Chances

[Devika]

Undergrad GPA ( B.com )- 3.2

Graduate GPA ( LLB ) - 2.9

LSAT- 161

Hey, 

I am a mom, immigrant, and a law degree holder. Sadly, my degree is non transferable and hence I have to redo my law school in Canada. I want insights into my chances of admission with this statistics  Also my first language is not English .My extra-curricular activity included educating public about importance of fitness and exercise via seminars and free classes ( home country ), free educational classes for children ( home country ), fundraising for homeless people ( home country ), charity donations ( Canada ), volunteering  in community events ( Canada ). Unfortunately, after completing LLB, I migrated to Canada and hence no experience of working under a lawyer.  I worked as a fitness trainer, school teacher, freelance makeup artist back home. I worked as a pharmacy assistant, Physiotherapy assistant, Health care aide in Canada as well. 

[CatLawyerWannabe]

Hello Devika, I advise you talk with admission office and student ambassadors at the university. You should also do an IELTS if your education wasn't in English and get a WES for your degrees and transcripts. As your chances will be higher if you apply early, I recommend you get your WES as it takes around 1 month.

I am also a newcomer and applied for UBC a few days ago. My LSAT is 154, Msc GPA 3.78. I have work experience with law firms and immigration agents in Canada, and have reference letters from them, plus several related voluntary positions in Canada. I applied through the discretionary category, which requires a well-written SOP. From what you have explained, I think you can write an amazing SOP.

I am still waiting for my application results, but this is what I have found so far for people like us.

Curious: Can't you do the NCA exam to get the Canadian equivalent law credentials?

[Devika]

Hey Yasmin,

Thank you for boosting my confidence. I need to do law degree again in here. Unfortunately, NCA is not for me. My degree is untransferable. So applying to schools to see my chances. I do not have relevant legal jobs experience but I have worked in various fields and acquired various skills. 

Best wishes for your application! Hopefully we both get in!

[CatLawyerWannabe]

4 hours ago, Devika said:

Hey Yasmin,

Thank you for boosting my confidence. I need to do law degree again in here. Unfortunately, NCA is not for me. My degree is untransferable. So applying to schools to see my chances. I do not have relevant legal jobs experience but I have worked in various fields and acquired various skills. 

Best wishes for your application! Hopefully we both get in!

Wish you all the best too! Let me know how it goes :)

[MyWifesBoyfriend]

On 9/25/2024 at 2:01 PM, Yasmin said:

I am also a newcomer and applied for UBC a few days ago. My LSAT is 154, Msc GPA 3.78.

I know this isn’t your chance thread, and I do not intend to be condescending or mean in any way, but I would hope you have applied to a few back-ups. Even as a discretionary Applicant, UBC’s medians are very high and the discretionary category does not amount to a waiver for lower stats. Plenty of discretionary applicants have competitive stats as well.

 

Edit: Also might as well chance the OP as well since I am here. 
 

While I believe you could maybe squeeze into schools like Windsor, Bora Laskin, TRU and TMU, it is not likely. If you’re willing to re-sit, I would gun for a 165+ for a safe shot at some of these schools, and a batting chance at others (Queens, Western, Dal, etc.). With your current stats, you would need a 170+ to even have a 50/50 chance at UBC. 

Edited October 2, 2024 by MyWifesBoyfriend

[pastmidnight]

Something else to consider that is going to significantly impact your chances of admission – are you a Canadian citizen/PR, or are you on a visa/working towards PR? If the latter, you need to keep in mind that Canadian JD programs accept very few international students, and anecdotally most of the ones who are accepted have undergraduate degrees from Canadian universities and high GPAs and LSAT scores.

I agree entirely with what @MyWifesBoyfriend said – UBC's discretionary category is not a waiver for low stats, and I would strongly encourage you both to apply more broadly if you have not already done so.

