Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/15/21 in all areas

  1. 49 points
    Just gonna grab some popcorn before this thread pops off 👀
  2. 32 points
    Woah, I'm shook! Got accepted via email. cGPA: 2.96 LSAT: 161 filled in part B. I have been lurking here throughout the whole process and wanted to thank everyone for posting (even though I haven't myself). Good Luck everyone! 😁
  3. 29 points
    I never thought I would be posting in Osgoode's accepted thread BUT here I am! Accepted yesterday (April 15th). cGPA: 3.4 LSAT: 162 Filled out part B. Last year I was on the verge of giving up and now here I am with an Osgoode offer 😌 I hope my low cGPA gives hope to others in the same boat.
  4. 29 points
    Making this about Ryerson at all is a distraction to the main point. You're asking why create more seats in law school. Which is perhaps a fair question, but it could be about any newer law program, as Hegdis has pointed out, or about any expansion in existing programs, such as Ottawa's fairly recent increase in class size. So, what you're really asking is, how many seats in law school are enough? How many graduating law students should there be? And of course I have my own opinions on the matter, but without even pushing them heavily at this time, of course there are legitimate arguments to be made for more vs. less. For both sides of that discussion. If you imagine there cannot be, then that is definitely you losing perspective. If you want to hear the most compelling argument for more vs. less, here it is. That's that you aren't as special as you think you are. And neither am I. It's that the legal profession, like any other profession, is not and should not be exempt from competition and from market forces. I mean, that's really the concern lurking behind your belief that we don't need more graduating law students, right? Because it's already hard for some of us to find jobs. Well, it's good for us if there aren't many lawyers looking for work, but it's bad for people who employ lawyers - both individually and institutionally. And a basic understanding of markets and competition will obviously prove that. My own feelings on this subject are complicated, and do not fall entirely on one side or the other. But if you cannot see how or why there are valid arguments to say the legal profession should not be completely protected from competition, and that employment need not be guaranteed for all law graduates, then again, that's because you lack perspective. Repeat after me. Lawyers are not special. No more so than any other professional on the marketplace. Get over yourself. And good luck.
  5. 28 points
  6. 22 points
    It matters to me, a non-big law articling student who's treating this thread like an episode of Suits. Don't make me wait until next week to find out if Goodmans is doing a full hireback!
  7. 22 points
    Not to pick on you, but this is an excellent example of why @albertabean's suggestion regarding more diverse adcomms, and why U of T's recent decision to launch the Black Student Application Process, are so essential. It's okay to be uncomfortable when reading or hearing racial slurs. Most people are. And often, when black or other minority writers use racial slurs, it's supposed to make you uncomfortable. But your job as an adcomm member is to look past the discomfort you feel and consider the actual merits of the application and the reason the applicant chose to outline that particular experience. To say that it is never appropriate to use a racial slur in a personal statement—let alone to issue a blanket prohibition on referring to the slur, doing anything remotely close to referring to the slur, or "danc[ing] around" the slur—is incredibly problematic. To go so far as to say you would oppose a qualified applicant's admission solely because they refer to a racial slur is only more so (and that's without getting into your suggestion that discussing difficult topics head on is indicative of a lack of cleverness). A lot of good personal statements are going to talk about things that make you uncomfortable. That might be racial slurs, but it also might be other "mature" topics, such as sexual assault, child abuse, or one's experience in refugee camps. And while good applicants will use those experiences to demonstrate positive qualities—such as resilience or a desire to positively alter social institutions—they're also going to have to actually address those situations in order to do so effectively. The reason it's inadvisable for OP to include racial slurs in their personal statement is because, unfortunately, some adcomm members are going to draw this type of negative inference or are otherwise going to be unable to read past their discomfort. And the stakes for the individual are sufficiently high that it's not worth the risk, even though the problem is truly with the adcomm who is rendered so uncomfortable by the relation of someone's lived experience that they are unable to do their job.
