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

[A. Nony Mouse]

I already said that high tuition hurts students with fewer resources, barring schools offering more aid to students with fewer resources, so I'm not sure why you're arguing with me. I guess it sounded like you were using "diversity" to mean "race" earlier, and now you're including first-gen and low income. Yes, to the extent diverse = less money, increased tuition is likely a heavier burden. But it's its own distinct problem - it's not ONLY about diversity, it hurts lots of student who don't count as "diverse" under any traditional measurement. So I'm not dismissing the diversity angle, I'm saying that it's more complicated than that.

[Jclubb]

Also if this thread is meant to be anything other than someone speaking bitterly about a rejection from NU then why does it single out NU. We've already agreed that there was nothing wrong with dean's remarks (I hope that's still not up for debate) so why is it NU and not top tier law schools?

[Bulla]

I already said that high tuition hurts students with fewer resources, barring schools offering more aid to students with fewer resources, so I'm not sure why you're arguing with me. I guess it sounded like you were using "diversity" to mean "race" earlier, and now you're including first-gen and low income. Yes, to the extent diverse = less money, increased tuition is likely a heavier burden. But it's its own distinct problem - it's not ONLY about diversity, it hurts lots of student who don't count as "diverse" under any traditional measurement. So I'm not dismissing the diversity angle, I'm saying that it's more complicated than that.

Proposed solution ?

[Bulla]

Also if this thread is meant to be anything other than someone speaking bitterly about a rejection from NU then why does it single out NU. We've already agreed that there was nothing wrong with dean's remarks (I hope that's still not up for debate) so why is it NU and not top tier law schools?

We've talked about Yale and Harvard as well.

[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?

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

Dude, you're literally spouting nonsense. What the fuck does one person getting a job from their family connections have to do with your central thesis? Or are you just writing stream-of-consciousness bullshit about every time you felt like a rich kid succeeded in place of you?

It should be telling that no one-- literally no one --on this thread thinks that you have a point. I sincerely hope you're just bored and not bothering to take much time forming your arguments, because your posts are an incoherent mess.

[Jclubb]

Also if this thread is meant to be anything other than someone speaking bitterly about a rejection from NU then why does it single out NU. We've already agreed that there was nothing wrong with dean's remarks (I hope that's still not up for debate) so why is it NU and not top tier law schools?

We've talked about Yale and Harvard as well.

Maybe change thread title?

[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

Dude, you're literally spouting nonsense. What the fuck does one person getting a job from their family connections have to do with your central thesis? Or are you just writing stream-of-consciousness bullshit about every time you felt like a rich kid succeeded in place of you?

It should be telling that no one-- literally no one --on this thread thinks that you have a point. I sincerely hope you're just bored and not bothering to take much time forming your arguments, because your posts are an incoherent mess.

Mind leaving this topic and not show me your e-face again ? Go, you're a sad little creature.

[Jclubb]

I already said that high tuition hurts students with fewer resources, barring schools offering more aid to students with fewer resources, so I'm not sure why you're arguing with me. I guess it sounded like you were using "diversity" to mean "race" earlier, and now you're including first-gen and low income. Yes, to the extent diverse = less money, increased tuition is likely a heavier burden. But it's its own distinct problem - it's not ONLY about diversity, it hurts lots of student who don't count as "diverse" under any traditional measurement. So I'm not dismissing the diversity angle, I'm saying that it's more complicated than that.

Proposed solution ?

Do you have a proposed solution that has not been completely ripped apart for being unworkable or worse?

[cavalier1138]

Also if this thread is meant to be anything other than someone speaking bitterly about a rejection from NU then why does it single out NU. We've already agreed that there was nothing wrong with dean's remarks (I hope that's still not up for debate) so why is it NU and not top tier law schools?

We've talked about Yale and Harvard as well.

Maybe change thread title?

But the OP didn't apply to Harvard and Yale. Why would she want to attack them for their diversity-unfriendly waitlisting policies that are totally a thing?

[Jclubb]

Also if this thread is meant to be anything other than someone speaking bitterly about a rejection from NU then why does it single out NU. We've already agreed that there was nothing wrong with dean's remarks (I hope that's still not up for debate) so why is it NU and not top tier law schools?

We've talked about Yale and Harvard as well.

Maybe change thread title?

But the OP didn't apply to Harvard and Yale. Why would she want to attack them for their diversity-unfriendly waitlisting policies that are totally a thing?

But I didn't get into Harvard so can we please make this about them? I totally did not get in because they're diversity haters.

