MBA Before JD?

[Killerme33]

I too am studying for the LSAT. The best books to use (IMO) are the Powerscore Bibles (Logical Reasoning Bible & Logic Games Bible). Also be sure to buy some of the old actual tests from LSAC. A 170 on the LSAT is no easy task my friend, best of luck.

 

[GoSharks]

Originally posted by: Silex
Hey now, an MBA from SDSU ain't nothing to sneeze at. Their MSBA for International Business is ranked #21 and BA for Entrepreneurship is ranked #7 in the nation according to the 2007 US News & World Report.

SDSU's MBA isn't even currently ranked. Put it this way, why would a top tier school pick you over their other applicants? If you think it is because you have an MBA from some bottom tier school, you'll be wrong. The name of the school matters.

 

[JS80]

Both are waste of time and money going fwd IMO.

 

[Blackjack200]

Wow,

Lots of great information in this thread. I guess I have two questions...

#1: I went to County College and got a 3.95 GPA on my two year degree, then finished off my BA at a state school with a 3.6 GPA. For simplicity's sake, lets pretend I got exactly 60 credits at the 3.95, and 60 credits at the 3.6. Does that mean that the LSAC would consider my GPA to be 3.775 (=3.78) right at Stanford's median GPA?

#2: I really want to be enrolling somewhere by next fall. Assuming I start preparing immediately (I actually bought the book two nights ago) is is reasonably doable to get a 170? I typically do very well on standardized tests and enjoy the logic type puzzles on the LSAT.

Also, guess this is kind of question #3, but I've been out of school for about 5 years now, working in a fairly advanced position for someone my age at a financial company. How much will this hurt/help me?

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Blackjack200
Wow,

Lots of great information in this thread. I guess I have two questions...

#1: I went to County College and got a 3.95 GPA on my two year degree, then finished off my BA at a state school with a 3.6 GPA. For simplicity's sake, lets pretend I got exactly 60 credits at the 3.95, and 60 credits at the 3.6. Does that mean that the LSAC would consider my GPA to be 3.775 (=3.78) right at Stanford's median GPA?

#2: I really want to be enrolling somewhere by next fall. Assuming I start preparing immediately (I actually bought the book two nights ago) is is reasonably doable to get a 170? I typically do very well on standardized tests and enjoy the logic type puzzles on the LSAT.

Also, guess this is kind of question #3, but I've been out of school for about 5 years now, working in a fairly advanced position for someone my age at a financial company. How much will this hurt/help me?

1. Yes. It will be roughly around that area.
2. Depends. Theres 66 days until the December LSAT. You'd need to take a full length timed practice test and see where you stand. Logic games can be improved really quickly. Logical Reasoning and Reading Comp can not.
3. Work experiance is good but itt usually only distances you from a bad GPA. The exception is If you could swing a really good LSAT score, 5 years work experiance + high GPA + an LSAT score around 170 = pretty good odds admissions to Northwestern barring any character and fitness issues. Northwestern more or less requires about 2 years work experiance.

 

[Blackjack200]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Blackjack200
Wow,

Lots of great information in this thread. I guess I have two questions...

#1: I went to County College and got a 3.95 GPA on my two year degree, then finished off my BA at a state school with a 3.6 GPA. For simplicity's sake, lets pretend I got exactly 60 credits at the 3.95, and 60 credits at the 3.6. Does that mean that the LSAC would consider my GPA to be 3.775 (=3.78) right at Stanford's median GPA?

#2: I really want to be enrolling somewhere by next fall. Assuming I start preparing immediately (I actually bought the book two nights ago) is is reasonably doable to get a 170? I typically do very well on standardized tests and enjoy the logic type puzzles on the LSAT.

Also, guess this is kind of question #3, but I've been out of school for about 5 years now, working in a fairly advanced position for someone my age at a financial company. How much will this hurt/help me?

1. Yes. It will be roughly around that area.
2. Depends. Theres 66 days until the December LSAT. You'd need to take a full length timed practice test and see where you stand. Logic games can be improved really quickly. Logical Reasoning and Reading Comp can not.
3. Work experiance is good but itt usually only distances you from a bad GPA. The exception is If you could swing a really good LSAT score, 5 years work experiance + high GPA + an LSAT score around 170 = pretty good odds admissions to Northwestern barring any character and fitness issues. Northwestern more or less requires about 2 years work experiance.

Thanks,

Where should I take the timed practice test, does the LSAC administer them, or perhaps the prep courses you linked? Or is this something where I would just have to buy an old test and administer it myself?

Edit: Thanks for the tip on Northwestern, my sister lives out in Chicago so I'll definitely apply there if I get a good LSAT.

 

[Silex]

Originally posted by: GoSharks

Originally posted by: Silex
Hey now, an MBA from SDSU ain't nothing to sneeze at. Their MSBA for International Business is ranked #21 and BA for Entrepreneurship is ranked #7 in the nation according to the 2007 US News & World Report.

SDSU's MBA isn't even currently ranked. Put it this way, why would a top tier school pick you over their other applicants? If you think it is because you have an MBA from some bottom tier school, you'll be wrong. The name of the school matters.