  8. 21 points
    I never thought I would go out my way to make an account. However, I got accepted April 15th but I got an email on April 16th! Glory to God I’m still so shocked. GPA (OLSAS): 3.82 LSAT: 143 August, 150 January I had regular extra-curriculars and volunteering no research student or doing social justice work in Africa loool. I been following this forum all application process nervous I wouldn’t get anywhere with such a low LSAT, but I am here to testify that God knew my story and got me in. If you are feeling discouraged, please believe you have put all the work in and trust that he will do the rest just depend on him and ask for his guidance. The tears, frustration, anxiety and fear it’s all over now. I also got into Western but I’ll be accepting Osgoode. Best wishes to the rest!
  9. 20 points
    This is complete bullshit and an incredibly insular perspective that is totally ignorant of what most people's lives are like.
  10. 19 points
    Accepted today, notified via email. 3.33 CGPA and 163 LSAT. My first acceptance in 3 years of applications.
  11. 18 points
    Ugh you are in the running as one of the worst posters on this forum.
  12. 18 points
    You know, it always comes across as dickish any time you quarrel on any level with diversity, inclusion, etc. But you can't logically have this both ways. If Ryerson is admitting students who, for whatever reason, would not otherwise be given an opportunity to attend law school and by doing so are expanding diversity then okay, let's talk about that. But for that to be true, these students would need to be applicants who weren't admitted anywhere else. The issue behind all of these wonderful assertions about how Ryerson isn't applying lower standards - just different and more inclusive standards - is that it relies on the belief that the admissions committee at Ryerson is just better at identifying a strong law student and future lawyer than, well, anyone else anywhere trying to do that. And frankly, that's a hell of a claim. Say what you want about other law schools and their priorities - I cannot imagine anyone would disagree that they are all at least trying to find the best class of law students they can find. Different schools have different entrance criteria based on differing (though similar) philosophies around how to identify a likely candidate. So yes, there's room for a range of opinion. But the bottom line is this. If Ryerson admits a student that no one else would have admitted, it means either (a) they've admitted a student who would have been too weak to get into any law school previous to opening this new one, or else (b) it's because Ryerson's admissions committee is smarter and better at this than anyone else in Canada. You can choose to believe any of these options, and I'm not here to argue with you. But I'm tired of people trying to have it all ways. It isn't like other schools fail to recognize the value of diversity, of trying to account for different backgrounds, etc. Every school claims and tries to do that. So what's going on at Ryerson? Are they admitting weaker candidates, or are they magically better at this than anyone else anywhere, or...what's the third option? It's an interesting discussion. It's an important discussion. It's a valid discussion. But let's at least have the discussion properly. Because pretending there's some way to have it all is just intellectually dishonest.
  13. 16 points
    I came to Canada in my 22-y-o with a oversea bachelor's degree, to pursue a master's degree. I use my Chinese name only not a European one. I don't know a single rule of hockey. I am actually a new immigrant with poor English. But Canadian law schools still embraced me with offers and I'm going to pay (I will enroll this September) domestic tuition as a PR student, though I'm not a Canada citizen. I think it's the greatness of Canada and Canadian law school. I am not there yet but I feel super optimistically.
  14. 13 points
    I don't think it's appropriate to be questioning the validity of people's [email protected] has a long posting history on this site and certainly has demonstrated reasons to receive accommodations.
  15. 13 points
    GOT REJECTED LAST YEAR AND NOW I GOT WAITLISTED. LETS GO! I’m just so happy to hear back from them honestly, I wasn’t really expecting to get in seeing how competitive it was this year. Waitlisted at 11:44am MT too! L2 GPA - 3.85~3.9 LSAT: Cancel, 151, 158 Completed the diversity section related to my ethnicity. Not mature applicant. ECs (ofc subjective, but I did fill out all 10 spots): Mental Health Worker (CMHA), Piano instructor, Volunteer coordinator, Government EI Officer, Swim/Lifeguard instructor, Editor They told me that they aren’t in a position to provide offers? I am still assuming this is what they tell everyone and they waitlisted me because I’m lacking in an area to be accepted and from what I thought, we still have spots left. Also, they have not accepted any regular candidates under LSAT 160 so not expecting acceptance. But so happy to get some closure ps. Thanks for everyone on this forum, I don’t have friends/connections in law so this group has been very supportive.
