Northwestern Law School Dean Daniel B. Rodriguez and his claim of Diversity Forum

[Kali the Annihilator]

Again, diversity=you. Stop pretending

[feralinfant]

Yes they make one or two exceptions http://northwestern.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1617 2 admitted applicants with 173 LSAT and 2.7 GPA

I am not advocating they take on mass students but they need to stop talking about diversity if that is not really their intention. They take 1 or 2 students with high lsat and low gpa to show that they are not bias for what they are advocating for. That is all. Did they do better than other T14 law schools ? May be, looking at Yale and Harvard, they don't care but they are also rank 1 and 2 or 3. They will do anything to protect those ranks. I wonder how GRE will work with admission for Harvard and its rank.

So first, not everyone posts on law school numbers.

Second, even in that cycle you posted, I see far more than two admits that should probably fall into this category:

2.7/173
2.7/173
2.9/168
3.0/169
3.0/177.
3.1/174.
3.14/170
3.21/170
3.2/171
3.27/173
3.31/174
3.29/180
3.3/161
3.3/171

[Kali the Annihilator]

Yes they make one or two exceptions http://northwestern.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1617 2 admitted applicants with 173 LSAT and 2.7 GPA

I am not advocating they take on mass students but they need to stop talking about diversity if that is not really their intention. They take 1 or 2 students with high lsat and low gpa to show that they are not bias for what they are advocating for. That is all. Did they do better than other T14 law schools ? May be, looking at Yale and Harvard, they don't care but they are also rank 1 and 2 or 3. They will do anything to protect those ranks. I wonder how GRE will work with admission for Harvard and its rank.

3) diversity and rank aren't mutually exclusive. Schools can select for diverse applicants within the parameters of particular score/GPA bands.

There are obviously representation problems. Northwestern's last incoming class had 32% students of color, which is close to the representation in the US population (I think it's almost 37%). But blacks are 6.6% (compared to ~13%), Hispanics are 11% (compared to 17%), Native Americans are .5% (compared to 2%) and Asian Americans are 11% compared to 5.6%. (Then there are international students and students who didn't answer.)

HOWEVER, that in itself doesn't say much about schools' commitment to diversity without knowing 1) what those numbers have looked like over time, 2) what schools have actually done to improve those numbers, 3) how many non-white students are even taking the LSAT/applying to law school, and doubtless other things I'm overlooking.

I'm not going to claim that maintaining certain admissions standards has no effect on the makeup of a class (gatekeeping historically has had a racial/ethnic element), or that there are no improvements to be made. But I guess in terms of marketing - what is the alternative? If schools reach out to diverse students, they are apparently just using them for their yield - is the alternative *not* reaching out to diverse students? Given the correlation that exists between GPA/LSAT and law school grades, and given that law schools grade on a curve, shouldn't law schools reasonably worry about admitting students who fall below the general range of the class, in that doing so sets them up to be at the bottom of the class? (I don't know the stats on this at all but I've seen someone here insist that AA admissions disproportionately cluster in the bottom of their classes. I'm not convinced that's true or inevitable, but I think it's a legitimate concern for admissions people.)

Quoting this because you never addressed it that I can see.

I will never understand the sort of mania that requires you to to engage in good faith with those who have no interest in doing so.

[A. Nony Mouse]

[Kali the Annihilator]

I mean, i came in to play bash the retard too, but i did so mockingly because such a transparently self serving thread deserved it. You honestly engage this idiot like there is a single thing you can do to change its mind and it perplexes me.

[Bulla]

I mean, i came in to play bash the retard too, but i did so mockingly because such a transparently self serving thread deserved it. You honestly engage this idiot like there is a single thing you can do to change its mind and it perplexes me.

You really have to stop whatever you're taking. Resuming to insults only hides your true color, you resort to them to shield yourself from embarrassments. Simply go away.

Yes, 164 is a shit lsat.

There is literally nothing a gpa gets you that a place on the curve does not. Plus, I was a 1L in 2010, so fuck if I remember exactly what it was.

[Kali the Annihilator]

Can I get ranch on my word salad, please?

[A. Nony Mouse]

I mean, i came in to play bash the retard too, but i did so mockingly because such a transparently self serving thread deserved it. You honestly engage this idiot like there is a single thing you can do to change its mind and it perplexes me.

Too many years teaching, probably.

