<p>I just finished my freshman year in Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. From my experiences, I realize that I would never want to be a professional engineer and that patent law seems like the best career for me. </p>
<p>My school offers a B.A. in General Engineering, which preps you for patent law or business, giving you a broad view of all of the types in the engineering, while doing a little bit of concentration in the type you are most interested in. The only problem is, it's not an actual engineering degree. Do you recommend that I pursue a B.S. in Engineering (such as Civil) or should I go with the B.A. in engineering. I'm afraid that the B.A. won't give me a competitive advantage. The thing I like about it is that I can take a wider range of courses, not just specifically math and science. </p>
<p>I am worried that getting a B.S. in engineering (let's say civil) would hurt my GPA because the course load is much more demanding than a degree in general engineering. Do law schools realize how difficult engineering is? Should I worry so much about my GPA?</p>
<p>In general, they don't really care what your major is. If you have a 3.3 in engineering and a sociology major has a 3.5 with the same LSAT score, the sociology major is getting in before you are.</p>
<p>I agree that the degree will not make a difference and you need to be attentive to gpa. The gpa issue comes up over and over again on grad school boards, and the truth of the matter is that username is correct. You need to go for the gpa. Grad schools cannot quantify the difficulty of classes. A prof teaching a certain class may think that a C is a good grade, and another prof at the same school teaching the same class rarely gives below a B. JHU is a grade deflation school (as you know) and this MAY hurt you.</p>
<p>I can't answer your questions about law schools but will try to deal with the patent law questions you raised.</p>
<p>First, note that although the JHU General Engineering major is not a B.S., it still includes physics, math and plenty of engineering courses. You still will need to like that subject even to take the B.A. program. Otherwise you are setting yourself up for three years of misery taking courses, and needing to get good grades, in a subject that you don't like all that much. You need to think about whether you wish to major in engineering in general, or perhaps change your major to some other field.</p>
<p>Thirdly, if you are thinking of becoming a patent attorney, you may be placing yourself in a poor competitive position with law school graduates who have a B.S. or M.S. degree. You'll have to provide convincing answers at interviews (if you're selected for them) as to what a B.A. in engineering is, and why you're technically qualified to handle the work of your prospective employer. You should talk to professors in that program and to graduates of that program and find out how well they succeeded in patent law with that degree. You also should talk with praticing patent attorneys to see whether you would like that type of work before aiming for it.</p>
<p>And that shoud be enough things for you to do at the moment. Good luck with the process of career planning.</p>
<p>dadofsam: How much does the difference between a BA and a BS matter when it comes to patent law employment? I talked to and got information from a patent lawyer in the area who went to a Liberal Arts college and got a BA in biochemistry, and obviously he's employed. I believe he told me that differences between a BA and a BS don't matter that much, but I'd like to seee your opinion on this (it is good to get many opinions after all). Does this matter more for some majors more than others? For example, something that intrigues me about Wesleyan University, an LAC, is that within the major of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, they offer a concentration in Molecular Biophysics (reasons I am interested in this is that I enjoy all three major sciences - biology, chemistry, and physics - biological applications of physics intrigue me, and this seems to be where the future of research in biological sciences is going, which many qualified people have also affirmed for me). Since this is a BA program, can this hurt for employment? Also, even though the Molecular Biophysics thing isn't a major (it is a certification concentration), will the employers see this when you apply for a job or will you have to tell them directly and make a case for it? Since all LACs offer just BAs (I THINK), are they more understanding when they see you've gone to a top LAC such as Wesleyan or Williams and gotten a BA in a science program rather than doing what may be taking an easier route in a research university by doing a BA in a science when you have the option between a BA and a BS? Also, I would think that a BA could be advantageous since if I am not mistaken, you can get a more well rounded education out of it, and from what I have learned, you need to have a large skill set for patent law, from knowledge in the sciences, to being a clear and concise writer, to being able to effectively communicate with others, etc. After I talked with a patent lawyer, this still seems like the right career for me - but who knows, as I may decide I would hate it in the near future or later on.</p>
<p>Waffle: I'm afraid I can't give you an exact or single comprehensive answer to your question. It depends on the view of those doing the interviewing and hiring, as well as on the major. In general I would say that in engineering fields people are accustomed to see candidates with B.S. as opposed to B.A. degrees and would be more likely to question a B.A. In other fields, perhaps not so much; it depends (LACs can give both B.A. and B.S. degrees). I don't know that someone would rate a candidate with a B.A. from an LAC higher than one with a B.A. from a state university. It also depends on how many, and perhaps which, science courses the candidate has taken.</p>
<p>Thank you for the information. If you could answer my question about how employers look at a concentration within a major (or even outside of one), that would be great (if you have the time).</p>
<p>I e-mailed Wesleyan to try to get their take on this, though I know it will be biased, but if I can get connected to their career services it could help.</p>
<p>Also, will employers be splitting hairs between which major or course of study you take, such as the difference between Biophysics and Biochemistry? Would they be more likely to take on someone who has pursued biophysics since they have a good background in biochemistry and physics, or does it really matter? Would a physics major look better? I know that many law/business firms are hiring physics/math majors now since they perceive them as the "smartest" people. Also, another thing I have heard mixed opinions on: How important is an M.S. or even a Ph. D. for employment. I say this because ideally if I were to do this I would just apply to law school right out of undergrad, since I don't exactly want to spend years and years in school. I know that there are people who apply right out of college and others go to graduate school first, so does it matter that much?</p>
