7 replies to this topic

[maturestudent]

OK, let me be more specific. I've been out of school for more than 10 years, and planning to start law school this fall (either U of T or Osgoode). Last time I wrote exams (economics), I got an A average, but I'm rusty at exam skills at this point. I've done a fair bit of reading in law, so I know what the subject is like, and I can see that exam questions in law could be relatively straightforward (e.g., high level concepts) if they wanted to set them that way. Contrariwise, there are some issues with extremely complex and abstruse details, and answering those in a short space of time could really separate the wheat from the chaff.

I know that every student at these schools had very high university grades coming in, and the intended average going out is only B+ or thereabouts. Some people get A's, so that must mean that some people who were pretty good as undergraduates get B- averages or even C's. In a competitive job market, that means you might end up as an ambulance chaser or doing legal aid for shoplifters, or maybe not getting an articling position at all.

Many U of T first year courses are based 100% on the final exam, but most of them are open book. Osgoode appears to have more of a mix of evaluation methods. I also like the fact that four of Osgoode's courses last a single semester, so you don't have five or six final exams bunched together at the end of the year.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

[zzzzz]

...thoughts on your life or what you think law school will be like?

[whereverjustice]

maturestudent, on 04 February 2012 - 07:57 PM, said:

In a competitive job market, that means you might end up as an ambulance chaser or doing legal aid for shoplifters, or maybe not getting an articling position at all.

Haha, yeah, those legal aid guys sure are pathetic, eh? I mean, who goes to law school just to deal with poor people. BBB 4 Lyfe!

Jesus.

Onward:

maturestudent, on 04 February 2012 - 07:57 PM, said:

Osgoode appears to have more of a mix of evaluation methods. I also like the fact that four of Osgoode's courses last a single semester, so you don't have five or six final exams bunched together at the end of the year.

Well, that's first year, as you noted. In upper years most lecture-style courses are going to be 100% exams with an optional paper, but not all of them. You can also take a bunch of seminars which are paper based, or courses with a 'skills training' element (mediation, etc) where you do simulations during the year. Then there are clinicals which have their own weird world of evaluation.

I'd expect this is all very true of UT as well, though. Are you thinking of making a law school decision on the basis of perceived differences in first year evaluation methods?

[flowergirl]

I think the question (at least the one in the title of the OP) is an interesting one.

I am afraid though that this question realistically can only be answered by a student who went to both schools and even then it will be very inaccurate answer. I imagine the students who can answer this question can only be transfer students who transferred from Osgoode to U of T or vise versa. I imagine that this is a rare occurrence.

However, even if there is such transfer student does exists and visits the forum, the answer would be very inaccurate because level of difficulty of exams varies from course to course and year to year.

However, it would be interesting to see if anyone has an idea the how can the level of difficulty of exams between the two schools can be measured and what other data is available to answer this question.

[JudgeDredd]

it is perceptive to note the different evaluation methods for first year at different schools. At osgoode for first year you have 3 100% finals in december (with practice midterms in october). At UofT, and Western I believe, the december exams are fail-safe or can only improve your mark? Anyway, at those schools the december exams are more like practice midterms.

So at Osgoode, those who learn quick and get into the rhythm of law school early are benefit by those december 100% finals. Whereas at western and UofT, you can afford to be a bit more of a "slow-starter" and can get the hang of it in second term, learning from your mistakes (it takes many law students the first half of the year to really figure out what they are doing!). The drawback of the uoft/western way is that you have a lot more exams to write at once obviously, and the pressure can really build up for the end of the year.....vs. osgoode where you get some courses out of the way. Osgoode is also good for mixing up evaluation methods first year, you have ethical lawyering/legal process/perspective option which test your reflective/essay/writing skills, then torts/crim/contracts/property which are your typical 100% finals, some state and citizen/constitutional classes mix both written assignments and exams, so it is a good mix if you arnt a great 3-hour exam writer.

So is one "easier" than the other? hard to say....depends on the personal preferences are. You arn't gonna meet someone who went to both uoft and osgoode and can give you a clear answer lol. With the calibre of students UofT has, the curve is probably more challenging if you are coming in as a mature student...Osgoode takes quite a few more mature students than UofT I believe...Anyway, i won't ramble on anymore.

Edited by JudgeDredd, 04 February 2012 - 10:02 PM.

[Red]

I doubt there will be any difference between the difficulty of questions you will get at either of these schools. I assume the class average will be pretty similar at both schools. In law school, your grade will be based on how you do relative to the other students in your class. The difficulty of the question will have no real impact at the end of the day because every other student in your class has the same question. You're all in the same boat.

In theory, schools like U of T or UBC might be slightly more difficult than other schools because the students you're graded against "are stronger" (based on the strength of the incoming class). But in practice, I doubt it makes much of a difference.

[maturestudent]

whereverjustice, on 04 February 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Haha, yeah, those legal aid guys sure are pathetic, eh? I mean, who goes to law school just to deal with poor people. BBB 4 Lyfe!

Jesus.

I didn't mean to deprecate legal aid or working for poor people. It was just an attempt at humor, as an example of what somebody might who do can't get a starting job with an established firm and has to start out as a sole practitioner.

[maturestudent]

flowergirl, on 04 February 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

I think the question (at least the one in the title of the OP) is an interesting one.

I am afraid though that this question realistically can only be answered by a student who went to both schools and even then it will be very inaccurate answer. I imagine the students who can answer this question can only be transfer students who transferred from Osgoode to U of T or vise versa. I imagine that this is a rare occurrence.

However, even if there is such transfer student does exists and visits the forum, the answer would be very inaccurate because level of difficulty of exams varies from course to course and year to year.

However, it would be interesting to see if anyone has an idea the how can the level of difficulty of exams between the two schools can be measured and what other data is available to answer this question.

I understand what you are saying. I wasn't expecting something like the scientific precision of a double-blind experiment. However, I was hoping there might be some people who go to one school and have friends who went to the other school, and may at least have subjective opinions based on comparing notes.