Does (LSAT) Testing = Racial Discrimination? Forum

[bizzike]

To paraphrase another poster from another thread: if you have a college degree and you can't tell me the main point of a three paragraph essay about ducks then I have no sympathy for you regardless your skin color.

[jkhalfa]

this whole argument seems to just be a disguised AA debate)

I don't get the point of this thread either... maybe DF was just stirring the pot for amusement. The LSAT itself obviously has no significant white bias. It's not a test about country music lyrics or how to shop organic at Whole Foods or anything like that. So if you're only going to discuss the LSAT, everything can be summed up by "standardized tests aren't perfect, but they're the best tools we have for evaluating applicants," which is obvious, boring, and has been discussed ad nauseam by countless people for decades. Since we aren't allowed to talk about AA, which is the only relevant racial bias I can see, the thread is pointless.

[nothingtosee]

this whole argument seems to just be a disguised AA debate)

I don't get the point of this thread either... maybe DF was just stirring the pot for amusement. The LSAT itself obviously has no significant white bias. It's not a test about country music lyrics or how to shop organic at Whole Foods or anything like that. So if you're only going to discuss the LSAT, everything can be summed up by "standardized tests aren't perfect, but they're the best tools we have for evaluating applicants," which is obvious, boring, and has been discussed ad nauseam by countless people for decades. Since we aren't allowed to talk about AA, which is the only relevant racial bias I can see, the thread is pointless.

It's not obvious the LSAT is not white biased.

Look at who produces papers outlining the increasing acidity of oceans, marriage property rights in 13th century Tuscany, abstract expressionist photography, or the impact of auditory stimulation on 4 year olds and you see a group that includes very few AAs, MAs, PRs, or NAs.

Now it may be the case that the LSAT is not more advantaged for whites (specifically overclass whites who can afford/risk a degree in something like philosophy or art history vs accounting or engineering) than the legal profession. But a glance through a law faculty facebook or partner profiles at a large firm makes it abundantly clear that whites are advantaged in the legal profession.

[Pancakes12]

this whole argument seems to just be a disguised AA debate)

I don't get the point of this thread either... maybe DF was just stirring the pot for amusement. The LSAT itself obviously has no significant white bias. It's not a test about country music lyrics or how to shop organic at Whole Foods or anything like that. So if you're only going to discuss the LSAT, everything can be summed up by "standardized tests aren't perfect, but they're the best tools we have for evaluating applicants," which is obvious, boring, and has been discussed ad nauseam by countless people for decades. Since we aren't allowed to talk about AA, which is the only relevant racial bias I can see, the thread is pointless.

It's not obvious the LSAT is not white biased.

Look at who produces papers outlining the increasing acidity of oceans, marriage property rights in 13th century Tuscany, abstract expressionist photography, or the impact of auditory stimulation on 4 year olds and you see a group that includes very few AAs, MAs, PRs, or NAs.

Now it may be the case that the LSAT is not more advantaged for whites (specifically overclass whites who can afford/risk a degree in something like philosophy or art history vs accounting or engineering) than the legal profession. But a glance through a law faculty facebook or partner profiles at a large firm makes it abundantly clear that whites are advantaged in the legal profession.

So much LR fail

Also I've never produced any papers on ocean acidity but I can read. Very few Asians in philosophy but they aren't disadvantaged in reading it.

[unodostres]

I enjoy reading about blacks and Mexicans in my reading comp sections

[09042014]

I enjoy reading about blacks and Mexicans in my reading comp sections

This just biases it towards creepy white doods.

[BillsFan9907]

I enjoy reading about blacks and Mexicans in my reading comp sections

So true. The LSAT, if anything, goes out of its way to NOT talk about white dudes. The only one about white men that I remember was about Italian frescos. I am sure that there are a handful more. But off the top of my head this is what I remember:

1. A black dude who ran simulations on sand dunes
2. A black film maker who integrated traditional African themes in his socialist movies
3. A black female dancer who revolutionized dance via the "cakewalk"
4. 50000000 pieces about Native Americans
5. A piece about Mexican-American traditional songs.
6. A piece about a Mexican-American playwright or something.
7. A piece about a black poetess at the start of colonization in the USA....
8. A brown vs. Board of ed piece.
9. Latin American Female authors transcending boundaries (novel vs. autobiography).
10. A bunch of stuff about how white men oppressed women in the middle ages and how women subtly fought back.


