Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
amb

request for reference letter - not from my academic references

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know if it is common for UVIC admissions to request a letter of reference from a supervisor (in this case the lawyer 'I work most closely with') at your place of employment when the references you listed were academic references as you are still in your undergrad?

 

I just received this request and, as they didn't ask for reference letters from the start, am a little thrown off. I have already been accepted to UBC and Dalhousie, both of which I consider a better fit for me going forward, and so if I have no intention of accepting an offer from UVIC should I receive one is it worth it to waste the time of my lawyer and further time of the admissions committee?

 

I'm curious if anyone else has had a similar experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you apply as a mature/access candidate? i think you're required to submit ref letters if you did - oops just read the part where you mention that you're still in undergrad...

Edited by rachelzane4050

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting because I applied through the regular applicant category, which is why I'm a little confused. I haven't heard of this happening to regular applicants, and it would seem a little strange if it was just me...

Edited by amb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have no intention of accepting the offer it is abundantly obvious that getting the letter is not worth anyones time. Sometimes I genuinely wonder about some of the comments on this site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have no intention of accepting the offer it is abundantly obvious that getting the letter is not worth anyones time. Sometimes I genuinely wonder about some of the comments on this site.

There's no need to be nasty about it. My thought was perhaps it's in contemplation of a potential scholarship, which I understand is a little presumptive, and so I was curious if anyone else had experienced something similar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no need to be nasty about it. My thought was perhaps it's in contemplation of a potential scholarship, which I understand is a little presumptive, and so I was curious if anyone else had experienced something similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If money is a concern for someone a significant scholarship could lead them to reconsider a school they were previously not particularly interested in.

 

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If money is a concern for someone a significant scholarship could lead them to reconsider a school they were previously not particularly interested in.

 

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Thanks exactly it, thank you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If money is a concern for someone a significant scholarship could lead them to reconsider a school they were previously not particularly interested in.

 

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

Yes, I understand that. In fact, that makes perfect sense. I don't think the best way of conveying that interest is by saying "I have already been accepted to UBC and Dalhousie, both of which I consider a better fit for me going forward, so if I have no intention of accepting an offer from UVIC should I receive one is it worth it to waste the time of my lawyer and further time of the admissions committee? 

 

If money is a concern for someone, the above passage is a very odd way of conveying that message. I mean, it literally does not even mention a scholarship, money concerns, anything. 

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

    • Hi,   I was just wondering if my reference would need to write one general reference letter that is applicable to every school or a targeted reference letter to each school. On the OUAC website it says that only one version is allowed so I am pretty confused.    Thanks in advance for the help!  
    • Going to help Ryn out when I can. I have the same experiences as them.  The review teams do not have the previous files, but we can request the information from admin if we needed it.  Practically speaking though, the scenario you're worrying about will not happen. It's quite rare for us to look at your previous application.  That being said I've always been of the opinion that you should tell the committee about your experiences. No reason to remove them IMHO 
    • There are a lot of recent topics on this website that you can review that discuss ways a new call can obtain employment. I was called in June 2019 and got my current job off of contacting a partner from a firm that was hiring in one practice area and providing him with an application package. I then did two interview with them, as per normal. Other people I know tended to do the same thing, rather than relying on Indeed, etc., just because it is so competitive and unless you are a superstar, it can be hard to distinguish yourself. 
    • If OP went to TRU in 1L then UBC in 2L, I'd assume they just didn't have strong cover letters/resumes. I'm in 3L at TRU and received 9 Vancouver OCIs with the following grades: A-, B+, B+, B, B, B, B. I had heard rumours that transferring to UBC from TRU/UVic looks bad to employers unless you had a compelling reason to transfer (family issues, you got married, etc.). I have no idea how true that is, so yeah.
    • Its mostly hyperbole for the pace of it part, I don't really see myself holding a tin can and a sign that reads "Will review contracts for Food".  There is nothing wrong of course with teaching fundamental skills. Just borrowing a page from say, physics. They teach fundamental theories and its very important to. But its laterally supplanted with learning how to use sophisticated machinery, and now supplanted with learning how to design and program simulation models. We spend like, an hour a week learning to use Westlaw and Quicklaw which are the tools of yesterday. We learn nothing about how these tools are going to operate. But yes, case summaries have not changed. It literally went unchanged for over a decade. Not for criminal law obviously, but the summaries I looked at were virtually identical to mine in teaching ratios and so-on with the same cases used. My point wasn't that it isn't useful; but the way of teaching it has not adapted yet and this is IMO problematic.  Sorry I seem very bitter and so-on, but I am just kind of frustrated with how archaic some of the curriculum for law schools generally seems to be entering my second year. 
×
×
  • Create New...