<p>I know this comes up all the time, and it upsets some people, and few people actually have solid answers.</p>
<p>What sort of effect does minority status really have in law school admissions?</p>
<p>Say a 3.58-3.65 GPA and a 164-168 LSAT for a Hispanic male. Where could this honestly land somebody coming from a top-30 private school?</p>
<p>How many points might URM status add to an LSAT or GPA?</p>
<p>Thanks a bunch, I'm just really trying to plan out what I'm going to think about.</p>
<p>Planning out what to think about?
You should be planning to get your best grades and best LSAT scores you can.
I pray you aren't implying anything else that could be inferred from that last sentence.</p>
<p>US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Dissent in Grutter vs. Bollinger, from Judge Boggs:
[quote]
Roughly speaking, under-represented minorities with a high C to low B undergraduate average are admitted at the same rate as majority applicants with an A average with roughly the same LSAT scores.(20) Along a different axis, minority applicants with an A average and an LSAT score down to 156 (the 70th percentile nationally) are admitted at roughly the same rate as majority applicants with an A average and an LSAT score over a 167 (the 96th percentile nationally).</p>
<p>The figures indicate that race is worth over one full grade point of college average or at least an 11-point and 20-percentile boost on the LSAT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course:
1.) All races are not equal. In medical school admissions, African Americans receive roughly double the numerical boost that Hispanics receive, and in undergraduate admissions to elite schools, one study (Espenshade) found that African Americans received 230 SAT points (out of 1600) while Hispanics only received 185. Asians were penalized by 50.
2.) This applies only to the University of Michigan law school. Assuming that other schools use a similar algorithm may or may not be safe.</p>
<p>Study for the LSAT and try your best. Don't rely on your URM status to get into the top schools if that's where you intend to go. Being an Asian female, I hope Asians aren't penalized for their LSAT score in law school admissions.</p>
<p>3.65, 168 LSAT = Ding at YS, In at CCN and the rest of the T14, other than H. H is a good shot, I'd say 65% chance of admission. URM is huge</p>
<p>whats CCN? YS?</p>
<p>LSAT for a hispanic male is probably ~8 points. For a black male even higher.</p>
<p>C-Chicago Law School
C- Columbia Law School
N- NYU Law School
Y- Yale Law School
S- Stanford Law School</p>
<p>Saying HYSCCN is just a shorthand way of stating the T6 (top 6)</p>
<p>"One study (Espenshade) found that African Americans received 230 SAT points (out of 1600) while Hispanics only received 185. Asians were penalized by 50..."
Gosh, I that's really hard to believe. 230 Pts. out of 1600 is a ton. For some "odd" reason, I do not see the equivacality of an Asian with an SAT score of 1500/1600 and an African American with a 1220/1600. IMO, that is just stupid (Not attacking you, just attacking that finding, and the system in general). </p>
<p>I got >1220 in 7th grade. So my intelligence, based on my SAT, had I been African American, is enough to merit me on the same levels of an Asian scoring a 1500? That's just downright wrong.</p>
<p>Well, thankfully, those who are given a fish will only eat for one day.</p>
<p>Well, there's two questions.</p>
<p>First, is Espenshade correct? I frankly don't have the math to verify or deny his findings, but 230 SAT points sounds on par with things that I can approximately verify: MCAT and LSAT gaps. 230 SAT points out of 1200 is 19%. The LSAT gap is 11 points out of 60, or 18%. The MCAT gap is approximately nine points out of 42, or 21%. So it sounds about correct.*</p>
<p>Second, assuming he's correct, is that a fair system? This obviously is a matter of value judgment, not statistical analysis.</p>
<p>In any case, whatever your views on affirmative action, it is doubtless only one component of a system that is badly broken in general. If memory serves, the Wall Street Journal once estimated that only about half of Duke's student body was admitted on academic merits -- grades, coursework, SAT, extracurriculars, etc. The other half was admitted for athletics, legacy, "development" (i.e. donations), geography, race, and yield protection.</p>
<p>It is also important to note that according to Espenshade's calculations, nearly 80% of the spots that would be vacated in a race-blind system would go to Asian American candidates, meaning that white candidates would have their admissions rates affected negligibly while Asian American candidates would be significantly more likely to gain admission.</p>
<p>Finally, he also calculates that many of the other components (legacy, athletics, etc.) do not materially affect the proportion of underrepresented minorities, implying that these are mostly white candidates taking spots away from more-qualified but still-white candidates.</p>
<p>*As I've had to discuss previously, just because a test's maximum is 180 does not mean that the test is effectively graded over a 180-point range. A blank SAT will yield a score of 400 (now 600); a blank LSAT will receive a score of 120; a blank MCAT will receive a score of 3. Hence I claim that they are out of 1200, 60, and 42, respectively.</p>
<p>Forget it... This argument has gone on a million times... Time and time again, for some reason, you win. life just isn't fair</p>
<p>I have a question to add. I'm Hawaiian (among other things) and it is my dominant ethnicity. How does affirmative action factor in for someone like me?</p>
<p>Speculation:
Premise: Native Hawaiians count as Native Americans.
Premise: The harder it is to find a student, the more of an affirmative action boost they get.</p>
<p>Confirmed:
Premise: Native American students are much rarer in law schools than any other race.</p>
<p>Conclusion:
Native Hawaiian students should expect an even larger gain from affirmative action than African American students.</p>
<p>I think premise 1 is pretty debatable. "Asian and Pacific Islander" is a pretty standard racial designation. That being said, you should still make the argument in your application if you feel your ethnicity is a big part of your life experience.</p>
<p>So 3.6 and 168 should be able to get me in at NYU or Penn? Definetely no Yale, even with great ECs? Harvard maybe with good ECs? Or do they not matter at all?</p>
<p>bump.............</p>
<p>What I would do in your place is I'd go ahead and add the 8 suggested points (see Payne above; since URM status in general seems to be worth about eleven, eight sounds reasonable for Hispanic status) to my LSAT score and then plug that into <a href="http://www.chiashu.com/lsat.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.chiashu.com/lsat.html</a>.</p>
<p>Even though the numbers are self reported I would try lawschoolnumbers.com</p>
<p>Et seems for this cycle of those who reported on lawschool numbers Hispanic URMs admitted to NYU had the following stats:</p>
<p>lsat 168 gpa 3.52, race; Hispanic-PR male, School: Ivy, major: evolutionary biology</p>
<p>lsat 175, gpa: 3.8 race: hispanic male, School: Top LAC (swat), major: Political science</p>
<p>lsat 168, gpa 3.49, race: hispanic female, School Top LAC, </p>
<p>lsat 165, gpa 3.94, race: mexican male. school: Public (form list of schools, could be texas)</p>