[Kali the Annihilator]

I mean, i came in to play bash the retard too, but i did so mockingly because such a transparently self serving thread deserved it. You honestly engage this idiot like there is a single thing you can do to change its mind and it perplexes me.

Too many years teaching, probably.

Its pedaniellet not pedant. diversity

[A. Nony Mouse]

VIVE LA FRANCE

[Bulla]

Yes they make one or two exceptions http://northwestern.lawschoolnumbers.com/stats/1617 2 admitted applicants with 173 LSAT and 2.7 GPA

I am not advocating they take on mass students but they need to stop talking about diversity if that is not really their intention. They take 1 or 2 students with high lsat and low gpa to show that they are not bias for what they are advocating for. That is all. Did they do better than other T14 law schools ? May be, looking at Yale and Harvard, they don't care but they are also rank 1 and 2 or 3. They will do anything to protect those ranks. I wonder how GRE will work with admission for Harvard and its rank.

3) diversity and rank aren't mutually exclusive. Schools can select for diverse applicants within the parameters of particular score/GPA bands.

There are obviously representation problems. Northwestern's last incoming class had 32% students of color, which is close to the representation in the US population (I think it's almost 37%). But blacks are 6.6% (compared to ~13%), Hispanics are 11% (compared to 17%), Native Americans are .5% (compared to 2%) and Asian Americans are 11% compared to 5.6%. (Then there are international students and students who didn't answer.)

HOWEVER, that in itself doesn't say much about schools' commitment to diversity without knowing 1) what those numbers have looked like over time, 2) what schools have actually done to improve those numbers, 3) how many non-white students are even taking the LSAT/applying to law school, and doubtless other things I'm overlooking.

I'm not going to claim that maintaining certain admissions standards has no effect on the makeup of a class (gatekeeping historically has had a racial/ethnic element), or that there are no improvements to be made. But I guess in terms of marketing - what is the alternative? If schools reach out to diverse students, they are apparently just using them for their yield - is the alternative *not* reaching out to diverse students? Given the correlation that exists between GPA/LSAT and law school grades, and given that law schools grade on a curve, shouldn't law schools reasonably worry about admitting students who fall below the general range of the class, in that doing so sets them up to be at the bottom of the class? (I don't know the stats on this at all but I've seen someone here insist that AA admissions disproportionately cluster in the bottom of their classes. I'm not convinced that's true or inevitable, but I think it's a legitimate concern for admissions people.)

Quoting this because you never addressed it that I can see.

I don't know what you want me to comment on ? I do like your clear response and i agree with it. As Prof. Paul Campos quoted, Harvard is one of many T14 law schools which aggressively pursue diverse applicants who they know they won't accept. I am having issues with the admission practice from T14 law schools.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Particularly whether actual percentage of diverse students is really a way to measure commitment to diversity without taking into account a lot of other factors. I'm saying that commitment to diversity isn't necessarily inconsistent with what you dislike about the admissions practices.

[Bulla]

Particularly whether actual percentage of diverse students is really a way to measure commitment to diversity without taking into account a lot of other factors. I'm saying that commitment to diversity isn't necessarily inconsistent with what you dislike about the admissions practices.

What more would be as a prove than a greater percentage and the success of these students ? I've always liked to simplify an argument and those who complicate an argument, lose sight of the main argument.

We're talking about

1. Diversity.
2. Admission practice.
3. T14 law schools comments to ABA.

Do you think there is any correlation between rise in tuition and the way DOE is now allowing all students to take the maximum amount of loan to cover tuition for higher education. Do you think it is unethical and abuse of the system by law schools ? Do you serve diversity when you shower students with students loan debt ?

[mrcfa1995]

Top schools are pursuing diversity (i.e. URM boost in admissions, POC % getting increasingly closer to the general pop.), but not at the expense of high scores and GPA's. Unless I misread, your complaint seems to be that T14 schools should remove the high emphasis placed on GPA and LSAT in admissions, which will likely never happen. Yeah your GPA and LSAT aren't indicative of IQ or work ethic, but it's all the schools have to go off of besides your WE or Resume

[41262]

I have been following this thread closely. OP, thank you for your important work in alerting us to the real problem in elite American law schools today - an inexcusable bias against white French women with low LSAT scores, as epitomized by the impossibly cruel NU. This bias clearly puts the lie to any claims such schools have about valuing diversity, and in a just world your bold and well-argued plans for reform would not go unheeded. I think I speak for all posterity when, again, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

[Bulla]

I know others are learning from this topic. The pack that come in here with insults. I seriously don't care about. Ive tried it with one who refused to disclose his 1L gpa. He just ran toward the corner with more insults. That is the best he could do.