[CatLawyerWannabe]

On 10/2/2024 at 3:08 PM, MyWifesBoyfriend said:

I know this isn’t your chance thread, and I do not intend to be condescending or mean in any way, but I would hope you have applied to a few back-ups. Even as a discretionary Applicant, UBC’s medians are very high and the discretionary category does not amount to a waiver for lower stats. Plenty of discretionary applicants have competitive stats as well.

 

Edit: Also might as well chance the OP as well since I am here. 
 

While I believe you could maybe squeeze into schools like Windsor, Bora Laskin, TRU and TMU, it is not likely. If you’re willing to re-sit, I would gun for a 165+ for a safe shot at some of these schools, and a batting chance at others (Queens, Western, Dal, etc.). With your current stats, you would need a 170+ to even have a 50/50 chance at UBC. 

That is fine. I don't want to move from Vancouver because I have an established career and live with my family here and I do not want to move. That's why I haven't applied to any other school. If I get into UBC, I will be happy. If not, I have other life goals to pursue. Priorities :)

[CatLawyerWannabe]

On 10/2/2024 at 7:37 PM, pastmidnight said:

Something else to consider that is going to significantly impact your chances of admission – are you a Canadian citizen/PR, or are you on a visa/working towards PR? If the latter, you need to keep in mind that Canadian JD programs accept very few international students, and anecdotally most of the ones who are accepted have undergraduate degrees from Canadian universities and high GPAs and LSAT scores.

I agree entirely with what @MyWifesBoyfriend said – UBC's discretionary category is not a waiver for low stats, and I would strongly encourage you both to apply more broadly if you have not already done so.

I am a Canadian PR. I am also aware that the discretionary category is not a waiver. Another thing to consider is that, at least based on my own experience, an LSAT score of 170+ is almost impossible for non-English speakers. As for my case, my accuracy was above 80%, but would need more time to process arguments on LSAT in another language.
As for GPA, I cannot do anything about that. It was around 10 years ago and in another country, based on so many unrelated courses.

In total, my decision of only applying to UBC was calculated :)

[MyWifesBoyfriend]

2 hours ago, Yasmin said:

That's why I haven't applied to any other school. If I get into UBC, I will be happy. If not, I have other life goals to pursue. Priorities 🙂

Fair enough.

2 hours ago, Yasmin said:

Another thing to consider is that, at least based on my own experience, an LSAT score of 170+ is almost impossible for non-English speakers. As for my case, my accuracy was above 80%, but would need more time to process arguments on LSAT in another language.

Not sure what this means. Plenty of non-native English speakers get high LSAT scores. Hell, a sizeable portion of Canada speaks French as a first language. How will your future clients feel if you used this same excuse to justify poor performance?
 

This is not meant to be a condemnation of you as a person, but rather a reasonable warning. There’s a real chance you may NEVER get into UBC with those stats. You need to re-sit the LSAT for high 160s if you want a not-impossible chance.

Edited October 7, 2024 by MyWifesBoyfriend

[Yogurt Baron]

9 hours ago, Yasmin said:

Another thing to consider is that, at least based on my own experience, an LSAT score of 170+ is almost impossible for non-English speakers.

I mean, two things.

1. MWB's point is about your admissibility. I'm short. Playing in the NBA is almost impossible for a guy my height. My noting that does not make it any likelier that the Raptors will offer me a contract tomorrow. Are there all kinds of barriers for folks whose first language isn't English? Absolutely, there are. MWB was describing the barriers, not endorsing them.

2. The implicit notion that, hey, writing a 170 LSAT is hard for those who don't speak English as a first language, but anyone else can just up and do it, is part of why I hate "study for the LSATs" culture so much. Only 2% of LSAT writers score a 170+ - that's about two hundred people in Canada every year. Almost everyone who writes the LSAT is some mixture of unusually smart, unusually privileged, unusually driven, or unusually self-confident for some other reason. To write a 170+, you need to not just be better at this than 98% of the general public - you need to be better at this than 98% of that subset of the population that writes the LSAT. The notion that 10,000 people are going to reach for a brass ring, 200 are going to get it, and that also, all of the 10,000 can be in the 200 if they all just try really hard, is...not how math works.

