Top Law Schools

..

acrossthelake wrote:I don't want to start an affirmative action debate in here, so please let's not detract down that road.

It's decently well-known that for undergrad, there's a portion of the elite schools where it is to one's disadvantage to be Asian. I don't feel like pulling up the studies to cite, but just in general at these particular schools the admit rate for Asians is proportionally lower compared to the rate at which they apply. I really don't believe it's caused by any of the rather insulting stereotypes (ex: "Oh, Asians just have no personality") I've seen offered as an explanation, especially since in schools where consideration of race was eliminated, the rates of admissions then became proportional. I'm not trying to start a discussion into this, either, my question is simply this:

Does this happen for law school admissions?

From the reading I've done of LSAC data, this (fortunately) doesn't seem to be the case, but I wasn't sure if anyone else had seen any data or reports that would speak either way.

I ask because if so, I'm going to just mark Caucasian and be done with it.

Thanks.

If this is true, I would pretty angry if I were you. Unfortunately, Asians don't seem to be a protected race in America.

..

I remember hearing about the "Asian quota" at HYP-type schools back in the day. Regardless of whether or not it indeed existed (or still exists), it had my particular corner of the Asian community up in arms.

On the other hand, I think law school admissions follow the "best-students model," which is why schools rely so heavily on LSAT and GPA. Outside of URMs, I don't think race or ethnicity matters all that much to law school adcomms.

Malcolm Gladwell, on the difference between law and UG admissions:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/1 ... rentPage=4

I was going to call BS, but I decided to do a Google search first, and, WOW. Learn something new every day. I had always thought that students were split into two groups (URM and non-URM). I had no idea about this sort of racial treatment. Not only is it worst to be Asian, but one study showed African Americans treated significantly more preferentially than Hispanics, in terms of test scores.

To answer OP, I can't see why this general method would be different in undergrad than law school; however, it's probably the case (and I base this on almost no evidence) that Asians are typically less over-represented in law school admissions than undergraduate.

ogurty wrote:I was going to call BS, but I decided to do a Google search first, and, WOW. Learn something new every day. I had always thought that students were split into two groups (URM and non-URM). I had no idea about this sort of racial treatment. Not only is it worst to be Asian, but one study showed African Americans treated significantly more preferentially than Hispanics, in terms of test scores.

To answer OP, I can't see why this general method would be different in undergrad than law school; however, it's probably the case (and I base this on almost no evidence) that Asians are typically less over-represented in law school admissions than undergraduate.

nope, from the studies ive read, it is indeed true that for undergraduate studies, in a lot of schools, it hurts to be asian

not sure why you're surprised by african americans benefiting more from affirmative action than hispanics...thats pretty much how it goes for law schools as well

fortunately, i did not find any studies that pointed to such a racial bias in law school admissions -- maybe it exists on some lvl but it will certainly not be NEARLY as detrimental for you as it would be in undergrad admissions (id mark asian if i were you...or rather, i DID mark asian haha)

..

acrossthelake wrote:I don't want to start an affirmative action debate in here, so please let's not detract down that road.

....

Does this happen for law school admissions?

From the reading I've done of LSAC data, this (fortunately) doesn't seem to be the case, but I wasn't sure if anyone else had seen any data or reports that would speak either way.

I ask because if so, I'm going to just mark Caucasian and be done with it.

Thanks.

I did a little research into this when I was applying as I was curious about this question too. The fact that Asians are ORM for UG admissions is definitely true (there was that research study awhile back that found Asian applicants experienced the equivalent of -160 points on their SAT (out of 1600) when applying to college), but this definitely does not seem to carry over to Law School admissions. Anyways here was my best estimate from just examining several sources and making a guess based on what I know:

Asians applying to law school experience are basically equivalent to White applicants, although perhaps there is a slightly negative effect at the highest tier schools (HYS).

Again, this is highly speculative as there are tons of confounding factors, but the basic idea is that ABA data shows a trend of the top 3 law schools perhaps being a little more selective for Asian applicants.

The Data (ABA latest statistics for law school population):

Harvard: 10.1% Asian, 11.3% African-American
Yale: 11.6% Asian, 7.5% AA
Stanford: 12.6% Asian, 10.8% AA

Columbia University: 15.1% Asian, 8.1% AA
Chicago: 11.5% Asian, 6.3% AA
NYU: 10.5% Asian, 6.5% AA

So, for example, Harvard UG has much more Asian students then HLS (around double the percentage). The African-American numbers are just for comparison as they show that, overall, the top 3 law school have a greater share (percentage-wise) of minority applicants. Thus, for example, it seems like Harvard is the only school where there are more African-American's then Asian's attending. This is despite the fact that Harvard UG is approx. 9% AA and approx. 18% Asian, roughly speaking.

