Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi guys. 

So here's my concern: I did horribly in 1L first semester exams. 

I got a C+, C and D+. Yes I know. Horrible. 

Anyway, I am in Osgoode and due to the strike and fear of getting more Cs, decided to pass/fail all my other second semester exams. I passed all of them. 

Now, heading into OCIs, what should I be doing? I don't expect to be getting offers from Bay Street jobs, in fact I never wanted them to begin with. My question is mainly about mid size/small firms. 

Should I be addressing it? Should I be explaining my strengths while trying to tell them that despite my grades, I will be a strong worker and a good candidate (I have a lot of prior experience in and out of Canada). Is it a no go and I'm pretty much doomed not to get a job for summer of 2L?

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's going to be really difficult to get any OCIs during the 2L recruit. You'll likely need to do quite well in first semester of second year and hope to work that into a 2L job during the informal recruit that occurs throughout the spring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, concernedlawstudent said:

Hi guys. 

So here's my concern: I did horribly in 1L first semester exams. 

I got a C+, C and D+. Yes I know. Horrible. 

Anyway, I am in Osgoode and due to the strike and fear of getting more Cs, decided to pass/fail all my other second semester exams. I passed all of them. 

Now, heading into OCIs, what should I be doing? I don't expect to be getting offers from Bay Street jobs, in fact I never wanted them to begin with. My question is mainly about mid size/small firms. 

Should I be addressing it? Should I be explaining my strengths while trying to tell them that despite my grades, I will be a strong worker and a good candidate (I have a lot of prior experience in and out of Canada). Is it a no go and I'm pretty much doomed not to get a job for summer of 2L?

Thoughts?

If that is the case I would work on having an absolutely stellar CV and cover letter. As well I would beef up/talk up my extracurriculars as much as possible. You should also try to focus in on an area of practice and make sure you pick courses and activities that complement that area. But I think it is going to be tough to get any interviews with those grades. You could still get a summer job but you'd have to improve your 2L grades and target small firms that don't participate in the organized recruitment or may not even advertise at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it's a clinic or something, you are very unlikely to find a 2L summer job. Your main thing, for the future, should be to develop experience and exposure in the specific area(s) of law that you are interested in. No matter when, down the road, you don't want to be going into interviews with nothing to say but "I'll work really hard and despite what my transcript suggest, I'm really smart." Everyone says that. And most students will have that and far better grades than you. The way you can set yourself apart is with relevant experience and demonstrated interest in specific area(s) of law. It's concerning to me that you can't seem to nail that down. Fix that issue asap. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Hi guys. 

So here's my concern: I did horribly in 1L first semester exams. 

I got a C+, C and D+. Yes I know. Horrible. 

Anyway, I am in Osgoode and due to the strike and fear of getting more Cs, decided to pass/fail all my other second semester exams. I passed all of them. 

Now, heading into OCIs, what should I be doing? I don't expect to be getting offers from Bay Street jobs, in fact I never wanted them to begin with. My question is mainly about mid size/small firms. 

Should I be addressing it? Should I be explaining my strengths while trying to tell them that despite my grades, I will be a strong worker and a good candidate (I have a lot of prior experience in and out of Canada). Is it a no go and I'm pretty much doomed not to get a job for summer of 2L?

Thoughts?

That was a terrible decision.

If you got poor marks in your first semester, you should've sought advice and tried new techniques to improve your grades. By making your exams pass/fail, you hid from your troubles rather than confronting them. 

You need to have 1L grades. Pass/fail are not grades. Even in a small firm, you're going to be questioned on the fact that you have no grades for 1L. Your answer (if answered truthfully) will be: "Because I was scared of getting poor grades". That's not going to go down well.

You've really fucked yourself over on this one. Good luck.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, thegoodlaw said:

That was a terrible decision.

If you got poor marks in your first semester, you should've sought advice and tried new techniques to improve your grades. By making your exams pass/fail, you hid from your troubles rather than confronting them. 

You need to have 1L grades. Pass/fail are not grades. Even in a small firm, you're going to be questioned on the fact that you have no grades for 1L. Your answer (if answered truthfully) will be: "Because I was scared of getting poor grades". That's not going to go down well.

You've really fucked yourself over on this one. Good luck.

