Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Decent People

About jan

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I had similar (worse, even) stats with 0 meaningful ECs and got in everywhere I applied, including McGill and the University of Toronto.
  2. Mine goes to Accounts Receivable, meaning directly into my student fee account. If your scholarship grants more than tuition costs, you can have the difference sent to your bank account via direct deposit.
  3. To answer your logistical question, to my knowledge (as a 0L), yes, there are schools that allow students to study part-time while holding down a job. That said, there are no Canadian law schools that offer a program that is fully compatible with someone who works full-time during standard business hours. The vast majority of required classes at any law school are scheduled during the day, so you'd have to have a very flexible work schedule to attend class. I can't imagine that there's a way that you could pull this off without compromising your current career. Even if you somehow get a study arrangement that works for you, in order to practice law part-time (the viability of which I'm definitely not qualified to comment on), you'd have to initially practice full-time. Part-time articling positions, to my understanding, are exceedingly rare. Are you down to commit 6-8 years of your life outside of work to land a side gig that will probably never yield a ROI? If so, that's cool, and I wish you the best of luck. Being confident in that decision sincerely sounds like an awesome place to be in life.
  4. Your stats and experiences are comparable to mine (I had a negligibly higher GPA, but worse ECs) and I was accepted. I wrote the LSAT, though, and had an alright score. The admissions process is pretty nebulous to me, but I'd say that you have pretty good odds. Best of luck!
  5. The tuition thing? The deregulation was announced in May or so, and the Tribune and Daily both covered it. The Provost posted something a while ago that blatantly says that international student tuition will rise next year, albeit by an undetermined amount. I'm betting that it'll be a pretty significant increase, just based on my own familiarity with the institution, and how lots of other Canadian universities treat international students as cash cows. I'm actually not sure if the new regulations apply to law programs (because IIRC, only arts, science, and education programs had their limits capped by the province, hence why commerce and engineering are so relatively pricey), or if they were already free reign. I wouldn't be surprised if rates jumped up regardless, though. Anyways, I digress. Point is that tuition rates could offset the affordability of the city.
  6. First of all, posting your GPA and LSAT might be helpful, if you're comfortable with that. Canadian schools generally do not really have enormous scholarships. At most, you might get a fraction of your international tuition fee covered. I think the biggest non-renewable scholarship at my school is $10,500, whereas international student tuition is over $40,000 per year. Schools also aren't usually super transparent about their scholarship recipient selection process, though I would imagine that emailing schools you're interested in might be helpful. Off the top of my head, Montreal might be the most affordable major Canadian city to live in. That said, McGill is going to jack up international student tuition starting next year, since the province recently deregulated those fees.
  7. You're right, I should have specified that. Although I'm not sure how much that would impact my point that a very tiny minority of admits shared similar statistics. I haven't looked much into U of C, O of S, UVic, or Ottawa, but I imagine those schools would be reasonable targets. A 90th percentile or higher LSAT would definitely strengthen your application, yes. It's awesome that your practice tests are as high as they are, congratulations. That said, If I were in your position, I would probably focus way more on bringing up my GPA than putting much more effort into a high LSAT score, especially if you're practice testing above the median for many schools. If you can pull your last two years up to a 3.6 or 3.7, you'd definitely get into the schools you listed in this post, and maybe some of the ones in your original post, as well. If it's possible to exceed your credit limit and take an extra year, that is often an option presented on this forum for people in similar circumstances. I can't speak to the last two sentences of this paragraph, since I'm a 0L, but there are plenty of threads on the forum posing similar career questions! Sorry about that. Of 160 people who accepted offers at U of A for the 2017-18 entering class, only 5 had a GPA similar to yours. This is at the school with arguably the most lenient admissions requirements of the ones that you listed in your original post. I just wanted to bring some numbers into why I was making the claim that I was. As somebody else said, different schools have different access policies, so I would advise you to look into that if you are interested in that route. Maybe you do qualify at some schools. To my understanding, generally, access applicants are those who faced major systemic barriers (because of class, racial identity, disability, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) or, for some schools, difficult situations (extreme financial burden, family crises, major health issues, for example), that significantly limited their lifetime academic performance. In general, access categories cater to applicants who have faced extreme and unusual circumstances that proved to be a massive and insurmountable barrier to academic success. I'm not so sure if being an immigrant, working and supporting a family through university, or dealing with family crises while studying are necessarily extreme or unusual. Those are all pretty common circumstances for a lot of Canadian students (including myself for all three of them, actually) that do not necessarily limit academic performance potential. That said, I don't know your story, and I would never expect you to share something so deeply personal on a public forum. It is very possible that you do qualify, and if so, that's awesome! This forum is a good resource for deliberating that call, but I would recommend relying on actual admissions policies to guide the decision of which category to apply under.
  8. I would say that your cGPA unfortunately makes your chances extremely slim to none for all of those schools as a regular applicant. This is based entirely on what I know about Canadian law school admissions as a recent applicant, for the record. The U of A probably has the most generous admissions policy of any of the schools that you listed, and even there, only 5/160 regular category admits had an L2 comparable to yours. All of those applicants had an LSAT equal to or higher than your highest practice score. So, I guess you have a shot there if you can score 95th+ percentile on the LSAT. Based on the limited biographical information you've shared, I do not think your life experiences would warrant an access application or offset your GPA in a dramatic way.
