Ask me questions!

[ZukoJD]

I’m just going to add a small tidbit I gathered from attending Ryerson’s open house last year. The Dean said that the majority of their cohort (I believe it was 60% plus) said they were interested in corporate law. 

So, this seems to corroborate at least a bit what is being said in the thread here. Ryerson’s mandate probably doesn’t line up well with the aspirations of those attending their school.
 

Add in the fact that Ryerson decided upon a tuition price putting it very much in the upper range of Canadian schools, and I find the whole thing a bit disingenuous.

 

[CleanHands]

1 hour ago, ZukoJD said:

-Snip-

At any law school in Canada the majority of students are going to want to do BigLaw (note: this is coming from someone who hates BigLaw and thinks this is insane; it's just obviously true). As I said before, statements about law school "mandates" are bullshit and just extremely lazy efforts to mask less than desirable graduate outcome trends. It is not a coincidence that only schools with bottom-of-the-barrel admission standards and poor OCI job placements go on about "mandates" while the most competitive schools don't need to because they don't need to justify their graduate outcomes.

And of course, I'd imagine that fewer students at schools with poor OCI job placement rates would express an interest in those jobs even if they were interested (compared to students with similar interests at schools with high placement rates), due to the lower probability of landing them and the embarrassment of failing to achieve a stated career objective. Kind of like how at schools that place well, there are always a lot of students who express interest in BigLaw during 1L that suddenly will have a "change of heart" right after grades are released and say "I've been thinking about this and I'm more interested in serving 'real people' in a rural retail practice."

[JudgingJudy]

Hi there do you happen to have the 1L schedule?