Law School Discussion

Queen's reputation

Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #20 on: March 09, 2005, 09:59:29 AM »
Queens and Western are definitely not known to US schools; they really aren't even known to Canadians.

Canadians certainly know of Queen's.  Its reputation as a private school wannabe and a general school for the rich are well-known amongst the public.    Not sure if this is good or bad ;)

The Overman

  • ****
  • 100
  • I am the lightning, I am the frenzy.
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #21 on: March 09, 2005, 12:39:58 PM »
Queens and Western are middle of the pack Canadian schools and aren't known to Canadians?  That's just crazy talk.  If you're American than I can understand why you might be misinformed or confused.  However, if you're Canadian I'm at a total loss for a reason to explain such a terribly incorrect statement.  Western and Queens are two of the top universities in Canada and are known to any Canadian who knows anything about universities.  I reccomend that you read the latest Macleans University Report Card, as I'm sure you will find it very informative.  These are two of the most difficult schools in Canada to get accepted at.  This is not my opinion, it is a fact that Queens has the highest entrance average in the country and Western has the third or fourth highest.  I apologize for ranting at you and coming across as harsh, but I feel it's important that you get your facts straight.

Cheeks

  • ****
  • 1915
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #22 on: March 09, 2005, 02:20:09 PM »
Why do you "feel its important I get the facts straight"?  Why would you ever care what I think ... anyways, my rebutal is as follows ...

I'm Canadian and don't go to either Queens or Western.

With that said, sure, I've heard of Queens and I've heard of Western.  As have my friends, as have people that are in the academic circle.  However, if you went up to joe guy on the street, and asked him if he's heard of Western, he would most likely reply with "yeah, its a school".  Would he know that it has a decent business school?  No.  Would he know what its ranking in the Macleans University Report?  No. 

Queens and Western are fine schools, as most of the universities in Canada are.  I'm not saying that they're not good schools.  But they are FAR from the best in Canada, and arguing over this is pointless.  Mcgill and Toronto are both far superior!  You site one statistic ... difficult to get accepted at ... this is only one factor that contibutes to overall quality.  Furthermore, you said, Western and Queens are "two of the top" in Canada.  There aren't that many schools in Canada!  There's no t14 here.  There are groups, UT Mcgill, then schools like Queens, western, mac, etc, and then some bottom schools. 

Also, the debate over whether or not US schools recognize that Queens or Western are top schools is closed.  They don't.  They view them as another "Canadian" school.  The US adcoms aren't sitting there spliting hairs over which is better, Mac or Western, trust me ... its UofT, Mcgill, the rest, as far as they're concerned. 

The Overman

  • ****
  • 100
  • I am the lightning, I am the frenzy.
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #23 on: March 09, 2005, 03:10:40 PM »
I never said that Western and Queens were the top two schools in Canada.  I merely said that they were two of the best in Canada.  It cannot be disputed that these schools are in the top five and although there aren't that many universities in Canada that's still really good and can hardly be called middle of the pack.  I agree that UofT and Mcgill are more highly regarded and probably better schools, however Western and Queens are not as far behind as you are suggesting.  According to you the American law schools are so ignorant of Canadian universities that when applying it wouldn't matter if you had an HBA from Ivey or a media studies degree from Brock because both are just "another Canadian school".  I was told by the Dean of Admissions at UofT's law school that they carefully consider the quality of an applicant's undergraduate institution.  This seems to me like a policy that any good law school would have.  Yet you seem to think that the top American law schools are completely ignorant of the quality of Canadian schools, except for UofT and Mcgill.  I totally agree that they would regard these two schools as being superior to the rest, but I don't believe that all other Canadian universities are lumped together and considered of equal quality.  Your claim just doesn't make sense.

Cheeks

  • ****
  • 1915
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #24 on: March 09, 2005, 03:25:07 PM »
I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue anymore..

I didn't group all schools together; I said that there's a top tier, a middle (to which W and Q belong), and a bottom tier.  Why would someone pick Q over a school like UBC or Mac or UVic.  I doubt its because Q is a much better school.  More likely would be that such individual would rather spend their time studying in kingston, or for some intangible reason like that.

"According to you the American law schools are so ignorant of Canadian universities that when applying it wouldn't matter if you had an HBA from Ivey or a media studies degree from Brock because both are just "another Canadian school"."

Okay, that's just ridiculous.  You're taking extreme points.  However, if you ask a US adcom is they know what Ivey is, they will say No 99% of the time.  Even at the top YHS.  Again, I told you that when Yale recruited in Canada, they only did so at Mcgill and Toronto.  Honestly, though, if a brock finance student has a higher GPA than the Ivey kid, I gaurentee you that all else equal, a US school takes the Brock kid.  Every time.

