Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ljlife

Best pre-law Arts majors?

Recommended Posts

In your opinion, what are the best Arts majors that prepare you for law school? I plan on doing political science but I'm debating between philosophy, history and economics as my 2nd major (I find all three interesting so i can't decide, leaning towards philosophy at the moment). Also, if someone does 1 major and 3 minors, do you think that law schools will look at them negatively because they didn't do 2 majors or honours? Ideally, I'd love to do a major in political science, minor in history, minor in philosophy and a minor in french, but I'm afraid that it will look like I slacked off.

 

By the way, I'm the one who posted the McGill vs Concordia undergrad question a while ago and if anyone is wondering....I chose McGill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't care, study what you're interested in.

 

Only one thought, you know the old line about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing?  Far better to get a deep knowledge of one or two particular areas then to end up with a superficial knowledge of 3 or 4.  Take a wide variety of courses in first year (because, hey, you don't know what you're interested in), narrow it down in second year and upper years.  Using myself as an example, I started doing a degree in poli-sci, but took economics, history and some other courses in first year.  By second year, I was doing an economics degree with a history minor, and by third year it was mostly economics (principally because the economics department offered more interesting history courses than the history department, although I took a spattering of philosophy courses in 3rd and 4th year which turned out to be very valuable).  Nobody actually cares what your majors/minors are, a degree's a degree, but its just more intellectually satisfying to come away from undergrad with a deep understanding of something. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can achieve the same grades doing a major vs. honours, do honours. If your grades will suffer, do a major with 1 or 2 minors. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I'd spent my undergrad learning a new language.

 

I plan to minor in french to become perfect at the language... I think it's a good idea, especially since I plan to apply to McGill and civil law schools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, economics would be the most useful (in real life) of the three 2nd majors you're deciding between.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't really matter but something where you have to do a lot of writing and reading may help. If your university has a strong program in an area with good job prospects that might help too (if you choose not to go straight to law school and work for a bit). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would approach it as follows:

1) Pick something you are interested in (which you seem to feel equally about them so far)

2) Pick something employable

 

The first is because you will need good grades, and it is easier to learn a subject you are interested in.  The second is because the majority of people who apply do not get into law school.  You may even find in 4 years the idea of law school (or more school in general) is the last thing you want.  So it is good to put yourself in a position where you will be employable after undergrad.

 

Edit: For number 2 I should add I have no real input on what degrees are "employable."  Lots of people are in jobs that the only requirement was any degree, so it isn't a clear definition.  I imagine becoming fluent in French would greatly benefit you.  Opens up a lot of doors in many areas.

Edited by TKNumber3
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Edit: For number 2 I should add I have no real input on what degrees are "employable."  Lots of people are in jobs that the only requirement was any degree, so it isn't a clear definition.  I imagine becoming fluent in French would greatly benefit you.  Opens up a lot of doors in many areas.

Someone linked this earlier, it's good http://cou.on.ca/publications/reports/pdfs/cou-gradsurvey_nov2013-final-final-s

double major in forestry/theology, be a druid, 100% employment rate

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would probably do poli sci and economics if I were you, not just for law but general knowledge as well(economics can be very useful)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, if I had to do it all over again, it would either be Communication Studies (again), Psych/Linguistics (audiology or OT), or Industrial Relations (labour field). Look into the industrial relations courses at McGill. It's a small department, and is a mix of business and arts classes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't care, study what you're interested in.

 

Only one thought, you know the old line about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing?  Far better to get a deep knowledge of one or two particular areas then to end up with a superficial knowledge of 3 or 4.  Take a wide variety of courses in first year (because, hey, you don't know what you're interested in), narrow it down in second year and upper years.  Using myself as an example, I started doing a degree in poli-sci, but took economics, history and some other courses in first year.  By second year, I was doing an economics degree with a history minor, and by third year it was mostly economics (principally because the economics department offered more interesting history courses than the history department, although I took a spattering of philosophy courses in 3rd and 4th year which turned out to be very valuable).  Nobody actually cares what your majors/minors are, a degree's a degree, but its just more intellectually satisfying to come away from undergrad with a deep understanding of something. 

I take an issue with the idea that an undergraduate degree in an arts program will leave you with "deep knowledge."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take an issue with the idea that an undergraduate degree in an arts program will leave you with "deep knowledge."