[GreyDude]

14 hours ago, MyWifesBoyfriend said:

Not sure what this means. Plenty of non-native English speakers get high LSAT scores. Hell, a sizeable portion of Canada speaks French as a first language. How will your future clients feel if you used this same excuse to justify poor performance?

For what it’s worth, McGill does not require the LSAT and explains that the reason for this is that it would be unfair to the large proportion of its applicants for whom French is their first language. 

[MyWifesBoyfriend]

42 minutes ago, GreyDude said:

For what it’s worth, McGill does not require the LSAT and explains that the reason for this is that it would be unfair to the large proportion of its applicants for whom French is their first language. 

This is a whole other can of worms. If a French-speaking school figures that a test administered in English is unfair, that makes sense. But then what should they use in lieu of the LSAT? Grades and extracurriculars? What if the individual did not have the luxury to focus on school during their undergrad? 

I find it unfair that the student who got a paid vacation for four years in undergrad would have their cGPA prioritized over some other standardized proxy of law school aptitude that limits the external factors involved with getting high undergraduate marks.

Edited October 8, 2024 by MyWifesBoyfriend

[GreyDude]

Well, McGill is an English speaking school that requires basic bilingualism (and has french sections of 1L classes), which I suppose you know. McGill uses an eclectic combination of grades, reference letters, PS and CV. Plus the LSAT if you did it (if you did the LSAT you must submit the score).

12 minutes ago, MyWifesBoyfriend said:

I find it unfair that the student who got a paid vacation for four years in undergrad would have their cGPA prioritized over some other standardized proxy of law school aptitude that limits the external factors involved with getting high undergraduate marks.

I don't really understand this, so if you can explain that would be good. As far as I think I *do* understand, I don't see any particular value in the LSAT that couldn't be covered by other things, including grades. As evidence I offer the French language schools, none of which use a standardized exam as part of their admissions, and all of which seem to be doing just fine without it.

[CatLawyerWannabe]

I totally agree with GreyDude arguments. LSAT is outdated and honestly, take it from a top student in a top university in her own country, is more like a language exam than a logic/analytical skill test. Many law schools in the US are gradually moving away from LSAT as an admission requirement. Now that they have removed the logic games, it's even more difficult for non-English speakers.

The thing that annoys me is the suggestion to "re-sitting the test". My accuracy was above 80% on the test, and I do not have any problems with thinking logically. However, I cannot improve my thinking process in English in a short time. It needs to happen naturally and over time. Anybody who has learned a second language other than their own native language knows that.

I can totally ace the test in my native language as the questions are not really hard. The difficult part is that I need to do all the analysis in English in less than 1 minute, which is absurd and, at least, has never happened during my almost 8 years of working in business and immigration legal fields. Therefore, as to MWB's question "How will your future clients feel if you used this same excuse to justify poor performance?", trust me, it never has happened and never happens that I need to reason, argue, and answer to an argument in 30 seconds, at least not in business and immigration areas where I want to practice.

 

[CatLawyerWannabe]

17 hours ago, MyWifesBoyfriend said:

Fair enough.

Not sure what this means. Plenty of non-native English speakers get high LSAT scores. Hell, a sizeable portion of Canada speaks French as a first language. How will your future clients feel if you used this same excuse to justify poor performance?
 

This is not meant to be a condemnation of you as a person, but rather a reasonable warning. There’s a real chance you may NEVER get into UBC with those stats. You need to re-sit the LSAT for high 160s if you want a not-impossible chance.

Just so you know, there have been cases of people with LSAT in the 150s admitted to UBC in this forum. So it's not impossible. 

[MyWifesBoyfriend]

Help

[Chef Justice]

22 minutes ago, Yasmin said:

Many law schools in the US are gradually moving away from LSAT as an admission requirement

I have not been noticing this at all. I know some schools say they will use someones GRE in lieu of their LSAT, but US schools place quite a bit more emphasis on LSAT scores than GPA scores.

