Jump to content

BlockedQuebecois

Members
  • Content Count

    6158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Everything posted by BlockedQuebecois

  1. Out of curiosity, what do you mean by "it's not enough?" How much time and resources should a law school devote to "aboriginal law?" Why isn't McGill's offering, which seems to be aboriginal components in mandatory courses, some specialized courses, and an intensive week not enough?
  2. To get your proper GPA you'll need to go course by course inputting your grade and credit weight. There is no way to convert directly from GPA to percentage or vice versa.
  3. I'm not sure you can consider things changing over the course of 7 years "sudden". As Ryn said, there's a strong correlation between cGPA and admission, and not a strong correlation (or at least a significantly weaker one) between L2 and admission. Not only that, but Osgoode explicitly states they look at your cGPA and the cGPA necessary to be competitive. Could L2 be used by Osgoode during their holistic review process? Sure, maybe. Is it a strong predictor of admission decisions? No.
  4. Even if that isn't what they're asking, I'd be interested to know how you go about securing an articling position at the Crown's office!
  5. They also clearly stated their final round would be over the course of the "next few weeks", so I doubt it was one day of admissions and done.
  6. Well the odds that 1789 people applied to U of T Law two years in a row are actually pretty good. That being said, if you read the reports both the 2013 and 2014 reports clearly indicate the law statistics are from the 2012-13 academic year.
  7. Vancouver has access to world class hiking as well. Don't even need to do the hour and a half drive.
  8. Your score should show on OLSAS. If it isn't showing I would recommend calling OLSAS during their regular hours.
  9. My bad, working from memory. Either way, I don't think an LSAT a couple points above median makes someone with a GPA .75 below median competitive. As I said, they'd be much more likely to make the cut at an L2 school.
  10. Osgoode seems to look at cGPA, so not good. I'd be surprised if you got an offer, especially with an average LSAT. Did you apply to any L2 schools? You would likely be competitive there.
  11. My favourite part of this story is that Harvey Wax went on to attend Harvard Law School.
  12. "For many people the GRE and LSAT are inaccessible... so we will now accept both the GRE and LSAT". Gee, thanks harvard.
  13. After seeing this in action, I think I may steal it.
  14. Hmm, could I get directions to the street where everyone is as attractive and generally gets along?
  15. In at Osgoode and Ottawa, I assume. Competitive at U of T, your LSAT pulls you down but your GPA pulls you up. It'll likely depend on your ECs and PS. LORs don't matter.
  16. Agreed. OP, if you applied to your new university without informing them you had previously attended Ryerson (and forwarding them your transcripts) it's very much within their rights to kick you out of the school, place you on probation, or take other administrative action. You could attempt to hide this fact from your university, but I imagine that your punishment would be even worse the longer you wait. If I were you I would be headed, hat in hand, to your university's office of the registrar to explain you did not realize transcripts from other post secondary institutions were required during the admission process.
  17. Me too. It's making me wonder if there was a problem with the reference letters, or if the diversity claim came across as bogus. I'd expect them to have heard by now, especially considering a diversity claim.
  18. May I ask what you mean by some classes being worth more than others? Are you referring to credits? Or some other weighting system?
  19. Globalization is fairly "liberal" in a lot of senses of the word, except perhaps wrt economic liberalism, which supports an individualist economy. It's certainly not a "conservative" policy since conservatism definitionally strives to maintain traditional ideals and values, of which globalization is not one. If we're using liberal as a stand-in for "progressive" I'm completely unconvinced that globalization isn't progressive. Economics has shown us that free trade results in wealth redistribution to poorer countries and helps the working class of all countries in the agreements. Seems pretty progressive to me. I'm also unconvinced "financialization" is a non-liberal policy, but I'm also not convinced it's a particularly useful term. Meanwhile, being agnostic on social issues is not conservative social policy.
  20. Your opinion on law school subsidies sounds like my opinion on post secondary as a whole. I'm a huge proponent of tuition free post secondary - so long as we limit all degrees to a number close to the market demands for that degree. Same with trade schools and the like. In my mind we should graduate enough students to have a competitive market that aligns with the % unemployment necessary for a healthy economy (a bit above 4%), and pay for their education entirely. Then if people want to pursue an education despite not being competitive for it they can pay the full, unsubsidized amount.
  21. If someone came to me stating they voluntarily drank a gallon of mountain dew a day for 3 years and then bitched about getting diabetes by saying society wrought the mountain dew upon them and is to blame for their inhumane condition I would also criticize them - likely in harsher words than I used with you. If that makes me callous then whatever. Your analogy regarding payday loans is also flawed: payday loans are generally a last resort for desperate people to avoid incredibly adverse circumstances. Law school is not. I'm happy to have you complain about the issues of student debt and employment conditions and whatever else your heart desires. I don't think that's a useful use of your time or your readers, but I also don't really care. What I take issue with was your language. Law school was not wrought upon you. You were not forced into inhumane circumstances. You made an educated choice and pursued a professional degree. Not only was this a choice, you were fortunate to have the opportunity, as many people never will. Take accountability for your actions and stop blaming the world for your ills. Like it or not, your debt was your fault, not our neoliberal society's.
  22. Again, if the user was doing this I would agree. Instead, they went on a tirade against the system, blaming society for their debt and blaming everyone but themselves for the debt they willfully entered in to in hopes of becoming a lawyer. Not only did they shirk their responsibility, they claimed their situation was "inhumane", despite entering into it completely voluntarily. I don't think that's a particularly useful viewpoint or choice of language for this topic, so I challenged it. And again, my position isn't elitist. I don't think law school tuitions are fair, and I think we should lower the barriers to entry. If that's elitist I don't know what isn't.
  23. Would that person have had the high law school debt had they chosen not to go to law school? Of course not. You're free to argue society should value education more, and that we need lower barriers to entry. I would agree with you. Hell, we may even agree on how society should do that. Where I take issue with the original post is the wording. Debt was not wrought upon the user, nobody forced them to attend law school. They made a conscious decision to attend law school, aware of the cost of tuition and funding options. They were not forced into "inhumane" debt repayment circumstances. When they took advantage of the funding options they were of sound body and mind, and aware of the terms of repayment.
×
×
  • Create New...