  16. 13 points
    @McGillObama I find your posts a little concerning here and not for the reasons others have rightly pointed out, or even the comments you made about intelligence and lawyers, etc. It concerns me that you may be going to law school with beliefs and value systems that are quite narrow-minded and judgmental. Look, I don't care how intelligent you are. I really don't. I care about whether you are unbiased and objective enough to treat your peers well, participate intelligently in law school classes and legal clinics, and be the kind of person a client would want to have as their lawyer. Leaving your academic intelligence aside, your emotional intelligence is clearly lacking right now (and it's ok if you are young and inexperienced as I am assuming you are now). You come across as someone that would be quick to jump to irrational conclusions and not act in the best interests of your clients as you have all these pre-conceived notions about people and different communities. I'm not really knocking you down here. Take this as advice and an opportunity to learn. Many of the law students and lawyers here had similar values and belief systems as you before they (we) went to law school and starting practicing in the real world. Think about the fact that as a lawyer, you will likely be servicing very real, ordinary, average intelligence people in most cases, and what kind of person you want to be when acting in their interests, and how you want to carry out your responsibilities and proceed through life. Seriously, who the fuck cares about this law vs. physics, lawyer innate intelligence, etc. BS. This shit doesn't concern me at all in the real world. As someone going to law school wanting to be a lawyer, you need to let go of your preconceived notions and biases of what being a lawyer entails, and be more open-minded and willing to interact with people and communities that are different from you. This will take you a lot farther in life than your biochemistry degree, your IQ, how many publications you have, and so on. The fact that you are in the process of going to law school, yet lingering on what your high school peers are doing and what their grades in high school may have been, is quite alarming. You do not want to carry this personality into law school because it reeks of toxicity and negativity. I can assure you that even if you were a law school medalist, I would not want to be your friend. And your peers will remember who you were during your time there when you all graduate and go out into the real world. So please, for your own sake, be kind and gentle to yourself and others, and go into law school with a little more respect for your peers, and openness to learning from others and about their different experiences and value systems. I wish you good luck in your future endeavours.
  17. 13 points
    Why is your beef only with Ryerson though and not with Queen's recently increased class size and Ottawa's increased class size a while back? I've connected with many of the current 1L students at Ryerson and am excited to see what they bring to the legal profession. They came across as passionate individuals wanting to pursue access to justice, public interest, legal technology, and help society in general. A lot of the students accepted at Ryerson are mature students and BIPOC who also bring good perspectives and life experience to the legal profession. Many of these students would have been completely shut out of pursuing a legal career or have gone abroad if Ryerson did not accept them. As a law student, I can see why this is giving you anxiety if you are worried about job competition, but you need to face saturation and competition in literally every other field, including healthcare and business professions. If you were an employed lawyer, I think you'd be more balanced in your perspective and see the value in having different voices, perspectives, and experiences represented in the legal profession.
  18. 12 points
    Hello, I am very tired. I keep trying to find the impetus to study but coming up empty. I am overcome with apathy, exhaustion, and frustration at the state of *everything*. I'm cognizant of the fact that my exams are fully graded (don't even get me started), but I am simply burned out after a garbage year of zoom school and pandemic life. I can't be the only one feeling this way. How are y'all coping? What are you doing to get through this?
  19. 12 points
    You came to the wrong neighbourhood, son.
  20. 12 points
    OP, consider taking a breather. How many threads have you made in just a couple of weeks/months? There’s such a thing as over-analyzing/researching.
  21. 12 points
  22. 12 points
    this is great, im gonna use this next time i want to reject the opinions of the informed in favour of the uninformed
  23. 11 points
    Nobody's saying that, and I'm not sure who you're trying to impress with first-year physics concepts. Multiple people in this thread have science and engineering degrees. Rote memorization or basic scientific analysis isn't impressive, which is why we have unemployed and chronically underpaid PhD grads.
