Jump to content

BlockedQuebecois

Members
  • Content count

    2336
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

BlockedQuebecois last won the day on October 4

BlockedQuebecois had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1286 Good People

1 Follower

About BlockedQuebecois

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1565 profile views
  1. Should I withdraw my application? RE: cGPA

    This is for the dual JD program which is: (1) not advisable, and (2) known to have much lower standards than the single JD program.
  2. Should I withdraw my application? RE: cGPA

    You're past the LSAT refund date, and you're not able to refund your application fees either. There is literally no advantage to withdrawing your application other than saving your ego from the blow of receiving rejections. If you leave your application in, there is the chance that you perform well on the LSAT and get admitted. Unless I'm incorrect and you can get money back, I wouldn't withdraw. That said, your chances are very low.
  3. Is anyone else really exhausted and burnt out?

    Yeah, people have. It's not normal. The mean repeat test taker increases their score by 2.8 points, and the distribution is a near perfect normal distribution, so you're as likely to drop 4 points as you are to gain 7. And sure, there's a guy or gal out there who went from 150 to 175+, but statistically, they're less than 0.05% of repeat test takers. About 20k people wrote for the second+ time in 2012, which means that a grand total of 10 people did that. If you're feeling lucky...
  4. Is anyone else really exhausted and burnt out?

    People do it Reading through books. Doing practice tests in the slowest manner possible. Trying to learn how each game and LR question is formatted and how best to diagram them and and and. Never understimate peoples ability to waste their own time.
  5. Investing LOC

    https://www.mrrooter.ca/toronto/ I agree with the sentiment. The example is bad
  6. I demand to know... why anyone would do a JD MGA?

    I've never seen someone insist that they know what a word means so many times without defining it.
  7. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    You realize that's essentially the status quo, right? If a disabled applicant applies in the regular category they're completely free to not disclose accommodations and are free to admit supporting documentation through SAM with everyone else. Nothing stops them. It's just that if they would like additional consideration due to a failure to receive accommodations on the LSAT or systemic barriers to their education (read: failure to receive accommodations) then they have to provide that information when they apply in the access category. Also, I'm sorry, you don't think AdComs should be deciding if something is an acceptable access claim for admission to their program? What? What the hell do you want then?
  8. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    Okay, so why don't you answer my question: why don't we just let those that don't want to disclose accommodations apply in the regular category and speak about their disability in their PS if they'd like to?
  9. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    Osgoode states that disabilities are considered under the equity or performance categories, meaning its to address those who failed to receive accommodation on the LSAT or those who faced systemic barriers in their education. It’s hard to imagine either of those are relevant to someone that has always been accommodated. Disabilities are not recognized under the diversity category. Osgoode doesn’t track applicants who need accommodations going forward. That’s handled following admission through York’s accessibility office. It says so during the application process and after admission. It’s actually made quite explicit, I’m looking at the email.
  10. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    [Portion only quoted, since the useless accommodation is its own problem that would require even more discussion] Okay, so why not just have them apply in the regular category and discuss their disability in their PS, if they want to, for diversity consideration?
  11. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    Okay, so what you're arguing for is a policy in which people with disabilities are considered no differently than regular applicants unless and until they choose to say their grades were impacted?I can get behind that. But if that's the case, why not just have them apply in the regular category?
  12. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    I got there because treating all grades equally is default an assumption the people were adequately accommodated. Do you not see how that’s true? To hold people with varying abilities as having equal outcomes is to assume that they were accommodated adequately, as yo have a level playing field. I agreed with the scenario of physical disabilities applying access in my post. I’m discussing learning disabilities. I think it’s clear being in a wheelchair doesn’t impact your grades. So why not just have them be disadvantaged by applying in the regular category? If someone doesn’t want to disclose their accomodations, they can simply apply in the regular category and discuss whatever they’d like in their personal statement. If that’s the diversity their accommodated self will bring to the class, then great. What’s the problem with that? I don’t think it’s a basis to downgrade some applicants, but a basis to accurately assess applicants. Imagine a student with a learning disability that makes them read slowly who got a 159 on the LSAT. If they were accommodated by having extra time, then that 159 is likely just what they should have gotten. If they weren’t accommodated, then that 159 may be a result of their slow writing, not their actual abilities. In that case, you could choose to weigh their accommodated GPA more heavily. Why should it be up to them? What’s wrong with the school saying “you can apply regular category and talk about the diversity you may bring in your personal statement, or apply access, provide an accurate accounting of your accommodations, and we’ll consider you in that category”. They still have the choice. Nobody is being forced to disclose anything. It’s just that if you want to be considered in the special category your have to provide some special information.
  13. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    Again, what you’re arguing for is just a de facto assumption that they were accommodated. That’s fine, so long as you’re okay with punishing those who didn’t receive accomodations and fail to disclose it (possibly due to misunderstanding or whatever). I don’t really see the purpose of allowing them to apply access at all at that point. Does someone with a fully accommodated learning disability really bring that much diversity to a class? Sure, a deaf or blind person would, but I don’t think the guy with ADHD who has been fully accommodated his whole university career adds much. Plus, isn’t it kinda mean for a law school to let people with lower grades in just to add diversity? If you’re letting them in because they’re grades and LSAT were suppressed due to systemic barriers and you expect law school won’t have those barriers then great, I support you. But if you’re letting in sub par students that you believe were on equal footing with all others and yet still performed worse than them then you’re just setting them up for failure. That doesn’t seem fair.
  14. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    Except you’re not arguing that universities shouldn’t request disclosure of medical conditions, which I agree is completely outside their area of expertise. They’re being asked to disclose accomodations, which, as an institution that is responsible for granting the exact same accomodations, is totally within their are of expertise. If you don’t think one’s bank account balance is predictive and explanatory of ones academic achievement then you’re simply not up on the current research.
  15. Citing Disability or Accommodation

    I also don’t get why you’re talking about someone being forced to disclose that information. No one is being forced to disclose that information. They’re simply required (or they may not even be required, see Ryn’s post) to disclose that information if they want special consideration. Same way that you’re not forced to disclose your bank account balance to Osgoode, you’re just required to do so if you’d like to he considered for bursaries. I don’t see what’s unreasonable about a university requiring certain information for consideration in a certain category.
×