164/3.76. What next?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
Captainahab
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 4:52 pm

164/3.76. What next?

Postby Captainahab » Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:35 pm

I'm spending more time worrying than studying for my LSAT retake so I thought I'd post my question.

Stats: 164 (official, 3 years ago, 1 month studying while in school), 3.76 gpa top undergrad, social science degree.

Wanted: best chance possible at a legal career in the common law world. Risk averse. Family can help with debt, but I don't want to be unemployed.

I am working a boring technical writing job currently. I've always wanted to practice law but took this job because my 164 LSAT score sucked. I was too demoralized to even think about that test again until now. Here is my current plan:

Study and retake to get a 168+ in December. I'm already in the process of studying. If successful, apply to everything down to USC this year and the next (but earlier). If 167 or below, apply to Toronto/McGill/osgoode/alberta/ubc and take chances on a better but lower-paying Canadian market. Live in Canada for the rest of life. (I don't care where I live and really mean that.)

Is this a decent plan? Should I make any changes to it? Anyone think I should stick it out in tech writing if I don't get my 168+? Or that I should simply study 3 hours a day, for years if necessary, until I get my 168+ (ew)? Also, what if the Canadian job stats are misleading? All of them claim high articling placement, but how do I know how many articling students actually get hired back? Maybe I'd be better off with a T20 or T30 in that case.

Hopefully, my retake works out. If it doesn't though, I need a plan B. Thanks in advance for any advice.

User avatar
YourCaptain
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: 164/3.76. What next?

Postby YourCaptain » Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:41 pm

You retake, score 173+. You do not settle for a 164. As a rising 2L, let me emphasize - your competition is brutal.

Trequartista
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:26 am

Re: 164/3.76. What next?

Postby Trequartista » Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:19 pm

Captainahab wrote:
Study and retake to get a 168+ in December. I'm already in the process of studying. If successful, apply to everything down to USC this year and the next (but earlier). If 167 or below, apply to Toronto/McGill/osgoode/alberta/ubc and take chances on a better but lower-paying Canadian market. Live in Canada for the rest of life. (I don't care where I live and really mean that.)

Is this a decent plan? Should I make any changes to it? Anyone think I should stick it out in tech writing if I don't get my 168+? Or that I should simply study 3 hours a day, for years if necessary, until I get my 168+ (ew)? Also, what if the Canadian job stats are misleading? All of them claim high articling placement, but how do I know how many articling students actually get hired back? Maybe I'd be better off with a T20 or T30 in that case.

Hopefully, my retake works out. If it doesn't though, I need a plan B. Thanks in advance for any advice.


This is relevant to my interests.

Captainahab
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 4:52 pm

Re: 164/3.76. What next?

Postby Captainahab » Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:05 pm

YourCaptain wrote:You retake, score 173+. You do not settle for a 164. As a rising 2L, let me emphasize - your competition is brutal.


Easier said than done, but you're obviously right. With the LSAT I can take as much time as I need to improve and I generally know where I stand. On the other hand, I have no idea how I'll fare in 1L.

Trequartista wrote:
Captainahab wrote:
Study and retake to get a 168+ in December. I'm already in the process of studying. If successful, apply to everything down to USC this year and the next (but earlier). If 167 or below, apply to Toronto/McGill/osgoode/alberta/ubc and take chances on a better but lower-paying Canadian market. Live in Canada for the rest of life. (I don't care where I live and really mean that.)

Is this a decent plan? Should I make any changes to it? Anyone think I should stick it out in tech writing if I don't get my 168+? Or that I should simply study 3 hours a day, for years if necessary, until I get my 168+ (ew)? Also, what if the Canadian job stats are misleading? All of them claim high articling placement, but how do I know how many articling students actually get hired back? Maybe I'd be better off with a T20 or T30 in that case.

Hopefully, my retake works out. If it doesn't though, I need a plan B. Thanks in advance for any advice.


This is relevant to my interests.


