9 replies to this topic

[maturestudent]

Hi all,

I wonder if anybody here has experience with an interview at Osgoode. I have one scheduled for later this month.

Do you know what sorts of things are discussed at the interview? How soon after the interview do you get a decision?

I understand from the Osgoode website that they interview a subset of applicants who have special characteristics:

"The Admissions Committee will, by invitation, interview a select number of Mature Student applicants to assist in the selection process. The committee generally interviews applicants throughout the month of February and possibly into early April. Some Mature Student applicants may be assessed on the basis of documentation only. Applicants in all other admission categories are assessed on the basis of documentation only."

They mention mature students (which at Osgoode is somebody who doesn't have undergraduate university preparation, at least on OLSAS, where I wasn't able to call myself a mature applicant for Osgoode). I'm mature in years, but actually have a postgraduate degree with an A average from one of the leading US universities, and have received early admission to U of T (without an interview). However, there are certain differences between the schools, and I think I might like Osgoode better.

Thanks for your input.

[antioppressivepractice]

maturestudent, on 05 February 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

Hi all,

I wonder if anybody here has experience with an interview at Osgoode. I have one scheduled for later this month.

Do you know what sorts of things are discussed at the interview? How soon after the interview do you get a decision?

I understand from the Osgoode website that they interview a subset of applicants who have special characteristics:

"The Admissions Committee will, by invitation, interview a select number of Mature Student applicants to assist in the selection process. The committee generally interviews applicants throughout the month of February and possibly into early April. Some Mature Student applicants may be assessed on the basis of documentation only. Applicants in all other admission categories are assessed on the basis of documentation only."

They mention mature students (which at Osgoode is somebody who doesn't have undergraduate university preparation, at least on OLSAS, where I wasn't able to call myself a mature applicant for Osgoode). I'm mature in years, but actually have a postgraduate degree with an A average from one of the leading US universities, and have received early admission to U of T (without an interview). However, there are certain differences between the schools, and I think I might like Osgoode better.

Thanks for your input.

Hi if you do a search on the Osgoode thread others have discussed their interview and one person even remembered all the questions and posted them on here. If you can't find them I will look for it later and post it here.

[BetterCallSaul]

See http://lawstudents.c...__1#entry149720

[Hilda of Whitby]

maturestudent, on 05 February 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

"The Admissions Committee will, by invitation, interview a select number of Mature Student applicants to assist in the selection process. The committee generally interviews applicants throughout the month of February and possibly into early April. Some Mature Student applicants may be assessed on the basis of documentation only. Applicants in all other admission categories are assessed on the basis of documentation only."

They mention mature students (which at Osgoode is somebody who doesn't have undergraduate university preparation, at least on OLSAS, where I wasn't able to call myself a mature applicant for Osgoode).

Hi, maturestudent.

Just FYI, the passage you quote from the Osgoode website seems to be out of date. I Googled it and learned that it applies to the 2004/05 cycle. I believe that back then they did have a separate category for mature applicants, but under the holistic review process adopted in 2007, the categories have shifted around somewhat.

The suggestion that to be a mature student, at Oz or elsewhere, you can't have an undergraduate degree is quite wrong as far as I know. So is the idea that OLSAS makes the decision on who's a mature student. Don't the schools have their own definitions, usually based on age and/or number of years out of school?

It's true that someone with no UG would have little chance of being admitted until he or she had amassed some pretty impressive life experiences, which probably means being old enough to fit the mature category. But that doesn't mean mature students can't have an UG degree! (basic LSAT logic there )

I don't mean to jump down your throat, OP, and I realize all this wasn't the main point of your post. Just wanted to make sure that others reading this thread don't get incorrect information.

Edited by Hilda of Whitby, 05 February 2012 - 01:27 PM.

[antioppressivepractice]

BetterCallSaul found the thread I was talking about it has a lot of information for you in terms of the questions and stuff. In terms of your status as a Mature Student it is okay if you have gone to University and have a degree you can still be in this category. It is usually based on the number of years you are out of school. That being said I was told by the admissions that I could check of mature student on my application even though I had not been out of school for exactly five years. Anyways I am sure you will do very well on your interview considering you have already had an early admission to U of T. I wish you the best of luck and you have absolutely nothing to be worried about.

