
The numbers are 2015 enrollment data and 2015 census bureau projections for the national comparison with Hispanic at 16.3% and AA at 13.1%
hope you find it interesting.
Lol sorry, this chart is specific to my thesis and I am only studying those two groups for several reasons. When I have time I could update it for you to include other minority groups.kingpin101 wrote:Didn't realize only hispanics and blacks are minorities.
+1. I couldn't agree more. I went to a top UG that i believe was ~9% hispanic, but i've heard numbers thrown out that only like 1/3 were actually US born and raised. There are a lot of issues with doing this though. First, how would you truly know? A lot of these wealthy Latin Americans are born in the US (Miami) so they're American Citizens. After being born here they will typically go back to their country, attend an American school (or British/French), and then many times come back to the US for high school (Miami again lol. Though a few NY, LA, and boarding schools) and attend college here. The issue is that there are some hispanics who come from poor backgrounds that had similar movements throughout childhood and then attended a top high school on scholarship/finaid.texcellence wrote:I would love if T14s differentiated between US-born Latinos and (almost entirely) white-passing, wealthy students coming from South America. I've heard a couple brown folks at Harvard and Columbia complain about this a ton, but I wonder what the actual breakdown is.
Thats extremely low. SmhFlokkness wrote:Feeling every bit of that 4.7% at Boalt, lol. It's like being back in Klan country, only with more asian kids.
It's okay because we have critical mass, which provides an excellent fascimile of "diversity."Iam3hunna wrote:Thats extremely low. SmhFlokkness wrote:Feeling every bit of that 4.7% at Boalt, lol. It's like being back in Klan country, only with more asian kids.
I don't think they care that much, otherwise some school would have at least double digits for AA %s and would be willing to distinguish more finely on "Hispanic" to make sure they are truly getting folks from non-privileged backgrounds. I think the numbers are where they are because they are the numbers the various powers that be can live with...not too low as to cause a crisis or embarrassment and not so high as to make anyone uncomfortable.Flokkness wrote:It's okay because we have critical mass, which provides a fascimile of "diversity."Iam3hunna wrote:Thats extremely low. SmhFlokkness wrote:Feeling every bit of that 4.7% at Boalt, lol. It's like being back in Klan country, only with more asian kids.
A former Harvard adcomm works with Spivey. I would be interesting to hear her take on minority recruitment at HLS or generally.fliptrip wrote:I know I don't really know what it's like inside a T-14 adcomm, but I would love to just have a shot at recruiting students of color. If I were at Harvard, maaaannnn, I swear not a single brown person I wanted would be depositing anywhere other than H. I'd get 'em. Calls, stalking, emails, facebook friend requests, TLS posting, I'd get 'em.
Those numbers are low enough they should be ashamed, not just embarrassed. Maybe I shouldn't comment because I'm not URM but those numbers are horrifyingly low. They should do better. I agree that they all seem to be lacking in motivation. Maybe they are all too worried about their medians and not enough about diversity.fliptrip wrote:I don't think they care that much, otherwise some school would have at least double digits for AA %s and would be willing to distinguish more finely on "Hispanic" to make sure they are truly getting folks from non-privileged backgrounds. I think the numbers are where they are because they are the numbers the various powers that be can live with...not too low as to cause a crisis or embarrassment and not so high as to make anyone uncomfortable.Flokkness wrote:It's okay because we have critical mass, which provides a fascimile of "diversity."Iam3hunna wrote:Thats extremely low. SmhFlokkness wrote:Feeling every bit of that 4.7% at Boalt, lol. It's like being back in Klan country, only with more asian kids.
As long as Dean Fliptrip showed me the money I'd be therefliptrip wrote:I know I don't really know what it's like inside a T-14 adcomm, but I would love to just have a shot at recruiting students of color. If I were at Harvard, maaaannnn, I swear not a single brown person I wanted would be depositing anywhere other than H. I'd get 'em. Calls, stalking, emails, facebook friend requests, TLS posting, I'd get 'em.
Interesting, but generally they do have as much incentive as anyone else don't they? I'm assuming the dominating feature of minority applications is still LSAT score (i.e., URMs at Harvard average roughly ~5 points better on the LSAT than URMs at Michigan; quite the assumption, but why should it be any different?)joeant wrote:Those numbers aren't surprising. And I say that as a first-generation lower-middle-class Hispanic law student. There are many reasons other than racism that may explain those numbers--chief among them is the lack of qualified Hispanic and black applicants. As a total aside, does anyone know of a way of pulling lsat data that details how different groups perform and how many times they take the lsat on average? Specifically, I'd like to find out whether retake attempts, on average, increase lsat scores, and how many times certain groups take the lsat on average. This is entirely irrelevant to the thread, I know, but it would be interesting to see if one reason blacks and Hispanics do no score well on standardized test--and are thus underrepresented at top-tier law schools--is because they don't have an incentive to take it more than once.
Probably still racism, but on another note - what is the standard for qualification? If having a high LSAT/GPA was so indicative of 1L performance then why don't high scorers go to lower tiered schools and become rank 1 of their class? I'm pretty sure that there are enough Hispanics and Blacks that do well enough on the LSAT (proving that they are capable) to not have minority representation 60% below the national average. Lets face it..past a certain score the LSAT is not a measure of competence...its just used to differentiate between high scorers (and factors such as luck, confidence, test taking skills come into play).joeant wrote:Those numbers aren't surprising. And I say that as a first-generation lower-middle-class Hispanic law student. There are many reasons other than racism that may explain those numbers--chief among them is the lack of qualified Hispanic and black applicants. As a total aside, does anyone know of a way of pulling lsat data that details how different groups perform and how many times they take the lsat on average? Specifically, I'd like to find out whether retake attempts, on average, increase lsat scores, and how many times certain groups take the lsat on average. This is entirely irrelevant to the thread, I know, but it would be interesting to see if one reason blacks and Hispanics do no score well on standardized test--and are thus underrepresented at top-tier law schools--is because they don't have an incentive to take it more than once.