Second bachelors? Forum

[sa1]

From reading various posts, it seems that most law schools really only consider undergrad GPA and LSAT score with regards to the "scoring aspect." Correct me if I'm wrong, but even graduate degrees don't count much towards the scoring aspect, such as someone that is on the margin. So, how would a second bachelor's factor into the equation? Would it have a modest to no impact, a weighted blend of both degrees' (grades/hours), given equal weight, or newer degree overweighted or even perhaps "replace" older degree?

My background: I changed schools and majors during undergrad. I tell people I was on the "Dean's List" but not the one they're most familiar. I barely graduated, I was undisciplined and enjoyed the social aspects more than most. Since then, I acquired three masters at much higher-ranked institutions than my undergrad (including a Magic-7 MBA), with much better grades covering subjects where I had the biggest weaknesses in undergrad. The other bachelor's I'm looking into covers the other key areas with significant weaknesses in undergrad.

Thanks in advance!

[cavalier1138]

A second undergrad degree will mean less than a graduate degree. 95% of the admissions equation is LSAT and undergrad GPA. The latter is fixed as soon as you earn your first bachelor's degree, and undergrad coursework you do after that point is meaningless for the application process.

[sa1]

Much thanks Cavalier! From a coursework perspective, since the first bachelor's sets it in stone for undergrad GPA, I guess the best option would be taking graduate-level courses (perhaps attaining a masters) in the weaker areas.

[Dcc617]

Your best bet is crushing the LSAT.

[sa1]

Hi Dcc, the requisite crushing of the LSAT was a given. Perhaps crushing GRE also might make a difference.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Hi Dcc, the requisite crushing of the LSAT was a given. Perhaps crushing GRE also might make a difference.

Not likely. GRE and LSAT are a belts-and-suspenders situation

[polareagle]

The courses you took then and did poorly in are irrelevant (even more so the courses you seem to want to take now to make up for it). If I'm understanding, you're proposing getting a fifth degree (either another bachelors or a fourth masters) in order to put yourself in a better position to get a sixth degree.

Why on earth are you seeking more degrees? You have too many already! If you're independently wealthy and just looking for a way to spend time, then fair enough (although I can think of ways to spend that time that are more fulfilling--both to you and society). If god forbid you're debt financing any of this, please stop for a moment and ask yourself why you keep pursuing degrees rather than work. Do you truly want to practice law? If so, why the three masters? (And is this interest going to change just as the one that led you to those degrees apparently has?) If not, why get a law degree?

[sa1]

Polareagle, you're assuming that I'm putting off looking for work to attain another degree. Also, have you ever heard of part-time classes? Other than what I wrote, you know nothing else about me, my work experience, or my efforts to obtain a job. You're not a fly on the wall looking at all the research I do or the people I contact, including letters and phone calls to group heads and sometimes C-Suite. You don't know of all the jobs to which I've applied, including the "returnship-type programs." If you're not familiar with such programs, they're not for people with only a couple of years' experience. I've inquired about part-time, temporary, and contract roles, in addition to permanent roles, including roles that would be junior to the one I held last. I've offered some pro bono work to employers to give them an opportunity for a test drive before committing. Don't ever question my work ethic or efforts to obtain a job.

Are you aware you don't have to work as a junior associate for a law firm to utilize a law degree? My Father was valedictorian of his law school class (he worked full-time and took classes full-time while married and two rug rats running around) and never "practiced law." He utilized those skills in various ways (e.g., writing contracts), and was relatively senior in one of the world's largest corporations, and was that company's liaison to the associated government department for his employer's line of business. The law degree would complement my financial services background, of which two of the masters complement. Have you ever heard of a credit agreement, bond indenture, M&A agreement, or equity offering? All involve legal documents utilized to consummate transactions. I've probably seen more legal documents associated with such transactions in a single year than all the legal documents you'll probably see your entire life.

I asked for the best approach to mitigate the low undergrad GPA for law school acceptance. I didn't solicit opinions of whether I should pursue law school or not. So, for the most part, your comments were outside the scope of the question.

I'm not interested in bickering back and forth. Your points were noted. Perhaps you'll note mine.

[sa1]

Forgot to add, I've been very involved with nonprofits as a board member, including board president currently. So, I have the community involvement base well covered.