  24. 11 points
    Absolutely, assuming a reasonable starting point in terms of natural aptitudes, just about anyone could learn to be a good lawyer. Just like I could learn to be a good accountant. But here's an important qualifier. I never would learn to be a good accountant because I am not interested in that work. In fact, on standardized testing, I apparently have very strong mathematical aptitudes - stronger than my language aptitude. And yet I've gravitated into a career that's entirely about language and not at all about math. And I've gotten good at it (I hope) because I find it interesting and it holds my attention. My concern, framed around the OP's many threads, is this. You seem to keep asking about a career in law like you're looking to settle into a job that pays well, looks good on LinkedIn, and doesn't otherwise demand too much of you. I may be being unfair to you right now, and you might actually have very strong motivations towards legal work that are not otherwise apparent in what you've posted. If so, great. But if not, I really think you might want to consider this problem. Saying that you could if sufficiently motivated learn to be a good lawyer isn't much help if you aren't actually motivated. If you're really looking for a career that will give you maximum output in exchange for minimum input, you clearly aren't that motivated. Do something you care about and many of your repeated concerns take care of themselves. The advice may be trite, but it's also very true. If you really want to do law - and I mean if you want to do it for the sake of doing it, not because you think law will be the best return on effort you can find - I'm sure you have the capacity to become good at it. If not, find something else you actually want to do and get good at that.
  25. 11 points
    My used 1L textbooks were worth $420, and the Nintendo Switch bundle with Mario Odyssey came out to $420 after tax. It was one of the best trade deals in the history of trade deals.
  26. 11 points
    I believe that you are thinking of American law schools (and American choice schools that factor race in as part of a holistic review of all applicants. Not about Canada as I don't think that the same research to the level of depth has been done here. As others lambast @SNAILS, here is an article that summarizes a lot of the research that has been done in the USA on this topic. The model minority stereotype isn't as strong in Canada because we have protectionist systems that prevented that (eg. medical professionals from other jurisdictions have a difficult time being able to practice in Canada so highly educated immigrants didn't always choose Canada as their first choice. These populations place a high value on education and quite often are privileged where they come from. Many are hardcore tiger parents. Whereas all of the first generation immigrant parents that were around when I was growing up had come from very humble beginnings. This an oversimplified analysis). Canadian stereotypes about model minorities have mostly (but not all) been created out of our immigrant populations quite literally making something out of nothing - quite often working in low wage jobs with the hope that their children will be the ones that lift the family out of poverty through higher education. The model minority stereotype both privileges' and disadvantages of those minority groups that don't meet the stereotype. They benefit because on first look, many hold members of these groups with high regard. But they people assume information about their background, which may not be true which impacts access to all kinds of programs, supports, etc. Anyways - this topic is about how law schools embrace diversity. I am not a law student yet so I don't know how to comment on that. I think that the answers today will look different in 5 years from now. Overall I can't say how I want them to - but I can say that I would like them to start looking at the language that they use. Case in point - UVIC's discretionary application states the following: "Describe the manner in which your ethnic background or culture has adversely affected your academic achievements or LSAT score." Reading that I think that someone that is not from a visible minority and/or Indigenous group wrote that. I get what they are trying to ask, but their language is so off. It isn't your ethnic background or culture has adversely affected your academic achievements or LSAT score, it is the racism, bigotry, systemic bias, patriarchy amongst 10,000 other things that have impacted your LSAT score. No one should feel that it is a bad thing being born into a certain background. We should be angered at the things in society that negatively impact people born into certain backgrounds.
  27. 11 points
    You’re free to say what you want on this forum (at least in so far as the mods don’t stop you). I’ve tried to suggest gently that you might want to consider these kinds of comments, and commenting on things you don’t know about, more carefully. But you should know that it’s very easy to piece together who someone is from their post histories, and posts like this, where you call some schools “bottom feeders” and your “thanks baby” style comments are the kind of thing that make people want to spend the five minutes perusing your post history and looking on LinkedIn for you. I say that as someone who made more than my share of dumb, ill considered comments that I regret on this forum before, particularly when I was a 1L. I hope that people don’t hold those comments against me, and that my decision to be more thoughtful in my responses will convince those that would hold it against me that I’m no longer that person or hold those beliefs. But it’s a lot easier if you just don’t burn that social capital in the first place. Just some food for thought, I’m going to tap out of this thread now.