Knowledge is communities in the Ozarks, it's all relative. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your opinion, what are the best Arts majors that prepare you for law school? I plan on doing political science but I'm debating between philosophy, history and economics as my 2nd major (I find all three interesting so i can't decide, leaning towards philosophy at the moment). Also, if someone does 1 major and 3 minors, do you think that law schools will look at them negatively because they didn't do 2 majors or honours? Ideally, I'd love to do a major in political science, minor in history, minor in philosophy and a minor in french, but I'm afraid that it will look like I slacked off.

 

By the way, I'm the one who posted the McGill vs Concordia undergrad question a while ago and if anyone is wondering....I chose McGill. 

 

The one that gets you a decent paying job if you don't get into law school (the majority of applicants don't). 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ I don't think there is a BA that ensures a decent paying job is there?

Certainly any motivated BA holder can get a decent paying job, but it would not be as a result of their specific degree area.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Economics is the most employable arts degree but only do it if you're good at math.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in BC that the theatre design / production BAs have remarkably high employment rates (for arts degrees, in their chosen field).

Edited by kurrika

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone's already said it, I'll just say it again in eye-ache-inducing bold font.

 

With the exception of specialized degrees like engineering, most undergraduate degrees will not get you a good job, no matter how impressive the title of the course or difficult the content. It's the great lie the establishment told our generation. It's a well-meaning lie, because for our parents it was true, but it's a lie nonetheless.

 

Most jobs either don't require an undergrad degree, or require an undergrad plus something else. That's why if you're in undergrad, it's absolutely essential that you know why you're there. If you're there for the love of knowledge, take whatever the hell you want. If you're there to get a job, figure out the kind of job you want immediately. If you don't know what you want, take "love of knowledge" courses and think about it for awhile or even better drop out and get some life experience and think about it for awhile. This is important because unless you're fine spending time and money on a long, open-ended journey of discovery (and nothing's wrong with that), you should be planning your undergrad by working backwards from the actual requirements of the kind of job you want, that you took the time to research to the courses you should be taking. My own mistakes deserve italics.

 

Which brings us to law school. If you're planning to go to law school, take easy courses where you'll get high marks. That's it, that's all. Don't overthink it. The vast majority of law schools do not care what you took in undergrad.

 

If you're afraid the easy courses will disqualify you from the other thing you might want to do in four years, put some serious effort into figuring out what that other thing is and make sure the harder courses you're going to take are actually a prereq for doing the other thing. Because the dumbest thing you can do if the goal is law school is take difficult courses that you don't enjoy that still won't qualify you for jack shit. I put most poli sci, philosophy, economics, and general science classes in that category.

