Jump to content

KJR

Members
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

63 Decent People

About KJR

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I love watching the evolution of this thread.
  2. From what I've heard second-hand, some courses will likely only be offered in-person even in the fall. I can only tell you that this applies to upper-year courses; I have no idea about 1L. It makes sense since most upper year courses can be distanced more easily due to smaller class sizes. I'm sure some courses will remain online for fall but not all courses will be available online. CAVEAT: this could obviously change if the University dictates it but unofficially this is the plan.
  3. U of A: 11 applications; 7 OCIs; 0 ITCs 1L: CR (U of A did mandatory pass/fail) 2L: B, B, B-, B+, A- (3.15) BC resident with decent ECs and tailored cover letters to each firm. While ultimately unsuccessful, my proportion of applications to OCIs was decent even though my grades were fairly average. Just because you don't have a B+ average doesn't mean you don't have a shot.
  4. That is a fair point, but I would argue that the overall employment prospect statistics do not necessarily give the general applicant any real idea about their specific employment prospects, maybe a probability at best. It is probably a better metric than the supposed rank classification system. I still think, as mentioned by a number of people in this thread, that cost and location are far more important factors for applicants to consider. If you are lucky enough to have your choice of law school and cost is no issue, then by all means job prospect statistics are probably the best metric for you to use. However, I don't think that most applicants are in that position.
  5. "Can you elaborate on this point? Assuming that you are interested in corporate law and want to work for a full-service firm, the school you attend does have an impact on your prospects I will just say that I am in Western Canada and my knowledge of Ontario schools and how your choice law school will affect your future job prospects is non-existent. I would say that for applicants who think they are "interested in corporate law," really are not aware of what corporate law entails, how could they because they have never been exposed to the area. I think the larger point I was making still holds true. If you are a terrible student at U of T you are not more likely to get a job on Bay street than an excellent student at (Insert another Ontario School here). Again, I know absolutely nothing about Ontario schools so I could be wrong.
  6. Does anyone know the deal with PFOs? When can we expect them to go out and do some firms just ghost you?
  7. I don't have a lot of insight into these things but I think there are certain "no brainer decisions" but have more to do with location and sometimes area of practice. For instance, if you want to practice in Alberta, it doesn't matter if you go to U of C or U Alberta. If you want to practice in BC, UBC and UVic are probably no different, and arguably, TRU will be comparable. If you live in BC and want to work in Ontario, UBC will likely give you a better opportunity than TRU, mainly having to do with the alumni network, but to some degree, reputation will help. Honestly, from what I can tell from friends and random anecdotes, it matters more what your grades are in law school than what school you go to. In say Ontario, a student in the top 10% of their class will be more successful in finding a job in Vancouver than a student in the bottom 20% at UBC or UVic. In the end, it is how you do in law school that matters more than the name of the university on the degree There does seem to be some form of ranking, but it is subjective and depends on your location and what you value. Some schools have better clinics, and others have specialized programs or focus areas. There will always be the U of T student who looks down on the Ryerson student, or the UBC student who looks down on the TRU student because their school is more competitive in terms of admission, but that is more about ego than education. (Not trying to offend U of T or UBC students. Don't come at me). I wouldn't get bogged down in what other people think about the name of the school you end up at. Think about the location you want to practice, the cost of tuition and whether there is some other factor that is a must for you (e.g., certain course selection). Other than that just focus on doing well once you get there.
  8. I get that you guys are pissed and it probably screwed up some people's plan but the policy decision of the university is really completely within their discretion. Someone asked if the change in policy is "right" that is completely subjective and will vary from different perspectives. To the University the decision was right and to people who have a split two score average the decision was right. To people that based their plan off of past practice, yeah it might seem wrong. The reality is that many of you will be admitted to, if not U or A, some other law school. If you want to launch some campaign of vengeance, wait until you are rejected and then maybe blame the policy. But a lot of people are freaking out over a policy that is not going to significantly prejudice you. Some of you need to chill. Soon enough you'll be admitted at which point no one will give two shits about your LSAT score, and anyone who does is likely a douche.
