<p>I'm interested in a Masters in History, early american history to be specific. Some time in the first half. I'm not entirely sure yet. But I'm pretty intent on becoming a lawyer and i'm going to be spending most of my time and money prepping for the LSAT. </p>
<p>Are there any grad schools that accept an LSAT score in lieu of a GRE?</p>
<p>If you want to be a lawyer why spend the time and money on a MS in history?</p>
<p>No, graduate programs in history do not accept the LSAT in lieu of the GRE. Why? Because they’re not law schools.</p>
<p>Um, why all the extra schooling? Pick one- MA in History and GRE, or LSAT and law school.</p>
<p>I really enjoy history. I just love the subject. I could read history books for hours. I like the research aspects of analyzing documents to find connections and recreating a person’s life. But I also like the things associated with Law. Besides the money, I like the idea of a career that’s competition based. I don’t think I’d be happy unless I could argue with people and finds precedents to justify my arguments and then be told whether or not my compilation of arguments and research is correct enough to be awarded a win.</p>
<p>So I want to learn history and I want to advance the study of history but a career in law appeals to my personality more. I also like the money. And since I’m gonna be in school anyways, I want to save time and get both degrees. There’s also a part of me that wants to be teach History at the college level later in life.</p>
<p>Then go to law school. Read history books for fun in your own time.</p>
<p>If you have time and money to do an MA in history and then go to Law School, do that. I don’t see how anyone on here should tell you what to do. If you have the means to get more education, why not. Just make sure your reasons are sound.</p>