Top Law Schools

Hi, all.

I am hoping to work in Education Policy/District Admin and was recently turned on to getting a law degree as a means to that end. I'm super green to this and applied last cycle to Ed.D programs and Biz schools (outcome: interviews and waitlists at all top 10 biz schools to which I applied in Round 3, but no acceptances; no acceptances to Ed.D programs). I am reapplying to some biz schools, but am hoping to apply to law school as well. Not too interested in a dual degree program given that I already have a master's degree, though might consider. Here are my stats:

GRE scores: 170 (out of 170) on GRE Verbal and 165 (out of 170) on GRE Quant
UG GPA: 2.99 at "Top 50" US News with huge upward trend. Mental health issues now under control.
Grad GPA: 3.8 at Ivy Ed School
WE: Teacher for 6 years and department head
Other: URM (Hispanic)

I don't know if it is even worth applying given my UGPA and the question of how GRE scores will be used, but any ideas are appreciated.

Thanks.

No one really knows how GREs will be viewed, but as an URM with a high score, you should be well-positioned. Your GPA hurts you, but there’s nothing you can do about that now.

I’d drop apps in at HLS (why not?), Columbia, Northwestern, and Georgetown.

teacher_man wrote:I am hoping to work in Education Policy/District Admin and was recently turned on to getting a law degree as a means to that end. I'm super green to this and applied last cycle to Ed.D programs and Biz schools (outcome: interviews and waitlists at all top 10 biz schools to which I applied in Round 3, but no acceptances; no acceptances to Ed.D programs). I am reapplying to some biz schools, but am hoping to apply to law school as well. Not too interested in a dual degree program given that I already have a master's degree, though might consider. Here are my stats:

This is the more concerning part of your post for me. It sounds like you want a job that doesn't require a JD, and you clearly didn't think you needed one last year.

JDs are for practicing law. If you don't want to practice law, a JD is not worth the time and money. And even if a JD would give you a boost for education policy work, you definitely don't need a top school for district-level work.

cavalier1138 wrote:

teacher_man wrote:I am hoping to work in Education Policy/District Admin and was recently turned on to getting a law degree as a means to that end. I'm super green to this and applied last cycle to Ed.D programs and Biz schools (outcome: interviews and waitlists at all top 10 biz schools to which I applied in Round 3, but no acceptances; no acceptances to Ed.D programs). I am reapplying to some biz schools, but am hoping to apply to law school as well. Not too interested in a dual degree program given that I already have a master's degree, though might consider. Here are my stats:

This is the more concerning part of your post for me. It sounds like you want a job that doesn't require a JD, and you clearly didn't think you needed one last year.

JDs are for practicing law. If you don't want to practice law, a JD is not worth the time and money. And even if a JD would give you a boost for education policy work, you definitely don't need a top school for district-level work.

I get you on that. I am definitely just starting to consider this option, and I see and appreciate your concern. A lot of people who are making a profound impact in education policy are JD's (many without classroom/education experience), though, and that is ultimately where I'm leaning. I am honestly planning to apply and see if this is even an option, as well as to seek out conversations with people in the kind of jobs that I am interested in to see what they advise.

nick_scheu wrote:No one really knows how GREs will be viewed, but as an URM with a high score, you should be well-positioned. Your GPA hurts you, but there’s nothing you can do about that now.

I’d drop apps in at HLS (why not?), Columbia, Northwestern, and Georgetown.

I was thinking the same actually.

teacher_man wrote:A lot of people who are making a profound impact in education policy are JD's (many without classroom/education experience), though, and that is ultimately where I'm leaning.

I'm curious to know what jobs you're talking about. Politicians? A lot of smart people from middle-class backgrounds went to Harvard Law in the 80's to and ended up in politics because they were smart and ambitious to begin with. (Barack Obama comes to mind.) If there ever was a pipeline there, it probably doesn't exist anymore, because law school has gotten much more expensive and other degrees (MPP, MPA, etc.) are better options now for people interested in policy work.

teacher_man wrote:I am honestly planning to apply and see if this is even an option, as well as to seek out conversations with people in the kind of jobs that I am interested in to see what they advise.

This is a very good idea, but I'd be mindful of the fact that both law school and politics may have worked a bit differently back when those people were building their careers.

icechicken wrote:
This is a very good idea, but I'd be mindful of the fact that both law school and politics may have worked a bit differently back when those people were building their careers.

Will do. Thanks for the insight.

nick_scheu wrote:No one really knows how GREs will be viewed, but as an URM with a high score, you should be well-positioned. Your GPA hurts you, but there’s nothing you can do about that now.

I’d drop apps in at HLS (why not?), Columbia, Northwestern, and Georgetown.

This would have to be for next cycle though, right? Correct me if I'm wrong but, unlike those other schools mentioned above, Columbia isn't accepting the GRE until Fall 2018...

icechicken wrote:

teacher_man wrote:A lot of people who are making a profound impact in education policy are JD's (many without classroom/education experience), though, and that is ultimately where I'm leaning.

I'm curious to know what jobs you're talking about. Politicians? A lot of smart people from middle-class backgrounds went to Harvard Law in the 80's to and ended up in politics because they were smart and ambitious to begin with. (Barack Obama comes to mind.) If there ever was a pipeline there, it probably doesn't exist anymore, because law school has gotten much more expensive and other degrees (MPP, MPA, etc.) are better options now for people interested in policy work.

teacher_man wrote:I am honestly planning to apply and see if this is even an option, as well as to seek out conversations with people in the kind of jobs that I am interested in to see what they advise.

