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.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my previous question.
I may be applying this cycle and have a question with regards to the Sketch part of the application. When I previously applied to Law School I added every little volunteer/extracurricular from the time I entered University. For simplicity purposes, I wanted to retain only the last 3-4 years of relevant experience. Would this be a problem for an individual that had more sketch items in a previous application 1-2 years ago? For example some activities are not included at all whereas they were on a previous application?
And just for the sake of knowing I guess, would you have access to and look back at a previous application if you were assessing a candidate?