It’s really kind of stupid that the school offers that option - I can’t see how it helps anybody. If the point is supposed to be reducing anxiety, it’s really just deferring it, as we’re seeing here. 

Be that as it may, OP can’t undo that decision, so s/he has to move forward with the pass/fail grades, and start by figuring out how to do better in 2L, and by picking an area of practice and developing a CV. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP may want to consider looking into firms with cycles in the winter, when they'll have their 2L Fall grades. If you have Cs/Ds in 1L, but have Bs in 2L, you'd have a legitimate 'I struggled, but have worked to find a better strategy' story to tell. I'm pretty sure non-TO markets (Ottawa [non-IP], London, Hamilton) have recruitment cycles in January

Share this post


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

It’s really kind of stupid that the school offers that option - I can’t see how it helps anybody. If the point is supposed to be reducing anxiety, it’s really just deferring it, as we’re seeing here. 

 

Could it be designed for 3Ls who already have articles lined up, who just need a degree but don't need to maintain certain grades?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 3rdGenLawStudent said:

Could it be designed for 3Ls who already have articles lined up, who just need a degree but don't need to maintain certain grades?

I had to take the P/F option on 2 courses. I had articles lined up already. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Luckycharm said:

I had to take the P/F option on 2 courses. I had articles lined up already. 

 

I figured, that makes more sense. Thanks for confirming!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-06-11 at 12:48 PM, providence said:

It’s really kind of stupid that the school offers that option - I can’t see how it helps anybody

It was because of the strike, and mainly to help students who were materially affected by it. Obviously, you can't drop the courses, so as a compromise, the P/F option was given for all second semester courses. But it was an all-or-nothing deal, so if you only had one or two classes materially affected, well, too bad.

Anyway, it was basically highly advised not to take it unless: (1) you were in third year; (2) you had articling already lined up; and (3) your grades were otherwise good. Not to mention, you should only have taken it if you were materially affected by the strike. Taking the option in 1L is pretty crazy if you want to go for OCIs, even if you were affected by the strike, unless the effect was so substantial you were at risk of getting a ton of bad marks.

OP - you're gonna be in for a huge challenge. I don't think you will succeed at getting OCIs. With your low grades and an entire other term of CRs, I don't know if a firm will want to use one of its interview slots on you. My advice would be to figure out why your grades were so poor in first term, improve your approach to studying and taking exams, and do better next year so you can participate meaningfully in the articling recruit. If you have an entire year of even average (B) grades, your chances will vastly improve in getting something out of the recruit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed with @Ryn. Also, if it's possible, I would go see your exams that you pass/fail optioned and see how you did, see if you improved from first term, see how else you could improve, etc.

 

I warn that it may end up really shitty and stressful for you if you did do Well. But at this point that's a sunk cost. Just go see how you've done and try to fix the scenario. You're not lost by a long shot. Lots of employers in the articling recruit next year. Just gotta pull up your bootstraps and organize your next steps.

Edited by pzabbythesecond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ryn said:

It was because of the strike, and mainly to help students who were materially affected by it. Obviously, you can't drop the courses, so as a compromise, the P/F option was given for all second semester courses. But it was an all-or-nothing deal, so if you only had one or two classes materially affected, well, too bad.

Anyway, it was basically highly advised not to take it unless: (1) you were in third year; (2) you had articling already lined up; and (3) your grades were otherwise good. Not to mention, you should only have taken it if you were materially affected by the strike. Taking the option in 1L is pretty crazy if you want to go for OCIs, even if you were affected by the strike, unless the effect was so substantial you were at risk of getting a ton of bad marks.

OP - you're gonna be in for a huge challenge. I don't think you will succeed at getting OCIs. With your low grades and an entire other term of CRs, I don't know if a firm will want to use one of its interview slots on you. My advice would be to figure out why your grades were so poor in first term, improve your approach to studying and taking exams, and do better next year so you can participate meaningfully in the articling recruit. If you have an entire year of even average (B) grades, your chances will vastly improve in getting something out of the recruit.

May be a stupid question but how would the strike “materially affect” law students such that they couldn’t get a decent letter grade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pzabbythesecond said:

Agreed with @Ryn. Also, if it's possible, I would go see your exams that you pass/fail optioned and see how you did, see if you improved from first term, see how else you could improve, etc.

