Jump to content

Pythia

Members
  • Content Count

    78
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Pythia last won the day on May 19

Pythia had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

28 Decent People

About Pythia

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. How does the cum laude distinction at UO law work? What percentage of the graduating class typically gets this distinction?
  2. I can't speak for tax law, but I can speak a bit about accounting. Basically no accountant does difficult math per se. However, accountants do need good numerical sense (the ability to figure out how changes in certain figures will affect different ratios; the ability to read, understand, and infer information from financial statements; etc.). I don't think this is especially challenging stuff though; most law students I know (even the ones who swear up and down that they hate math or are bad at it) can, I'm quite certain, pick this skill if they need to with a bit of practice.
  3. I wonder if the PCs have ever read Proverbs 31: 8 - 9.
  4. DoJ sent job offers this morning.
  5. Let's wait a few years and see who's right. I suspect what you're saying is way too optimistic. E.g. you're grossly undervaluing problems related to incomplete information. Why on earth would good firms, in the near term, favour applicants from a school that is new, about which there are no quality guarantees, etc. over schools where they know what they're getting? (Law is not like computer science, where school of origin may matter comparatively less since the skills required to be a good coder are easier to test in a short period of time in an interview setting or something like that.) I suppose that, by your logic, a law school opened in New York City should do better than established schools that are remote from large urban centers (e.g. Cornell). Curiously, this isn't the case; Fordham Law, despite being around for 100 years, is still considered worse than Cornell Law (which, it should be noted, only has 18 years on Fordham Law). I reiterate that, in a profession in which tradition and pedigree are highly coveted and in which most members are fairly risk averse, it seems unlikely that most law students or law profs will, at least in the short-term, opt for Ryerson over say Western or Queen's.
  6. You think that, in a profession where tradition and reputation mean so so much, an upstart school will somehow beat schools that have been established for decades, have renowned faculty members, have relationships with existing law firms, etc.? With respect, this seem very Polyanna-ish.
  7. Osgoode, U of T and Queen's have actual curves which allow for rank-wise comparison of students. Other schools do not seem to mark this way and instead have target averages. A B+ at Queen's will tell an employer that a student sits somewhere between the 51st to 85th percentile in a class, depending on the particular class; based on Osgoode's academic regulations, a B+ at Osgoode will put a student somewhere between the 65th and 85th percentile in a class; based on U of T's regulations, Honours standing in a course will put a student somewhere between 55th and 85th percentile in that class. I'm not sure that the grading scales at other schools allow outsiders to make such easy comparisons (although some schools, like Ottawa for example, will tell you your rank in your class IIUC; some schools also make grade distributions for classes publicly available online, which helps with figuring out what a particular mark means in the context of a particular class).
  8. B average or B median?
  9. What's Western's curve like?
  10. What does one even learn in a Statutory Interpretation course?
  11. Anybody hear anything yet?
  12. What do you mean by outlining? I think I sometimes do this, but even then I sometimes end up completely missing things.
  13. So one thing that I've noticed is that I appear to do a decent job identifying issues when I go through older exams. I think this could be do to one of two things: (a) I'm going through old exams with people who are either ill-prepared or not smart, which results in me over-estimating how good I am at identifying issues; or (b) I usually don't time myself when I go through old exams, so that the issue-spotting might not be reflective of how the exam issue-spotting experience will be like. But this is just my guess.
  14. I received some feedback from instructors on grades for the year. A common refrain was that, although my analysis tended to be quite good, I often missed issues (sometimes small issues, sometimes larger issues). Part of this difficulty appears to arise out of time management problems. However, just as often, I seem to genuinely overlook things that should be properly subjected to legal scrutiny on exams. I only have one year in law school left. Having said that, I would nevertheless like to try to improve my exam performance in my final year (at least to the extent that I can). What are some ways to improve exam issue spotting?
×
×
  • Create New...