"I was told by the Dean of Admissions at UofT's law school that they carefully consider the quality of an applicant's undergraduate institution"

we're not debating Canadian law school practices, so I don't knwo why you brought this up.  However, I've submitted a study on such admission practices which shows the contrary of what you suggest (for most Canadian law schools).  That said, UofT wasn't in the study, and I tend to believe your statement applies to them.

Either way, Western and Queens are in a group of a Canadian schools, probably 10-15 of them, which can pretty much be considered equal.  They're very good schools, but to suggest their minute differences are known by US adcoms is ludicris.

The Overman

  • ****
  • 100
  • I am the lightning, I am the frenzy.
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #25 on: March 09, 2005, 03:31:21 PM »
Furthermore, if you went up to the average person on the street and asked them about UofT or Mcgill, they wouldn't likely be able to tell you much about those schools either.  So your point about people not knowing all about the quality of Western or Queens, or what programs they are known for, doesn't prove anything. Also, if you conducted this little "experiment" in Ontario, people would likely know a lot more about Queens or Western then they do about Mcgill.

The Overman

  • ****
  • 100
  • I am the lightning, I am the frenzy.
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #26 on: March 09, 2005, 03:52:35 PM »
UofT is an excellent law school and many consider it to be in a different league than other Canadian law schools.  It's certainly the most difficult school to get into, although I realize that isn't the only thing that's important.  Most of the other Canadian law schools that I've talked to said that they don't consider what school your undergrad degree is from, so your study is most likely correct.  That said, I feel that UofT is a better law school than the others and their stricter admissions policy is part of the reason for this.  You possess the view that the top American schools have a much more lax admission policy and don't consider the quality of the applicant's school.  Or maybe you feel that they do care, except if you went to a Canadian school and then they don't bother to look into it.  A school whose admissions board considers a degree from Brock to be equivalent to a degree from Queens is not making a very good effort to ensure that they accept only the very best applicants.  A school that doesn't bother to find out that a 3.8 gpa at Brock is nowhere near equivalent to a 3.8 gpa at Queens, can hardly be said to have a very effective admissions policy.  Maybe you're right and the top US schools just don't care what Canadian school you went to.  I'd like to think that they are a little more discerning in their consideration of Canadain applicants.

Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #27 on: March 09, 2005, 04:14:28 PM »
I don't even know why I'm bothering with this but:

That said, I feel that UofT is a better law school than the others and their stricter admissions policy is part of the reason for this.

I wouldn't doubt it's a part of the reason, but nowhere near the whole story.  McGill doesn't even require an LSAT and its GPA requirments are below more than one school, but it still manages to do just fine.  I'd say the amount of $$$ the school has matters, but then look at McGill again.  Maybe I'd say research matters, but then look at McGill yet again in the last ten years...  The issue of 'reputation' is a complex one.

As for this:

A school that doesn't bother to find out that a 3.8 gpa at Brock is nowhere near equivalent to a 3.8 gpa at Queens, can hardly be said to have a very effective admissions policy.

No offense, how exactly do you know that your Queen's GPA is superior?  Have you studied extensively at Brock?  Have you looked at their curve subject-by-subject and compared them with Queen's?  Or are you just buying into the old 'if you can walk and talk you can go to Brock.'


The Overman

  • ****
  • 100
  • I am the lightning, I am the frenzy.
    • View Profile
Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #28 on: March 09, 2005, 04:40:35 PM »
You are totally right caecilius, reputation is a complex issue.  Someone could certainly argue that UofT is not the best law school in Canada.  That said, the reason I know that Brock is an inferior school is simply entrance averages.  While I know grades aren't everything it's common sense that if school A's entrance average is 88% and school B's entrance average is 73%, that the former is going to have a far superior student body.  I don't mean to say that if you go to Brock it isn't entirely possible that you're a genius.  But people are evaluated in relation to their peers and the higher the intelligence of your peers, the harder it is to get good marks. 

Now that I've answered your question I would like to pose the same one to Cheeks.  How exactly do you know that UofT and Mcgill are so superior to the rest?


By the way for the record I don't go to Queens.

Re: Queen's reputation
« Reply #29 on: March 09, 2005, 04:45:43 PM »
That said, the reason I know that Brock is an inferior school is simply entrance averages.

This can be valid, but it tells us nothing about grading practices of Brock itself.  Therefore, we still don't know if it is any easier to achieve a 3.8 in Brock, because we don't know the curve (official or unofficial).