<p>I'm calm, sorry if it sounded accusatory-it most certainly wasn't meant to be. :)</p>
<p>would film studies be a good major? i heard film studies majors develop great analytical skills that can be used in law school.</p>
<p>I think chemistry and yes, in fact, music majors actually have the highest acceptance rate to law school, statistically speaking. If you can write well, have a high GPA and score very well on the LSAT, it honestly doesn't matter what your major is. In fact, chemistry or music is probably better than, say psych or communications because if anything, it will be considered a more challenging program by the adcom.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In fact, chemistry or music is probably better than, say psych or communications because if anything, it will be considered a more challenging program by the adcom.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yet that never seems to work when it comes to engineering, which, along with physics and mathematics, are probably the most challenging programs. Nevertheless, the adcoms don't seem to care.</p>
<p>same question as role27, why is econ a good major while business is not?</p>
<p>Econ is theoretical; Business is practical -- a trade.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yet that never seems to work when it comes to engineering, which, along with physics and mathematics, are probably the most challenging programs. Nevertheless, the adcoms don't seem to care.
[/quote]
Very true. It's unfortunate because law schools may actually be turning away the most qualified candidates.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you can write well, have a high GPA and score very well on the LSAT, it honestly doesn't matter what your major is. In fact, chemistry or music is probably better than, say psych or communications because if anything, it will be considered a more challenging program by the adcom.
[/quote]
Unless you wanted to get into the highest paying field of law on average - patent law. Then I believe you would need to have a science or engineering degree. Unfortunately, not too many of those majors are admitted to the top law schools because their GPAs are inherently lower. For those who do make it there, their income is based on simple supply and demand.</p>
<p>Not really; one would simply need some coursework in the sciences -- which can be done after one earns a first degree, thus not jeopardizing admissions to a top school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
which can be done after one earns a first degree, thus not jeopardizing admissions to a top school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hold on, that the courses are not calculated in one's LSDAS GPA does not mean they, and their grades, are not considered by law schools.</p>
<p>Very true. You are right the will be considered; but just like a Master's degree would: it would be nice, but it's not a major factor. If one has the GPA and the LSAT (which law schools need to remain competitive), the rest is superfluous.</p>
<p>It is pretty safe to say that if one has a 3.75+ GPA w/ LSDAS and a 3.0 GPA on the after-college courses (20 to 30 credits), one would still be in the running for a seat in a top 10 school. However, it might not be the same if those courses were taken as an undergrad, thus lowering one's GPA significantly (assuming subpar performance, of course).</p>
<p>
[quote]
it would be nice, but it's not a major factor. If one has the GPA and the LSAT (which law schools need to remain competitive), the rest is superfluous.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, it is not. If someone earned a Ph.D or M.A. after graduating, the fact that he/she earned it and the GPA earned in the process factors significantly.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is pretty safe to say that if one has a 3.75+ GPA w/ LSDAS and a 3.0 GPA on the after-college courses (20 to 30 credits), one would still be in the running for a seat in a top 10 school. However, it might not be the same if those courses were taken as an undergrad, thus lowering one's GPA significantly (assuming subpar performance, of course).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How do you substantiate this?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Not really; one would simply need some coursework in the sciences -- which can be done after one earns a first degree, thus not jeopardizing admissions to a top school.