[Bulla]

You guys are adorable together.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I already said that high tuition hurts students with fewer resources, barring schools offering more aid to students with fewer resources, so I'm not sure why you're arguing with me. I guess it sounded like you were using "diversity" to mean "race" earlier, and now you're including first-gen and low income. Yes, to the extent diverse = less money, increased tuition is likely a heavier burden. But it's its own distinct problem - it's not ONLY about diversity, it hurts lots of student who don't count as "diverse" under any traditional measurement. So I'm not dismissing the diversity angle, I'm saying that it's more complicated than that.

Proposed solution ?

I don't have one. I'm not a law school or ABA admin so I've never had to come up with one. Many people suggest drastically curtailing federal loans, or making them subject to the kind of economic analysis re: return on investment that, say, a small business loan incurs. But those solutions aren't going to help diverse (first-gen, low income, lower scoring) students because those students are less likely than upper-class students to have access to funds under those plans. Some people say law schools should be on the hook for loan payments if students can't get jobs adequate to pay off the loans. But that's the same problem (students can pay for school will then be more desirable applicants). More need-based aid would be nice, but without some kind of magic source of funding for it, tuition will go up for everyone else, and it's easy to envision a situation where that squeezes out applicants in middle income groups (people say this is the case for undergrad already - people with no resources get aid and people with lots of resources pay for themselves, but sort of average middle class students aren't rich enough to pay without hardship nor poor enough to get full aid. I'm not saying their interests should trump EVERYONE else's, but it's still an issue to consider). Just lowering tuition across the board would be great, but I have no idea how that would ever happen. Part of the increase in tuition has come about because (for public schools) states don't fund higher ed any more, and a lot of legal jobs pay enough that people will be able to pay off loans, and the high tuition they pay supports operations throughout the university, not just at the law school. So there are a lot of institutions with budgets based on getting this money, and cutting it in any significant way is going to be hugely resisted.

I guess if you put a gun to my head I'd want to see more need-based aid over merit aid, but given the rankings arms race that exists (and is real, and you can't get rid of by just deploring it) this is difficult, because schools value the ability to buy top students with aid. I know you're going to say this goes back to your original point, which is that schools value rankings over diversity - to which I will say, NO ONE DISAGREES WITH THAT. It's not a revelation. Everyone should be aware of that already. But they also value those rankings in part because high rankings translate into funding and top students and options, not just because they are snobs.

(For the record, I didn't get into Harvard THREE TIMES, and the last time for law school I was old, so yeah, definite diversity haters. Nothing to do with my subpar LSAT score.)

[cavalier1138]

(For the record, I didn't get into Harvard THREE TIMES, and the last time for law school I was old, so yeah, definite diversity haters. Nothing to do with my subpar LSAT score.)

Those anti-monster SNOBS.

[Jclubb]

You guys are adorable together.

I asked you a serious question about your proposed solution. Perhaps if you actually addressed the questions and problems we all are having with your arguments then we would be able to have a serious discussion. But as it stands ITT my comment that Harvard is a diversity hater because I, a non URM, did not get in is an acceptable argument based on the level of arguments being made in here.

[sanzgo]

I think diversity is great but there are many problems in the way it is implemented.

In the US, we equate diversity with skin color. That couldn't be further from the truth.

I have seen African American kids who grew up in wealthy suburban areas attending private school, who then attended an IVY (ridden with grade inflation) with the help of AA, and then attended a T13 with a 163 LSAT. So what exactly are these kids contributing in terms of diversity? They grew up wealthy and were provided with all the opportunities in the world to achieve their goals, just like their rich White counterparts. So what gives them the right to be judged against standards much lower than those used to judge their White counterparts? The fact that they have more melanin?

A poor Hmong American kid who grew up in an area ridden with violence and had to attend community college while working 40 hrs/week b/c he/she had to take care of siblings and managed to graduate with a 3.6 and 163 LSAT is wayyyy more impressive than the kids in the previous example. But this Hmong American kid will never make it into a T-13 despite having life experiences that have the potential to be much more enriching to the campus environment.

I accept that diversity of life experiences contributes to a more enriching classroom experience, no doubt. But I will never for the life of me be able to understand how some wickedly intelligent liberals can actually support AA in its current form.

At least with a number-based approach to admissions, it's hard to scream unfairness despite its downsides.

[41262]

I think diversity is great but there are many problems in the way it is implemented.

obviously, I mean look at how appallingly the french are treated

[cavalier1138]

I think diversity is great but there are many problems in the way it is implemented.

obviously, I mean look at how appallingly the french are treated

1. All US law school classes are taught in English.
2. Professors repeatedly mispronounce terms like "travaux preparatoires" in lecture.
3. Smoking is not socially acceptable enough.
4. Baguettes have insufficiently crispy crusts.