 

I warn that it may end up really shitty and stressful for you if you did do Well. But at this point that's a sunk cost. Just go see how you've done and try to fix the scenario. You're not lost by a long shot. Lots of employers in the articling recruit next year. Just gotta pull up your bootstraps and organize your next steps.

Would a pass/fail exam be marked that way though? Or would you need to go through it with the prof?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, providence said:

Would a pass/fail exam be marked that way though? Or would you need to go through it with the prof?

Valid point. I assumed it's marked and then just translated on the transcript because that's how my school does it. Good catch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, providence said:

May be a stupid question but how would the strike “materially affect” law students such that they couldn’t get a decent letter grade?

I guess that would be your own judgement call. Some of my courses were affected quite substantially (e.g., one switched completely online and the instructor had difficulty making the tech work). If you drove to campus, you sometimes had to wait an hour to get in because of the picketers, prompting a lot of people not to come and therefore be forced to miss class. That sort of thing.

9 minutes ago, providence said:

Would a pass/fail exam be marked that way though? Or would you need to go through it with the prof?

The prof marks you normally. He or she has no idea you elected P/F, as the grade is changed by Student Services. So, presumably, you could review your exam with the prof. Though, I recall being told in some official communication regarding the P/F option that we weren't allowed to solicit our grades from the professors if we chose to opt into P/F. I could just be misremembering, so it might make sense to double check.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The strike did not materially impact law students unless you were looking for excuses to skip classes and/or take the C/NC option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been less than union-friendly on this discussion elsewhere, so let me fly the flag now. The strike did, at least potentially, affect law students very significantly unless they were willing to cross union picket lines. Which some people, quite legitimately, are not willing to do. In fact I consider it one of the great ironies of Osgoode and the supposedly social-justice-committed cohort they brag about that they care about everything in theory, but in practice, as soon as it gets in their way, they stop giving a shit. That's another topic, I guess, but I'd be very conflicted about those picket lines. As I said elsewhere, I'd probably end up standing on the edge of the picket telling everyone their union was run by idiots and they should be embarrassed by it. But still - you either believe in collective bargaining or you don't. And if you do, you sometimes need to live with people using their power in ways you don't approve of. Otherwise, you're that guy who believes in democracy until everyone else votes in someone you don't like.

So, yeah. Policies at Osgoode take in the possibility - even if it's true in few cases - that students may be unwilling to cross the picket lines. And truly, good for the ones who won't. Agree, disagree, think they are right or think they are wrong - law students who are willing to pay a price for what they believe in should be applauded. Law students who believe in the theory but reject the practice as soon as they find it inconvenient should confront some hard truths, when they start applying for those jobs at union-side law firms and try to pretend they actually believe in this stuff.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would crossing a picket line (especially as a consumer!) suggest that you don't believe in collective bargaining? I firmly believe in collective bargaining, but have crossed picket lines both as an employee and a consumer. I believe in collective bargaining, but don't believe it's my job as an outsider to the bargaining unit to weigh in on who should get the better bargain. Let them fight it out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Diplock said:

I've been less than union-friendly on this discussion elsewhere, so let me fly the flag now. The strike did, at least potentially, affect law students very significantly unless they were willing to cross union picket lines. Which some people, quite legitimately, are not willing to do. In fact I consider it one of the great ironies of Osgoode and the supposedly social-justice-committed cohort they brag about that they care about everything in theory, but in practice, as soon as it gets in their way, they stop giving a shit. That's another topic, I guess, but I'd be very conflicted about those picket lines. As I said elsewhere, I'd probably end up standing on the edge of the picket telling everyone their union was run by idiots and they should be embarrassed by it. But still - you either believe in collective bargaining or you don't. And if you do, you sometimes need to live with people using their power in ways you don't approve of. Otherwise, you're that guy who believes in democracy until everyone else votes in someone you don't like.

So, yeah. Policies at Osgoode take in the possibility - even if it's true in few cases - that students may be unwilling to cross the picket lines. And truly, good for the ones who won't. Agree, disagree, think they are right or think they are wrong - law students who are willing to pay a price for what they believe in should be applauded. Law students who believe in the theory but reject the practice as soon as they find it inconvenient should confront some hard truths, when they start applying for those jobs at union-side law firms and try to pretend they actually believe in this stuff.

I’d walk through without a second thought. Not my battle. 

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!    
×