[nixy]

Are you aware you don't have to work as a junior associate for a law firm to utilize a law degree? My Father was valedictorian of his law school class (he worked full-time and took classes full-time while married and two rug rats running around) and never "practiced law." He utilized those skills in various ways (e.g., writing contracts), and was relatively senior in one of the world's largest corporations, and was that company's liaison to the associated government department for his employer's line of business. The law degree would complement my financial services background, of which two of the masters complement. Have you ever heard of a credit agreement, bond indenture, M&A agreement, or equity offering? All involve legal documents utilized to consummate transactions. I've probably seen more legal documents associated with such transactions in a single year than all the legal documents you'll probably see your entire life.

I'm kind of confused. Writing contracts is practicing law. If you've spent so much time with legal documents, more than a practicing lawyer, why do you need a JD?

Anyway, there's no point in taking classes that would address your weaker areas from undergrad, because law schools won't care. They care about your undergrad GPA because that's what they have to report for USNWR rankings. And sure, if you had no further educational experience they might worry that your UGPA suggests you're going to struggle in law school. If you've succeeded in multiple grad programs since then, however, schools won't really be worried about your ability any more. There is absolutely no need to take more undergrad or grad classes if the purpose is to make up for weaknesses in your undergrad performance on law school applications, in part because there aren't any prereqs for law school. You can have a BA in anything and go to law school. I had a classmate who was a dance major; it doesn't matter what you did in undergrad. If there's some other reason you want to get yet more education before getting a JD, that's different, but if it's to make your law school application look stronger, you absolutely do not need to do that.

And having too many graduate degrees will lead law schools to wonder what polareagle wondered - do you really want a JD, and why? Not saying you can't convince them, but it will be notable.

[cavalier1138]

1. Your father got a JD in a very different job market. It is not a generalist degree.

2. Your plan to "rehabilitate" your GPA is not going to work. If anything, obtaining multiple graduate degrees will make you a less attractive candidate, because it makes you look like you don't know what you want to do with your life.

3. Cool it with the arrogant, defensive attitude. By your own account, you haven't done anything that puts you in a position to talk down to the practicing attorneys who are trying to give you advice about how to get into law school. You were asked about why you want the degree because your posts made it sound like you were unsure of how you would make use of your JD, and your paragraphs-long rant confirmed that you would be wasting an inordinate amount of time and money on a degree that would do very little to help you achieve your career goals.

[sa1]

Nixy,

A very cogent response that is greatly appreciated. Perhaps my comment about my Father not practicing law wasn't delineated as intended. He never practiced it at a law firm.

I want to become much more effective and efficient in structuring transactions (risk/return), particularly concerning M&A opportunities, perhaps leveraging it into a private equity role. In a nutshell, there's always room for improvement, and there's plenty of room.

I agree with the questions admissions might have about the number of degrees. Many roles in financial services are becoming much more quantitative and technical. An MBA was the main route to take in the past, but they are being supplanted by more STEM-related or higher-level finance and economics backgrounds.

Thanks for your input!

[sa1]

1. Your father got a JD in a very different job market. It is not a generalist degree.

2. Your plan to "rehabilitate" your GPA is not going to work. If anything, obtaining multiple graduate degrees will make you a less attractive candidate, because it makes you look like you don't know what you want to do with your life.

3. Cool it with the arrogant, defensive attitude. By your own account, you haven't done anything that puts you in a position to talk down to the practicing attorneys who are trying to give you advice about how to get into law school. You were asked about why you want the degree because your posts made it sound like you were unsure of how you would make use of your JD, and your paragraphs-long rant confirmed that you would be wasting an inordinate amount of time and money on a degree that would do very little to help you achieve your career goals.

Cavalier, #1 and #2 are noted and appreciated. When you state getting advice from practicing lawyers, are you sure the other respondent is a practicing lawyer, or still in law school? If you reread your #3, my responses to Nixy answers some questions some readers might have. Whenever you call me arrogant and defensive in my response to the following, "please stop for a moment and ask yourself why you keep pursuing degrees rather than work" falls flat. He made the assumption I wasn't pursuing work. Which of course implies my work ethic or desire to obtain a job is secondary at best. I provided examples to counter his claim. You would've responded similarly if someone implied the same for you. Case closed.

[nixy]

FWIW, I don’t think that doing a JD will help you learn what you want to learn. People who go to law school have to learn that kind of thing on the job.
And it’s kind of inefficient to do a 3-year grad program to get better at a job you already have that doesn’t require licensure. If you do actually want to practice law (which includes working in-house, and no one said it was limited to working for a firm), that’s one thing, but your responses don’t really seem to suggest that.

[sa1]

Thank you for your input Nixy.