This is a very good idea, but I'd be mindful of the fact that both law school and politics may have worked a bit differently back when those people were building their careers.

I see your point, but I think it would be misleading to suggest there is not a pipeline from law to politics. Perhaps one should not go to law school for politics and politics alone, but law school certainly is a possible path for policy work even today. I am not suggesting that it is worth the debt or that it will guarantee you anything. Nonetheless, lawyers continue to be a large professional feeder into politics.

What about the score of analytical writings? Isn't it relevant to the admission?

burqin wrote:What about the score of analytical writings? Isn't it relevant to the admission?

About as relevant as the LSAT writing sample, or any other attempt to standardized-test writing ability.

icechicken wrote:

burqin wrote:What about the score of analytical writings? Isn't it relevant to the admission?

About as relevant as the LSAT writing sample, or any other attempt to standardized-test writing ability.

I have a different idea. Why Harvard initiated to have applicants report GRE scores as an alternative? Probably they are fed up with the admitted students trimmed by the LSAT thinking. They are just seeking some element for diversity of applicant pool. So they tend to utilize the facilitation of GRE analytical writing scores.

I just deduce it with common sense.

burqin wrote:

icechicken wrote:

burqin wrote:What about the score of analytical writings? Isn't it relevant to the admission?

About as relevant as the LSAT writing sample, or any other attempt to standardized-test writing ability.

I have a different idea. Why Harvard initiated to have applicants report GRE scores as an alternative? Probably they are fed up with the admitted students trimmed by the LSAT thinking. They are just seeking some element for diversity of applicant pool. So they tend to utilize the facilitation of GRE analytical writing scores.

I just deduce it with common sense.

If that were the case, then why not just announce that they're actually going to start reading the LSAT writing sections this year?

It's not common sense at all to think that they're going to weight the GRE's mindless writing section and continue to ignore the LSAT's comparably mindless writing section. And it has nothing to do with diversity.

[/quote]

If that were the case, then why not just announce that they're actually going to start reading the LSAT writing sections this year?

It's not common sense at all to think that they're going to weight the GRE's mindless writing section and continue to ignore the LSAT's comparably mindless writing section. And it has nothing to do with diversity.[/quote]

I admit it's possible they consider GRE writing scores mindless. But it's also possible they are apt to utilize the GRE writing scores. Law School directly reading the LSAT writing sample is not a good idea and they must know it. After all, GRE has a relatively more reliable, mature, effective and efficient method of ranking writings, which LSAT lacks.

burqin wrote:I admit it's possible they consider GRE writing scores mindless. But it's also possible they are apt to utilize the GRE writing scores. Law School directly reading the LSAT writing sample is not a good idea and they must know it. After all, GRE has a relatively more reliable, mature, effective and efficient method of ranking writings, which LSAT lacks.

The GRE is also noticeably easier than the LSAT. You're just speculating.

cavalier1138 wrote:

burqin wrote:I admit it's possible they consider GRE writing scores mindless. But it's also possible they are apt to utilize the GRE writing scores. Law School directly reading the LSAT writing sample is not a good idea and they must know it. After all, GRE has a relatively more reliable, mature, effective and efficient method of ranking writings, which LSAT lacks.

The GRE is also noticeably easier than the LSAT. You're just speculating.

1000% agree - It took me years to study the LSAT and get a respectable score - it took me two months to get in the 80% for Verbal and 70% for math - and the study intensity was not the same as compared to the LSAT - I also killed the writing sections - per the GRE website - the current Law Schools that accept the GRE:

Law Schools That Accept GRE Scores
Law schools that have recently announced accepting GRE scores include:

Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Brigham Young University Law School
Brooklyn Law School
Columbia Law School
George Washington University Law School
Georgetown University Law Center
Harvard Law School
Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
St. John's University School of Law
Texas A&M University School of Law
University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law
UCLA School of Law
University of Chicago Law School
University of Hawai'i at Manoa William S. Richardson School of Law
Wake Forest University School of Law
Washington University School of Law

https://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/about/law/

Dude, don't go to law school.
Get an MPA or something if you're itching to go back to school.

I get that you're just the kind of whimsical applicant (well minus the poor GPA) schools are looking to attract with the GRE policy, but take the LSAT to open more doors if you're serious about this path (you're likely not).

Holy crap, a 170 GRE?

Anyway...you seem like an interesting applicant who can get into some good schools. Just apply and see.

Also, I second the fact that you are limiting yourself by not taking the LSAT.

Thanks for all of the feedback, all. I will weigh it all. I know that I need to give more thought to whether law school is the right choice, but I'm applying in the interim and will make the decision once I know whether it is even an option.

Slight update: my LSAC calculated cumulative GPA is actually exactly a 3.00. Doubt that changes anything!

I’d steer clear of explaining mental health issues btw, if possible.

Rigo wrote:I’d steer clear of explaining mental health issues btw, if possible.

I certainly understand that it is risky, but I was clinically depressed and not undergoing any treatment at that time. I will be 8 years removed from that period of my life by the fall 2018 and have successfully taken on many challenges since, including graduate study.

Anyone else agree? My GPA was solid freshman and senior years and extremely low sophomore and junior years, resulting in a 3.0 cumulative GPA. Do you think it needs explaining? If not, will they just assume lack of maturity at that time?

Thanks.