Jump to content

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, ProfReader said:

 

How is one "cheating" but not the other? By your definition of cheating, isn't the first merely cheating more than the second?

Because one is used as a complement and one is a substitute for work. This is entirely subjective. I don't consider copying a summary from X website directly in your notes with having done a note summary and using another to fill any holes/add material on the same level. I consider these substantially different, you may not. 

Edited by throwaway1001
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a very convenient theory that you have come up with to justify your actions and complain about others.

Edited by ProfReader
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ProfReader said:

That is a very convenient theory that you have come up with to justify your actions and complain about others.

It is what it is. 

Edited by throwaway1001
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, throwaway1001 said:

I did it. I don't think I ever used someone else's summary for a case. I did use their final notes to puff up mines. Some people do all the summaries and some don't. At the end of the day, its about if you understand the issues (but if you ask me, those people are only setting themselves up to fail). The only class where we had "volume cases" was Contract.

Disclaimer : 1L PCLF

What does PCLF stand for?

 

PCLF

AcronymDefinition

PCLFPlanning and Conservation League Foundation (Sacramento, CA)

PCLFPolk County Library Federation (Balsam Lake, WI)

PCLFPortland Community Liberation Front (Portland, OR)

PCLFPeritoneal Cavity Lavage Fluid

PCLFPhiladelphia Christian Leaders Fellowship (Pennsylvania)

Edited by Luckycharm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Programme de common law en français (French JD program)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, throwaway1001 said:

Because one is used as a complement and one is a substitute for work. This is entirely subjective. I don't consider copying a summary from X website directly in your notes with having done a note summary and using another to fill any holes/add material on the same level. I consider these substantially different, you may not. 

Nobody asked or required you to make your own summary. Technically, a 100% exam course requires zero work; all you have to do is show up and write the exam like everybody else.

I've just never heard a law student call using an old summary "cheating"; they often look down their nose out of a sense of superiority to justify how hard they perceive themselves working, but cheating? It's an open-book exam! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2020 at 5:41 PM, ArchivesandMuseums said:

I do not know, but do we really need to brief "every case"? I am not sure...

It depends person to person. In first term I read every case and briefed it religiously in addition to creating my own CANs. It was a bit too much. I switched strategies in second term. Still read cases, stopped briefing, and built my CAN/outline as I went along. It was great because by the end of the term I had pretty much all my CANs done so all I had to do was use them to practice exams with. I found this worked out better for me.

I also know people who didn’t read cases AND used other people’s CANs. They seem to be doing fine. I wouldn’t consider this cheating since at the end of the day you are tested in application of the law and not on the content of cases assigned. I personally didn’t feel comfortable doing this because I learn best through reading the case and taking the main point and summarizing it in my own words. The process of creating a CAN also helps me see the bigger picture and how the body of cases fits into that area of law.

Edited by Aschenbach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, capitalttruth said:

The learning strategist I talked to this week said I can try the first three weeks full time to see if I can get an impression of the workload, and then if I feel overwhelmed, I can drop down to part time by the end of September and get half of my tuition back. She added the caveat that 3 weeks may not be enough time to get an accurate impression of how intense the workload is toward exam time.

Do you know if this is an option available to all students (who are eligible for part-time), or was that specifically a consideration extended to you after talking with UOttawa? I've been having a lot of the same questions/concerns as what you described in your OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Aschenbach said:

It depends person to person. In first term I read every case and briefed it religiously in addition to creating my own CANs. It was a bit too much. I switched strategies in second term. Still read cases, stopped briefing, and built my CAN/outline as I went along. It was great because by the end of the term I had pretty much all my CANs done so all I had to do was use them to practice exams with. I found this worked out better for me.

I also know people who didn’t read cases AND used other people’s CANs. They seem to be doing fine. I wouldn’t consider this cheating since at the end of the day you are tested in application of the law and not on the content of cases assigned. I personally didn’t feel comfortable doing this because I learn best through reading the case and taking the main point and summarizing it in my own words. The process of creating a CAN also helps me see the bigger picture and how the body of cases fits into that area of law.

If I were to just read cases without briefing them for the purposes of creating my own CANS, would this be a more efficient way to achieve success? For some reason, I have this impression that case briefing is an important element of studying along with everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, binggou said:

Do you know if this is an option available to all students (who are eligible for part-time), or was that specifically a consideration extended to you after talking with UOttawa? I've been having a lot of the same questions/concerns as what you described in your OP.

It's just apart of the normal accommodations I've received throughout undergrad, grad school, LSAT etc. It may also be extended to you if there is documentation. Talk to Jessica Simon at the Equity and Academic Success Committee. https://commonlaw.uottawa.ca/en/people/simon-jessica

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, capitalttruth said:

It's just apart of the normal accommodations I've received throughout undergrad, grad school, LSAT etc. It may also be extended to you if there is documentation. Talk to Jessica Simon at the Equity and Academic Success Committee. https://commonlaw.uottawa.ca/en/people/simon-jessica

Great to know, thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, capitalttruth said:

If I were to just read cases without briefing them for the purposes of creating my own CANS, would this be a more efficient way to achieve success? For some reason, I have this impression that case briefing is an important element of studying along with everything else.