[polareagle]

Yikes. You're right that I made an assumption, apparently unfounded, that you weren't working while getting your three masters degrees. I'm sorry about that--of course, I'm aware that people can get part-time degrees.

Honestly, my assumption derived from the fact that the only people I know who've gotten two (let alone three) masters degrees are people who tend to be more academically inclined and not focused on work. I'm impressed by the fact that you've gotten three masters while working, although I guess I still question their utility. (Of course you don't have to, but for our edification, it'd be interesting to know what the other two were. And were they in-person or online? Doing three full in-person part-time masters is a serious time commitment.)

Also, for what it's worth, I am indeed a practicing lawyer and almost certainly the oldest person on this thread (aside, perhaps, from you). There's no reason for you to notice it, but as it says in the sidebar, I joined this site over a decade ago, and I promise I wasn't in middle school when I did!

I agree with Nixy and Cavalier's points. It sounds like--and again I'm guessing based on limited information--you're looking for a JD to give you an entree back into a world from which you took some time off. (I've only ever heard of returnship programs in the context of people who left the workforce to care for kids, but I don't doubt they can be broader than that). Your reference to contacting C-suite people and offering pro-bono services kind of supports this.

If that is the case, I [as an anonymous internet poster with all the cachet that brings with it] very, very strongly urge you not to try to go to law school unless you really are looking to start over completely. Your attempts to network with potential employers and pursue returnship type programs seem much more likely to be fruitful (at much lower cost in money, time, and energy). New law school graduates--even those with prior careers--don't just catapult into higher-level roles because, as Nixy says, law school doesn't really teach you any of the practical things you need to practice as a lawyer. (You learn how to bluebook and do legal research, but those would be irrelevant to the jobs it sounds like you want.)

Maybe consider pitching yourself to a start-up? They're more in need of jack/jill of all trades type people and may be more willing to take a flyer on someone who's been out of the workforce than a more established company (with the caveat that they'll pay much less).

[sa1]

Thanks Polareagle, I appreciate your comments. My main issue was the assumption. There was no other information provided from which to make the assumption (e.g., don’t know me or another source that does), and the assumption was way off base. I provided info to challenge that assumption. It’s like the LSAT; the answer lies within the fact set provided, not an assumption from extraneous sources or personal experience. If additional information is needed for clarity or the previous was incomplete to comment, then additional data should be gathered from the source, or a reliable secondary source, if available, in which to opine. With all this said, an olive branch …

The other poster’s comment about me being defensive and arrogant … Well, my comments and your acknowledgment buttress my position. Arrogant? I spelled out what I’ve done and willing to do to get a job. In some communications to potential employers, in so many words, I gave them a satisfaction guaranteed or your money back proposal. Still no takers. Many might consider that lack of interest rather humbling. I sure do. I’ve had more than a few responses after interviewing that they were concerned I would be “bumping up against” the team leader, etc. I made clear I have ambitions, but I have no problem “subordinating” my position so I can contribute to the team and the company as a whole, that any promotions would be after they deem it appropriate given my contributions, that I wasn’t “gunning” for anyone’s job. I’ve had several people that know me can’t believe someone hasn’t made me an offer. A few made a similar comment, that they’re a bit insecure, that I overwhelm them, etc. Perhaps, but I don’t know if it’s true. If the others truly knew me, they would want me to be their wingman; I would “fly in a very tight formation.” I have an ego, but I would suggest that those folks that know me would say it’s not overinflated. Rather, it’s kept relatively in check.

I make clear in my discussions with employers that I’m not interested in “being an academic.” My first priority is my career. Probably the key issue an employer might have for someone that’s been out of work is skill atrophy. The additional training and education keep my skills fresh and extend them. My prior masters’ were in-person, but others would be done online if it’s an option.

From a cursory glance, it may look as if I have no rhyme or reason, but trust me, there’s a lot of hypotheticals I run through my head, way beyond second-order thinking. As Gretzky’s Father told him, “Skate to where the puck is going, not where it has been.” I spend a lot of my time doing research about where many think “the puck is going” and position myself accordingly, such as the greater emphasis on more quantitative and technical aspects in financial services, which I addressed in my prior post. In the past, there was the debate of the generalist v. specialist route. You could rise quicker if you became really good as a specialist, but in order to take a really senior role, you would need to transition to a broader scope. Knowing when to make that transition, if it became available, was crucial, but there was also the issue if your “silo specialty” became obsolete. If it’s not transferable, it’s pretty much game over. The generalist faces the opposite. From what I’m reading, the future expects both “broad and deep.” A few years ago, I heard an updated version of the jack/jill of all trades, master of none idea, to a jack/jill of all trades master of one. Now, it’s master of 1+.

