Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
 1 
 on: October 20, 2014, 08:00:46 PM 
Started by ndigiaco14 - Last post by Citylaw
Agreed I do not think it necessarily shows diversity by the time you are a 2L you will be the same age as everyone else.

In the law certain things are considered a suspect class with more protections race, gender, etc, but age is NOT one of them.

If you have space for an addendum you can explain you got through undergrad in two years by cramming classes, etc, which might be impressive, but age is not diversity.

Good luck on the law school process, and feel free to use this board there are good posters that offer great insight on this board.

 2 
 on: October 20, 2014, 01:39:47 PM 
Started by ndigiaco14 - Last post by Maintain FL 350
Yeah, I agree with the previous posters. You can write about your age if you want to, but I don't think it will make any difference. Being one year younger than average isn't that unusual.

My understanding is that the only diversity statements that carry significant weight are those associated with URM status. And even then, certain URM groups can benefit more than others (African American, Native American). I'm not even sure that socioeconomic or sexual identity status matters much, either.

All of these are soft factors and with the exception of the above mentioned URM classifications, will pale in comparison to GPA/LSAT profiles. 

 3 
 on: October 20, 2014, 12:26:31 PM 
Started by ndigiaco14 - Last post by Miami88
I would say age could be a solid topic to talk about, but not really under your circumstances. If you were 12 years old - ok .... if you were over 30 - ok... But being one year less than the expected age is prob not worth it.

 4 
 on: October 19, 2014, 10:05:20 PM 
Started by CTL - Last post by I.M.D.Law
I say the Queen should just sell Quebec back to the French. Good riddance. France already has islands they still own just off the Canadian Coast as is.

 5 
 on: October 19, 2014, 10:03:06 PM 
Started by ndigiaco14 - Last post by I.M.D.Law
I'd leave age out. Gender is pointless too since men are now a MINORITY of law students (and many other doctorate fields too) Race is still worth mentioning.

 6 
 on: October 19, 2014, 05:55:46 PM 
Started by ndigiaco14 - Last post by ndigiaco14
New to this so I'm not sure that I'm posting in the right place right now. I just wanted to ask for opinions on the topic of a diversity statement that I may include in my application. Whenever I look up what diversity statements should be based upon, I see race, socioeconomic status, age, sexuality.
I was thinking about writing based on age. I will be applying to law school as a 20 year old, and I recently saw a stat that only 1% of Columbia's last entering class was age 20 or younger. Although I will be newly 21 when I enter law school, that's still young, right? I will finish my undergraduate education in three years, rather than four, and attending law school just after I graduate. I feel like the diversity statement would be a good way to highlight that.
Let me know what you all think! Thanks :)

 7 
 on: October 19, 2014, 12:50:08 PM 
Started by ndigiaco14 - Last post by ndigiaco14
New to this so I'm not sure that I'm posting in the right place right now. I just wanted to ask for opinions on the topic of a diversity statement that I may include in my application. Whenever I look up what diversity statements should be based upon, I see race, socioeconomic status, age, sexuality.
I was thinking about writing based on age. I will be applying to law school as a 20 year old, and I recently saw a stat that only 1% of Columbia's last entering class was age 20 or younger. Although I will be newly 21 when I enter law school, that's still young, right? I will finish my undergraduate education in three years, rather than four, and attending law school just after I graduate. I feel like the diversity statement would be a good way to highlight that.
Let me know what you all think! Thanks :)

 8 
 on: October 19, 2014, 04:26:42 AM 
Started by CTL - Last post by randyorton
The worst province in Canada is Quebec. Don't move here without learning quebecois. Plus the bar exam is in French. Montreal isn't so great if you're a law student with limited French skills.

 9 
 on: October 18, 2014, 02:04:02 PM 
Started by I.M.D.Law - Last post by Duncanjp
It's a bit of an overreach by the court, IMO. [And wasn't that Messiah decision overturned on appeal?] But I can see an argument against giving parents unbridled freedom to stigmatize their children with some patently offensive imprimatur or something that would clearly subject the kid to endless ridicule - for the purpose of subjecting the kid to ridicule. Like if some jokester named his kid Turd just because he thought it would be funny.  "Oh no no no! His name is Turducken. Turd is just his nickname." Probably happen.

 10 
 on: October 18, 2014, 11:51:46 AM 
Started by I.M.D.Law - Last post by I.M.D.Law
This article is a bit old, and I know it comes up every now and then, but I just thought about it again today.
How do you feel about courts saying to some people "you can't name your kid messiah" while others name their kid Jesus, Mohammad, etc? Plus the ones naming kids stuff like apple, or just painful things like antween or whatever.

Seems like a 1st amendment issue on top of a few other things. Any thoughts either for or against?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/12/messiah-baby-name_n_3741893.html

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10