Hi everyone,I think both DC labor and qmmm raise some excellent points. I suspect that Adcomms are really hamstrung by this ranking BS and would like to consider other indicators of potential success. Further, I suspect that one's experience or soft skills might resonate better with certain schools (eg scientist applying to Franklin Pierce might get a better response than applying to Baylor....with specialization in litigation).Which schools might have a better appreciation of applicants with a hard science background? Maybe schools with a strong IP program.I have explored the patent agent route. It seems that in biotechnology you need a PhD to compete given the glut of post-docs in academic biomedical research. Firms want the advanced degree as way a to market the "scientific expertise" of their firm. Many post-docs go get JD/PhD combination to compete. There is not much emphasis placed on experience. Not many firms in Texas do biotech work and many don't pay the tuition. There is a firm in Austin that would like to hire me as a tech specialist if I get into law school in a city where this firm has an office. The senior partner understands the importance of my experience but feels the JD will insure that my options are not limited in the future. Her advice get your MS done and get a year of law school at SMU/Houston/or DC law school and we will talk seriously about options.So right now I am in limbo or stuck until I can figure what might work. My options are somewhat limited because my wife would like me to stay in Texas. Have scheduled a meeting with two of the law schools that I am considering. I am just going to meet with any law school that I am considering and even the ones that denied my application. Don't know if my late applications hurt me...applied Feb 14.Any thoughts? I am tired of having the absence of an advanced degree being the rate limiting step in my career. Presently, I am a fulltime graduate student and a fulltime employee at UT Southwestern Medical Center. I am doing everything I can do to get there but it is frustrating when you feel all you need is 5-8 more points on a 3 hr test and that's it. Plus, your success on the LSAT depends on how much time you spend practicing and how much money you invest in preparation....and all else is not considered. Just give them what they want?Thanks,NW Lessig- What consultant did you use?
I really think nontrads need to cast a broad net. Schools seem to vary on what they look at with us. I have a 3.4ish/ 158 and got into a T50 school, waitlist at another and waitlist at a T14.Your best bet is to kill on the LSAT, and not to rely on soft factors to give you a boost. However, don't be afraid to apply widely and see what happens. It's a very unpredictable process.
Everybody on this board seems to rave about soft factors like work experience. I would put all of my effort into getting a high LSAT score. I finished my B.A. 8 years ago, have great soft factors inculding a 4.0 M.A. and several years academic work experience.Everywhere I was accepted, I think I would have been accepted with no soft factors. The only things that mattered were my undegrad GPA and my LSAT score. In fact, no where that I applied with median LSAT and GPA scores accepted me. I was well over in one or both categories in all the schools that accepted me. I was waitlisted at two schools where I was median though.Does anyone on this board have a story about soft factors helping him? Maybe you will have better luck with the process, but I think a great LSAT score is your best chance.
When I spoke with the admissions dean at WashU, she ask what I thought was the problem with my application. I replied LSAT! Her response was I disagree.....it's late! This rolling admisions approach is quite different than graduate school. Hey if you guys have suggestions on law schools for applicants with a technical background.