My first master’s is in accounting at a very good school (but not a top 10), which complements my background doing fundamental financial analysis. Around that time, there were several high-profile accounting scandals (e.g., Enron, WorldCom), and folks with accounting knowledge were at a premium. Many top-tier MBA programs have limited accounting course offerings or given other curriculum requirements, a student is constrained even if accounting was their concentration. I never wanted to be “an accountant,” but the knowledge/skills is the foundation for the analysis. For example, a company touted its significantly improved results in an earnings call. The knowledge I received with this master’s helped me to identify that while there was some “improvement,” 2/3s of it was solely-related to an accounting change, a recategorization, not due to underlying economics. When I brought it up, nobody else (non-company) on the call caught it. Company reps mumbled a bit, then admitted I was correct. That knowledge mitigated risk to our portfolio position.

I pursued the Magic 7 MBA to feed my interest in finance and economics, as well as more accounting courses. It complemented my interests, career background, and other master’s. Additionally, for a lot of jobs in financial services, “pedigree” matters. For example, when I interviewed at an investment bank, the guy asked me why I went for my MBA after my master’s in accounting. I asked him with all of my other work experience and my master’s in accounting, if I didn’t have the MBA from the M7 school on my resume, would I be sitting there interviewing with him. He said, “no.” I said, “there’s your answer.”

The other master’s is an interdisciplinary program in law, economics, and international relations, areas in which I have an interest, and they have an impact on the financial markets. I’m a voracious reader, including the subjects aforementioned. A director of the program mentioned 10 newspapers/magazines as sources for the subject matter. I already had subscriptions to eight of those sources before matriculating. So, the program wasn’t so much as pursuing an unrelated degree, it was more of an extension of what I was already reading in my free time, albeit more in-depth and robust and “putting my thoughts on paper and having them assessed.” Of course, there’s the added benefit of the alphabet soup and access to another alumni network at a prominent university.

I’ve always had an interest in the law, with the exception of when my Father was preparing for the bar, as I witnessed when he lost it with his rug rats and the neighborhood kids running around making a ruckus. That made a lasting impression, figuratively and literally. Don’t worry, no one was hurt, but a piece of furniture was definitely worse for the wear … I threw this in as I’m sure many lawyers can relate.

I reiterate, I do appreciate the comments within the scope of the question. If there are other comments or opinions extraneous, that’s fine too, so long as they are constructive and not based on unfounded assumptions. I also want to clarify my comments made in response to prior posts were explanations, not excuses. There’s a difference between the two.

Here’s the big picture, I’m looking for the best (i.e., effective and efficient) use of my time that align with my interests and career aspirations. I’m contributing to my community with nonprofit activities, I don’t have personal relationship commitments (i.e., divorced (coincidentally, she’s a lawyer) and “cautious”), but I’m generally friendly and enjoy walking around my neighborhood and having in-depth discussions with my friends and neighbors. Not to get too theological, but I’m right with my Maker, and study The Word frequently. All such activities will continue regardless what I may do. I’ve also researched some stuff for various hobbies/activities (e.g., art and architecture, food and wine, music, physical activities). If I’m going to pursue them, it would be in the context of “kicking it up several notches” rather than just dabble in it. With that understood, while some of it can be done online, much of it would be in-person. Given the virus, I suspect there will be residual effects with the distancing issue, making much of it difficult if not infeasible for some time. So, it comes down to “and what else …”? Central to the question is opportunity cost. See, I learned something in b-school after all.

I’d rather spend it productively based on the interests and career aspiration parameters, which brings me to law school and/or perhaps other graduate work. “My motor is running.” Rather than keep “revving it up” yet “remaining in neutral,” I want to “slip into gear” and move forward.

This discussion board has already given me some ideas. I thank you all. I can just copy and paste most of the discussion here, and I’m well on my way to finishing an autobiography. I did mention I’m big on efficiency. I’ve also been told I need to work on my verbosity. These messages provide information I can use for my application for a Ph.D. in Editing from the Blasé Pascal School …

Best regards to all the posters, I wish you much success in your endeavors.

[cavalier1138]

I have an ego, but I would suggest that those folks that know me would say it’s not overinflated. Rather, it’s kept relatively in check.

If this is you keeping your ego in check, that's... something.

