had interviews with the other two.![]()
So is this evidence that GPA-centric schools will give a break to URMs? It certainly seems so. But I think it also shows that admissions decisions, even though they seem predictable, can surprise you.
Besides NAs, there are significantly fewer URM males taking the lsat. see Nik1's post (third to last on page 1) ITT:hyperbolme wrote: 1) Does being a female URM affect my chances at all? I've found data available on male URMs, but I'm finding little info on female URMs, so it would be good to know if being a woman even matters. This may be a non-issue; in any event, I'm curious.
This is where the LSAT statistics get very specific. The numbers below represent the number of female testers in each ethnicity. How do your LSAT scores seem to compare to those with a similar genetic and gender background?
•American Indian or Alaskan Native:
Number of Testers: 232
Mean: 144.32
Standard Deviation: 9.53
•Asian:
Number of Testers: 4,120
Mean: 152.33
Standard Deviation: 10.23
•Black or African American:
Number of Testers: 7,236
Mean: 141.43
Standard Deviation: 8.41
•Canadian Aboriginal:
Number of Testers: 9
Mean: 146.67
Standard Deviation: 10.45
•Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander:
Number of Testers: 93
Mean: 144.51
Standard Deviation:8.68
•Hispanic or Latino:
Number of Testers: 4,105
Mean: 145.37
Standard Deviation: 9.07
•Puerto Rican:
Number of Testers: 1,110
Mean: 137.41
Standard Deviation: 9.71
•White or Caucasian:
Number of Testers: 25,299
Mean: 151.98
Standard Deviation: 9.19
•Multiple Ethnicities:
Number of Testers: 3,549
Mean: 148.35
Standard Deviation: 9.85
•No Response:
Number of Testers: 530
Mean: 155.05
Standard Deviation: 9.81
Average LSAT Scores By Male Gender And Ethnicity
And here is the counterpart which represents the male testers in each ethnicity.
•American Indian or Alaskan Native:
Number of Testers: 242
Mean: 147.03
Standard Deviation: 8.67
•Asian:
Number of Testers: 3,388
Mean: 153.10
Standard Deviation: 10.85
•Black or African American:
Number of Testers: 4,217
Mean: 142.54
Standard Deviation: 9.09
•Canadian Aboriginal:
Number of Testers: 8
Mean: 151.75
Standard Deviation: 9.36
•Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander:
Number of Testers: 54
Mean: 149.32
Standard Deviation: 10.41
•Hispanic or Latino:
Number of Testers: 3,108
Mean: 147.57
Standard Deviation: 9.34
•Puerto Rican:
Number of Testers: 750
Mean: 138.99
Standard Deviation: 9.57
•White or Caucasian:
Number of Testers: 31,629
Mean: 153.44
Standard Deviation: 9.27
•Multiple Ethnicities:
Number of Testers: 2,929
Mean: 151.22
Standard Deviation: 9.67
•No Response:
Number of Testers: 854
Mean: 155.93
Standard Deviation: 9.34
Yes.Dr.Zer0 wrote:Is this the link you are looking for Nova?
http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source/research- (lsac-resources)/tr-12-03.pdf