ITE Canada seems to be a decent option, doesn't it? Cheaper, more forgiving of low LSAT scores, and unlike Australia, Canada has a generous visa program for international graduates of its law schools (3 years, no LMO necessary). On top of this, the schools all boast impressive articling placement -- like 95% or more. I've also heard that the hours are better and that it's also easier to make partner. Still, I'm pretty skeptical. I don't know of any data on how many graduates of, say, UBC are permanently employed as lawyers three years out of school (meaning they're hired somewhere after the articling year). I remember one poster at lawstudents.ca said 25% of his/her graduating class at UBC was unemployed or underemployed. Also, Canadian citizens are given preference for government jobs (if I've misunderstood the PSEA, please correct me), which considerably reduces the number of articling positions available to internationals. Articling in rural areas, which is sometimes an option for students below the median, might be tough if you can't prove your connections to the region. Maybe in theory the Canadian economy is able to absorb all new law graduates every year, but it's really unclear whether it works out this way in practice. So really, how much better is Canada than a US T20 in terms of getting a job?

Hopefully I didn't just derail my own thread...

Trequartista
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:26 am

Re: 164/3.76. What next?

Postby Trequartista » Sun Aug 14, 2011 6:01 am

Captainahab wrote:
YourCaptain wrote:You retake, score 173+. You do not settle for a 164. As a rising 2L, let me emphasize - your competition is brutal.


Easier said than done, but you're obviously right. With the LSAT I can take as much time as I need to improve and I generally know where I stand. On the other hand, I have no idea how I'll fare in 1L.

Trequartista wrote:
Captainahab wrote:
Study and retake to get a 168+ in December. I'm already in the process of studying. If successful, apply to everything down to USC this year and the next (but earlier). If 167 or below, apply to Toronto/McGill/osgoode/alberta/ubc and take chances on a better but lower-paying Canadian market. Live in Canada for the rest of life. (I don't care where I live and really mean that.)

Is this a decent plan? Should I make any changes to it? Anyone think I should stick it out in tech writing if I don't get my 168+? Or that I should simply study 3 hours a day, for years if necessary, until I get my 168+ (ew)? Also, what if the Canadian job stats are misleading? All of them claim high articling placement, but how do I know how many articling students actually get hired back? Maybe I'd be better off with a T20 or T30 in that case.

Hopefully, my retake works out. If it doesn't though, I need a plan B. Thanks in advance for any advice.


This is relevant to my interests.


ITE Canada seems to be a decent option, doesn't it? Cheaper, more forgiving of low LSAT scores, and unlike Australia, Canada has a generous visa program for international graduates of its law schools (3 years, no LMO necessary). On top of this, the schools all boast impressive articling placement -- like 95% or more. I've also heard that the hours are better and that it's also easier to make partner. Still, I'm pretty skeptical. I don't know of any data on how many graduates of, say, UBC are permanently employed as lawyers three years out of school (meaning they're hired somewhere after the articling year). I remember one poster at lawstudents.ca said 25% of his/her graduating class at UBC was unemployed or underemployed. Also, Canadian citizens are given preference for government jobs (if I've misunderstood the PSEA, please correct me), which considerably reduces the number of articling positions available to internationals. Articling in rural areas, which is sometimes an option for students below the median, might be tough if you can't prove your connections to the region. Maybe in theory the Canadian economy is able to absorb all new law graduates every year, but it's really unclear whether it works out this way in practice. So really, how much better is Canada than a US T20 in terms of getting a job?

Hopefully I didn't just derail my own thread...


I think you are asking the right kind of questions. While Canadian law schools and law students often boast that their employment prospects are much better than US law schools, in terms of getting any job, we don't really have hard data to back that up. One thing though, if you can get into U of T in Canada, then that is probably as good an option as some of the T-14, probably better than a good number of T-14 if getting any job is what you are interested in.

I think UBC might be suffering from the over-competitive Vancouver market. The Ontario market is generally easier to crack than Vancouver.

One thing though. The dearth of people complaining about a lack of jobs on places like lawstudents.ca might suggest that there really isn't any shortage of jobs and that people generally do just fine.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Christinabruin and 8 guests