Jump to content

Powerlevel

Members
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About Powerlevel

  • Rank

  1. Is the optional essay really optional?

    Your information is outdated. The current optional essay choice 3 relates to access claims: Optional Essay 1 Describe a meaningful intellectual experience you have had. This could be a dynamic class you took in high school or undergraduate school, your favourite mathematical concept, or a learning relationship you developed with someone outside an academic context. Consider circumstances under which you developed a talent or skill that has transformed the way you approach problems. Optional Essay 2 What do you hope to achieve with your JD? If you have a clear vision of your future goals, describe it, and explain to the Admissions Committee how you believe the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto will help you reach your goals. Optional Essay 3 Elaborate on any obstacles to achievement (physical, social, cultural, geographic, economic) that you believe the Admissions Committee should consider in assessing your application.
  2. Finally pulling the cord.. law school ..

    With respect, I don't think it's remotely hard to parse what law schools exist in BC. Nor do I think that any guidance, direction or "privilege" is required to find out information that basic and straightforward. That's absurd. Also your analogy doesn't really work because the person asking the simple question wasn't doing so in combination with stating a desire to become a lawyer, which is salient to why the OP received the responses they did. I'll stop right now and won't continue to argue or a be a dick, but I just don't agree with you characterizing this as if the OP had perfectly reasonable questions that would be normal for an "outsider" to ask in this context.
  3. Finally pulling the cord.. law school ..

    @IdontargueIdebate Here's the thing: the way you approached all of this gives off the impression that you think that any idiot can wake up one day and decide to be a lawyer on a whim (to clarify I am not calling you an idiot, but I am saying you clearly didn't put much thought or effort into this), which is actually somewhat insulting to many people here even if you did not intend it that way. As soon as I saw the original post, before seeing any replies, I was certain some degree of contempt would be the response, and it's a bit baffling you didn't anticipate the same.
  4. Finally pulling the cord.. law school ..

    With respect, you expressed interest in a career that requires strong research ability, reading comprehension, motivation, initiative, etc., and you came here asking absurdly basic questions that any reasonably competent person should have been able to find out on their own through literally 10 seconds of googling. Do you understand why that is extremely unimpressive to people who have already put in the effort to do their own research, obtain competitive GPAs and LSAT scores, put together applications, and in some cases already gone to law school and/or become practicing lawyers? If you need to be spoon fed to this extent regularly, this is simply not a career path you should pursue.
  5. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that only help if the transcripts are from participating Ontario institutions? So if the applicant went to post-secondary in another province, don't they need to have had the requests sent to OLSAS and actually received by Nov 1st?
  6. I understand that this is an issue that people quite understandably feel very strongly about, but simply saying "educate yourself" to people is condescending and unproductive (as it's said so that you don't actually need to present an argument or evidence supporting claims you've made; it's easier to just assert something and put the onus on the other person). It's especially inflammatory to write in the context of a thread about someone who was the subject of a false allegation, and it's off topic and risks derailing the thread. Anyways, OP, I wish you the best of luck in the application process. I would also strongly advise against including this in a personal statement, although I am just another applicant and am not speaking from any position of expertise...it just strikes me as a can of worms that you really shouldn't open.
  7. Mature vs General Admission Category

    Great, thank you for the information.
  8. If one's GPA and LSAT score are competitive for the general admission category but the candidate also meets the requirements to apply under the mature category, which is more advantageous to apply under? I've seen suggestions that impressive work experience can compensate to an extent for relatively weak GPA, but could one actually undermine their application through applying as a mature applicant if their GPA is strong (if, say, their work experience was viewed as less impressive than other mature applicants)? How about schools that have an "access" category instead and don't have clear definitions of what constitutes a "mature applicant"? If one meets definitions of a "mature applicant" according to other schools, is it worthwhile to apply under an "access" category for these schools? I was originally just going to apply under the general admission category because my stats are adequate, but I've heard mixed advice as to whether it's still worthwhile to apply as a mature applicant. Any input is appreciated.
  9. I am not considering non-disclosure, was never considering non-disclosure, and never stated nor implied that I was considering non-disclosure.
  10. They were aware that I had attended the first school and factored that in when I was admitted, but they never asked me if I had ever been required to withdraw (if they had I absolutely would have been disclosed it, but it never came up). They saw my transcripts for the first school, at any rate. Thanks for the quick response.
  11. Based on admission statistics, I'm quite confident that I am a competitive candidate for most law schools in Canada as far as my LSAT score and GPA in relation to my undergraduate degree are concerned. I am concerned, however, about post-secondary coursework I took approximately 10 years ago (unrelated to the four-year degree I later earned). The short story is that I failed courses and was required to withdraw twice. In both cases, I successfully appealed the withdrawal and was readmitted, on the basis that I was suffering from a medical condition that had affected my academic performance. I left that institution without a degree (voluntarily, after the second successful appeal), and after addressing my medical issues I enrolled in a different program at a different institution. I graduated with a GPA that is competitive for Canadian law schools and this is indicated on my transcripts (I did not use transfer credits that affected my GPA where my degree is concerned). I have also performed well in a variety of complex, stressful and relatively high-level jobs in the period between when I was having academic difficulties and now, so I have nearly a decade of strong academic and professional performance to illustrate that my previous medical issues are resolved. Obviously, law school applications ask for all post-secondary academic history to be disclosed and explicitly ask whether an applicant has ever been required to withdraw from a college or university. So it seems that I have to disclose all of this, truthfully answer "yes" to the latter question, and attempt to explain this. I would appreciate any advice on how I should approach this, what sort of responses I may expect, how concerned I should be, and if there are any specific schools I should completely write off attending as a result of this history. I understand that different schools calculate GPA differently and these courses may or may not enter into said calculations at all. In the event that they aren't taken into consideration in a given school's formula, how much would this history factor in to how I am assessed provided I supply documentation and an explanation? Thank you.
×