  9. Disclaimer: This was my method, but it may not work for you. I have a weird brain and retain information best by dissecting and compartmentalizing it. I'm going into this comment under the assumption that you've learned some of the fundamental/conventional tactics for tackling RC and LR outlined in some of the more popular LSAT prep books and in courses. If you haven't, I recommend checking those out before taking my comment seriously. Something that helped me out with RC was thinking of it as a long-form LR organized around a particular theme. The point isn't really understanding the passage as a whole, but rather being able to filter it down to its key premises, and answer questions about those. My tactic for difficult passages was to isolate the main point of the article (what's up and why), and the conditional statements that inform that point (which I understood as basically analogous to LR prompts). The questions are primarily about those elements, and can be answered without really fully comprehending what the article is actually talking about. A synthetic understanding of the passage isn't completely necessary to score well, in my opinion. Questions will often pertain to only one or two sentences (often the topic sentence of a paragraph) that can be considered without any other context, just like an LR question. My tactic for difficult RC passages was as follows: Read the passage once without making any marks on the page. Read the passage again, highlighting the main point and any conditional statements. Read the questions and try to link each one to a highlighted statement. Answer the questions using the linked information. Learning to identify key words and phrasing that set up conditional statements was critical to this method. Some people recommend reading the questions first to make this process easier, but personally, that just tripped me up. Also, finding a good way to annotate consistently and efficiently helped a lot.
  10. I scored about 3 points higher than my average PT. It was sheer luck. I think preparing for a "worst case scenario" (specifically unconventional game types) helped a bit, though.
  11. First and foremost, no problem regarding the delay. This is a forum, after all, and a relatively niche one at that. I think you replied in a very timely manner, considering that context. Re: Stress I don't disagree with a word of this. I think we're on the same page, and that you're really offering up some kind words and good advice here. Stress management is undoubtedly a critical skill, especially in a rigorous discipline or profession. The intended thesis of my original comment was that the stress associated with waiting on an admission decision that could go either way, especially this late in the game, is unique and novel for a lot of prospective students. This unprecedented anxiety is something that many people can only learn to deal with retrospectively. Recognizing that something that you think is the end of the world isn't actually the end of the world in the moment is a feat that would require an extraordinary amount of self awareness. Most people don't discover that life is unpredictable and success is non-linear until their strict life itinerary doesn't go according to plan, and they only recognize in the aftermath that they emerged completely unscathed and can still continue on to their desired destination. Fortunately or unfortunately, as you suggest, similar uncertain, transitory circumstances will undoubtedly arise in the future, regardless of whether an applicant goes to law school or not. Rejection and failure are always possible, and panic is pretty much an unavoidable response to facing those possibilities. Sometimes the stress is impossible to neutralize. Hopefully, meditation upon this experience and the advice that kind strangers offered throughout it will allow applicants facing similar scenarios in the future to better control and reflect upon their panic in a productive way. But being unable to do that at this moment, especially if they've never faced rejection at such a (seemingly) significant scale before, is an unfortunate part of the stress management learning curve, in my opinion. Re: school acceptances I was lucky enough to score some acceptances from a few schools. McGill was the first offer that I received, and I ultimately decided to accept it. Thanks for offering your guidance. I sincerely appreciate your support. I imagine we'll eventually cross paths, although I'll probably be too embarrassed to out myself as the person who rambled a couple thousand words of nonsense about stress to you.
  12. Oh yeah, I'm not at all trying to imply that getting into law school is some sort of gateway into a stable and fulfilling life, or even career. I don't believe whatsoever that getting into law school eliminates or even mitigates any kind of uncertainty about the future. I'm sorry if I came off as naive or arrogant in that regard. That wasn't my intention at all. At the risk of getting overly personal, I honestly have zero concrete academic or professional ambitions or expectations right now. I know that it's very probable that law school isn't right for me. I kind of applied and got in as a fluke. I definitely recognize that uncertainty is a constant in life. Posts in the articling students' subforum here demonstrate that the ride never ends. I would wager that anticipation and uncertainty aren't the most common stressors that people face directly because of law school and as lawyers, though. Maybe law students and lawyers face those sources of anxiety more than other professionals do, but who knows. I was just trying to express how an all-or-nothing attitude might convince someone that getting into law school is the be-all and end-all of their entire life. Of course, that mindset is not realistic; that's what is unhealthy about it and the anxiety that it generates. I do believe that the only way that many people, particularly high-achieving, goal-oriented people, can overcome that way of thinking is by learning the hard way that accomplishing a goal as complex as landing a specific job is not a predictable or linear journey where good intentions and outputs are always rewarded. The application cycle represents one such critical moment where somebody might have to come face-to-face with that reality, possibly for the first time.
  13. Thankfully, I've somehow managed to already receive an offer. Regardless, this is generally good advice. Obsessing over a decision that's entirely in somebody else's hands is definitely neither emotionally sustainable nor productive. That said, I would imagine that the stress of law school is very different from the existential dread of indefinitely suspending future plans (as well as, for many candidates, their entire self-worth) while waiting on an incalculably probable outcome of what is often perceived as the culmination of a lifetime of dreaming and hard work. I'd assume that the vast majority of people who are academically and/or professionally successful enough to consider applying to law school have successfully found a way to navigate constant pressure to perform. It's the anxiety over not having that performance rewarded (in a specific, life-changing way) that drives people to freak out over law school admissions. The fact that hard work isn't guaranteed to pay off is a reality that all high-achievers must eventually crash face-first into. That's the looming risk of investing your entire life and identity into stacks of paper, as many law school applicants do. It's scary to recognize that handing off a meticulously curated CV or transcript isn't a transaction (as precedent outcomes would generally suggest), it's a gamble. That's why I find the numbers unsettling.
  14. This really puts it all in perspective. It's kind of scary that the acceptance rate is less than 10%. Other law schools are probably hitting a similar ratio, too. It also seems to get more and more competitive each year.
  15. You might want to thoroughly research the unique structure and pedagogical approach of McGill's law program, and compare it to UVic's. That knowledge is fundamentally necessary to make an informed decision between the two schools. I'm a 0L, so I can't offer much more substantial advice than that.
  • Create New...