Now for the stuff that could be affecting this numbers enough to mean that there is no negative association with Asian applicants at all:

-Asian's are more likely to go towards science/ medical track fields than law school. This has been show in quite a lot of research and definitely contributes to fewer Asian law school applicants. The caveat is that there should still be quite a lot of top Asian law school applicants considering the percentage of Asians in top UG's.

-Location, school preference, etc. : For example, Stanford has more Asian applicants because of its location. Columbia blows NYU out of the water, 15% to 10%, perhaps because of greater emphasize on the Columbia Ivy League name over NYU. However, this raises the fact that Harvard might experience the same effect of increased applicants. (Also might be true for other minorities, remember seeing something about AA applicants preferring H out of HYS too).

-The numbers are spread out that way due to school preferences. For example, Chicago is known for not being very URM friendly, which is probably affecting its numbers.

Anyways take of it what you will, the actual data I can find isn't very conclusive or glaring... in the end I think there is little to no effect so you probably don't have to worry too much about it. I don't think I saw an effect in my admissions cycle either.

My hope is that it's not as prevalent in law school admissions as it is in UG admissions (or nonexistant?) Either way, even if I decline to state my race, my last name would give it away..

acrossthelake wrote: Fun trivia fact, holistic admissions were first implemented at the Ivies in the early 1900s to keep Jews out...

That worked out well.

..

GettingReady2010 wrote:

acrossthelake wrote:I don't want to start an affirmative action debate in here, so please let's not detract down that road.

It's decently well-known that for undergrad, there's a portion of the elite schools where it is to one's disadvantage to be Asian. I don't feel like pulling up the studies to cite, but just in general at these particular schools the admit rate for Asians is proportionally lower compared to the rate at which they apply. I really don't believe it's caused by any of the rather insulting stereotypes (ex: "Oh, Asians just have no personality") I've seen offered as an explanation, especially since in schools where consideration of race was eliminated, the rates of admissions then became proportional. I'm not trying to start a discussion into this, either, my question is simply this:

Does this happen for law school admissions?

From the reading I've done of LSAC data, this (fortunately) doesn't seem to be the case, but I wasn't sure if anyone else had seen any data or reports that would speak either way.

I ask because if so, I'm going to just mark Caucasian and be done with it.

Thanks.

If this is true, I would pretty angry if I were you. Unfortunately, Asians don't seem to be a protected race in America.

I'm Asian, and with all the advantages coming here (usually highly educated parents etc) I personally don't mind it at all. And school is better when it isn't lily white + a few asians. Probably why my seminars suck though

..

acrossthelake wrote:

ajmanyjah wrote:

GettingReady2010 wrote:
If this is true, I would pretty angry if I were you. Unfortunately, Asians don't seem to be a protected race in America.

I'm Asian, and with all the advantages coming here (usually highly educated parents etc) I personally don't mind it at all. And school is better when it isn't lily white + a few asians. Probably why my seminars suck though

I mind that Asians are treated differently than Whites in undergrad admissions, but don't mind the URM distinction.

True. Ideally this can be fixed with an SES ranking if you are not a URM (or even if you are) but I will say for most Asians, our background is far more educated and privileged than the average white person

..

acrossthelake wrote:

ajmanyjah wrote:

True. Ideally this can be fixed with an SES ranking if you are not a URM (or even if you are) but I will say for most Asians, our background is far more educated and privileged than the average white person

Asians make up <5% of the U.S. population while Whites make up nearly 80%, so while that might be true on average, the law school applicant population pulls mostly from those in the privileged/educated sector of the White population anyway. The point of Affirmative Action isn't to "punish" education/privilege, but to aid those who are not educated/privileged. Somehow I doubt, esp. when I've looked at data, that it's the unprivileged/uneducated Whites who are benefiting at the expense of Asians.

unfortunately, it is what it is. while asians are only a small % of the overall US population, we make up a disproportionate amount in higher education...esp. in certain fields. that being said, why not chip away at the white majority instead of the asian minority for those same spots? i guess its either too "unrepresentative" of the overall population or the simple fact that racial equality is still a pipe dream lol. prob both.