[maturestudent]

Hilda of Whitby, on 05 February 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

Hi, maturestudent.

Just FYI, the passage you quote from the Osgoode website seems to be out of date. I Googled it and learned that it applies to the 2004/05 cycle. I believe that back then they did have a separate category for mature applicants, but under the holistic review process adopted in 2007, the categories have shifted around somewhat.

The suggestion that to be a mature student, at Oz or elsewhere, you can't have an undergraduate degree is quite wrong as far as I know. So is the idea that OLSAS makes the decision on who's a mature student. Don't the schools have their own definitions, usually based on age and/or number of years out of school?

It's true that someone with no UG would have little chance of being admitted until he or she had amassed some pretty impressive life experiences, which probably means being old enough to fit the mature category. But that doesn't mean mature students can't have an UG degree! (basic LSAT logic there )

I don't mean to jump down your throat, OP, and I realize all this wasn't the main point of your post. Just wanted to make sure that others reading this thread don't get incorrect information.

Actually, I just did the OLSAS application process a few months ago, so I know what I'm talking about. Each school has a different format for their personal statements, etc. within OLSAS. U of T, Queen's and Western have a mature student category in OLSAS, through which I applied. Osgoode also has a mature student category on OLSAS, but it states quite explicitly that this is only for people who don't have the minimum required undergraduate university education. Therefore, in applying to Osgoode, I could not apply in the mature category without appearing to ignore the explicitly stated definitions. It seemed strange to me, but I figured an aspiring law student should follow the letter of the written rules.

[antioppressivepractice]

Well it seems that there is a General category and an Aboriginal Category. Then there is certain considerations one may list on their personal statement that may include Equity, Work or Life Experience, Performance Considerations or Diversity. It states in the Work or Life Experience section that "For some applicants, work or life experience, rather than academic achievement is the best indicator of suitability and capacity for legal education. For example this would apply to candidates who:

-Did not pursue any post-secondary education, or
-Have been out of an academic environment for many years

Such applicants may wish to highlight ways in which their experiences demonstrate that they possess the skills necessary to succeed in law school

So it seems there are those applicants who have NO post secondary education and then some who have been out of school for some time. I too was under the impression it was only for people who had no university education until I had met with Admissions and the lady told me I could check it off even though I had an undergraduate and graduate degree.

[maturestudent]

BetterCallSaul, on 05 February 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

See http://lawstudents.c...__1#entry149720

Thanks Saul.

I had the interview, and some of the questions were like the ones describe in that link, but generally I found it not as highly structured. The people were quite pleasant, and we had a friendly chat. I had the impression that the key thing they were looking for is to ensure that I would be a reasonable fit, and that I had properly thought through the reasons for going to law school. When somebody has already established a career in another field, as I have, it is not surprising that they would want to scrutinize his motives for making a major change. They don't want to have a crank on their hands.

Not too long after the interview, I received an e-mail notification that I had been accepted. I found the interview a positive process. I actually feel a greater sense of accomplishment from being accepted at Osgoode, where I made my case in person, than at U of T, where I was anonymously accepted through my paper credentials.

Now I have to decide between them. Having a choice is good.

[BetterCallSaul]

Congratulations!

And best of luck on your decision.

[antioppressivepractice]

maturestudent, on 22 February 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Thanks Saul.

I had the interview, and some of the questions were like the ones describe in that link, but generally I found it not as highly structured. The people were quite pleasant, and we had a friendly chat. I had the impression that the key thing they were looking for is to ensure that I would be a reasonable fit, and that I had properly thought through the reasons for going to law school. When somebody has already established a career in another field, as I have, it is not surprising that they would want to scrutinize his motives for making a major change. They don't want to have a crank on their hands.

Not too long after the interview, I received an e-mail notification that I had been accepted. I found the interview a positive process. I actually feel a greater sense of accomplishment from being accepted at Osgoode, where I made my case in person, than at U of T, where I was anonymously accepted through my paper credentials.

Now I have to decide between them. Having a choice is good.

Thats great news, congratulations on your acceptance!