  28. 11 points
    Yet another reason for thank you emails to be eliminated.
  29. 11 points
    As the biggest Ryerson skeptic on this website, I’m not going to once again rehash my opinion as to why Ryerson is poor choice. But I will say this. As it stands, if you’re interested in being a sole practitioner, working in a remote area or working in a small firm, attending Ryerson might be a sensible course of action, but only if you haven’t gotten into any objectively better schools with historically high placement rates and strong alumni networks. If you’re dead set on being a lawyer and Ryerson is the only offer you’ve received, it’s a far better option than going to a UK law school or a school like Bond in Australia. I will concede that. Whether it is worth the $20k per year price tag is an entirely different question. How Ryerson will perform in terms of placement remains to be seen. Apparently some students have been hired in the 1L recruit. That is a promising sign, although not enough to overcome my scepticism. As the legal market in Canada grows (expected to be roughly in line with GDP growth) I do think that in the future, Ryerson could see its day, contingent on the fact that the number of law grads remains somewhat consistent with market equilibrium. In my humble opinion, opening a law school when there is an obvious overage of law grads in Ontario was not a good thing, even with the implementation of LLP. A shortage of articling jobs translates directly into a shortage of associate positions. By its very nature, I think LLP is a poor alternative to articling, since 30% of positions in the 4 months work term are unpaid, and the digital learning in the other 4 months is no substitute for real life experience. I expect a large number of Ryerson grads to rely on LPP. All things considered, if you are a current non-Ryerson student at any Canadian law school right now, you have a serious interest in seeing that the number of law grads in Ontario remains consistent with what the market demands. An overage of grads is not a good thing for the profession. It will only increase competitiveness while driving down average salaries in the field. More of anything makes it less valuable. If you are a student at Windsor or Ottawa in particular, you have an especially strong interest in seeing that the number of freshly minted grads remains consistent with what the market demands, since some students at these schools already have problems in finding well-paid articling positions. The bottom line is that if you’re a Canadian law student right now, especially in Ontario, it would be in your interest to hope that additional law schools don’t spring up, saturating the market with grads. My worry is that since the LSO has endorsed Ryerson Law, more universities in Canada will see a financial opportunity to open up their own programs despite the obvious shortage in articling positions. Filling up seats in these programs will not be a challenge given the number of applicants every year that don’t secure a seat. In 10 years from now, is it possible that we will see a Laurentian Law? My other concern, (while less pressing), is that as it stands, the limited number of law school seats acts as a natural gatekeeper, ensuring that only the best and brightest make it into the profession. I think this is a good thing for the profession in general. I disagree with the idea that so long as there is a demand for law schools seats, we should continue to pump out more and more grads. In fact, I think certain schools should decrease enrolment. Here’s an article on the subject that echoes a lot of what I said: https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/news/general/lso-endorses-proposed-ryerson-law-school/274947
  30. 10 points
    Neither of your usernames strike confidence in me that either of you would know.
  31. 10 points
    So we’re just wading knee-deep into shitpost Sunday at this point?
  32. 10 points
    Mfs take third-year clinical biochemistry and start thinking they're the next Hilleman.