[/quote]
I'm sure that patent lawyers need to sit for a separate exam. I think they need to hold either an undergraduate or graduate degree in engineering or science.</p>
<p>Competition in patent law is fierce. I'm not talking about getting into law school-but in the actual profession.</p>
<p>Taking as few science/engineering courses as possible in order to qualify for the patent law-may allow you to sit for the patent bar-but it isn't going to get you a job, allow you to do well at that job, and actually get and retain clients. </p>
<p>It isn't all about law school, or even going to the "top law schools." Biotech patent law in particularly requires an extrordinary amount of very sophisticated technical knowlege that just isn't taught at the undergraduate level-let alone the non-major science level. </p>
<p>When people get hired for patent law positions, the science degree matters more than the law degree. You'll notice that a lot of law firms tend to hire Ph.D.'s directly out of grad school and send them to law school at night (generally at some fourth tier "no name" school), while they work full time. </p>
<p>So, if you want to go into patent law-fine-but concentrate on establishing scientific credentials first and get that Ph.D. (which I don't take lightly but is essentially required for advancement). Keep in mind that you'll be working with scientists and engineers who will know almost instantaneously if you are faking and don't know what you are talking about and your credibility regardless if you went to law school at Harvard, or New England College of Law, will be shot. Unless you really love the science-it probably isn't worth the bother. There are certainly easier ways to make a buck that don't require arguing the finer points of chimeric humanized horse antibodies or siRNA's.</p>
<p>Keep in mind getting into law school is only one step in a sucessful career as a lawyer. Most of your success will come through your own hard work, drive, luck, creativity, and talent as you actually work as a lawyer.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, it is not. If someone earned a Ph.D or M.A. after graduating, the fact that he/she earned it and the GPA earned in the process factors significantly.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>A PhD would probably be significant, an MA probably would not. In any event, the GPA is not factored into the LSDAS GPA that shows up on your score report.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In any event, the GPA is not factored into the LSDAS GPA that shows up on your score report.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Whether or not it is factored in, the law schools will see the grades.</p>
<p>Earning a BA or BS does not grant one immunity such that he/she can start failing courses anywhere...</p>
<p>"Earning a BA or BS does not grant one immunity such that he/she can start failing courses anywhere..."</p>
<p>lol. Of course not; but people can probably get by with Bs and Cs (preferably Bs;)). Law schools would not focus on those grades.</p>
<p>In reality, it all depends on one's goals. If somebody wants to go into corporate law and start a career as soon as possible, then graduate school would make no sense -- LS would possibly see the person as an academic dilettante. On the other hand, if one was wants to teach or go into research, well, it's safe to say that having a doctorate would make for a compelling application (assuming the applicant can articulate it). </p>
<p>I also like Rigels123 post. However, it may be easier to guarantee one's admissions to a top LS by acing the LSAT and having a high GPA --it's a numbers game after all-- and THEN pursuing the graduate degree in engineering or the sciences. Admission to a top professional school (law, med and to a lesser extent business -- work exp. is a primary factor) is probably much more competitive than admissions to most grad school programs.</p>
<p>I have to argue that you are best served by majoring in something that you are passionate about. You will almost certainly end up with a better GPA taking classes that interest and stimulate you than if you simply take what you may think is the "easy road" (and, in my experience, the easy road never turns out to be quite as easy as it may seem). Law schools like to have diversity in their entering classes because it makes for better discussion and debate in and out of the classroom. How many government/poly sci majors do you think that any law school wants concentrated in their classes? The most important thing is to get something that is meaningful to you academically out of your 4-year college experience. Doing well usually follows naturally. Don't forget that plenty of students change their minds and their majors more than once during college.</p>
<p>My law school graduating class at a top 10 law school had hard science majors (bio, chem, physics), history majors, art history majors, engineers (and quite a few of them, too), english and literature majors, architecture majors, fine arts majors (photography, painting) spanish, french and japanese majors . . . you get the picture. Yes, we also had a few government/poly sci types. I believe that at least 40% of my class had one or more years of work experience before starting, and 25% had completed a post-graduate degree, including several M.D.'s and veterinarians. </p>
<p>My point is to plan for the future, but to get the most out of the moment too. College is a wonderful and valuable life and learning experience. Don't miss out on opportunities there because you were too busy thinking about what you might be doing five years later.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Don't miss out on opportunities there because you were too busy thinking about what you might be doing five years later.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's a pity how many of these future neurotic undergrads will listent to this. It's a pity how long it took ME to listen to this.</p>
<p>Guys and gals, just major in what you enjoy, okay? It's that simple.</p>
<p>Hey, I'm an Ivy League Undergrad who wants to double major in Anthropology and Religion, and then add a minor in something like International Relations, which has a lot of economics here but not higher-order econ.</p>
<p>Is that a good course of study for law school, both in preparation and admissions?</p>