I vaguely remember some poster from a few years back who wanted to apply to law school so he could become president and force some obscure property tax measure through congress. Your ambitions aren't as ridiculous, but your general approach to this whole endeavor is remarkably similar.

[sa1]

And yet you're making assumptions about someone you don't know. That says all I need to know.

[nixy]

Welcome to the internet.

I think the only assumptions people are making are based on how you’re responding to people. I know it can be disconcerting to have people get things wrong about you, but I also think that your second to last post comes across as off-putting. I recognize this forum a different context than f2f, but it’s all we have to go on.

I really don’t think doing a JD is going to keep your skills fresh and extend them in your current field. It will give you the licensing credential you need to practice law, an entirely different profession. If you are entitled unable to find a job and need to do something to fill the gap in your resume, I suppose another master’s or law school is as good as anything, but it’s expensive and not really getting the direct results you want. And if you’ve had “more than a few” responses after interviewing that questioned if you could work under someone else, that’s really what you need to work on rather than getting more education. (I speak as someone who had a career before law school and also had to watch out for this kind of issue.)

[sa1]

Thanks for your input Nixy.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Thanks Polareagle, I appreciate your comments. My main issue was the assumption. There was no other information provided from which to make the assumption (e.g., don’t know me or another source that does), and the assumption was way off base. I provided info to challenge that assumption. It’s like the LSAT; the answer lies within the fact set provided, not an assumption from extraneous sources or personal experience. If additional information is needed for clarity or the previous was incomplete to comment, then additional data should be gathered from the source, or a reliable secondary source, if available, in which to opine. With all this said, an olive branch …

The other poster’s comment about me being defensive and arrogant … Well, my comments and your acknowledgment buttress my position. Arrogant? I spelled out what I’ve done and willing to do to get a job. In some communications to potential employers, in so many words, I gave them a satisfaction guaranteed or your money back proposal. Still no takers. Many might consider that lack of interest rather humbling. I sure do. I’ve had more than a few responses after interviewing that they were concerned I would be “bumping up against” the team leader, etc. I made clear I have ambitions, but I have no problem “subordinating” my position so I can contribute to the team and the company as a whole, that any promotions would be after they deem it appropriate given my contributions, that I wasn’t “gunning” for anyone’s job. I’ve had several people that know me can’t believe someone hasn’t made me an offer. A few made a similar comment, that they’re a bit insecure, that I overwhelm them, etc. Perhaps, but I don’t know if it’s true. If the others truly knew me, they would want me to be their wingman; I would “fly in a very tight formation.” I have an ego, but I would suggest that those folks that know me would say it’s not overinflated. Rather, it’s kept relatively in check.

I make clear in my discussions with employers that I’m not interested in “being an academic.” My first priority is my career. Probably the key issue an employer might have for someone that’s been out of work is skill atrophy. The additional training and education keep my skills fresh and extend them. My prior masters’ were in-person, but others would be done online if it’s an option.

From a cursory glance, it may look as if I have no rhyme or reason, but trust me, there’s a lot of hypotheticals I run through my head, way beyond second-order thinking. As Gretzky’s Father told him, “Skate to where the puck is going, not where it has been.” I spend a lot of my time doing research about where many think “the puck is going” and position myself accordingly, such as the greater emphasis on more quantitative and technical aspects in financial services, which I addressed in my prior post. In the past, there was the debate of the generalist v. specialist route. You could rise quicker if you became really good as a specialist, but in order to take a really senior role, you would need to transition to a broader scope. Knowing when to make that transition, if it became available, was crucial, but there was also the issue if your “silo specialty” became obsolete. If it’s not transferable, it’s pretty much game over. The generalist faces the opposite. From what I’m reading, the future expects both “broad and deep.” A few years ago, I heard an updated version of the jack/jill of all trades, master of none idea, to a jack/jill of all trades master of one. Now, it’s master of 1+.

My first master’s is in accounting at a very good school (but not a top 10), which complements my background doing fundamental financial analysis. Around that time, there were several high-profile accounting scandals (e.g., Enron, WorldCom), and folks with accounting knowledge were at a premium. Many top-tier MBA programs have limited accounting course offerings or given other curriculum requirements, a student is constrained even if accounting was their concentration. I never wanted to be “an accountant,” but the knowledge/skills is the foundation for the analysis. For example, a company touted its significantly improved results in an earnings call. The knowledge I received with this master’s helped me to identify that while there was some “improvement,” 2/3s of it was solely-related to an accounting change, a recategorization, not due to underlying economics. When I brought it up, nobody else (non-company) on the call caught it. Company reps mumbled a bit, then admitted I was correct. That knowledge mitigated risk to our portfolio position.