  33. 9 points
  34. 9 points
    Right off the bat, this is a serious inquiry and something I have been genuinely concerned about lately. This means a lot to me because I have lived in Canada all my life and identify myself as a die-hard hockey-crazed Canadian citizen. However, people tend to nitpick how I was not born here (came to Canada when I was less than one years old), appear non-white, and because I have a "foreign name" people would assume that I am an international student with poor English. Yes, I have had some tough years being bullied because of my name to the point I felt ashamed having it because teachers asked if I could change it to deter the bullying. Or having heard the infamous phrase off the street, “go back to your own country.” Of course, I by no means have experienced the worst and am proud to have tackled a lot of these barriers growing up, but I do feel is a responsibility to highlight that this is real problem that does happen in Canada. I can see how someone can assume common trends they experience which results to manifest into dangerous over-generalizations and stereotypes, but thankfully we are becoming more self-aware of these situations and striving towards promoting awareness and education. I really would like to start a productive conversation on how you may feel your university lacks or promotes diversity. Whether it is making racism/gender/sexism/etc workshops mandatory, having different applicant streams, or pretending nothing is wrong, I’m really curious. Is it enough? What do you envision being more appropriate during this day and age? If this wasn’t an experience you connect with, can you still think of things that could be done? Please keep in mind that we are all human, we are not perfect. Even universities make mistakes (lol), but I definitely think it is important to have dialogue acknowledging on how you feel whether your university is making an effort during this time. I don't think it hurts looking at ways we can improve and strive to be better :). Sending good vibes.
  35. 9 points
  36. 9 points
    This got a lot funnier than I could have expected. As a Rick and Morty fan with an IQ of 190 (I assume), I can confidently say that anything short of theoretical physics is essentially carpentry by another name. I mean, even here we can see a lower science student who struggles with basic reading comprehension.
  37. 9 points
    I graduated last year, so I'm probably in the best position I ever will be to do one of these. As a preliminary disclaimer, my experience with the zoom aspect was in the back half of my last semester, so I just didn't care about it at all. I'm also going to focus on things that, I think, set Osgoode apart from many other schools, particularly in Ontario. Every school has a "collegial environment" and fun clubs. I can't tell you if Osgoode's environment is more or less collegial than Queens, because I didn't do 1L at both schools. So me saying it does doesn't help you. Clinics – This was ultimately why I attended Osgoode, and I think it is Osgoode's one real defining characteristic compared to other schools. Osgoode offers a ton of clinics. Some of them are better than others—looking at you, Osgoode Business Clinic—but the overall quality is quite high and the number/diversity is unmatched by any Canadian law school. Career Prospects – Osgoode is one of a handful of schools in Canada that offers its graduates the ability to work anywhere in (English-speaking) Canada in more or less any setting. This isn't so much about Osgoode opening doors to you (I don't think any schools except perhaps McGill and U of T truly "open" doors that would otherwise be closed). Rather, it's about not closing doors before you've had the chance to prove you deserve to be considered. When it comes to hiring out of law school, either for summers or articling, there are firms that will just never consider applicants from certain schools. Bay Street Hiring – If you're dead set on working on Bay Street, don't speak French, and don't get into U of T, you should attend Osgoode. It routinely beats out the other non-U of T schools for placement rate in both the 1L and 2L recruits. (Appellate) Clerkships –This builds off the point about not closing doors, but Osgoode places a relatively large number of students at the ONSC, ONCA and SCC each year. It also does well with placing students in the Alberta and BC clerkship programs, although the raw numbers are lower due to a lack of interest in clerking out-of-province. You're still going to need very strong grades to get an appellate clerkship, and above average grades for a trial level clerkship, but all else being equal, your odds of getting a clerkship are better at Osgoode than a lot of other schools. Adjunct Professors – Osgoode benefits from a strong alumni network that includes a lot of alumni who serve as adjunct professors at the school. Osgoode is also purportedly located in Toronto. What that means for you is that you're going to have access to a lot of high end, practicing lawyers to learn from. Almost more importantly, it means you're going to be networking with high end, practicing lawyers regularly, many of whom can either give you a job or help you get one. I know people who articled at top litigation boutiques, top criminal law firms, and top family law firms who ended up there because one of the partners at the firm happened to serve as adjunct profs for trial advocacy or some similar course. Joint Programs – Osgoode offers four joint