I honestly don't know why Canadian schools weight GPA and LSAT's similarly, or even in favour of GPA.

Achieving a 3-8-3.9 in a social science/humanities background, especially in the grade inflation we see nowadays, is not difficult. This at most shows that someone at the age of 17-18 may have been in a better head space at that time compared to someone who only got there when they are 19-20; I find it difficult to think it speaks to aptitude. Another issue, for example, is someone with a 3.6-3.7 in engineering versus someone with a 3.9 in humanities. I'd argue that the engineering GPA is more impressive, but some schools don't take the degree difficulty into consideration and ultimately only care about what's going to be reflected in their admission stats.

What the LSAT achieves in what GPA fails at is standardization and equalization amongst applicants.

2 minutes ago, MyWifesBoyfriend said:

Help

I'm here at your darkest hour.

Edited October 8, 2024 by Chef Justice
Grammar

[GoatDuck]

14 minutes ago, Yasmin said:

The difficult part is that I need to do all the analysis in English in less than 1 minute, which is absurd and, at least, has never happened during my almost 8 years of working in business and immigration legal fields

I don't know what you mean by "business and immigration" areas of law, but I expect that in any practice area you will be expected to make quick and accurate inferences from dense texts written in English. Often times, you will not have the luxury of spending an entire minute rereading two sentences. People get into law schools and become lawyers with a 154 LSAT score, and I am not saying that the LSAT is overall a good proxy for how good of a lawyer you will be, but it is absolutely not absurd to expect future lawyers to be able to do quick and accurate analysis in English.

[Mal]

@GreyDude

(1) French schools doing "just fine" is both irrelevant and meaningless. It is irrelevant because there is no French alternative which might offer a school the ability to select better students; it is meaningless because it is not possible to evaluate what "fine" means in this context. 

(2) It seems like maybe you don't understand very well. If you'd like to speak intelligently on the subject: I suggest you read the LSAC research on the LSAT, because they spend significant amounts of time and money ensuring that the LSAT offers something that cannot be easily replicated with other factors. To get you started here: https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/lsat-still-most-accurate-predictor-law-school-success

@Yasmin While it sucks that you have a language barrier in terms of the LSAT, language is just as important in law school and legal practice. Time is often of vital importance in the legal field, whether having limited time arguing in front of a judge in litigation or simply because of the inherent demands on your time on the solicitor side. You are simply incorrect in your assertion otherwise, with all due deference to your eight years in business and immigration legal fields.

Edited October 8, 2024 by Mal

[MyWifesBoyfriend]

2 hours ago, GreyDude said:

I don't really understand this, so if you can explain that would be good. As far as I think I *do* understand, I don't see any particular value in the LSAT that couldn't be covered by other things, including grades. As evidence I offer the French language schools, none of which use a standardized exam as part of their admissions, and all of which seem to be doing just fine without it.

I think we are speaking past each other, and this is because of my poor word choice and lazy normative judgement. I should not have said 'prioritize' but rather, 'instead of'. The civil law programs use cGPA only (and instead of) LSAT. My point is that this is not enough. My other point is that GPA may lend itself to inequitable outcomes. GPA is a better metric for work ethic, if anything. LSAT (or an equivalent standardized test) is a better metric of aptitude.

My additional point is that GPA and school related extracurriculars only indicate that the student had a ton of free time unencumbered from other exogenous concerns (job, illness, mental health). In comparison, the LSAT minimizes these factors and allows the law school insight into a prospective student's raw cognitive aptitude. If student A had their tuition and living expenses covered, full freight, by their parents, and student B had to pay their way through school, then you could imagine that GPA is not a very helpful metric. A job is a bad example, but you get the point. The LSAT is student B's chance to make a comeback, all else being equal. 

42 minutes ago, Yasmin said:

Just so you know, there have been cases of people with LSAT in the 150s admitted to UBC in this forum. So it's not impossible. 

Awesome, you've got this. Good luck!

