<p>Like would they want to accept some less conventional pre law undergrad majors like hard sciences as opposed to accepting a bunch of polisci/philosophy/history majors?</p>
<p>Most law schools love to have some hard science undergrads. For example, the head of our environmental law department had an undergrad degree in chemical engineering. Similarly, many of the partners in our health law section had degrees in either nursing or medicine. IP is another area where an undergrad (or a masters or a Ph.D.) in a pertinent area would be a plus. One caveat, however. In my experience, it is the rare hard science undergrad who does particularly well in law school. Science majors tend to think in terms of black and white while law is typically an array of gray! Also, many science majors do not acquire the writing skills necessary to excel in law school. These are crass generalizations, of course, but be sure to include plenty of courses that require considerable writing in your undergrad curriculum, whatever the major.</p>
<p>I see, but do you think Law Schools would go out of hteir way to recruit hard science majors as opposed to polisci majors to bolster their diversity?</p>
<p>I can’t say for sure. I don’t think they would “go out of their way” if that meant dipping down much in terms of gpa or lsat scores just to get a science major.</p>
<p>I would venture to say that my Bio/English combo has taken me quite far.</p>
<p>I think that I got a few acceptances and definitely scholarship offers that I wouldn’t have otherwise gotten for my numbers…then again, my GPA would have been ~ .5 (or more) higher without the bio major (and extra Organic Chem classes)…so…</p>
<p>Fly The Helo, you mean it’s taken you far in law school?</p>
<p>Anne, do you think they would rather take a engineer over a polisci major with same LSAT and GPA?</p>
<p>I really can’t speak for law schools per se as I have never been in law school admissions. My opinion is that, all things being equal in terms of gpa and lsat scores, they’d be crazy not to go for the engineer over another run of the mill poli sci major. (I was a poli sci major, by the way!) There are more and more specialized areas of law where technical expertise is a plus, e.g., IP, environmental law, etc. Purely anecdotal info, but I know of someone who had about a 3.8 gpa, a masters in biology, but an lsat under 170 who got into Stanford a few years ago. Again, one has to assume that the bio masters helped with her lower than average lsat score for that school. Good luck!</p>
<p>Well, I have a hard science background (Bio was my “primary” major) so I have good research skills and my bio program was rather writing intensive. Science writing is different for every field but general biology tends to include alot of highly technical methodical writing (research papers etc.). I also got the opportunity to do a fair number of presentations, and anything that helps with public speaking is golden. English piled on top of that really refined my technique (and being flexible in your style is really what counts…just being able to write one type of document well is not going to help you in law school). Work in critical thinking and close reading is also something that Bio tends to overlook. </p>
<p>Two people with the same numbers, same softs, equal personal statements etc but differing only in major (hard science vs. pre-law, poli sci, communications etc. ) I would bet they take the science major every time.</p>
<p>Wow, this is pretty useful stuff, thanks Anne!</p>
<p>Yea the problem is I’m thinking of doing Polisci, and I’m afraid it might get looked down upon as ‘easy’ and ‘too common’.</p>
<p>Do you think they group History or Econ majors along with Polisci+Philosophy majors as the ‘too common’ majors</p>
<p>
Probably not. They would almost certainly reject both or accept both. The circumstance in which they’d pick one or the other would be absurdly rare (but there, I concede that they might take the engineer).</p>
<p>Back to jimbluecheese: I certainly wouldn’t try to “game” my major just to enhance my chances of getting into law school! Major in something you are passionate about. Usually, that will translate into higher grades and better academic recommendations, both essential elements of a successful law school application. </p>
<p>At this point, I will digress a bit. The tendency in these forums is to focus on the “gold ring” of getting into certain law schools–as if that is the end game, in and of itself. Nothing could be further from the truth! Law as a career is a marathon, not a sprint. You must do well wherever you go to law school regardless of where you are admitted. Once you land the big law firm offer (if that is your goal), you will find that very little you actually learn in law school prepares you for the actual practice of law. You are very much an apprentice. Once you make partner, if you are lucky enough and have worked hard enough to do so, you still have to perform. My point is not to be negative, but to counter some of the law school myopia that these forums tend to encourage. There is so much more to being a successful attorney than merely getting into a certain law school! Keep your eye on the big picture.</p>
<p>Law school values personal development, and rightly so. Some qualities they take into account are short sighted, sure, but many are good indicators of the potential for future success. Law school itself is less about teaching the substantiative law and more about developing skills that will serve you in your career in law (or in many others as well). You achieve personal development by challenging yourself with difficult and diverse learning experiences. In the concrete sense, that translates into difficult majors and diverse topics. Whether you look at taking the right classes as a way to get into law school or as a way to develop yourself as an effective lifelong learner and critical thinker, the result is the same.</p>
<p>Many of top lawyers well most of them do not come from the top schools. Their are lawyers who earn millions and gone to some of the crummiest schools. If you have a big persona, the kind people are drawn to, you can build up a client base and do class action law and make big bucks more than top law groups will make.</p>
<p>That being said physics majors have been proven to perform the best on lsats and business majors the worst because it is about critical thinking skills and being able to think logically.</p>
<p>Also law schools know that physics is harder than poli science so a physics major with a 2.8 gpa is not viewed as dumb comparaed to his poli sci counter part. However not all schools view this that way.</p>
<p>Most (if not all) top law schools like to create diverse classes in order to foster discussion and an exchange of ideas inside and outside of the classroom. Diversity can come from many sources. Of course, cultural and ethnic diversity can play a role. You should not downplay the role that work experience, age, marital status, military experience, college major, life experience, socioeconomic status/background, geography, etc. can play in fostering the kind of diversity that makes the law school experience interesting. Of course, it is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight these factors (to the extent they are not already obvious in one’s application).</p>
<p>How is Econ generally viewed?</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>I would like to know that as well.</p>
<p>Also how is History viewed? These are the 3 majors I’m intersted in: History, Political Sciecne and Econ. I want to know which is most preferred for diversity sake</p>
<p>Major doesn’t matter hardly at all in most cases. It especially doesn’t matter among three of the most common majors. Nobody will care. Pick whichever seems most fun to you.</p>
<p>I would say this would be a luxury consideration at best. If a school could afford to consider it without hurting its median LSATs and GPAs, then perhaps it would be a nominal factor.</p>