Jump to content
Slippinjimmy97

Is TRU a reputable Law School

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

So to be clear, you're literally arguing that someone with a 3.0 and 150 LSAT is equally likely to perform well in law school than someone with a 4.0 and 180?

I'm saying its not a done deal that the person with lower stats will perform worse than the person with perfect stats.  I want to be clear that  I don't think that LSAT and GPA are totally irrelevant, but I do think that the difference in admission standards between law schools in canada is not enough to state that one school has a weaker cohort than the other in terms of producing lawyers.  To answer that question i would say it's possible that the student with lower scores outperform the one with higher scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lawstudent20202020 said:

I'm saying its not a done deal that the person with lower stats will perform worse than the person with perfect stats.  I want to be clear that  I don't think that LSAT and GPA are totally irrelevant, but I do think that the difference in admission standards between law schools in canada is not enough to state that one school has a weaker cohort than the other in terms of producing lawyers.  To answer that question i would say it's possible that the student with lower scores outperform the one with higher scores.

So to be clear, you believe there is a correlation between LSAT / uGPA and law school success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

So to be clear, you believe there is a correlation between LSAT / uGPA and law school success.

Not a determinative one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lawstudent20202020 said:

That's what determinative means.the correlation is not strong enough for that to be true.

So then you are arguing that, on average, a 3.0 / 150 student will perform as well as a 4.0 / 180 student?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

So then you are arguing that, on average, a 3.0 / 150 student will perform as well as a 4.0 / 180 student?

I'm saying there's too many other factors at play to make that call one way or the other. 

Also we are talking about the strength of schools and the difference between the two is nearly at that scale.

Edited by lawstudent20202020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lawstudent20202020 said:

I'm saying there's too many other factors at play to make that call one way or the other. 

Well no, that's not how this works. Presumably, because we're talking averages, the other factors average out. 

You have two students, and the only difference between them is their LSAT / GPA score. One has a 150 / 3.0. One has a 180 / 4.0. 

Which student do you think will perform better at their hypothetical law school?

Edited by BlockedQuebecois
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Well no, that's not how this works. Presumably, because we're talking averages, the other factors average out. 

You have two students, and all you know about them is their GPA and their LSAT. One has a 150 / 3.0. One has a 180 / 4.0. 

Which student do you think will perform better at their hypothetical law school?

First off, no they do not "average out" that is not how it works. Second we are comparing schools not extremes. If we do take extremes then at .49 you could get away with that, but the difference between law schools is not extreme enough.

Edited by lawstudent20202020
For clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just going to point out the obvious here: you're avoiding the question because it proves the point. 

Anyone with the data we have and a quarter of brain would lay money on the 4.0 / 180 student. Just like anyone with a quarter of a brain would lay money on that person performing better at basically any halfway educational pursuit. If you told me they were both going to become accountants, I'd still bet money on the 4.0 / 180 kid. 

It's just silly to suggest that decent proxies for intelligence – GPA and LSAT – have no bearing on one's future abilities in a field in which success is largely (though not even close to entirely) based on intelligence. 

But hey, fight your fight. I'll let the reader decide which argument is more persuasive. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

I'm just going to point out the obvious here: you're avoiding the question because it proves the point. 

Anyone with the data we have and a quarter of brain would lay money on the 4.0 / 180 student. Just like anyone with a quarter of a brain would lay money on that person performing better at basically any halfway educational pursuit. If you told me they were both going to become accountants, I'd still bet money on the 4.0 / 180 kid. 

It's just silly to suggest that decent proxies for intelligence – GPA and LSAT – have no bearing on one's future abilities in a field in which success is largely (though not even close to entirely) based on intelligence. 

But hey, fight your fight. I'll let the reader decide which argument is more persuasive. 

But we are not talking about the difference between 150 and 180. I will plainly answer your question, yes someone with perfect stats is probably a smarter person/ better student than someone with a 150 and a 3.0. However that is completely irrelevant to the issue as the statistical relevance breaks down as you decrease the difference between the numbers.

The point in contention was that TRU produces worse lawyers than UBC or other schools due to lower admission standards and the evidence does not support that. The correlation is not strong enough at to support that at the levels we are looking at between schools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, lawstudent20202020 said:

But we are not talking about the difference between 150 and 180. I will plainly answer your question, yes someone with perfect stats is probably a smarter person/ better student than someone with a 150 and a 3.0. However that is completely irrelevant to the issue as the statistical relevance breaks down as you decrease the difference between the numbers.