You don't like a particular argument or a discussion, don't engage in it. But don't show up with insults thinking you're talking big when you're really really small with the way you carry a conversation. I bet you're the type of students sitting in a lecture talking behind people's back and making fun of those who participate in the lecture calling them gunners.

[Kali the Annihilator]

In this way, op truly is a freedom fighter battling for us all.

[cavalier1138]

I know others are learning from this topic.

What are they learning?

I mean, if it turns out that you're an AI developed solely to spit out nonsense filled with buzzwords about the problems with law school admissions, then I will have learned that we don't have to worry about Skynet for at least another few decades. But if not, then this has mainly just been a display of your own ridiculous self-pity.

[Bulla]

Perhaps that’s because they are pursuing careers in STEM fields instead. Perhaps they are pursuing Business degrees. Or perhaps they aren’t applying because they think lawyers and law schools are stuck in their ways and living in the past. It’s impossible to know for sure, although one important group, the Association of American Law Schools, is undertaking an important national study (“Before the JD” is its title) of potential law students.

Rising tuition and low employment rate and salary to cover your debts - Dean Rodriguez, you know it.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/changing ... -rodriguez

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/06/thanks-t ... graduates/

Thanks To The Recession, Even T14 Law Schools Had To Beg Firms To Hire Their Graduates

How can we convince top students that if you want to change the world – be it through social justice or disruptive technology – you need to start with a legal education?

Doesn't work well when many here say big law or bust.
----

When someone tells him a response he knows and doesn't like. Well Dean Rodriguez will give his short answer and leave it at that.

Mr. Mandel simply misses the point, and by a mile.

If I read this correctly, Dean Rodriguez is proposing alternative curriculum offerings and degrees. Certainly that will help some law professors and deans keep their jobs. However, nothing in this article addresses the underlying issues that have resulted in fewer qualified applicants for JD programs and an ever-decreasing number of "JD required" positions available for those that do graduate that offer a reasonable ROI for an ever-increasing cost of the degree.

Over the past two decades, law schools, like much of academia, turned into expensive degree mills funded by a student loan bubble that should have exploded years ago but for the artificial protections granted to educational institutions under the bankruptcy laws. Salaries of law professors, along with tuition, have increased substantially beyond the CPI or any other reasonable baseline measure. Meanwhile, the traditional role of the "junior associate" in law firms has been made nearly obsolete by advances in legal technology and business processes. While there has, for many decades, been a double hump of average salary ranges of new lawyers (i.e., a large group ranging in the current equivalent of $35k - $70k working at small law firms and for the government, and a smaller second group ranging from $120k-$160k working for large firms), following the recession the bottom of the tier rapidly expanded with the increasing ranks of professional document review attorneys paid at the same hourly rates paid to "contract attorneys" 20 years ago. At the same time, the cost of law school has increased something like 300-400%. And let's not forget the role of the ABA in this: requiring x% of the faculty to be full-time on tenure track, maintaining library square footage and hard copy book requirements, and other "status quo" demands that ignore the digital world. This is NOT sustainable!!!

Just over 20 years ago, law schools started using email. In August 2007, a handful of law students came to class with the first version of the iPhone. We can now transfer vast amounts information instantaneously to anyone, anywhere on this planet. While are drowning in data, we have software that can allow one attorney do the job of 100 in a fraction of the time and expense. Providing alternative degrees and non-JD courses to keep deans and tenured law professors employed will not change this path.

We need to have law schools that can affordably educate intelligent, qualified men and women in the law, and train them to become functioning, licensed attorneys who can provide the legal services that we need in the real world. I urge you to focus on coming up with some realistic solutions for that problem.

[Bulla]

I know others are learning from this topic.

What are they learning?

Talk to your buddy below.

In this way, op truly is a freedom fighter battling for us all.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Particularly whether actual percentage of diverse students is really a way to measure commitment to diversity without taking into account a lot of other factors. I'm saying that commitment to diversity isn't necessarily inconsistent with what you dislike about the admissions practices.

What more would be as a prove than a greater percentage and the success of these students ? I've always liked to simplify an argument and those who complicate an argument, lose sight of the main argument.

