[美国&加拿大] 尘埃落定话申请（JD） [复制链接]

xuanie
UID：2540871

超级会员

Rank: 7 Rank: 7 Rank: 7

声望: 1086
寄托币: 7424
注册时间: 2008-9-3
精华: 6
帖子: 758

发表于 2013-1-3 07:07:28 |显示全部楼层

本帖最后由 xuanie 于 2013-1-4 03:59 编辑

四年前，大学的室友moonie在这里发了她的尘埃落定话申请，而我也很快地等到了自己的Econ PhD offer。可当时我们都没有想到，life is not just about plan A's, it's about turning plan B and plan C into your plan A and making the most of it. 过去的四年对我来说，有挣扎，有纠结，直到11年年底，我才意识到我是一个很失败的经济学PhD。（请参见我的博文 Why I failed in the PhD program）之后的各种际遇，终于让我在四月份下决心准备LSAT考法学院。多亏了moonie一路上提供了很多宝贵的经验，终于在8个月后等到了圆满的结局。借moonie的话开头：

“之前我在这里潜水的时候多，或许现在是回报的时候了吧。虽然本科毕业直接申请JD的中国同学依然是小众，但无可否认的是，前辈们已经用他们的经验和努力为我们这些后来人提供了宝贵的参照。因此我也决定把自己的感想写下来，希望对有志于此的同学们有所助益。”

-------------------

背景：

美国top public school小本，high honors in Economics and Statistics

本科时兼职RA6个月，本科毕业后全职工作8个月

top 15 Econ PhD program ABD

LSAT 170
UGPA 3.84
Grad GPA 3.65

Offer: UVA 25k/year, NYU, Chicago (ED and attending):victory:

-------------------

申请time line

2012年4月29日，LSAT diagnostic test, 不计时，160
2012年6月11日，LSAT
2012年7月6日，LSAT成绩公布，纠结是否重考，一周后决定放弃重考
2012年7月17日开始东岸法学院自助游，开始大量搜集网络上各种信息并着手准备PS
2012年8月16日结束东岸法学院自助游，开始考虑选校，并确定PS draft
2012年11月完成PS开始申请
2012年12月2日完成全部申请
2013年1月1日尘埃落定！！

-------------------

因为我的背景经历和申请过程并不是很典型，所以我主要来分享下自己写PS和面试的经验吧。祝大家申请顺利！

另外大家如果有什么问题也欢迎在这里提出来，我可以尽量回答。（尤其对UMich,Wisc-Madison,湖区的生活，DC的生活有问题的

）

======================================

先推荐一本书

从why law，到申请再到JD 3年的生活，很值得一读

======================================

我是怎样写我的PS的

在开始动笔写PS之前，我先研究了Yale Law Admissions Blog上的系列"PS Bootcamp"

注：TFA是Teach for America的缩写，相当于我们的大学生支教。如果有意向在PS里描述自己支教过程的请看一看这一篇

密歇根大学法学院Deam of Admissions关于怎样写PS也有一篇很有用的博文

Michigan Law Dean Z “Personal statements: What not to do”

强烈建议大家在动笔写PS之前一定要通读这几篇博文

在我看来，PS需要说明的就是两个问题：Why law? Why me?能否在短短的2-3页纸里阐明你对这两个问题的答复对申请至关重要。

Why law

在PS bootscamp里，Asha提到了很多老生常谈的PS套路。比较典型的包括了“我喜欢辩论/讨论/在公众场合发表自己的看法，所以我想做律师”，“我从5岁就开始想做一个律师/所有人都觉得我适合做律师”，“我喜欢看law and order, the practice, boston legal所以我想做律师”，“我见到了社会很多不公（比如有色人种在美国受歧视/TFA见到很多地方的教育系统有很多问题/国际学生常描述自己国家的法律体系如何不够理想）因此我想读法学院改变社会/拯救世界”

在一开始构思PS的过程中，我最早的构想是写一个引人入胜的“故事”来说明我为什么想读法学院。但是在大约一个月之后，我意识到，写“故事”的问题在于首先我的生活中并没有特别“跌宕起伏”的人生经历。在三个国家读书成长的经历也许可以算很有意思，但有大把的申请人履历远胜于我。（我本科时的一个朋友在牙买加做过传教士，跑步横穿过整个美国，伦敦奥运会打过酱油，加上金光闪闪的成绩单，毫无疑问地进了HLS）要靠故事的新奇来吸引admissions，并不是一个非常现实的方法。另外因为我读Econ PhD的经历，读法学院是转行，一个1000字左右的故事很难在解释why law的时候同时解释why not econ

