Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

"Race" in College Applications FAQ & Discussion 12

19192949697186

Replies to: "Race" in College Applications FAQ & Discussion 12

  • OHMomof2OHMomof2 Registered User Posts: 11,740 Senior Member
    @theloniusmonk Well you can't really run an experiment and claim yourself that it succeeded. You'd need some neutral third party to validate the conclusion. You'd need to find out what happened to the white and Asian lawyers that were rejected by Yale because of their race.

    I wouldn't, to succeed from Yale's perspective. Yale's ranked #1, their graduates of all races are highly sought after.

    From Yale's perspective it's going great.
  • theloniusmonktheloniusmonk Registered User Posts: 1,731 Senior Member
    Well ok that's correlation, not really a causation. I ran across this article on best law schools blacks schools should attend (from the book with same name) and interestingly Yale is 19th - because it has a lower percentage of blacks than its peers, and more importantly its black graduates do not go into diverse fields, basically only academia. So Yale and Stanford were dinged for that. Now the writer says that no black person will pick Howard (#2) over Yale if they get into both, and wanted to figure out why Yale was ranked low.

    https://abovethelaw.com/2012/10/the-best-law-school-for-black-people-is-not-yale/

    I think the best line of the article is this:

    "I’d like to live in a world where the list of best law schools “for black people” was exactly the same as the list of best law schools “for people.” I think we’re close. Black people are already conditioned to make the same stupid decisions based on the U.S. News rankings as white people have been making for a generation."

    So Yale doesn't accept as many blacks percentage wide as its peers and guides them if you will to lower paying jobs. Yeah that's working great for Yale, not so good for its black graduates (at least compared to Harvard, Columbia, Georgetown, Northwestern et al).
  • SAYSAY Registered User Posts: 945 Member
    And as I said despite going to YHS Law school and the other top schools the largely progressive law firms are almost entirely absent of URM partners showing the prediction to be accurate. Center is correct that many on this thread substitute ideology for proven facts and science.
  • OHMomof2OHMomof2 Registered User Posts: 11,740 Senior Member
    edited January 20
    @theloniusmonk its black graduates do not go into diverse fields, basically only academia

    Well except those Supreme Court justices I guess. Then again, Howard has at least one of those, and Harvard Law has a president...
    For students attending one of these 25 law schools, every career path in the the legal profession is open to you. Your chances of securing a position as a Biglaw associate, Appellate Law Clerk, or DOJ attorney may be greater at some schools than others, but students who do well at any of the schools listed here should have a reasonable expectation that they can pursue the career they want. How do we know? Because graduates of these law schools do so every year. These are the go-to schools for large law firms and the schools judges look to for law clerks time and time again.

    The entire top 25 list you linked has some kind of affirmative action, except maybe UT.

    How do you interpret THAT?
  • SatchelSFSatchelSF Registered User Posts: 1,055 Senior Member
    edited January 20
    Notwithstanding anything people post on this thread, the reality is that black graduates of elite law schools do not fare well at elite law firms. All of the top firms will actively recruit black attorneys from the top law schools, but comparatively few of those attorneys will be around after 3 or 4 years as an associate. The typical path for one of these attorneys with elite credentials will be to then take a government position or an academic one.

    There are a number of theories on why this is. The best discussion I have seen has is by Professor Sander at UCLA. Clearly many posters on here do not care to understand what is actually happening, but for those who do, I'd recommend reading Sander's article in its entirety. If you do not have the time, the pages to concentrate on imho are pp. 1809-16: https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=645078002070013013012004097029122064049002040059035036071127120006004094004069031091100000007125053063114115085111067027088039029017011037069111114025084092015041062038098065070071004017031078091084026090080080105089110088017085091119088127104017&EXT=pdf

    (So sorry for the length of that link - forum rules prevent the use of a shortener.)

    And not to bury the lede:

    "While many questions are open, the author [Professor Sanders] concludes that aggressive racial preferences at the law school and law firm level tend to undermine in some ways the careers of young attorneys and may, in the end, contribute to the continuing white dominance of large-firm partnerships."

    In essence, large (elite) law firms are at the small end of a merciless funnel. The successful candidate will generally be towards the top end of her class at an elite law school, admission to which implied that she was at the elite level of a very competitive college. As I wrote upthread somewhere, places like Yale Law School regularly reject the large majority of applicants from even HYP.

    At each level of that funnel - including at the law firm hiring level - blacks will receive enormous preferences. People who have not been through it or who are not intimately knowledgeable about the subject will find it hard to appreciate the actual size of the preferences.

    Nevertheless, at some point the rubber meets the road, and the economics of a law firm - specifically how senior associates and partners advance and are compensated - are not based on political correctness, but rather on sheer ability to get the work done and to satisfy very demanding clients. The results are very predictable, actually inevitable for black attorneys as a group (obviously, any individual can be more than capable of succeeding - Eric Holder, for example, would be a prime example of that phenomenon). Keep in mind that the work expectations can be overwhelming even for the most academically and intellectually capable white attorneys - the large majority of them will "wash out" as well. It's just that the black attorneys will wash out even faster and at much higher rates, which accounts for the observed paucity of black senior associates and partners at these firms as compared with their incoming recruit cohorts. Professor Sanders proposes that the differences observed in success rates will be proportionate to the size of the preferences initially granted at the law firm hiring level, and by extension at the law school, college, and sometimes even secondary school levels.
  • SatchelSFSatchelSF Registered User Posts: 1,055 Senior Member
    "The entire top 25 list you linked has some kind of affirmative action, except maybe UT.

