Jump to content
anonymous95

Accepted at McGill 2018

Recommended Posts

Got accepted this afternoon, so thought I'd start a post! 

GPA: 3.87, LSAT 169, solid softs and reference letters. (Comparatively) weak French. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, legallybl0nd said:

Congratulations!! How exciting! Did you receive an email, or on Minerva? Great stats! 

I received an email, and now Minerva shows as "Admitted." My official letter will apparently be available tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, roadrunner said:

@anonymous95 Congratulations! You have great stats. Did you have a French interview first?

I didn't even have a French interview! I have decent French experience, as in I've studied it in university a bit, and managed to take an upper year interdisciplinary French course, but I never studied French until university. I openly admitted in my personal statement that I'm not fully bilingual, but that I'm willing to work on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@anonymous95 Got it. Congratulations again! We have very similar stats....like, very similar, haha. Hoping that means McGill will be sending me some good news soon. I feel great about my French but I'm not sure if they will want to give me a French interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats to those admitted and best wishes for all those awaiting !! Quick question: is there any chance that a mature applicant with fairly  strong profile gets a decision early in the process ?

Edited by Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to note on here that for other applicants not to worry. A very small amount of acceptances go out (proportionally) in December at McGill. Think of it as a pre-early acceptance round. To those who've gotten in, congrats and I hope you choose McGill! To those who are sitting anxiously, don't worry, a very large number of acceptances will go out in January and beyond (moreso than other schools, proportionally).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Accepted as well!!! 4.0 GPA, 162 LSAT, strong ECs.

I won't be accepting my spot, so I hope this opens up some space for others eager to get into McGill. Congrats to everyone!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, katefromlawschool said:

Accepted as well!!! 4.0 GPA, 162 LSAT, strong ECs.

I won't be accepting my spot, so I hope this opens up some space for others eager to get into McGill. Congrats to everyone!

Congrats! How strong is your French, if you don't mind? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2017 at 1:02 PM, katefromlawschool said:

Accepted as well!!! 4.0 GPA, 162 LSAT, strong ECs.

I won't be accepting my spot, so I hope this opens up some space for others eager to get into McGill. Congrats to everyone!

 

On 11/30/2017 at 12:42 AM, Anonymous170 said:

I also got accepted this afternoon!

GPA: 3.9, LSAT 170, French Minor from undergrad

 

Congrats to you both! Did either of you have a french interview? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 40lawz said:

 

Congrats to you both! Did either of you have a french interview? 

Thank you! I didn't have a french interview, but I indicated in my application that I'm fairly bilingual 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-11-30 at 8:15 AM, Knight said:

Congrats to those admitted and best wishes for all those awaiting !! Quick question: is there any chance that a mature applicant with fairly  strong profile gets a decision early in the process ?

Mature applicants would normally go through an interview with two professors. There might have been other dates, but last year I am only aware of such interviews being held in late March, with decisions being taken a few weeks after.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, McGlaw said:

@katefromlawschool

@Anonymous170

@anonymous95

 

Well done, guys! What was your cGPA in percentage (prior to OLSAS conversion)? 

My school doesn’t actually give percentile grades. Anything from 90-100 is an A+, 85-89 is A, and 80-84 is an A-. It’s on a 12 point scale. This screws up our gpas because if you get a 99% in one class and a 89% in another, you’d get an 11.5 average which is around an 87.5, since they average the 12 point scores rather than the percentage scores. 

But for comparison, my grades were:

