That does seem more likely than them suddenly caring about poor people.

It is strange how no one had a problem with school requiring children to sit still, learn and be obedient until girls turned out to be better at that than boys.

It is also suspicious that for decades if not longer, no one had a problem with the applications ranking system possibly discriminating against poor people.

If they were being honest about that whole "cannot afford test preparation courses", the obvious solution would be to offer those courses for free, wouldn't it?

I think it's more to let in white kids and not have the classes dominated by Asians. That's the secret story behind most of the "affirmative action" stuff in the Ivies.

If boys are outperforming girls then that just shows that girls are dumb and deserve the role of underclass, but if heaven forbid girls are outperforming boys, then something is wrong with the metic…

[–] Dalggi 7 points Edited

I think this is more geared towards minorities/economically disadvantaged students. LSAT is much harder to prep for than SAT or GRE when you are entering law school you must have already finished your bachelors so most are 21+ years old. People who do well generally study full time 6-12 months. Being able to study full time is something only the economically advantaged can do. Sure you can study and work but you are far less likely to do as well as some one who is studying full time and especially someone who can afford more expensive prep. LSAT prep courses run hundreds of dollars and tutoring is normally over 100$ an hour. Additionally, studies show men tend to score higher on the LSAT while women generally have higher GPAs.

Law school students tend to be economically advantaged because even applying is so expensive you have to pay $215 to take the LSAT, $195 to put together an application to law schools on CAS, then pay $45 to each school you apply to send your CAS report then $0-80 per school for application fees.

Considering the fact that males are failing at every possible academic level when compared to women, they probably have to lower the bar specifically for male applicants or they won't have any men at elite institutions at all!

Although, I would consider that the only positive social progression that had occurred in the past 10 years.

[–] drinkwater 4 points Edited

Such bullshit, the rise of deriding higher education as well as higher education being captured coincides with women and girls performing better then men and boys. They're sabotaging our success, just as they do when we dominate a job, suddenly pay is lower and public opinion is in the gutter.Despite every single roadblock in our way. And now they give them even more of a leg up.

Yes, I endorse your interpretation. I think this is exactly what is going on.

Almost always it's to benefit men, in the west, it's particularly white men. They wouldn't bother actually helping people who need it.

[–] [Deleted] 2 points Edited

Eh, this is actually a thing at other law schools. There are special applicant categories for indigenous students and those who didn't perform well on their testing. And guess what? Many of those students went on to become awesome lawyers.

I support this, and I believe this is just the stuffy schools getting on board with the policies at other schools.

Edit: and a LOT of the special applicant category students are female IME. A lot of women who have children.