We're talking about

1. Diversity.
2. Admission practice.
3. T14 law schools comments to ABA.

Do you think there is any correlation between rise in tuition and the way DOE is now allowing all students to take the maximum amount of loan to cover tuition for higher education. Do you think it is unethical and abuse of the system by law schools ? Do you serve diversity when you shower students with students loan debt ?

Okay, first, this is a totally different argument than what you started with (though glad you seem to have abandoned the waitlist thing?) and is totally distinct from percentages of diverse students and whether schools are seeking to increase them. Second, no one disagrees that increasing tuition is exploitative and students would be best served by curbing tuition, so not sure what you're arguing against here or why you're offering this as a gotcha. To the extent diverse students have fewer economic resources than other students, high tuition likely disprortionately affects them (tempered by the possibility of schools offering them more aid), but the rise in tuition hurts all students and is not strictly speaking only about diversity.

[Jclubb]

I've yet to learn anything that would be helpful for future applicants. Aside from maybe the fact that you should be enough of an adult to look at your numbers and figure out your chances at a school before you apply. Otherwise this thread is a bunch of contradictory unsupported claims making generalizations based on anecdotal evidence. This argument pretty much is one side stating facts or asking questions of the other sides facts and the other side saying well this one time I saw this one guy and he said this one thing.

To future applicants. Do not think those at lower tiered schools enjoy their time more than those at higher tiered schools. There will be some that hate it and some that love it no matter what school you go to. If you want to take anything useful out of this thread it is that you need to understand the way the admissions process works and do your research. Check where people with your numbers get in and then apply to schools you have a shot at. If you want to apply to reach schools then go for it. But understand it is a REACH school. Meaning you most likely won't get in and that you should not be bitter or confused when those with higher scores get in and you're stuck with a rejection letter.

[Bulla]

Particularly whether actual percentage of diverse students is really a way to measure commitment to diversity without taking into account a lot of other factors. I'm saying that commitment to diversity isn't necessarily inconsistent with what you dislike about the admissions practices.

What more would be as a prove than a greater percentage and the success of these students ? I've always liked to simplify an argument and those who complicate an argument, lose sight of the main argument.

We're talking about

1. Diversity.
2. Admission practice.
3. T14 law schools comments to ABA.

Do you think there is any correlation between rise in tuition and the way DOE is now allowing all students to take the maximum amount of loan to cover tuition for higher education. Do you think it is unethical and abuse of the system by law schools ? Do you serve diversity when you shower students with students loan debt ?

Okay, first, this is a totally different argument than what you started with (though glad you seem to have abandoned the waitlist thing?) and is totally distinct from percentages of diverse students and whether schools are seeking to increase them. Second, no one disagrees that increasing tuition is exploitative and students would be best served by curbing tuition, so not sure what you're arguing against here or why you're offering this as a gotcha. To the extent diverse students have fewer economic resources than other students, high tuition likely disprortionately affects them (tempered by the possibility of schools offering them more aid), but the rise in tuition hurts all students and is not strictly speaking only about diversity.

Do you think diverse students i.e., student of color, minorities, first generation students and low income students are more vulnerable than those who are privileged ? So when you saddle them with more debts, it hurts them rather than helping them ?

So i have a friend who his uncle is a judge, he gets to call a big law firm and this guy surpasses all the interviews and in a blink of an eye gets hired as an associate. His GPA wasn't that great either but because of his uncle, he got the job

Compare to someone who is well diverse, have the experience and passion and have a better gpa but doesn't get the job because well look at first generation student as an example. We know and we see it here on top-law schools. Don't go to law school unless 1) you have a relative in the legal field that will help you with employment, 2) you won't inquire more debts 3) you're going for the right reasons. So if a diverse student from first generation, or low income and the list goes on and on, don't have the proper connections, he or she will struggle until he or she gets a good job to pay back his or her debt.

I don't know, sometimes we want to sink our heads in the sand and ignore many things. I am not that person.

[cavalier1138]

So i have a friend who his uncle is a judge, he gets to call a big law firm and this guy surpasses all the interviews and in a blink of an eye gets hired as an associate. His GPA wasn't that great either but because of his uncle, he got the job

Who hurt you?

[Bulla]

So i have a friend who his uncle is a judge, he gets to call a big law firm and this guy surpasses all the interviews and in a blink of an eye gets hired as an associate. His GPA wasn't that great either but because of his uncle, he got the job

Who hurt you?

Dude go away lol you're a troll to the max. I already said i have a job lined up after graduation. Do a better job next time