first year: 2 A+s, 1 A, 2 A-s

second year: 4 A+s, 1 A

third year: 5 A+s

fourth year: 4 A+s, 1 A

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Ambit aren't you a 0L? Let's not speak with such confidence when you have literally zero exposure to the recruiting procedure from either side of the fence.
    • Hey OP, I would highly recommend just fool proofing the LG section using the 7Sage method. It is literally the best, IMO. Also, contrary to what has already been said, I highly recommend not doing LG sections from tests 1-30. They are very, very different from what you will encounter on test day! Believe me when I say that! After having mastered the games from 52 - 80s, I went back to try the LG sections from PTs 1-30 and they were very hard and very different and absolutely nothing like many of the recent games. Sometimes, those games also have like 2-3 misc. games (which you can't foolproof since they are always different). I would recommend just using PTs 52 - to the latest ones (80 something now) and fool proof those. By the end, you will be very prepared to handle virtually all games come your way test day. Hope that helps     ALSO: I think after fool proofing approximately 10 LG sections, you will start to approach the LG section almost unconsciously and on automatic, which is nice  
    • Graduation awards, as far as I know, have gone out. The rest I am not sure. Nevermind, I thought you meant graduation bursaries. So I actually don't know the answer to your question at all, haha
    • She provides that a decision having an unjustified and disproportionate impact (“that seriously infringes”, in your words) on a Charter right will always be unreasonable, but she doesn’t then say the LSBC’s decision was unjustified and disproportionate (or seriously infringed). She instead meets the majority and dissent halfway by reasoning that while the decision’s negative impact “could not be characterized as minor”, its benefits were nonetheless proportionate, rendering the decision reasonable. "With respect" followed by brow beating. They straight up called out McLachlin and Karakatsanis by saying they were hypocrites, citing extra-judicial commentary. Unbecoming to say the least.   The denial of TWU’s proposed law school with the mandatory covenant is itself good: (i) The covenant likely runs afoul of provincial human rights legislation; (ii) the covenant itself is unnecessary and ridiculous, (not convinced by the concurring or dissenting reasons to the contrary); and (iii) a ruling that TWU Law with the Covenant could go ahead would, however reasoned, reflect poorly on the legal profession because much of the general public wouldn’t appreciate the rationale behind such a decision. But the reasoning of this case, as you allude to, leaves much to be desired. I agree with Cote and Brown when they say the majority’s analysis of the LPA is wrong. They hit the nail on the head when they said that the scope of the LSBC’s statutory authority defines how it carries out its public interest mandate, and not the other way around. The LPA’s provisions and mandate relate to matters relevant to the governance of the legal profession and its constituent parts, and, in that way, they empower the LSBC to “control the doorway to the profession, not to decide who knocks on the door.” Equal access to the legal profession and diversity in the legal profession are, indeed, distinct from the duty to ensure competent practice and the majority decision does leave you wondering if things like tuition fees are also fair game (though I think bursaries, scholarships, loans, etc. weaken the dissent’s analogy). Beyond that and maybe their comments on the problems with weighing Charter rights and Charter values, the dissent goes off course and I prefer the concurring reasons. Brown and Cote’s diversity argument is borderline disingenuous. It stems from a conflation of “religious law schools” and “religious law schools with unnecessarily discriminatory covenants”. smh when they used the idea of religion being about “religious relationships” and when they said qualities that go to a person’s self-identity are at stake for TWU community members. On that note, I’m surprised McLachlin went as far as to say the LSBC’s decision deprives TWU community members of the ability to express their beliefs in institutional form and from associating in the manner they believe their faith requires. That is quite a stretch. I also think the dissent are off on the “reasonableness” piece when they say the Benchers abdicated their duty. I see no issue in conducting the reasonableness analysis when an elected administrative body carefully considers a proposition (or “deliberates”), determines it’s leaning one way on that proposition but thinks either of two solutions is reasonable, then puts that proposition to a referendum (though the Benchers likely knew what the outcome of the referendum would be, and also didn’t want to deal with the fallout of approving TWU Law with the covenant).
    • I would mention it for sure, my partner moved to Canada from Iran around 5 years ago as well and deinfltey the religious police.will be picky about stuff like that  Like.providence mentioned relate it back to law and keep it effiencnt there isn't that much space so show how that motivated you to be practice  law, she mentioned a few great ways of.how to do that, be honest and make.it personal because it will show and reflect positively In terms of gpa you have a OK cgpa ( just make.sure this the olsas cgpa) and  a very good  l2 and b3, for osgoode your cgpa and lower end lsat will not make you a strong applicant per say ( I think 2016 median cgpa was 3.67 and median lsat 162)and for u of t your b3 is competitive BUT your lsat will be a serious problem here because their median is 166, BUT for both schools they have "holistic" approaches so sometimes candidate get in who don't necceqaily meet the medians but they have other aspects or qualities that would be an asset to the incoming class and also prove their aptitude for law and plus your kinda close to the medians for osgoode so I woudlny be shocked u of t i think your lsat is hurting you a lot though and you would need that up significantly to go there  Ottawa is also a cgpa school but your lsat will be good I think, but your cgpa is not bad at all so maybe? I honestly don't know much about them I've never seen class stats for them I think western and queens would be solid schools to apply to as well, your l2 is above their last posted class median yoir cgpa is right at their class median, plus your lsat is closer to their class median of 161 albeit still a bit below  I would also apply to Windsor as well  they like personal statements tailored to social justice btw  If your lsat hit 166 or higher I think you have a strong shot at u of t, 164 or higher a strong shot at Osgoode ), western and queens 161 or higher  strong shot too especially since your b2/l2 beats the median for both and your cgpa beats the median for last year's class for cgpa for queens, but that guarantees nothing this whole admission process is a little random somtieme, deinfltey apply and I'm pretty confident you get in somewhere, stenghrn your LOT and personal statement and ec list as much as possible, and if you can try to get higher on the lsat I would.personally do so   Good luck!    
×