  9. I find it interesting how many applicants to law school look selectively at on part of the text on this page instead of reading the admission page in its totality. You guys focus on the admission average line and neglect to look at the main text under the regular applicant heading. Does it say admission is based on previous academic record and average of LSAT scores? No. It says directly LSAT score. Regular Applicant Admission is based on an applicant’s pre-law academic record and Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score. The Admissions Committee adjusts the weighting of these scores annually in order to provide the best prediction of success in law school. Even under admission process it says the same thing before the admission average is mentioned. Admission Process Admission is based on an applicant’s pre-law academic record and Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score. Please note that admissions to the Juris Doctor (JD) program are competitive and meeting the minimum requirements for application does not guarantee admission. An applicant's admission average will be calculated based on the most recently completed 60 credits and weighted against the averaged LSAT score. Please refer to the Admitted Applicant Profile Card to view the score combinations of last year’s admitted students. Who says the admission average (which you guys keep quoting) is the determinative factor in admission? It makes no mention of this in the admissions process section. What would prohibit them from using LSAT score as it says under the regular admission heading and the first paragraph (which you keep neglecting to quote). I admit that noting the admission average leads to some confusion but it does not put more emphasis on this than the section that says "Admission is based on an applicant’s pre-law academic record and Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score" (which is noted twice). For those of you who were explicitly told that they would use the average LSAT score I can understand your frustration but I really don’t see where on the application page you are sourcing your anger. Maybe you had a legitimate expectation that the average would be used based on LS.ca or past practice but, as a matter of interpretation, the admission page doesn’t clearly state that at all. Making the argument that the admission page is inconsistent with previous practice is an argument that I sympathize with and can get behind. But you cannot legitimately say that the application page clearly states that the averaged LSAT score will be the only way the admission committee will look at LSAT scores.
  10. This is a good reason to be outraged. However, there is also the possibility, depending on when you emailed them, that they have since changed their admission policy. While that would be a dick move, it is within their power to determine how they admit students. Does it suck? Yes. Is it negligent? No. I would 100% be pissed too but applicants don't get to dictate what is fair policy.
  11. First, I would like to acknowledge that you guys have every right to be upset because this appears to be a change from what you expected. I get that and I am not trying to minimize your justified outrage. That being said, You have neglected to post the first paragraph on the admissions page. Admission is based on an applicant’s pre-law academic record and Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score. Please note that admissions to the Juris Doctor (JD) program are competitive and meeting the minimum requirements for application does not guarantee admission. Note It does not say that admission averages shall be the determinative consideration in admission. . This first paragraph is clear what admission is based on. I only point this out because saying that is a strong assertion and not correct. You made this decision based on an assumption about the process. There is sufficient ambiguity between the two paragraphs that if you wanted to truly understand the admission process you would have contacted the university. Again, I get it, you are pissed and you probably should be. But asserting that the university owed you a notification on how they decide to make policies and by not doing so they acted negligently is absurd.
  12. It makes more sense to take the highest as this tends to be the norm. Honestly, the average tends to prejudice students who may be strong candidates who were not fully prepared for their first LSAT.
  13. I don't think the OCI scheduling necessarily makes as big of an impression as the "in-firm" interviews. Moreover, from a psychological perspective, people tend to remember two sets of people when exposed to many presentations, interviews or meetings, those who they see first and those who they see last. If anything, the worst time to schedule OCI's would be in the middle of the day. At least this is what I am telling myself about my OCI schedule (Most of mine are later in the day). Content of an interview will always outweigh the timing.
  14. I've heard from Lawson and Clark Wilson but didn't apply to Singleton. Additionally, Gowling, DLA, BLG, Miller Thompson and Dentons.
  15. There are far more than 5 - 10 positions available. I personally know at least 20 people who got jobs last year but I know the actual number is higher. Edmonton 1L recruit is bigger than their 2L recruit.
×
×
  • Create New...