The point in contention was that TRU produces worse lawyers than UBC or other schools due to lower admission standards and the evidence does not support that. The correlation is not strong enough at to support that at the levels we are looking at between schools.

Let’s put some numbers to this, then. TRU and Lakehead both refuse to publish admissions stats (presumably because they think the scores will be low enough that it’s less harmful to let people assume the scores are bad), but the Windsor Dual program helpfully publishes their medians, as does U of T. 

U of T: 166 / 3.87

Windsor Dual: 155 / 3.12

So let’s check back: you think the average Windsor Dual student would do as well as the average U of T student if they went to the same law school? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

Let’s put some numbers to this, then. TRU and Lakehead both refuse to publish admissions stats (presumably because they think the scores will be low enough that it’s less harmful to let people assume the scores are bad), but the Windsor Dual program helpfully publishes their medians, as does U of T. 

U of T: 166 / 3.87

Windsor Dual: 155 / 3.12

So let’s check back: you think the average Windsor Dual student would do as well as the average U of T student if they went to the same law school? 

I'm gunna say yes. And I know you are going to say the opposite and there's no changing that. So i guess at this point we both agree to disagree, shake hands and walk away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But on a more serious note—why do these kind of threads tend to devolve into a (pardon my French) ‘whose dick is bigger contest’? OP is asking about job prospects not ‘the difference between a 150 and a 180’. While I don’t really think I have a lot of authority to speak on recruitment and what a potential employer is looking for being a (very new to the game) 1L, I do often lurk and from what I’ve read/gleaned from the forum if you’re looking for jobs in interior/rural BC TRU would be a good law school to go to for networking, or any other BC law school for that matter (they do say go to a law school in a province you want to practice in). It’s not really like the States where the tiers really seem to matter. Anyways best of luck to OP!! 

Edited by janegu
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's fair to say top students with top LSAT scores will likely do best in law school. I don't think that always translates into practice. For example, becoming a wildly successful personal injury lawyer has less to do with one's genius legal ability than it does with being a business conscious, hardworking and likable person (yes, I know you can't be a total numb-skull and still be a successful P.I lawyer). There are plenty of B- law students who have much greater success in practice than those at the top. Some people don't care to work hard in school, but when they've got a client they turn on the jets. Some people who are gifted academically have a difficult time doing the more mundane work of lawyering that clients nonetheless demand.

All that being said, I would imagine that on average top students are more successful lawyers than their less academically successful counterparts.

I guess we have to ask what being "successful" in law means.

Edited by TdK
clarity

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • A rejection email. I think it's beneath the Supreme Court of Canada to tell people to 'please fuck off,' but, well.... we look to substance, not form.  I believe the Court informs applicants not invited for an interview in March. I wouldn't expect anything before then.
    • Yeah I wouldn’t worry about it. When schools say they take the highest LSAT I’ve yet to see evidence that they don’t mean it. 
    • I’m sorry you’re going through this. As you know, law school is, without a doubt, a stressful environment for many if not most people. But I know plenty of people who entered law school with depression, and other mental illnesses, that have excelled nonetheless. I think it’s premature to frame this question in terms of your future clients. The real question here is whether you will be okay in law school. I assume you are already getting the professional help you need—to state the blindingly obvious, suicidal thoughts are extremely serious and, while I have no experience here, I wouldn’t do anything until you have addressed those. Anyway — ADHD and depression are not uncommon in law school. And I don’t think you’d be making a bad decision for anyone else by going to law school. And, on the contrary, if you have a genuine desire to be a lawyer, I think it would be a shame to talk yourself out of the opportunity unnecessarily. If you are accepted, perhaps consider deferring for a year to reevaluate?  I guess all I am saying is that (i) depression doesn’t preclude you going to law school succeeding and being a great lawyer but (ii) in the short term you need to put your health first, especially if you are having suicidal thoughts.
    • Hmmm. I still haven't received an email from TRU. I didn't even get one when my file was complete. I will probably give them a call this week to see what is happening.
    • Hey @learning31, the following are their stats: 152, 3.77 L2, 3.2 CGPA 151, 3.6 L2, 3.3 CGPA 154, 3.1 CGPA Since last year they looked at L3, none of the above L2s are confirmed.
×