Jump to content

How do you gauge the strength of your ECs?


amynamey

Recommended Posts

I've been browsing through previous accepted/waitlisted/rejection threads and I'm a little confused by how people rate their ECs.

What do people generally mean by "decent ECs"? And "strong ECs"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMP
  • Law Student

I wouldn't pay much mind to it. People say the same about their letters of reference "very strong LOR", it's all nonsense. 

Personally I think there are a few ECs that actually do qualify as quite strong, but the overwhelming majority of applicants have very normal ECs. Regardless of what they may think. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CleanHands
  • Lawyer
9 minutes ago, LMP said:

I wouldn't pay much mind to it. People say the same about their letters of reference "very strong LOR", it's all nonsense. 

Personally I think there are a few ECs that actually do qualify as quite strong, but the overwhelming majority of applicants have very normal ECs. Regardless of what they may think. 

If these sorts of buffoons on the forums have taught me anything, it's that the average undergrad student union kakistocrat considers themselves the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

  • LOL 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whist
  • Law Student

The majority of what people call "strong ECs" is BS, much like people self-rating their personal statements or letters of reference as strong. This includes having law-related experience, being captain of a debate club, having an overseas internship, etc etc. To be clear, these ECs are perfectly fine, but that's the extent of them - fine. Being an Olympic athlete, widely published author, aerospace engineer, and so on are what I would consider to be actually excellent ECs/experiences. Obviously, the vast majority of applicants aren't those things. There are folks who I would consider to be strong applicants not because they necessarily had singular backgrounds, but because they weaved their backgrounds into their application well and told a good story about who they are and why they should be admitted. The truth is most applicants are competing against similarly qualified people, especially K-JDs. Most people's applications are fine. And fineness gets you into law school all the time. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GoatDuck
  • Law Student

I just treated any softs that are more interesting than part time work experience at a gas station as "decent softs." I wouldn't read too much into it

Edited by GoatDuck
Typo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patient0L
  • Law Student
14 hours ago, amynamey said:

I've been browsing through previous accepted/waitlisted/rejection threads and I'm a little confused by how people rate their ECs.

What do people generally mean by "decent ECs"? And "strong ECs"?

LSData has a “softs” hierarchy:

https://www.lsd.law/softs

I would use it for entertainment purposes and/or to get some perspective that most of what students get up to in their spare time isn’t that impressive. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whist
  • Law Student
1 hour ago, Patient0L said:

LSData has a “softs” hierarchy:

https://www.lsd.law/softs

I would use it for entertainment purposes and/or to get some perspective that most of what students get up to in their spare time isn’t that impressive. 

The hierarchy/list here is for American law schools. So yes, it can help give perspective, but I want to note its jurisdictional boundaries just so any applicants passing by don't get mixed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patient0L
  • Law Student
4 hours ago, Whist said:

The hierarchy/list here is for American law schools. So yes, it can help give perspective, but I want to note its jurisdictional boundaries just so any applicants passing by don't get mixed up.

I think it’s there to let people know that they are not special 😉 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GoBigOrGoHome
  • Law Student

Generally speaking, I don’t think that a lot of people’s EC’s/softs are any better than the others in K2JD situations. 

 

Where I think someone stands out is the type of paid work experience and volunteer. And most who have this kind of experience will be older students. I am talking about a professional job like a policy analyst or accountant vs. Someone who worked as an admin assistant. Someone who sat on the board of a national non-profit using their expertise (whether gained through personal life experience or academic/professional pursuits) vs. Someone who’s decided to give back and engage in voluntourism. 
 

There definitely is standout ECs, but in my opinion I wouldn’t compare yourself to others because most people will overvalue their ECs. If you want to engage in ECs - do something that really matters to you vs doing it for your resume. Your depth of engagement and the actual difference you made/work you did in that area will give you more to write about rather than some surface level engagement in something you could care less about. 

Link to comment
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.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By accessing this website, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use. YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU WILL NOT CONSTRUE ANY POST ON THIS WEBSITE AS PROVIDING LEGAL ADVICE EVEN IF SUCH POST IS MADE BY A PERSON CLAIMING TO BE A LAWYER. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.