Can University of Phoenix Grads Get Into Law School? Forum

[Nobama_08]

I am a University of Phoenix graduate applying to law school for the fall of 2009. UGPA: 3.95; LSAT: 159. I majored in accounting, and all of my classes were taken on ground, as opposed to online. How will law school admissions officers view the fact that I attended UoP in light of the schools poor reputation as a diploma mill (though it really is not)? Do I have a chance at a low tier 1 or tier 2 school? Are there any law students or alum that attended UoP that have insights to share?

I understand why UoP gets the bad press that it does; however, after 4 years in the Air Force, I didn't want to wait 6 years to earn a degree from a state school (while working full-time). UoP allowed me to finish a degree in three and half years while working full-time. I've emailed the schools that I plan to apply to; naturally, they say that they take graduates from any regionally accredited school. Of Course they say that... they want the application fees.

[RVP11]

I'm sure you'll have a chance at Arizona State. Is that where you want to attend?

[Mithrandir]

The UoP is a regionally accredited school, making it no different on paper than any other university. Most people don't realize this, but admissions officers do. It shouldn't hurt your chances, especially since you actually went to classes as opposed to doing a completely online program.

[Nobama_08]

I'm sure you'll have a chance at Arizona State. Is that where you want to attend?

It's on my list with Utah, Alabama, UNLV, Wyoming, New Mexico, Kansas, Nebraska, Louisiana State, and U of Arizona. I tried to pick the cheapest schools inside of T1 and T2. If I had to venture in to T3 or T4, I would pick Mississippi and Texas Tech. I want to keep my debt load low to give me the widest array of options.

[snotrocket]

The online school won't knock you out. As pointed out above, accredited is accredited. But that LSAT score will sure put a lid on the prospects that a 3.9 might otherwise allow.

--LinkRemoved--
--LinkRemoved--
--LinkRemoved--
--LinkRemoved--
--LinkRemoved--

If you could just pick that LSAT up to 163, then you would boost your chances a good bit (especially your chances of getting $$$). With a 170+, you might even bust the Top 14:

--LinkRemoved--

Numbers are numbers, and if you find a school that wants your GPA, or if you could match that GPA with a solid LSAT, then I guarantee some admissions director somewhere will love you. A few schools like Vanderbilt seem to have anecdotal reputations for dinging all candidates with online degrees no matter what. There are likely some others with bad attitudes about it as well. But at 9 in 10 schools, nobody will care.

[mandingo]

The UoP is a regionally accredited school, making it no different on paper than any other university. Most people don't realize this, but admissions officers do. It shouldn't hurt your chances, especially since you actually went to classes as opposed to doing a completely online program.

Even regardless of whether you took brick and mortar classes or online, I dont think it'll make a difference. I think the most important criteria is regional accreditation. I find it hard to believe that someone with a 3.9 from a regionally accredited school (online or not) and a 170+ LSAT wouldn't get into T14.

[mpasi]

I doubt you'd like the kids at Texas Tech. They're pro-Obama.

[Nobama_08]

That's ok, I have experience dealing with the mentally-challenged!

[mpasi]

That's ok, I have experience dealing with the mentally-challenged!

Vote for McCain should be no sweat then, given your experience.

[Nobama_08]

I really don't like him either. If there were a viable "door #3", I would probably take that option. McCain is boring and one of the dumbest Republicans that I have ever seen (second only to the last Republican nominee). Obama is too radical for my tastes; yet, he's still a more palatable choice than Hillary. I am impressed with his legal credentials, though. Yet, Obama is too steps removed from Lenin. Had the Democrats nominated Wesley Clark, I might have been swayed to defect from the Republican party.

[tls5]

Yet, Obama is too steps removed from Lenin.

lol. and Lenin is two steps removed from SATAN.

[zeezoo]

I like how everyone on this forum talks like everyone is capable of hitting 170

[RVP11]

I like how everyone on this forum talks like everyone is capable of hitting 170

It's amusing.

"159? Dude, if you just get up to a 170+ you can go T14!!! No sweat!"

Buying the PowerScore bibles does not automatically make you 10 points smarter. It doesn't work like that.

I STARTED with a 161 and only got to the 170s on the real deal after 6 months of blood, sweat and tears. It ain't that easy, folks - and not everyone has the ability. I know for a fact I couldn't hit 177+ consistently - I hit my brick wall in the low-mid 170s. Everyone has their limits. It's a learnable test, but innate ability plays a huge role as well.

[tls5]

It's amusing.