    How do you interpret THAT?"

    Political correctness. There's really nothing more to it than that.
  • OHMomof2OHMomof2 Registered User Posts: 11,740 Senior Member
    "The entire top 25 list you linked has some kind of affirmative action, except maybe UT.

    How do you interpret THAT?"

    @satchelsf Political correctness. There's really nothing more to it than that.

    I'm sorry, clearly you didn't understand my question.

    You are saying affirmative action in law schools adversely affects black law students during and after they graduate. Yet this list of the best 25 law schools for black students all - except one - practice affirmative action.

    If AA was hurting blackstudents wouldn't the best law schools for them be non-AA schools?
  • SatchelSFSatchelSF Registered User Posts: 1,055 Senior Member
    edited January 20
    @OhMomof2 - I understand now. Yes, a very cogent argument could be made that black students would do much better to choose less "elite" schools, rather than those to which they are admitted on the basis of preference. This is the often-bandied about "mismatch" theory.

    There are certainly great black students who could be admitted without preferences. But the reality is that this number is very small at the elites. Linda Wightman has estimated that absent preferences, black enrollment at the most elite schools (first quintile) would fall by about 94%, a number which I believe is too high, but not outside of the realm of possibility. My guess is that enrollment would fall by about 80%. For a thoughtful critique of Wightman's work, see Harvard's Professor Thernstrom here: https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/167638/15_01_Thernstrom.pdf

    Look, whatever the number is, I can't see the value of maintaining a preference system in which every student assumes - and not without justification - that 80% of your visible racial group at the school has traditional, time tested credentials that put them in the bottom 10% of all admitted students.

    I was wrong above to say that political correctness is the only reason these schools champion AA. There is another, more nefarious one that many posters on here have hinted at but never really fleshed out. The deemphasis of GPA + LSAT - as with the deemphasis of objective stats generally as in college admissions - has a perverse but intended effect: it benefits certain privileged, white students. Certainly legacy and development types, though there may be others I would guess - the "right" type of student.

    Those students reap all the benefits of the deemphasis - they can gain admission without presenting the type of profile that the unconnected or "wrong" student must - and yet they suffer none of the downsides of being visibly identified and stigmatized as an underperforming group. I am reading a book on this very subject now, Schmidt's "Color and Money: How Rich White Kids Are Winning the War Over College," although i can't say I recommend it just yet. Justice Thomas also hinted at this in his dissent in part and concurrence in part in Grutter. See footnote 10 and accompanying text for a thoughtful discussion (his whole opinion, which was joined by Scalia in part, is a tremendously good piece of work: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-241.ZX1.html#FN10SRC.
  • theloniusmonktheloniusmonk Registered User Posts: 1,731 Senior Member
    Well except those Supreme Court justices I guess. Then again, Howard has at least one of those, and Harvard Law has a president..."

    Well those are only two and SC justices are not going to be a good sample since they're only 9 and they have lifetime appointments. We'd have to look more at federal benches, appellate judges etc. to really see if AA is working.out keep bringing up Clarence Thomas and now Thurgood Marshall, I don't think anyone would deny that AA helped Thomas, but that's one. Anyway the article says that many black Yale law grads don't go into high paying private firrms but lower paying academia.

    "The entire top 25 list you linked has some kind of affirmative action, except maybe UT."

    "How do you interpret THAT?"

    They do and it's only 5-7% so not even sure how often they need to base their admissions on race. It's really in the margins.
  • CenterCenter Registered User Posts: 2,155 Senior Member
    @CollegeIsBad you have some delusion that all the geniuses are deli owner and gardeners sons.
  • CenterCenter Registered User Posts: 2,155 Senior Member
    Where are you pulling your data on IQ by socio economic status? Considering we don't have much of a proletariat class anymore ---more of political victims as subjects of the bureaucrats class, I don't see "a lot more geniuses" coming out of delis--maybe New Delhi
  • CenterCenter Registered User Posts: 2,155 Senior Member
    Thank you. Please stop saying Proles. It is dated work and it demeans your message.
  • collegemomjamcollegemomjam Registered User Posts: 1,464 Senior Member
    @CollegeIsBad while I don't agree with everything you said, you raise an excellent point (if I'm interpreting it correctly)

    I think the longer everyone keeps dwelling on the "elite" schools on threads like these (and the "name of a college"), it only makes them seem more prestigious and adds to their reputation.

    If you have Yale stats and end up at Tufts because you didn't have a hook or a connection, don't sweat it. Just celebrate that you are at Tufts and get the best education you can. There will be other Ivy rejects right there beside you. You have no reason to believe that you will be any worse off in the end because you didn't graduate from a more elite school.

  • CenterCenter Registered User Posts: 2,155 Senior Member
    @CollegeIsBad this: "Only a loser places his value in the name of his alma mater." Nonetheless, I have to wonder how you ended up on this forum. You seem angry and bitter-- as well as pretty proud of your accomplishments-and rightfully so.
  • CenterCenter Registered User Posts: 2,155 Senior Member
    @CollegeIsBad Okay gotcha -well I dont agree with you on everything but I like your profound and absolute cynicism! I too despise the arrogance of the ruling class and their faux liberalism which is just designed to pay off the hordes to keep them from over running their estates in Greenwich but thats another conversation. :))
Sign In or Register to comment.