I also did not know anyone...until I started building my own network by reaching out to alums and Canadians working in NY. It's never too late to start networking. Even if you don't secure a job this time around, establishing contacts in the NY market will be helpful when you want to move down later. 

Hi everyone! Currently overwhelmed so glad to get some insight over 2 areas I am working through right now:   1) 1L Summer Jobs - I applied to almost all firms in the last 1L recruit in Toronto and Calgary but didn't get to hear back from any of them. Happy to note any connections, advice, or tips for getting a job this summer. I am pretty flexible with field/practice-area (law firm, in-house, banking, etc.), location, time, and pay/benefits this summer. 2) 2L Recruit - I'll be taking part in the upcoming 2L recruit for Toronto and Calgary. With that I just got my 1L grades which give me between a B and B- as my overall 1L average. With an equal amount of Bs and B-'s with a few B+'s, I have a C+ and D+ in Legal Ethics and Indigenous so I am concerned how would my overall application stand? What should I do to make this situation better? I've took part in negotiation + moot competitions, pro bono work, and an executive role in my law school's corporate law club throughout my 1L. I also have client service/work experiences from the past 5 years, which includes real estate sales from the past 3 years onwards and [before that] retail banking and fast-food service all during undergrad.   I am focussed on either big law/corporate (due to my work background) or government (litigation or prosecution) for the 2L recruit, but I'm not sure if I need to stay open/stick with one field or reconsider altogether. Great to hear from y'all! Thanks

Also, OP, I think the logic games section has been or is being removed.  Take challenging classes and consciously develop your skills in reading, reasoning, and writing during your undergrad. By the time you need to write your LSAT, you will probs be fine without much prep. The same skills will also serve you well during law school. I personally regret not taking writing courses in my undergrad lol.

good for you @BlockedQuebecois (and them)

I mean, it's their own opinion so I won't fault them for it, but when people start suggesting that "prep is useless, overrated, and unnecessary," I think it's helpful to provide an alternative viewpoint that preparation is, in fact, sufficient on its own to achieve a perfect score on certain sections. I don't even know if it was exhausting tbh. I feel like with the prep resources available nowadays, it was quite easy to learn the system I found most optimal, and then do a few practice tests to get used to doing it under timed conditions. My diagnostic tests were high -- I also believe I had good logical reasoning skills at the time -- but prepping made these scores even better and more consistent. I offered a caveat in my OP that I think extensive prep is only necessary if you want to score very highly. For those were it's not important to do so, then yes, there is less of a need for extensive prep. 

lol. People here acting like the skills tested by the LSAT cannot be learned or developed through time. Given OP is in their first year of undergrad, instead of starting doing specific preps right now for the LSAT, it might be a good idea to focus on the skills tested by the exam. You can certainly develop these skills by taking classes in your undergrad program that focus on reading dense materials, writing, and subjects that require heavy abstract and logical reasoning.  While I personally did not prep for a year for the exam as I did not decide on applying to law school until the year of apps, I did find that my background in math, stats, and CS prepped me well for logic games and logical reasoning on the exam. On the other hand, I had lots of difficulty with finishing RC with the same accuracy on time and I did spend a lot of time learning the requisite RC skills. After some time in law school, I find that my RC skills have drastically improved compared to the time of my LSAT; i.e., the skills tested can always be improved. So, I don't think it's good advice to focus too much on the aptitude element of the exam. That is certainly true to some extent, but you can def learn to develop the skills necessary to perform well, as long as you have average intelligence, which most of us do.

This sounds exhausting, and I struggle to see how it’s a rebuttal of the point others are making, which is that they should do a diagnostic and see if they need to waste time learning about the four kinds of logic games or whatever.  A bunch of people just have reasonably good logical reasoning skills and so don’t need to draw little doodles or whatever.