programs, including a joint program with U de M that lets you get a civil law degree with one additional year of study. I didn't do a joint program, but I heard nothing but good things from those who did. I also know several people who spun the JD/MES degree into articling positions at top firms practicing environmental law, which is otherwise quite difficult to break into. I imagine the JD/MES was instrumental in them receiving those jobs. Financial Aid (Your Mileage May Vary) – Osgoode has an overall pretty generous financial aid program, and a decent selection of upper year scholarships. I received an average of $13,000 or so per year from Osgoode, factoring in bursaries, scholarships, and course prizes. How much you get will vary depending on your financial need and academic performance, but it brings the price down to be relatively comparable to the other Ontario schools. Or at least, it did for me. Course Selection – Osgoode has what I understand to be the widest selection of courses available in any school across Canada. That means you can really customize your experience and tailor your course selection to your career. I considered applying for a letter of permission to UBC or UVic during 3L, and unfortunately found those schools didn't have the diversity of course offerings I had come to expect from my school (not to knock those schools; I'd take fewer courses in exchange for a 14k tuition cut). I took a lot of general courses, but people I know (particularly those who were passionate about family or crim) essentially only took courses in their area of interests in 2 and 3L. Diversity – Osgoode's class is one of the more diverse classes in Canada. There is still room for a lot of improvement, particularly when it comes to socioeconomic diversity, but the school is trying and it's reflected in the student body. As an example, Osgoode is the only university in Ontario that admitted more black students than their proportion of the populating in Ontario during the last two years. If you're a member of a minority group, Osgoode has very well funded clubs that can provide some really wonderful mentorship and networking opportunities (this also applies to women – OWN has a lot of good events). The JCR – I know what you're thinking: "BQ, did you run out of things to say and so you're resorting to mentioning the Wednesday night pop-up pub located in the law school where you routinely got drunk before going to class?" Yes. Yes I did. But, it's a fun and relatively unique part of Osgoode culture. You go, you buy a shot, you buy a beer, you sneak it out of the JCR and into your Securities Litigation class. Suddenly, being at school until 8:00 pm learning about National Instrument 51-102 is palatable. And it's the day before Thursday pub nights, so if you're doing it right you can just think of it as a pre-game for that!* *Don't do that. Drinking for more than 24 hours straight is generally inadvisable. As for the strikes, they're really what you make of them. I had a strike in my 1L year. All the profs went to online teaching, although you could still attend in class for most of them, if you wanted. You could also pass/fail your courses for that semester if you wanted. For some students it added a lot of stress, but I found it to be relatively chill.
  38. 9 points
    With the disclaimer that I'm not a lawyer yet: isn't it is intuitively obvious that (as with most skills) it is learnable to an extent but innate abilities are a big deal? I am a hair under 5'9 and an ectomorph, and I used to work in law enforcement. I trained in judo and BJJ, but ultimately any guy who was 6'2 and a mesomorph innately had a huge innate advantage over me when it came to use of force/control tactics, and it would take them being incredibly lazy and putting in no effort and me doing an exceptional amount of training in order to offset that disadvantage. If they put in an exceptional amount of training, I was simply not capable of being as good at it as them no matter what I did. Similarly, I wouldn't recommend for anyone to pursue a legal career if they just aren't that bright. Because it involves performing intellectual work alongside and opposite people who are. And @pzabbythesecond, sorry bro, but I seriously disagree with you here. I have worked in many contexts where the vast majority of people would be simply be incapable of being competent lawyers regardless of how much they attempted to pursue that career. This isn't even to big up lawyering or to say it's that intellectually demanding, but (not to make assumptions about your background or anyone's in particular) as a general observation a lot of law students/lawyers simply don't have enough experience mingling with regular folk to realize just how stupid so many people out there are.
  39. 9 points
    I don't know about this; the American legal education system is proof enough that many law schools engage in predatory and misleading practices, and that they go to great lengths to obscure and withhold access to unfavourable data that would help applicants make more informed decisions. Applicants should bear some of the responsibility for their decision to attend law school, but saying that there's nothing predatory about creating more graduates than available jobs is a stretch. Look at how Windsor tries to market its Dual JD program, for example - I'd call that at least somewhat predatory ("Start here, go anywhere! Experience two legal cultures! Pay ~$50K for a low-ranked American degree that you'll never use!") .