<p>Law schools encourage you to take a subject where you can do the best academically. There is no "best" pre law as such. You cannot count on the fact that civil engineering is perceived to be harder than other subjects and that there will be some kind of adjustment. I personally think in arts programs it is easier to pass but harder to get a good grades whereas in engineering if you understand that material and do the calculations properly, you will get your points on the exams. Thus, in engineering it maybe harder to pass, but easier to obtain good grades relative to arts. </p>
<p>I know Civil E is hard but if study hard you can achieve top grades. Many people graduate good grades in engineering every year. There is no reason you can't too.</p>
<p>More often than not, jobs for patent lawyers specifically call for a patent lawyer with a degree in electrical engineering or biology or chemical engineering, etc. Your undergraduate major definitely makes a difference in your future career possibilities in patent law.</p>
<p>If you want to go into patent law a math background is usually insufficient, unless you can work in computer software; also you need to check the website I mentioned to see whether a solid math program meets the requirements for applying to take the USPTO registration examination. A major physics usually qualifies; however check that website to be sure what couses are required.</p>
<p>The technical background necessary for employment will vary from time to time and from employer to employer, at both corporations and law firms. It is impossible to predict whether, in 7 or 8 years, after you will have finished both college and law school, a degree in biophysics or one in biochemistry would be more valuable. I would not recommend majoring in civil engineering if you want to become a patent attorney since there is little patent work in that field, in general. However, if one is already a civil engineer and wants to become a patent attorney, that's not impossible as long as you have enough engineering training to be able to handle other engineering technology.</p>
<p>You'll make a good lawyer but would be a lousy engineer. </p>
<p>Lawyers are great with that type of deductive reasoning. It doesn't even have to correlate at all to reality. Engineers would point out that, when kids who got 4.0s and near-perfect SATs in high school are getting Cs in college, the major is probably a little rough.</p>
<p>No matter how smart you are, you'll have a tough time getting high grades in engineering. Many professors just don't give out more than one or two As. Many professors scale to a B- or C+ - so yeah, you might know all the material, but so does everyone else in the class, so welcome to the world of a sub-3.0 GPA. </p>
<p>Most of the engineers that I know studied very hard, are very smart people, and got really bad grades. When half the class gets a C or a D, it's hard. Furthermore, many professors design their tests so that you won't have time to finish or you won't be able to do all of the problems. I had one professor who explicitly said that his 10 question tests were designed so that you would never even start one problem, and one would be so hard that even the best students would only get 1/2 way through it, so the highest grade in the class would be an 85. I cannot tell you how many tests I took in college where the class average was below a 60. At lower-ranked engin. schools, the class averages can be in the 30s. I remember one test where my 81 was the highest grade - by 10 points. (I had spent a full day in the library looking up back issues of magazines and searching through books on reserve to supplement the information given in our textbook and in class.)</p>
<p>So I think that doing well in engineering is a bit more than just knowing a little math. Many schools deliberately give you tests that are way beyond anyone's ability level - even the tests are a learning experience that is supposed to challenge you.</p>
<p>Of courses the tests can have averages that are ridiculously low. In my thermo class, one of our midterms had a class average in the 30s (with one kid getting a 4). Mind you, this test was out of 100. This is the very reason why engineering is curved. There's no way in hell the professor could fail the entire class and still be around.</p>
<p>Any engineer knows that a choosing that field is more difficult and demanding than the majority of other fields. It is much harder to maintain a good gpa, and that is just a matter of fact. If you look at the average GPAs in colleges, engineering student's GPAs will be much lower. Also, engineers are required to take more credits than other students. I find it hard to believe that law schools don't give heavy weight to this fact. The students who chose engineering were challenging themselves. Why would law schools encourage someone to take easier classes just to get a better GPA? I would think a main factor in admissions would be to judge the intensity of the undergraduate degree that the applicant received.</p>
<p>i couldnt agree more with that^ and find it sad that law schools dont make efforts to account for the difference. although it is a difficult problem, the worst thing they can do is ignore it completely. i almost think it is a moral issue or something, i dont know. </p>
<p>but anyway what are the type of people that get the top patent law jobs? since their ugpa's would in general be lower, does it really matter where they go to LS? is it easier in patent law to earn your way up? id figure top school and performance in LS are both important, but how so in relation to other areas of law (out of and down the road from law school)?</p>
<p>Lovely error. Yes, we know that engineering is hard; we know that engineers have lower GPAs. </p>
<p>That doesn't mean that law schools care. It also doesn't mean that they care about it enough for them to sacrifice the all-important US News rankings to take qualified candidates. Some schools will; others will only take those with good GPAs. </p>
<p>In some ways, though, if you have a bunch of low Bs on a report card, how is the school to know if you would have gotten As in other classes? On the other hand, if someone has As in easy classes, you at least know they are capable of getting good grades. Also, a low GPA just looks bad!</p>
<p>In the initial jobs, as in pretty much all fields, people who were top performers in college, graduate school (if they attended) and law school get the best offers. Despite what you read in these threads, there are in fact some people who get very fine GPAs in science or engineering as well as in law school. It's just tougher overall in science/engineering than in some other subjects, or than in some colleges in general.</p>
<p>After some years, say three or four, performance in school becomes less important and abilities and skills in the profession, more mportant. After that, when, for example, one may be under consideration for a partnership in a law firm or a supervisory post in-house, grades mean very little. In a law firm what counts is the ability to get and retain clients while doing a lot of high quality work for them - and getting results. In corporations, there are other factors. In both situations, interpersonal skills count. At that point in your career, nobody really cares what your GPA was, whether you were on law review, or anything else you did in school (except perhaps for your general scientific background).</p>