Edited October 8, 2024 by MyWifesBoyfriend

[CatLawyerWannabe]

I see people here asking others for help, such a supportive community :D

I didn't read all the replies but I am sure everyone has valid points. Anyway, I will update the forum about my application (in a related thread).

Edited October 8, 2024 by Yasmin

[GreyDude]

9 hours ago, Mal said:

(1) French schools doing "just fine" is both irrelevant and meaningless. It is irrelevant because there is no French alternative which might offer a school the ability to select better students; it is meaningless because it is not possible to evaluate what "fine" means in this context. 

(2) It seems like maybe you don't understand very well. If you'd like to speak intelligently on the subject: I suggest you read the LSAC research on the LSAT, because they spend significant amounts of time and money ensuring that the LSAT offers something that cannot be easily replicated with other factors. To get you started here: https://www.lsac.org/data-research/research/lsat-still-most-accurate-predictor-law-school-success

Ad hominems aside, I don’t believe I said that the LSAT doesn’t do what it claims, or if I did say that, then I didn’t mean to. I believe I said (I meant to say) that what the LSAT achieves — its value, in other words — can be achieved by other means. I also didn’t intend to say that those other means were better. The LSAT is a useful tool. However, I also claim, though perhaps courting scandal and admittedly without much evidence, that the calibre of students at Canadian French language schools and McGill is not inferior to their counterparts where the LSAT is required.

As to ”just fine,” it was intended as shorthand to mean that schools like Laval, UdeM, Sherbrooke and UQAM (the list isn’t supposed to be exhaustive) produce lawyers of equal caliber to their English-language counterparts. I don’t think that this claim is irrelevant at all, or meaningless. But I’m certainly open to receiving any argument saying that it is. 

Edited October 9, 2024 by GreyDude

[GreyDude]

9 hours ago, MyWifesBoyfriend said:

I think we are speaking past each other, and this is because of my poor word choice and lazy normative judgement. I should not have said 'prioritize' but rather, 'instead of'. The civil law programs use cGPA only (and instead of) LSAT. My point is that this is not enough. My other point is that GPA may lend itself to inequitable outcomes. GPA is a better metric for work ethic, if anything. LSAT (or an equivalent standardized test) is a better metric of aptitude.

My additional point is that GPA and school related extracurriculars only indicate that the student had a ton of free time unencumbered from other exogenous concerns (job, illness, mental health). In comparison, the LSAT minimizes these factors and allows the law school insight into a prospective student's raw cognitive aptitude. If student A had their tuition and living expenses covered, full freight, by their parents, and student B had to pay their way through school, then you could imagine that GPA is not a very helpful metric. A job is a bad example, but you get the point. The LSAT is student B's chance to make a comeback, all else being equal.

Thanks for this. Overall, I tend to agree that cGPA by itself if not the best metric from the point of view of equity in the application process. Even though I’m claiming that the student body in a civil law program is likely to be of a similar caliber when compared to that of a common law program that requires the LSAT, I cannot but agree that a program using only cGPA to rank its applicants, with no consideration of extrinsic factors that might affect that score, is likely to miss out on many excellent candidates. To be honest, I can’t remember exactly how much effort UdeM puts into meeting that challenge, but I do recall thinking that it wasn’t enough. This does make an argument for using a standardized test, though even that would not be able to overcome everything you mention. Hence the use of a PS, references, and so on.

Edited October 9, 2024 by GreyDude
Clarity, I hope

[BlockedQuebecois]

It seems like a bit of a fools errand to try to compare the English and Quebec legal education systems, given how radically different they are.

If one wanted to argue the point, though, they would point to the fact that in order to produce lawyers of the same calibre as English schools, Quebec has to have their law school graduates complete an additional year of training at bar school and then write a markedly more difficult bar exam. 

With that said, I don’t think the LSAT has anything to do with lawyer competency, at least in Canada. The median LSAT scores at Canadian schools are simply too low to serve as a meaningful barrier to entry.