It really depends. I think to start you should do as much as you can and figure out what works for you. I started off briefing cases and then making my CANs close to the end of first term, but I found that this wasn't the best use of my time so in second term I CAN'ed as the term progressed. Every time I read a case I updated my CAN (preferably before lecture). Then after a lecture, I would revise my CAN with whatever the professor said.

Again, you would probably want to start off by briefing cases, CAN'ing, and taking notes, but feel free to adjust as you go on. I did all this in first term but my process got streamlined to just reading cases, CAN'ing and revising my CAN based on the lecture. Note that I only did above average and not like top student in my class or anything, but I did improve in second term even though I did less work. Everyone's process is different though, so the challenge is figuring out the process that fits best with your learning style.

 

Edited by Aschenbach
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does uOttawa have a database of previous years' syllabi for the various profs? I found course descriptions and grading schemes through the course search engine, but I am thinking of schedules that outline cases/readings/assignments/tests for each week.

Such a schedule might clarify whether the workload will be too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, HopefulE said:

Does uOttawa have a database of previous years' syllabi for the various profs? I found course descriptions and grading schemes through the course search engine, but I am thinking of schedules that outline cases/readings/assignments/tests for each week.

Such a schedule might clarify whether the workload will be too much.

I've been looking, for sure. Found an old Property syllabus with Prof. De Beer. Around 45 pages a week, I've heard Contracts and Torts have a similar reading length per week. Constitutional and Crim are a little longer, around 70-80 (?) per week. From what I can gather the average amount of reading per week is 250-300 pages, which is a lot but definitely manageable if you're only doing law school related stuff. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You’ll quickly get a sense who you need to read for. Some profs (Blair, Mayeda, Gruben) spoon-feed the reading material, so you may find reading beforehand redundant. 

That said, I generally liked to have read the material for my own peace of mind for the exam. I eventually did over 90% (probably 100%) of the assigned reading in Torts, Contracts, Property, and Crim, though not necessarily before class. I read well under 50% for Pubcon because I made my summary from Charterpedia. 

Regarding summaries, I hated making them. I made two summaries in 1L and otherwise just tabbed my textbooks to hell. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, easttowest said:

You’ll quickly get a sense who you need to read for. Some profs (Blair, Mayeda, Gruben) spoon-feed the reading material, so you may find reading beforehand redundant. 

That said, I generally liked to have read the material for my own peace of mind for the exam. I eventually did over 90% (probably 100%) of the assigned reading in Torts, Contracts, Property, and Crim, though not necessarily before class. I read well under 50% for Pubcon because I made my summary from Charterpedia. 

Regarding summaries, I hated making them. I made two summaries in 1L and otherwise just tabbed my textbooks to hell. 

 

 

If you don't mind me asking, why did you hate making summaries? Was this harder to do depending on the class?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, capitalttruth said:

If you don't mind me asking, why did you hate making summaries? Was this harder to do depending on the class?

No, I just found it boring and redundant since in 1L all the content was already in my textbooks. I don't recommend you going in planning on doing what I did though.

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

    • Your grades are quite good so I would apply broadly and cross my fingers. The only Canadian law school I've seen that accepts a lot of US transfers from bottom tier schools is U of T. But your grades have to be really good. I'm not sure how they will view your B's. Good luck. 
    • yeah it was a mistake. I posted this in law students when I meant to post in articling students and lawyers and I couldn't delete it after it had been posted. I think I mentioned it in this thread or the one that you linked. 
    • There's been a lot of focus here on IQ but one of the things that makes a good lawyer is a heavy measure of EQ and our friend here McGillicutty has demonstrated why many of my former STEM colleagues lack even a smidgen of EQ.
    • The only thing that matters is that you can get funding at a good interest rate. Scotia has the best offerings, but that doesn't mean that you're out of options if they decline you. In my experience, the bank that you have the longest history with is the one that usually helps you out in situations where your credit isn't up to snuff. 
    • I think you are slightly confused maybemaybe, so I can clear this up for you:  2 year applicants are those that are in their second year of their undergrad degree (will have 60-89 completed credits) by the time they enter law school and they are the ones who require exceptional stats (3.7 and 90th percentile); see excerpt from https://apps.admissions.ualberta.ca/programs/la/la020 ("There is no direct entry from high school into the Juris Doctor program (JD). Exceptional students may be admitted to the program after completing two years of university study with a minimum GPA of 3.7 and 90th percentile Law School Admission Test (LSAT) score. All other students must have completed at least the first three years of a degree before being admitted to the JD."). This applies when you apply in your second year of undergrad.  3rd year applicants are those that are in their 3rd year of university and who will have 90 or more credits by the time they enter law school and they are treated the same as those with degrees. Excerpt from same website " All other students must have completed at least the first three years of a degree before being admitted to the JD." This applies when you apply in your third year of undergrad.  Hope this clears everything up! 

×
×
  • Create New...