Jump to content

BlockedQuebecois

Members
  • Content Count

    6158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Everything posted by BlockedQuebecois

  1. I understand perfectly what the median means. The fact that there are as many people above and below tells us nothing about the standard deviation of the scores, or even if it is normally distributed. The idea of scoring 9 points below the median and being competitive is not particularly convincing, especially when the lowest accepted score on Ryn's calculator is 9 points below median. The odds get even worse when you consider they are also below the median for GPA.
  2. I'd love for you to show me a single person accepted to U of T with lower stats than these without significant ECs or an access claim. Even one.
  3. Not to be a downer, but the chances of getting into U of T with an LSAT 9 points below median and a GPA 0.2 points below median and what sounds like no notable ECs or access claims is pretty much zero. I still think OP has a chance at other Ontario schools (though Osgoode may be out too), but I don't think it's helpful to pretend they're competitive where they're not.
  4. Regardless of your ideology (or any ideology), having ideas so deeply settled in your mind that even incontrovertible evidence against your ideology will fail to influence your ideology is incredibly stupid. Maybe that's the scientist in me speaking up though.
  5. You only need to make $80,000 a year to be in the top 10% of Canadians. Cutoff for top 5% is $102,800, and cutoff for top 1% is $191,100. So $130,000/year likely puts you in the top 2 or 3% of Canadian income earners (and definitely in the top 5%).
  6. I'm not a lawyer, but I do have some experience working in a variety of fields. If you're in any kind of academic or business profession these fears don't go away. As far as I know there is nothing unique about being a lawyer that makes the fear of failure/embarrassment/rejection unique. You will find these fears in any profession or any job that requires more than the ability to breathe and operate a spatula, unless you're happy being the bottom rung of the ladder at a larger company or in government. If you don't like law then by all means try to leave, but I think you do yourself and your new job a disservice by thinking the daily rigours of being a professional are miraculously absent by picking a different profession.
  7. No god no! I was just referencing the post above! Really my advice boils down to go, have a good time, be well behaved, and drink the nice wine. No gifts required
  8. I was thinking more historically, where it's hovered just below 30%. You can say rounding up from that is still optimistic, but I feel like it's fair. It's roughly a third historically, with a down year this year (due to a larger class size, no?). Honestly I think raw number is a better metric of a schools performance with Bay Street OCIs anyways, since the limiting factor is 2L positions, with class size having no real effect on the market.
  9. About a third of the Osgoode class gets hired at a Bay Street firm during 2L summer. That number decreases for the other Ontario schools, but is significantly lower than the U of T figures. However, in terms of raw numbers Osgoode nearly matches U of T and far out paces the other schools.
  10. This actually wasn't the argument presented earlier when I asked. The previous arguments around cost that had been presented focused on access to credit. However, I actually find this argument rather compelling. I'm not sure I agree that individuals comfort with debt is a societal issue, I'll have to think on that, but it is a barrier I had failed to think about earlier. Perhaps people from lower income families are more hesitant to enter debt than even those from the middle class. I'll need to reflect on that. Thanks for the new perspective.
  11. Umm, I have? Do you mean that you did? Or did I miss a post in this thread?
  12. I thought it was clear I was being sarcastic with my comment there, not that I believed that to really be your argument, I'm sorry if that was unclear. However, I'll happily tell you that essentially every "nonmalicious" (yet still pretty malicious) assumption you made about me is categorically incorrect (if you'd like further details feel free to PM me). The game isn't rigged for me, in fact it's been rigged against me as much or possibly more than it's been rigged against you. I'd just point out you're definitely misrepresenting what my opinion is though. I think I've made it very clear that I agree with the idea that law schools are less accessible to certain demographics. I rejected the premise that they're inaccessible.
  13. Good luck changing anything in society by rejecting any debate (or in my case, request for explanation) around it.
  14. So your argument is that law schools should let in more homeless black women with schizophrenia who are off meds and hearing voices to harm herself. Well that compels me to your side for sure
  15. I've never heard of someone that doesn't have a history of being awful with money having to provide collateral or get someone to co-sign a PSLOC.
  16. I'm not sure why you seem so offended by people challenging your views, or continuing a discussion on your beliefs. This forum pretty clearly has long debates over things, many of them relatively inconsequential, because the users here enjoy them. If you have exactly what you're looking for and wish to exit the conversation you're free to, but I don't see any reason that means everyone else needs to discontinue the conversation.
  17. If the comic is your viewpoint that's great, I agree. I just don't think you were very clear in your first statement. You made it sound as though law school is a special form of inaccessible - that's something I disagree with. In fact, I think law school is more accessible than many other education systems as well as many other parts of society. If your viewpoint really is just "generally, coming from means is good for your life outcomes" then yeah, I can get behind that.
  18. Tell me again how you plan to bring your own viewpoint and perspective to the classroom? I'm sitting here hoping to further understand your position, and you're attempting to shut down discussion.
  19. I'm not sure this is what the fraggles are talking about, since grapefruit said law school was special. If the argument is simply "life is easier if you have a silver spoon inserted into your mouth at conception" then I can certainly agree, but grapefruit didn't see to be speaking about that when they said that in "inaccessible academic system these kinds of hegemonies of power are reborn"
  20. I think it's a bit unfair of you to say you meant finances when I asked what you meant and now to say "well it's so much more, since my first argument fell apart". Regardless, what else is it? I'm legitimately curious as to what you think makes law school so inaccessible. If there are concrete things you can point to I'd love to learn.
  21. Ah, well I agree with the concept (for the most part, of course it's easier to get into an English speaking law school if you speak English, it should be), I think we disagree on the meaning of inaccessible, though. Considering financial aid, bursaries, and most PSLOCs are applied for through the internet - I'd say both are likely to receive it. I'm not sure that stands well as a barrier. However, even if it did, I would also say that it's perfectly fair for financial aid and law schools themselves to restrict students to those likely to succeed. Someone with a very serious mental health issue is not always likely to succeed. Again, I disagree that this rises to the level of "inaccessible".
  22. I've got to disagree - If most or many of the people attending law school are doing through so financial aid and loans then it clearly is not "inaccessible". We aren't talking about the one person with a broken leg that climbed the stairs, we're talking about the many or the majority of people that take the stairs every day, even though it's a bit of work. It may not be "easy", but it's certainly not "inaccessible".
  23. I can't think of a single law school in the country where the total tuition/fees amount over the three years hits six figures for someone that isn't from a very rich family. Regardless, there are options that help students pay the high-cost tuition, so I don't think that makes it inaccessible. That's not the reason they've provided, but I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. Are you suggesting that they're using "inaccessible" to mean "not incorporating fringe political views into the curriculum?" See above. Many people that can't afford law school attend law school every year. In fact, I would wager that most people who attend law school can't afford it. If that's true, or even close to true, then law school is clearly accessible. This argument is not compelling.
×
×
  • Create New...