URM?

kiwiluvr

I'm not sure if I am considered a URM. I've always considered myself a minority being that I was born in Ecuador and moved to the US when I was younger. I have double citizenship and both of my parents/extended families are from Ecuador/South America. Spanish was my first language. I can't seem to find updated information on what groups are considered URM's since some old ones from the early 2000s say that only mexicans/puerto ricans are considered URM's. Would anyone be able to provide me with insight on this?

10000019

My guess is being South American will be a boost, but it won't be as large as if you ticked off Mexican or Puerto Rican. Don't overthink it. Mark the box that you fall under.

For firm hiring you should also tick off the diversity box.

taschasp

URM doesn't equate to minority; URM means under represented minority. In other words, you're a URM if you belong to a group that is X% of the U.S. population, but only 0.5X% (for example) of admitted law students or lawyers. For an Ecuadorian like you, or an Iranian like me, we are minorities in the U.S. but not considered URM in the world of higher education.

10000019

@taschasp said:
URM doesn't equate to minority; URM means under represented minority. In other words, you're a URM if you belong to a group that is X% of the U.S. population, but only 0.5X% (for example) of admitted law students or lawyers. For an Ecuadorian like you, or an Iranian like me, we are minorities in the U.S. but not considered URM in the world of higher education.

I'm assuming you meant to use the word "law school" instead of "higher education" because for colleges (and many other professional programs) it is beyond debate that being anything other than Caucasian or Asian is a bonus.

There is some confusion about which Hispanic groups are URM for law schools because many applications expressly point out ties to Mexico and Puerto Rico. I don't think it is important to distinguish whether other-Hispanic qualifies as URM or gives a generic boost, because even within the accepted group of URMs the boost varies.

And my last point is tangential to this thread: for firm hiring, pretty much every group except Caucasian-Male qualifies for diversity hiring. I am highlighting this because some groups, like Asians and Women, are not use to qualifying for diversity initiatives.

taschasp

@10000019 said:
I'm assuming you meant to use the word "law school" instead of "higher education" because for colleges (and many other professional programs) it is beyond debate that being anything other than Caucasian or Asian is a bonus.

Nope, I meant higher education. I didn't say that it's not a bonus--I said that it's not categorized as URM. In the world of the LSAT, your flawed assumption was to assume that "non-URM -> no increase in probability of admission", which doesn't make sense, because a lot of factors matter in admissions other than being URM!

I agree that it's a bonus, and in this case, it's a bonus because--to some extent--higher educational institutions want their student bodies to be diverse, irrespective of whether or not that diversity is representative of the U.S. population. Getting a boost for being a non-white, non-Asian but non-URM applicant is similar to getting a boost for having a unique experience or story that will, ultimately, make the student body at the school more interesting.

But that's a wholly different issue from URM. The primary intent behind the URM categorization is to bring up the numbers of admitted students who fall into groups that have been traditionally disadvantaged in the admissions process, evidenced by their under representation in higher education. The "bonuses" thus exist for different reasons.

10000019

@taschasp said:

@10000019 said:
I'm assuming you meant to use the word "law school" instead of "higher education" because for colleges (and many other professional programs) it is beyond debate that being anything other than Caucasian or Asian is a bonus.

Nope, I meant higher education. I didn't say that it's not a bonus--I said that it's not categorized as URM. In the world of the LSAT, your flawed assumption was to assume that "non-URM -> no increase in probability of admission", which doesn't make sense, because a lot of factors matter in admissions other than being URM!

I agree that it's a bonus, and in this case, it's a bonus because--to some extent--higher educational institutions want their student bodies to be diverse, irrespective of whether or not that diversity is representative of the U.S. population. Getting a boost for being a non-white, non-Asian but non-URM applicant is similar to getting a boost for having a unique experience or story that will, ultimately, make the student body at the school more interesting.

But that's a wholly different issue from URM. The primary intent behind the URM categorization is to bring up the numbers of admitted students who fall into groups that have been traditionally disadvantaged in the admissions process, evidenced by their under representation in higher education. The "bonuses" thus exist for different reasons.

URM isn't a universal term in higher education. For the handful of colleges and other professional schools that use the term URM, they do not limit Hispanic URMs to Puerto Ricans and Mexicans. Use a search engine and try to find colleges that use the term URM. You won't find many. Here is one: https://agsci.psu.edu/diversity/awareness/definitions.

I focused on the word boost because, as I mentioned earlier, designating someone as a URM does not mean anything. People want to be classified as URMs because of the boost. Within that group, the boost is not uniform.

The boost of race within admissions is mostly a black box. However, the few leaks we have to work off suggest that other-Hispanics also receive boosts well beyond typical softs, while Asian students do not receive a boost. I can't find the UVA leak that happened (but if my memory serves correct), they lumped together all Hispanics in their data. The Baylor leak also lumped all Hispanics together. If you look at anecdotal reports on LSN, other-Hispanics get into programs with lower stats than say Asians.

I don't like you suggesting that being a other-Hispanic is a soft. It undervalues how much of a boost it might be in admissions. Recognizing the potential value is important because it encourages applicants to apply to schools where they are below the medians. Law schools applications aren't cheap. Applicants aren't going to apply to schools that they think they have no shot getting into. Most of us recognize that traditional softs aren't going to get you into a school when you're below both medians. On the other hand, it's accepted that URMs have a shot at schools even when they are below both medians. Even though the bonus of being a other-Hispanic is not clear, my guess (based on LSN self-reported data and leaked admissions data) is that other-Hispanic applicants should reach further than Caucasian or Asian students.

To summarize, your first post would have been correct if you had used "law school admissions" instead of "world of higher education." Your first post wouldn't have been wrong, but I wanted to make clear that other-Hispanics may be receiving boosts that are higher than traditional softs and approaching the coveted URM boost. Your second post, however, had a host of false information.

10000019

duplicate