I pursued the Magic 7 MBA to feed my interest in finance and economics, as well as more accounting courses. It complemented my interests, career background, and other master’s. Additionally, for a lot of jobs in financial services, “pedigree” matters. For example, when I interviewed at an investment bank, the guy asked me why I went for my MBA after my master’s in accounting. I asked him with all of my other work experience and my master’s in accounting, if I didn’t have the MBA from the M7 school on my resume, would I be sitting there interviewing with him. He said, “no.” I said, “there’s your answer.”

The other master’s is an interdisciplinary program in law, economics, and international relations, areas in which I have an interest, and they have an impact on the financial markets. I’m a voracious reader, including the subjects aforementioned. A director of the program mentioned 10 newspapers/magazines as sources for the subject matter. I already had subscriptions to eight of those sources before matriculating. So, the program wasn’t so much as pursuing an unrelated degree, it was more of an extension of what I was already reading in my free time, albeit more in-depth and robust and “putting my thoughts on paper and having them assessed.” Of course, there’s the added benefit of the alphabet soup and access to another alumni network at a prominent university.

I’ve always had an interest in the law, with the exception of when my Father was preparing for the bar, as I witnessed when he lost it with his rug rats and the neighborhood kids running around making a ruckus. That made a lasting impression, figuratively and literally. Don’t worry, no one was hurt, but a piece of furniture was definitely worse for the wear … I threw this in as I’m sure many lawyers can relate.

I reiterate, I do appreciate the comments within the scope of the question. If there are other comments or opinions extraneous, that’s fine too, so long as they are constructive and not based on unfounded assumptions. I also want to clarify my comments made in response to prior posts were explanations, not excuses. There’s a difference between the two.

Here’s the big picture, I’m looking for the best (i.e., effective and efficient) use of my time that align with my interests and career aspirations. I’m contributing to my community with nonprofit activities, I don’t have personal relationship commitments (i.e., divorced (coincidentally, she’s a lawyer) and “cautious”), but I’m generally friendly and enjoy walking around my neighborhood and having in-depth discussions with my friends and neighbors. Not to get too theological, but I’m right with my Maker, and study The Word frequently. All such activities will continue regardless what I may do. I’ve also researched some stuff for various hobbies/activities (e.g., art and architecture, food and wine, music, physical activities). If I’m going to pursue them, it would be in the context of “kicking it up several notches” rather than just dabble in it. With that understood, while some of it can be done online, much of it would be in-person. Given the virus, I suspect there will be residual effects with the distancing issue, making much of it difficult if not infeasible for some time. So, it comes down to “and what else …”? Central to the question is opportunity cost. See, I learned something in b-school after all.

I’d rather spend it productively based on the interests and career aspiration parameters, which brings me to law school and/or perhaps other graduate work. “My motor is running.” Rather than keep “revving it up” yet “remaining in neutral,” I want to “slip into gear” and move forward.

This discussion board has already given me some ideas. I thank you all. I can just copy and paste most of the discussion here, and I’m well on my way to finishing an autobiography. I did mention I’m big on efficiency. I’ve also been told I need to work on my verbosity. These messages provide information I can use for my application for a Ph.D. in Editing from the Blasé Pascal School …

Best regards to all the posters, I wish you much success in your endeavors.

TL;DR

[CanadianWolf]

Are you a licensed CPA ?

I ask because of your masters in accounting degree & because work is almost always available for a licensed CPA. Also, easy for CPAs to work for oneself out of one's home.

[sa1]

Registered. I never practiced as "an accountant." There used to be Registered and Licensed delineation. Licensed required working in accounting with oversight be licensed CPA, continuing education requirement, and allowed someone to sign off on taxes and audits. I was more interested in the skills acquired with CPA studies in the context of corporate financial analysis. The AICPA eliminated Registered category, but grandfathering those folks with it.

Thanks for your comments!

Regards

[CanadianWolf]

A second BA/BS degree is unlikely to be of benefit to you with respect to law school admissions.

Based on the information shared by you in this thread, my opinion is that the best use of your time would be spent preparing for the LSAT or the GRE if you are determined to go to law school.

Because you have an M-7 MBA degree, maybe a professional certificate program focused on a specific non-law practice area would be of interest to you. Typically these types of certificate programs are available on an on-demand basis. Many are quite difficult, but all tend to be laser like focused on a specific practice area such as accounting, M&A, portfolio management, human resources, etc.