I guess you're right. It does show a ranking of N/A on US New's site. I find it quite disturbing that there is a direct correlation between ranking and tuition cost. The latter being one of the reasons that I am SDSU plus it is local to my job. Since I'm not planning on completing my MBA anyways right off the bat, I could always choose to transfer the credit to another school (good for 5 years). I was planning on finishing the MBA first, but maybe I can get lucky and get into a law school that also has a decent business school and do a joint MBA/JD.

Wreckem, I forgot to comment on your opinion my chances of getting into Stanford. I have been working as a Hardware Engineer for 3 years now out of college. Would my experience, coupled with a 170+ LSAT, and a low GPA (even for a #12 ranked UCSD Jacob's School of Engineering according to US News) still give me a fighting chance? Would my bachelor's give me more weight over someone who has a non-engineering degree? I can see this happening especially if on the application I can claim my specialization in IP law which shows direction and ability to link my undergrad and law degree together in such a way that they both can work off each other. Maybe, just maybe, I might be given a chance to prove myself.

 

[endervalentine]

fwiw: since it looks like you're interest in CA schools, my old college roommate from the ugrad years was in the same situation a few years ago. He graduated without a stellar GPA, worked for a startup then eventually decided to the IP route. He killed the LSAT but his low GPA didn't get him into places like Stanford, he did get into Santa Clara which from what he says is a pretty good school give the networking available in Silicon Valley. Studied his butt of in Santa Clara and got a pretty nice job afterwards.

So your chances of landing a top tier school is hard, but doesn't mean you won't land a job after your JD.

Make sure to really study for the LSAT, get good letter of recommendations and kick as in school once you get in whichever that maybe Good luck!

 

[Silex]

Thanks endervalentine! Appreciate the insider information I think your college room mate and I are the same person since I am mirroring his situation to a T. What was his bachelor's in?

I'm beginning to really take notice of Santa Clara. A joint MBA/JD from there might just be the ticket. Some warm and fuzzies below that makes the effort and time spent feel more worthwhile:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...iversity_School_of_Law

According to the Princeton Review, the average starting salary for Santa Clara Law graduates is $114,679.[14]

Then again this info might be skewed by their top 5%. Give us the median dammit!

 

[endervalentine]

Originally posted by: Silex
Thanks endervalentine! Appreciate the insider information I think your college room mate and I are the same person since I am mirroring his situation to a T. What was his bachelor's in?

I'm beginning to really take notice of Santa Clara. A joint MBA/JD from there might just be the ticket. Some warm and fuzzies below that makes the effort and time spent feel more worthwhile:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...iversity_School_of_Law

According to the Princeton Review, the average starting salary for Santa Clara Law graduates is $114,679.[14]

Then again this info might be skewed by their top 5%. Give us the median dammit!

ee from ucla

one note though, he worked his butt off compared to what he did during our ugrad years, I think he ended up pretty high in his graduating class.

focus and good luck!

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Blackjack200
#2: I really want to be enrolling somewhere by next fall. Assuming I start preparing immediately (I actually bought the book two nights ago) is is reasonably doable to get a 170? I typically do very well on standardized tests and enjoy the logic type puzzles on the LSAT.

Take a practice test using the same timing parameters as the actual LSAT. Even after studying and prepping, your score is not likely to go up by more than 10 points, and even that is difficult.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I do not believe Stanford would EVER admit someone with a 2.1 GPA regardless of LSAT score. I got a 168 on my LSAT and had a 3.4 UGPA and was turned down by Stanford (as I frankly knew I would be). Law school admissions are not about the "whole person," they are about numbers, and a 2.1 GPA will make admission to Stanford impossible for all intents and purposes. Frankly it will be very difficult to get into any good law school with that GPA. Unfortunately your minority status will also not be helpful, since it's obviously not the case that Asians are underrepresented at schools like Stanford.

 

[Silex]

Increasing around 10 points is what I see as the norm so knowing how well one does from the get-go should provide some circumstantial proof on how well one will do after studying. I shall follow my own advice

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
I do not believe Stanford would EVER admit someone with a 2.1 GPA regardless of LSAT score. I got a 168 on my LSAT and had a 3.4 UGPA and was turned down by Stanford (as I frankly knew I would be). Law school admissions are not about the "whole person," they are about numbers, and a 2.1 GPA will make admission to Stanford impossible for all intents and purposes. Frankly it will be very difficult to get into any good law school with that GPA. Unfortunately your minority status will also not be helpful, since it's obviously not the case that Asians are underrepresented at schools like Stanford.

I wholeheartedly agree, but I will still go your route and send an application in. What do I have to lose except $75? Rhetorical question. Check out this admissions graph for a sample of registered students from 08-09:
http://stanford.lawschoolnumbe.../0809/?whichCycle=0910

The max/min outliers I see is a lowest LSAT of 160 with GPA of 3.9 and lowest GPA of 3.64 with LSAT of 165. There was one fluke from 07-08 with a 170/3.1, but they probably had work experience under their belt or were a minority.

I would like to stay in CA so the two only other choices that I will have is Santa Clara University and UC Hastings.