  40. 9 points
    I believe in taking care of myself, in a balanced diet, in a rigorous exercise routine. In the morning, if my face is a little puffy, I'll put on an icepack while doing my stomach crunches. I can do a thousand now. After I remove the icepack, I use a deep-pore cleanser lotion. In the shower, I use a water-activated gel cleanser, then a honey-almond bodyscrub, and on the face, an exfoliating gel-scrub. Then I apply an herb mint facial masque, which I leave on for ten minutes while I prepare the rest of my routine. I always use an aftershave lotion with little or no alcohol, because alcohol dries your face out and makes you look older. Then moisturizer, then an anti-aging eye balm, followed by a final moisturizing protective lotion.
  41. 8 points
  42. 8 points
    I consider it a success if I manage two solid hours of work in a day.
  43. 8 points
    And you're leaving out the point that you are using a second account, and using both to participate in this thread! Do we really have to repeat again that only one account is allowed?!
  44. 8 points
    Pour ceux que ca intéresse, de ce que j'ai remarqué, le système informatique de l'UdeM se met toujours à jour à minuit, et c'est souvent à ce moment que les dépôts de 300$ apparaissent. Les dernières vagues ont été faites un mercredi, donc je vous conseille de garder un oeil sur votre centre étudiant à minuit ce soir.
  45. 8 points
    I didn't actually think racism would be so bad in law school until I read this post
  46. 8 points
    The question isn't "can you learn to be a good lawyer," but rather, "can you learn to be a good lawyer in your field?" Stop trying to be the jack of all trades. The most incompetent lawyers I have met are generalists trying to dabble in a few or many different areas of law. Many of them also happen to be sole practitioners or working in small firm environments. Most of them are really in it for the pay cheque and not trying to actually learn the law and hone their skills. If you look at most competent, successful lawyers you will notice that one thing they have in common is that they are not trying to present themselves as being the jack of all trades. They've picked one or two focus areas and have spent most of their careers learning and re-learning the law and honing their skills and experiences. They are specialists in their area of expertise. And this concept extends beyond the legal field itself as it applies to anything else like being an electrician, doctor, businessperson, actor, musician, etc. Yes, you need some innate intelligence and drive to be a lawyer, but in order to be a good lawyer, you just need to pick an area of law and master the hell out of it. Very few law students and new lawyers actually approach their careers in this manner which is why they see some early career struggles.
  47. 8 points
    cGPA: 75% LSAT: 180 Also have an MA and a few years working out of school (teaching English abroad and tree planting). Offer accepted, looking forward to meeting the rest of the class of '24!
  48. 8 points
    You know, for all this talk about law not being a golden ticket anymore and law graduates struggling in the job market, I don't know a single person that graduated from a Canadian law school and within 2 years didn't get on their feet and find some level of "success." Sure, there is a lot of stress and rejection faced by law students and new calls in the job market, but like most other professions this is to be expected when you are first starting out. Most lawyers I know are making above average salaries relative to most Canadians, and as someone who graduated with 100k+ debt and went into a public sector position paying an above average salary, I have been just fine with my regular debt repayments and career path. I think the negativity surrounding law school and lawyer careers on this forum and reddit is overblown. Look, OP, you will be just fine coming out of school even if it takes you an year or two to find your footing. Ryerson law graduates aren't going to cripple your job prospects and destroy your career. As a law student, I used to worry about competition, job prospects, and oversaturation in the legal market for articling and new call positions as well, and while those are certainly barriers to overcome, it gets a lot better once you get called and have some work experience to carry you forward. The rest will play itself out.
  49. 8 points
    I suggest you chill out a bit, to be honest. This outrage cropped up for both TRU and Lakehead and is (thankfully) now largely forgotten. No need to work yourself up over it.
  50. 8 points
    If you’re actually interested in civil discussion, it would likely be a good idea to explain why you feel Ryerson is a bad idea and how the problems you identify are unique to Ryerson rather than generally applicable to all Ontario law schools. In my experience, most of the people who dislike Ryerson are simply protectionists who are afraid to compete against more people, which I find rather unsympathetic. But if there are other, specific problems you think Ryerson causes, I’m sure people would be happy to hear about them.
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-04:00

  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up

  • Create New...