标题: 有写PS经验的请指教,with a click of a mouse,you can save my entire life. [打印本页] 作者: evaevawu 时间: 2013-8-31 00:15:27 标题: 有写PS经验的请指教,with a click of a mouse,you can save my entire life.
真的啊?那怎么办?你给我出出主意呗...我该侧重写什么呢?我看了哈佛大学法学院对个人陈述的建议:It is generally more helpful to write what you think readers should know to have a better sense of who you are rather than writing what you think the readers want to read.如果是这样的话,那写什么都可以了,但却要在PS里让审查者觉得你有资格能上他们的学校,那么不就是展示自己的优点,选择性的优点。作者: xuanie 时间: 2013-9-1 03:07:10
说实话.....辩论队或者辩论比赛诸如此类的描写真是十之四五都有人写,很容易让人犯困。
而且我个人觉得一个法律人的思维能力,分析能力用辩论比赛去体现总感觉有点不妥,设想下如果有同学代理过案件(案件性质和难度在所不论),如果用这个点去说自己的思维能力,法律文书写作能力等优秀是不是从立论的高度就赢了你呢?
还有,你去申请的是法学的第二学位,你真不用过多去说法律工作者需要啥能力,你有啥能力。你是一个已经有第一学位甚至可能已经过了中国bar的人。你要说的根本不是why law ? 而是why hk law 或者why us law.
当然,写PS的初稿大多是这样的。作者: evaevawu 时间: 2013-9-2 19:18:08
Moving on...on a conceptual level, the "I Love to Argue" P.S. seems to be based on the mistaken notion that it's actually good, or relevant, that you love to argue. It's not. Going on and on about how you love being confrontational and argumentative with each and every person in your life is a major red flag for the reader of your file. It's a character flaw. If you love to argue, and even admit that you do so over petty, irrelevant things, you suggest to the reader that you are reactive, a poor listener, unable to relate to different perspectives, and that you are generally an unpleasant person to be around (and to have in a class). The fact that you think it's an asset suggests that you lack self-awareness and are going to have problems getting along with others. In other words, you are going to be a social and administrative (if not academic) nightmare. Not so good.
其实主要是要有逻辑,所说的要与你的品质联系,而不是一味地说我很会辩论等等...作者: xuanie 时间: 2013-9-2 23:55:50