If you want to talk about students feeling disadvantaged, its me. Why don't I ever get reading comprehension passages about the Holocaust or one of the myriad of Jewish inventors?

[Pancakes12]

I enjoy reading about blacks and Mexicans in my reading comp sections

So true. The LSAT, if anything, goes out of its way to NOT talk about white dudes. The only one about white men that I remember was about Italian frescos. I am sure that there are a handful more. But off the top of my head this is what I remember:

1. A black dude who ran simulations on sand dunes
2. A black film maker who integrated traditional African themes in his socialist movies
3. A black female dancer who revolutionized dance via the "cakewalk"
4. 50000000 pieces about Native Americans
5. A piece about Mexican-American traditional songs.
6. A piece about a Mexican-American playwright or something.
7. A piece about a black poetess at the start of colonization in the USA....
8. A brown vs. Board of ed piece.
9. Latin American Female authors transcending boundaries (novel vs. autobiography).
10. A bunch of stuff about how white men oppressed women in the middle ages and how women subtly fought back.

That fucking cakewalk passage

[jkhalfa]

this whole argument seems to just be a disguised AA debate)

I don't get the point of this thread either... maybe DF was just stirring the pot for amusement. The LSAT itself obviously has no significant white bias. It's not a test about country music lyrics or how to shop organic at Whole Foods or anything like that. So if you're only going to discuss the LSAT, everything can be summed up by "standardized tests aren't perfect, but they're the best tools we have for evaluating applicants," which is obvious, boring, and has been discussed ad nauseam by countless people for decades. Since we aren't allowed to talk about AA, which is the only relevant racial bias I can see, the thread is pointless.

It's not obvious the LSAT is not white biased.

Look at who produces papers outlining the increasing acidity of oceans, marriage property rights in 13th century Tuscany, abstract expressionist photography, or the impact of auditory stimulation on 4 year olds and you see a group that includes very few AAs, MAs, PRs, or NAs.

Now it may be the case that the LSAT is not more advantaged for whites (specifically overclass whites who can afford/risk a degree in something like philosophy or art history vs accounting or engineering) than the legal profession. But a glance through a law faculty facebook or partner profiles at a large firm makes it abundantly clear that whites are advantaged in the legal profession.

I don't even have to rebut that, do I? It's obviously false as it stands.

I'll investigate a little anyway. Now I take it that your second paragraph means that since white people primarily write about these topics, minorities can't think about them as well and so it's not fair to use them on a test.

First of all, anyone who has studied for the LSAT knows that it's not a knowledge-based exam. It's about texts' logical forms, not their content. What you're claiming is like saying LG has a bourgeois bias because you don't own any means of production and have never inspected factories on different days of the week.

Second, that just seems like a very weird and dangerous assertion. On the one hand, you claim that race has nothing to do with intellectual ability and shouldn't be a factor in law school admissions. On the other hand, you claim that race is so important that you struggle to understand texts written by people with a different skin color. If that were true, wouldn't that be a good justification for discriminating against certain races in law school and in legal employment? Is a black lawyer similarly "disadvantaged" when he reads an opinion written by a white judge? Obviously not, but that's basically what you're claiming.

Other issues: Minorities definitely do useless liberal arts majors. Like others have said, the LSAT goes out of its way to be inclusive with race and gender. That's just true of standardized tests in general. From elementary school to the SAT, I can't remember ever taking a standardized test where regular anglophone names weren't outnumbered by obviously ethnic ones, or where males outnumbered females. (Note that all of this is completely irrelevant anyway. Kids should be able to calculate the velocity of Jon and Tom's train just as well as Pedro and Tamika's.)

[spleenworship]

This thread got dumb.

Thank god it allowed me to really spot some up and coming shitpoasters though. So that's something.

[094320]

..

[spleenworship]

Lock it ATL.