[当然我并不是说在PS里讲故事不好，如果你是一个很会讲故事的人，即使是非常平淡的故事也可以引人入胜。去年曾经帮一个朋友proofread过他的法学院PS，他讲了一个很简单的故事——小时候男孩子聚在一起踢球，人少的时候没什么规则，人多了就分组对抗，可是有时候会为了一些球场上的摩擦争执甚至大打出手。于是他们就决定每次踢球都要有人当裁判，可是没有人愿意当裁判，因为那是个不受关注的角色，大家也都觉得规则简单明了，裁判是一个鸡肋。一次猜拳他输了，必须去当裁判，然后遇到了一个是否判点球的情况他才意识到即使再完美的规则都是死的，当牵涉到人的行为的时候，一切的规则都是一个动态变化的过程。踢球的经历让他对执行规则，如何在复杂的情况下应用规则充满兴趣。长大后他觉得社会就是一个更复杂的游戏，有更多的参与者和更复杂的规则，一直以来的兴趣驱使他读了很多法律方面的书，最后决定要读法学院。没有花团锦簇的描述，没有金光闪闪的履历，只有一个简单的小男孩踢足球的故事，朴朴实实一篇文章，最后拿到了一所很好的学校的offer]

与其说PS是说服admissions为什么自己适合学习法律的文章，倒不如把PS当作一个和自己对话的机会，问一问自己，是否真的适合/应该学习法律。如果你读了自己的PS觉得假，或者自己都不是很能说服自己，又如何说服阅人无数的admissions呢？

对于申请LLM的同学来说，这一点也许会容易很多，毕竟一个法本和相关的法律从业经验本身就给why law这个问题一个很强有力的回答

最后我在PS中重现了我选择法学院的原因。我觉得职业的选择必须要满足两个条件——第一是我擅长做，第二是我喜欢做。而恰恰是这两个原因促成了我转行并申请法学院。

我擅长做什么：归纳复杂的理论并整理出不同理论内在的逻辑联系

我喜欢做什么：1）整理不同理论内在逻辑联系的过程， 2）把这个逻辑联系展示给别人看的过程，3）在现实生活中应用这些理论

因此我在PS中用一个比喻来解释了我对这两个问题的看法。

学习相当于在一个陌生的地方，由向导（教授/课本）带领着你去探索。我擅长发现向导指引的各条道路之间是如何由旁枝末节的小路联系在一起。我享受绘制地图的过程（1），享受自己作为向导为别人指路的过程（2），享受在不同的环境中用地图找出最合理路径（3）。而Econ PhD的训练更多的是发现原本不存在的小路（original research），并不追求利用地图指路（不重应用）。但是法学院可以同时满足我擅长做的和我喜欢做的两个要求。

我的PS从构思到完成一共用了五个月的时间，最后存了近100个版本的修改。没有很fancy的故事，只是我自己的“心路历程”。事实证明我的PS反响还不错。NYU的admission letter上有一段手写的评价

“Your PS is quite extraordinary. I don't think I've read anything quite like it. Among other things, your ability to become aware of your cognitive style is special.”

Why me

在我参观各大法学院的时候，和几个学校的admission officer聊天时都问过同样的问题

is there any character or personality that you are particularly looking for in an application? （你们会在申请中刻意寻找具有某种性格/特质的申请人吗？）

所有的人都告诉我，在申请中最忌讳的就是试图去揣摩admission officer的喜好，把自己塑造成一个“合适”的候选人。原因有二：第一，他们自己都没有一个很明确的标准（比如要外向的不要内向的之类）；第二把自己描述成一个陌生人就失去了PS中“真诚”的部分。甚至NYU的Dean of admissions戏称那些人具有“多重人格”不适合从事法律事业……

从我个人的经历来看，不同学校对申请人确实有偏好。比如我“过份学术缺乏戏剧性”的PS在UChicago的面试时吸引了面试官很多兴趣，但在西北面试时面试官明显不太感冒。UChicago对学术的重视，和西北相对对实用的重视造成了两所学校对申请人不同的偏好。申请学校和相亲其实有异曲同工之妙，硬件固然重要，但精神的契合才是dealbreaker。没有人可以和所有人都达到同样程度的精神契合。有的学校适合你，有的学校不适合，让你的PS真实地表现自己，让真正适合你的学校找到你，才是最好的选择。