Edited by alcatraz
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • I can't speak to whether the reasons stated were the real reasons or not, but I do personally think that the largest transition is from 0L to 1L. Unlike upper year students, incoming 1Ls currently have no formed relationships with other students, no understanding of the law, no experience with legal research, etc. Many have never done a moot or been in a law library. None have had the kind of legal education that only in person classes can bring (I'm thinking lots of questions/discussion).  Many law schools are going fully online for all years. The way I see it they made a decision to try to keep some semblance of normalcy for the entering 1Ls, putting extra resources/effort into them, rather than taking from 2Ls and 3Ls. But I can absolutely appreciate the feeling that it is unfair. All students will likely pay the same tuition, and surely most students would prefer an in-person experience. I do hope that admin/the SLS hear you, and perhaps complaints from your fellow students, and are able to accomodate something that feels more fair to you. These are definitely shit times. 
    • That’s unfair to upper year students. Admin has chosen to sacrifice 2Ls and 3Ls so that 1Ls get to be almost fully in-person.    1L’s were given a choice if they want their classes to be online, or in person – why can’t 2L’s and 3L’s? For 1L’s who choose in-person, all their classes are in person except constitutional. Upper years don't even get 1 class in person. We were told of a “mixed model” but that was thrown out completely.   Many of the upper year classes are capped at 25 people. These classes can happen in the larger lecture halls that hold 80+, and the 80 student classes kept online. This is especially confusing when all of Western undergrad has moved online, the campus is essentially entirely empty buildings.   Why is absolutely no effort being made to accommodate upper year students? The decision has even been made for winter term for upper years to be online – why is there no flexibility here at all? At no point has admin suggested that they will try to move for in-person classes in the winter semester if circumstances change.    It is lazy for admin to do nothing for upper years. I cannot help but think that various economic and business reasons were factored into the decision to give upper years the short end of the stick. I say this because there has been a total lack of transparency in the decision-making process, we have not been given an explanation as to why admin has so quickly given up on our educational experience.    The Dean reasons that social integration and building connections is important for 1Ls. But this is just as important in 2L and 3L. Plus, the social integration and academic support between 1Ls and upper years is so crucial to building connections at law school. I know my 1L experience would not have been as successful if I didn't have the help I got from upper years.    Further, two-thirds of covid-19 cases come from the GTA. London is fairly safe and will be safer come September. While there is a chance of transmission by having students move back, admin may students to isolate for 14 days prior to start of classes.   I have no hope left in admin as they appear to be set in their decision. I truly hope students keep the pressure on admin, especially the SLS at Western Law, to try to get some sort of in person education for upper year students. For most of us, it is our last year(s) of schooling before we enter the workforce forever – let’s not let go of it so easily.
    • I have declined the offer. The first concern I had about this program was the cost, and after giving it about 6 weeks' thought, this hasn't changed. All the best to everyone.
    • I'm a little late to this thread, but personal finances are a huge interest of mine, and wanted to contribute. First off, I would highly recommend to anyone a book called The Simple Path to Wealth by JL Collins. The title really says it all - it provides a simple and easy to follow approach to building personal wealth with the goal of achieving financial independence. It's US centric, but the author is cognizant of international readers, and the discussion is widely applicable to Canadians as well. Even the section on the approach to investing with registered plans applies as Canada has rough equivalents to the US 401(k), Roth IRA, etc. A second book recommendation for those saving up for a down payment is a book called The Wealthy Renter by Alex Avery. The book challenges the notion that it's inherently better to pay a mortgage than rent. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from looking to buy, but the book gives a far too little discussed perspective which is helpful to allow you to assess the reasons you want to buy in light of your own situation. After reading it, I decided that buying a condo/house doesn't really make sense for me right now (which isn't to say that won't change in the future). As for my own situation, I graduated in 2018 with around $60K in debt ($35K in government loans and $25K on my PSLOC). I was very fortunate that at the time, my parents gave myself and my siblings an "advance on our inheritance" of $60K to pay off debt or assist with a down payment. I immediately paid off my government loans before any interest became due, and took the other $25K and put it into my TFSA because I believed I could earn more interest than the prime rate being charged on my PSLOC. I actually drew down my PSLOC further to max out my TFSA. I currently owe roughly $40K on my PSLOC, which goes into repayment beginning tomorrow. My current plan is to pay the minimum payments on it over the next 10 years until it's paid off. This plan may change if interest rates increase significantly. This is definitely not for everyone, and I appreciate that I have a fairly high risk tolerance. As a quick aside, anyone who is reasonably financially responsible and who intends on making RRSP contributions during the year should consider filling out a CRA Form T1213 setting out your intended contribution for the year. The CRA will then provide you a letter that you can bring to your employer authorizing them not to deduct the income tax at source that you would be getting as a refund as a result of your RRSP contribution. No sense in giving the government an interest free loan for the year if you don't have to! Be careful though - if you don't actually make the contributions you indicate on the form, you will have a tax bill for the shortfall of incomes taxes owed when you file your return. I'm now a two year call working in a large Vancouver firm (base salary range is around $110K-$115K for a 2 year call in Vancouver biglaw). I max out my TFSA and RRSP contributions every year which is the current extent of my annual savings. I live what I consider to be a very nice lifestyle. Rent for my 1br downtown apartment is $2,300 per month, I go on 3-4 vacations per year, I eat out and go for drinks with friends regularly (or at least I did pre-Covid), and I'm constantly buying fun stuff to spruce up my place. I don't own a car and rent out my parking spot for $150 a month. I walk or bike almost everywhere, or take transit if I'm going far. I also save a ton on my eating out habit as I legitimately enjoy doing so with my firm and/or our clients, and this is all usually paid for by the firm. This was all on my 1 year call budget. We recently got our 2nd year pay bump which ends up as an extra $800 or so monthly after taxes, and have a decent 2019 bonus coming sometime in the future. My lifestyle already provides most of what I want, so this will likely go mostly to additional savings in non-registered plans. I currently expect to do the same for future salary bumps and bonuses. If I don't have any significant lifestyle changes (a big assumption), and stick it out in biglaw (another big assumption), I could probably retire (or work on a passion project) well before 50 based on the metric for financial independence that's discussed in the book I recommended above. For those interested, that metric is when you are comfortably able to live off of 4% of your assets - so, for example, $2.5M in assets would yield $100K annually (without adjusting for taxes, which may vary significantly based on how you draw that $100K).
    • Can I ask when o-week typically is? Is it the week before block weeks classes start, or is it the week in between block week and first term?

×
×
  • Create New...