Top Law Schools

http://www.asanet.org/journals/ASR/Dec12ASRFeature.pdf

You're welcome.

tl;dr be upper-class and white?

At first I was wondering why you had 37,000 posts....

lol. Thx for the read.

Huh, makes sense. I chose my firm because it felt right for me. And when I do a callback candidate interview, I dont worry about credentials (they've all been screened before I see them), I truly do go off of "Can I get along with this person on a day to day basis?" I really only ding people when we don't connect on a personal level.

This is generally why many minorities who succeed are accused of "selling out" or "acting white." It's really part of what makes them successful.

I had a good friend at work who was a minority and came from a lower SES than most of us. He was a really likable and easy going guy so he did well, but it was clear that he didn't fit in quite as well in the professional environment because of his different upbringing.

This doesn't start at the workplace though. First generation college students tend to do worse than their more privileged counterparts (http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/New ... shock.aspx).

I don't think this is at all conscious discrimination, or something that needs to be "fixed." It should be recognized and brought to the forefront though.

I like the WLRK shout-out in note B of table 1.

moonman157 wrote:tl;dr be upper-class and white?

Did read: upper-class yes but race is irrellevant by the time you've got to the screening stage. Or rather, it could be rellevant in any particular interview in a good, bad, or neutral way but overall isn't a plus or minus.

I like the WLRK shout-out in note B of table 1.

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE.

posted it a week back: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=199391

0L's don't get brownie points in employment threads

dkb17xzx wrote:posted it a week back: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=199391

0L's don't get brownie points in employment threads

Go back to playing Jenga 0L.