最后关于PS的一些细节问题，不要超出页数，严格遵守字号，行间距，页宽的规定。毕竟细节决定一切

======================================

关于面试

TLS上有一个专门总结各种面试经验的帖子，强烈推荐大家在面试前爬一爬这个楼。

西北大学的网站上可以找到他们评估面试者的标准，我个人觉得很具有指导性，摘录如下

Maturity (M) - Look for a healthy self-confidence and a sense of strengths and weaknesses. Most applicants are able to appear poised, under control, and polite. Stronger ratings should be reserved for those candidates with an outstanding presence and a dynamic personality. Weaker ratings should be given to those candidates who are outwardly nervous, fidgety, or show other signs of immaturity or lack of composure.

Sincerity and Concern for Others (SCFO) – Most candidates likely will fall into the “on par” category here. Candidates who are extremely self-centered or who display excessive egos should receive weaker ratings in this category. Stronger ratings should be reserved for those candidates who have demonstrated a strong commitment to assisting others (oftentimes through extensive community or other public service).

Listening Skills (LS) - Weaker ratings should be given to those interviewees who are longwinded, who try to control the interview, or who fail to answer the specific question you pose. An “on par” candidate is a decent conversationalist who provides responsive answers of an appropriate length. A stronger candidate might be an active listener who is able to relate answers to earlier parts of the conversation.

Intellectual Ability (IA) – This criterion focuses on the applicant’s ability to handle the academic rigor of a Northwestern Law education. To the best of your ability, indicate how likely you think the applicant is to excel at Northwestern Law. You can consider the difficulty of the applicant’s college major, whether the applicant successfully completed substantial writing projects in college and/or at work, the applicant’s ability to think on his/her feet, how clearly the applicant articulates his/her thoughts, etc. Please note that you do not need to solicit the applicant’s GPA or LSAT score; that information is available to the Admissions Committee through other means. You are free to ask the applicant for such information if you like, but you may also rely on qualitative factors instead of quantitative measurements when evaluating the candidate’s intellectual ability.

Career Progression (CP) – This criterion evaluates the length and quality of the candidate’s work experience. Over 95% of past entering students have worked for at least one year prior to beginning law school; over 80% have had two years or more of work experience. Applicants who are college seniors generally have had at least two professional business or legal internships. Stronger ratings should be reserved for applicants who have two or more years of quality postcollege, career/business-related work experience (it need not be legal experience).

Project Management (PM) – Here, we are trying to gauge the extent to which the applicant has had to plan, organize, and manage resources in order to accomplish an assigned task or reach an identified goal. An average candidate will have managed one or two substantive projects, preferably in a professional environment.

Career Focus (CF) - The average applicant can state one or two areas of interest within the law (i.e., environmental law, intellectual property, etc.) and can articulate specific reasons for wanting to attend law school beyond family influence. Stronger ratings should be reserved for those applicants who have very clear goals, related experiences, and passion for their career interest(s). Applicants who seem to be choosing law school without particular areas of interest within the law or as a “default” option should generally receive weaker ratings.

Extracurricular Activities/Breadth (XC) - The average applicant has participated in at least one academic, one volunteer, and one recreational extracurricular activity. Look for well-roundedness, and ask yourself if this person is likely to get involved in and contribute to student life.

Leadership Potential (LP) - Average candidates in this category have held minor leadership positions in extracurricular activities. Weaker candidates have been members of extracurricular organizations but have not taken any leadership roles. Stronger ratings are reserved for those candidates who have held major leadership positions in extracurricular activities or at work or who have personalities that show potential for strong leadership.

Motivation for Northwestern (NUM) - An applicant’s interest in Northwestern Law should go beyond just the school’s reputation, location, and size. The applicant should be able to articulate a specific interest in the Law School, such as the strength of a particular program, the work of a faculty member, or an aspect of our student environment. Stronger ratings are for those who have researched the law school and its programs and are outwardly enthusiastic about Northwestern.