Politically aware French law students have recently been spotted building barricades and singing catchy and inspiring showtunes outside of Northwestern. The latest developments on this story will be delivered by a not-at-all-suspicious policeman in disguise who is entrenched with these brave, brave souls.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Sanzgo, I get why you went where you did, based on the discussion so far, but discussions of the merits of AA are limited to a thread in the lounge devoted to the topic. The arguments tend to follow the same unproductive path and derail conversation. So please don't continue in that vein (and I'll ask others here not to respond to that bit).

[TheSpanishMain]

Yeah, I dont know what zinger of a point you think you are making here, but its not hitting. Subpopulations of subpopulations and all that.

So you got an LSAT of 120 - 149 20k+ applicants (you're telling them their scores are shitty for law schools)
You got an LSAT of 150 - 159 20k+ applicants (you're telling them their scores are shitty for law schools)
Then you got an LSAT of 160 - 180 14k+ applicants (you're telling those with 160 - 164 their scores are shitty)

Who are you again ? I forgot the e-creator. Work on your final GPA, get a good employment and learn to have compassion for others.

164 isn't shitty relative to the population of LSAT takers as a whole, but that's not who you're competing with when you apply to a school like NU. You're competing against a much smaller segment of the population when you narrow it down to people who are competitive at elite schools.

Proposed solution ?

Get an LSAT score at or above the median of the school you want to attend.

[cavalier1138]

Yeah, I dont know what zinger of a point you think you are making here, but its not hitting. Subpopulations of subpopulations and all that.

So you got an LSAT of 120 - 149 20k+ applicants (you're telling them their scores are shitty for law schools)
You got an LSAT of 150 - 159 20k+ applicants (you're telling them their scores are shitty for law schools)
Then you got an LSAT of 160 - 180 14k+ applicants (you're telling those with 160 - 164 their scores are shitty)

Who are you again ? I forgot the e-creator. Work on your final GPA, get a good employment and learn to have compassion for others.

164 isn't shitty relative to the population of LSAT takers as a whole, but that's not who you're competing with when you apply to a school like NU. You're competing against a much smaller segment of the population when you narrow it down to people who are competitive at elite schools.

In addition to this, I have no trouble saying that scores in the 120-150s range are objectively bad scores, regardless of future career goals.

[devilsadvocatetroll]

Dean: LSAC should incentivize us to do Y instead of incentivizing us to do X and disincentivizing us to do Y

Dean: *does X*

OP: Dean shouldn't do X!

This was on the first page and literally answers this thread.

OP is hating the player and not the game (which is even weirder as in this case the player is saying that the game should change).

[Bulla]

Sanzgo, I get why you went where you did, based on the discussion so far, but discussions of the merits of AA are limited to a thread in the lounge devoted to the topic. The arguments tend to follow the same unproductive path and derail conversation. So please don't continue in that vein (and I'll ask others here not to respond to that bit).

That is why i classified diversity under: Student of Color, First Generation, Low Income, and Minorities.

I can understand why Secretary of Office of Civil Right Candice Jackson who is 'white' complained about how she wasn't receiving the help minority students were receiving at her undergrad because she was white and not URM. If she is poor and need the adequate help to succeed then she deserves that help.

Yeah, I dont know what zinger of a point you think you are making here, but its not hitting. Subpopulations of subpopulations and all that.

So you got an LSAT of 120 - 149 20k+ applicants (you're telling them their scores are shitty for law schools)
You got an LSAT of 150 - 159 20k+ applicants (you're telling them their scores are shitty for law schools)
Then you got an LSAT of 160 - 180 14k+ applicants (you're telling those with 160 - 164 their scores are shitty)

Who are you again ? I forgot the e-creator. Work on your final GPA, get a good employment and learn to have compassion for others.

164 isn't shitty relative to the population of LSAT takers as a whole, but that's not who you're competing with when you apply to a school like NU. You're competing against a much smaller segment of the population when you narrow it down to people who are competitive at elite schools.

In addition to this, I have no trouble saying that scores in the 120-150s range are objectively bad scores, regardless of future career goals.

Did you ate your lunch yet ?
You didn't know ? 120 - 150 scores are the alternative fact. Don't degrade anyone with any score number. You're the one who said 164 was a shitty score, obviously you're crazy. You have to stop smoking whatever you're smoking.

The level of intelligence is measures but how high the LSAT score is. That is fake news.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Candice Jackson is a tool who should be ignored.

[41262]

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.

Did you ate your lunch yet ?
You didn't know ? 120 - 150 scores are the alternative fact. Don't degrade anyone with any score number. You're the one who said 164 was a shitty score, obviously you're crazy. You have to stop smoking whatever you're smoking.

The level of intelligence is measures but how high the LSAT score is. That is fake news.

tay-level ai confirmed

[Big Dog]

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

fwiw: for the sake of diversity, emphasis on GPA is much more important, i.e., revers splitter. There are plenty of diverse students pulling down A's in 'Studies' majors at colleges with high admissions rates.