 

[miniMUNCH]

I'm no expert on the JD side of things... but why pay for a MBA if you are gonna be a lawyer or a JD if you are gonna get an MBA and handle the business side?

If you are gonna get an MBA, shoot for the stars as far as schools go, with a couple back up schools that you know you'll get into... fuck being a lawyer, the money is not that good when
you boil it down to an hourly rate.

Also... you sure you'll have a job waiting for you when you finish your JD... the 'wrong' patent reforms could fucking nuke the patent law ractice.

my $0.02

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Silex

I would like to stay in CA so the two only other choices that I will have is Santa Clara University and UC Hastings.

I myself went to Hastings, as it happens. Very good school (it's arguably underrated, largely because the job market in the Bay Area is so tight and it has a not-great placement office), but the quality of life there is rough, largely because it's a free-standing law school, so you're permanently surrounded by law students (who are, in my view, the lowest form of human life). On the plus side, you're living in SF . . .

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: Silex

I would like to stay in CA so the two only other choices that I will have is Santa Clara University and UC Hastings.

I myself went to Hastings, as it happens. Very good school (it's arguably underrated, largely because the job market in the Bay Area is so tight and it has a not-great placement office), but the quality of life there is rough, largely because it's a free-standing law school, so you're permanently surrounded by law students (who are, in my view, the lowest form of human life). On the plus side, you're living in SF . . .

<----------- Hastings Alum as well.

The tenderloin sucks. Most of your class will be over competitive ass hats.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Blackjack200
#2: I really want to be enrolling somewhere by next fall. Assuming I start preparing immediately (I actually bought the book two nights ago) is is reasonably doable to get a 170? I typically do very well on standardized tests and enjoy the logic type puzzles on the LSAT.

Take a practice test using the same timing parameters as the actual LSAT. Even after studying and prepping, your score is not likely to go up by more than 10 points, and even that is difficult.

10-12 weeks is more than enough time to maximize your LSAT score if you put the time into it.

 

[Silex]

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
I'm no expert on the JD side of things... but why pay for a MBA if you are gonna be a lawyer or a JD if you are gonna get an MBA and handle the business side?

If you are gonna get an MBA, shoot for the stars as far as schools go, with a couple back up schools that you know you'll get into... fuck being a lawyer, the money is not that good when
you boil it down to an hourly rate.

Also... you sure you'll have a job waiting for you when you finish your JD... the 'wrong' patent reforms could fucking nuke the patent law ractice.

my $0.02

You mean like Bilski with patenting of software methods? We'll know soon enough.

 

[Silex]

Although I can see EE, ME, CE (as in Computer), and Chem always being in demand due tot the broad scope of applications in those fields. Although most bachelor's of Chemistry or Biology/Bio-Chem need Ph.D's to compete in the IP law portion of the industry in order to be competitive with other chemists/scientists who made the switch between industries.

 

[Blackjack200]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Blackjack200
#2: I really want to be enrolling somewhere by next fall. Assuming I start preparing immediately (I actually bought the book two nights ago) is is reasonably doable to get a 170? I typically do very well on standardized tests and enjoy the logic type puzzles on the LSAT.

Take a practice test using the same timing parameters as the actual LSAT. Even after studying and prepping, your score is not likely to go up by more than 10 points, and even that is difficult.

10-12 weeks is more than enough time to maximize your LSAT score if you put the time into it.

So...

I took a baseline LSAT practice test on Saturday and got a 165. Went back and worked through all the "logic games" questions that I got wrong (which was about half).

Took another practice test today and got... a 165

So I'm thinking that if I can improve a bit on the "logic games" section and improve my test stamina a bit (I'm really drained by the end of the test, and that will only get worse once the experimental section is added), I'm hopeful that I can get a 170.

I registered today for the December 5th LSAT.

 

[dbk]

gl son

 

[Silex]

^ Are you really his mother? Joking aside... thanks for the hijack Blackjack200! Nah, I don't mind. Wish you luck as I'm sure you're going to kill it with that practice score! Still, be sure to take many more practice tests so you build brain memory on just "knowing" the answers to the questions without needing to think too much. Get those synapses firing in a set pattern. I'm still a ways away since I've decided to complete my MBA first which means GMAT right now and then USPTO Patent Bar before I even touch the LSAT.

 

[Blackjack200]

Originally posted by: Silex
^ Are you really his mother? Joking aside... thanks for the hijack Blackjack200! Nah, I don't mind. Wish you luck as I'm sure you're going to kill it with that practice score! Still, be sure to take many more practice tests so you build brain memory on just "knowing" the answers to the questions without needing to think too much. Get those synapses firing in a set pattern. I'm still a ways away since I've decided to complete my MBA first which means GMAT right now and then USPTO Patent Bar before I even touch the LSAT.

Hijack? I'm just trying to keep it warm for ya :laugh:

Good luck with the GMAT, and let me know how that goes, I'm probably going to take one of those too to hedge my bets.

 

[Silex]

You're right. Thanks for keeping it warm... very luke warm. I hear from people who have taken the GMAT before the LSAT that the former was actually easier and somewhat good prep for the LSAT.