Overall Impression – There are several questions you can ask yourself when formulating your overall impression of the candidate, the answers to which will be extremely helpful to the Admissions Committee. Consider whether or not the applicant is a good “fit” for the Northwestern Law community. Would you have enjoyed having this person as a classmate? Does the candidate have good reasons for applying specifically to Northwestern Law? You should also ask yourself whether you would be willing to hire this candidate for your organization. Does the candidate handle himself/herself well in formal, professional situations?

The interview report form asks you to rate how the candidate compares to other interviewees along each criterion. You are also asked to provide your overall impression of the candidate’s interpersonal skills based on the interview as a whole. The Admissions Committee is particularly interested in how each candidate compares to other people you have interviewed, and you are asked to indicate whether the candidate is stronger, on par, acceptable but slightly weaker, or significantly weaker than other interviewees.

Ideally, you should compare each candidate against current Northwestern Law students or other Northwestern Law applicants you have interviewed. If you have not interviewed many Law School applicants, please use other professional interviewees as your reference point.

而面试时常见的问题则有下面这些。在芝大面试的时候，面试官强调，不要担心重复你在申请中已经阐述过的观点，因为面试官未必读过你全部的申请材料

Sample Questions 1. How did you make the decision to attend your undergraduate school?

2. How did you choose your major? Did you enter with the same major you graduated with?
3. As we look at your transcripts, will we notice any trends in your grades or any classes that were a struggle, or were your grades consistent all the way through? （这一类的问题切忌给人留下找借口的印象）
4. What was your favorite class in college and why?
5. Who was your favorite college professor and why?
6. What was your most difficult class in college and why?
7. Describe the main extracurricular activities in which you were involved.
8. What do you feel your most significant leadership opportunity has been?
9. How do you define an effective leader?
10. Describe your leadership style.
11. When you have free time, what do you enjoy doing for fun?
12. If you could now go back and start your undergraduate experience over, is there anything you would do differently or advice that you would give yourself as an incoming freshman, or would you do it again the same way?
13. What is the most challenging project or situation that you have encountered in your work?
14. What is the most significant project you have had to manage? How did you approach the task and what did you learn from the experience?
15. Describe the most significant written document you have completed.
16. Describe an oral presentation you made in which you were successful in communicating an idea or convincing others of your idea.
17. Was there ever a time that you experienced a conflict or disagreement with someone else in the workplace? If so, please describe the situation and how you handled it.
18. How do you generally go about resolving conflicts with others?
19. What do you consider as some of the best advice you have received from others concerning your educational choices or career?
20. What do you consider as your most difficult decision up to this point in your life?
21. If I were to meet with your supervisors and/or faculty members with whom you have had the closest interactions and ask them what qualities they feel you have that will help you succeed in a legal career, what do you think they would point out?
22. How did you make the decision to go to law school?
23. What kind of employment do you see yourself pursuing after you graduate from law school?
24. What is your ultimate dream for your long-term career?
25. How will you define success in your career?
26. I assume that you are applying to some other schools besides Northwestern. To what other schools are you also applying?
27. If you were to be accepted to all of the schools to which you are applying, how will you choose which school to attend?
28. On the down side, what if you don't get into law school this year? What is your backup plan?
29. What do you think your greatest challenge in law school will be?
30. What is it about Northwestern Law that appeals to you?

非英文母语的，最好在面试前整理一下自己对以上30个问题的答案，做到心中有数处变不惊。但是也要留意面试官问问题的方式调整自己的回答。

另外，建议大家面试时准备一些可以向面试官提的问题。这些问题需要有一定深度和针对性（是你展示你对这所学校兴趣和了解的一个机会）。尽量避免那些可以通过google或者在学校网站上就可以找到答案的问题。比如“你们什么时候能回复我呀”，“你们每年多少奖学金”，“你们每年收多少中国学生啊”，“我们可以选某个学院的课吗”这些都不是特别适合在面试时提出的问题。

准备这些问题需要大量的前期工作，这样的时候不要偷懒哦

已有 12 人评分	声望	收起理由
suprince7	+ 2	原创就是给力
珀尔修斯	+ 2	弓虽！
大西大西	+ 1	赞一个
直脖向天歌	+ 4	感谢分享
小哇	+ 6	瞻仰膜拜
liujingchao0519	+ 1	受益匪浅
Raquelxsj	+ 4	瞻仰膜拜
SYNCIA	+ 8	神马都是浮云