"159? Dude, if you just get up to a 170+ you can go T14!!! No sweat!"

I STARTED with a 161 and only got to the 170s on the real deal after 6 months of blood, sweat and tears.

161 isn't that far from a 159, dude. The point is, many people who do score much lower could get up to close to 170 after 6 months of blood, sweat and tears, without downplaying how crucial the toil and grind is.

[RVP11]

It's amusing.

"159? Dude, if you just get up to a 170+ you can go T14!!! No sweat!"

I STARTED with a 161 and only got to the 170s on the real deal after 6 months of blood, sweat and tears.

161 isn't that far from a 159, dude. The point is, many people who do score much lower could get up to close to 170 after 6 months of blood, sweat and tears, without downplaying how crucial the toil and grind is.

But who's to say this guy didn't study for his 159? How do we even know he CARES about the "T14"? And if he DIDN'T study at all for his 159, why would he put in effort now?

[koggit]

I think low tier 1 is a good target. You should also include a few reaches at the bottom of the T30. Tier 2s would be safeties.

[RVP11]

I'm sure you'll have a chance at Arizona State. Is that where you want to attend?

It's on my list with Utah, Alabama, UNLV, Wyoming, New Mexico, Kansas, Nebraska, Louisiana State, and U of Arizona. I tried to pick the cheapest schools inside of T1 and T2. If I had to venture in to T3 or T4, I would pick Mississippi and Texas Tech. I want to keep my debt load low to give me the widest array of options.

To get the most bang (career prospects) for your buck, I think you need to do all you can to go to ASU or UA, assuming you're an Arizona resident. They offer equal or better opportunities to nearly every school you listed and you can go to either school for less than $60k over 3 years. Again, this is all assuming you're an AZ resident and want to stay in the Southwest.

[Nobama_08]

I studied for six months to get a 159. Now, my problem is not so much ability but timing. My untimed tests were in the high 160s and low 170s. My timed tests were in the high 150s and low 160s. I'm not a fast reader. In fact, I don't do much of anything very quickly. So, that is my weakness. I don't know how easily this is to improve. Maybe with six months of extra study, I'll improve to 165 or better. I don't know, though. The other challenge is that I was working far too many hours when I took the LSAT (like 80 hours a week). I really should have taken a vacation, but clients are not always so cooperative. It would have been better to cancel my score or put the whole test off to October (incidentally, when work is very dead).

Since I have no desire to work BigLaw, I'm not sure that I should target schools like Stanford or USC (notice that I left out Harvard and NYU because I could never stand the cold of an Eastern winter). I'm fine with ASU, U of A, or Utah. I'd even go to LSU. Retaking the LSAT would only be about $$$, not getting into a better school. My biggest concern is that I could also do worse the second time around. How does that affect my chances?

[RVP11]

I know ASU, UA, and Utah all take the highest score. Maybe the best thing to do is apply early (like September/October) and do a re-take in October, December or February. You have a great chance at those 3 schools with your current numbers. Getting even a 162 could pull some money out of them and it won't matter that you're taking the LSAT after they've already accepted you.

[LSU Undergrad]

Hmm I was wondering this.

[lawgod]

If it's an accredited degree, I don't think it'll be a problem. People get into law school from the oddest schools, with the oddest degrees.

[PDaddy]

You can get into law school from any acreditted college or university. I can tell you, however, that you will have an uphill battle coming from schools like U-Phx. Your lSAT score and grades need to be that much better.

[ajmanyjah]

I really don't like him either. If there were a viable "door #3", I would probably take that option. McCain is boring and one of the dumbest Republicans that I have ever seen (second only to the last Republican nominee). Obama is too radical for my tastes; yet, he's still a more palatable choice than Hillary. I am impressed with his legal credentials, though. Yet, Obama is too steps removed from Lenin. Had the Democrats nominated Wesley Clark, I might have been swayed to defect from the Republican party.

And what about Wesley Clark was so much LESS socialist than Obama's policies (he did endorse him, and now is begging for government handouts to the ethanol industry)?

On the issues---# Plan for jobs-invest in security & budget relief to states. (Nov 2003) # Balance budget by repealing tax cuts to wealthiest Americans. (Oct 2003) # Short-term deficit ok in recession, but not long-term. (Sep 2003) # De-carbonize energy production for national security. (Sep 2007) # Raise CAFE standards after consulting with experts. (Jan 2004) # Establish redline of protection in places like ANWR. (Aug 2003) # Protection outweighs benefits from drilling in Alaska. (Jul 2003) # Renegotiate Kyoto Agreement rather than reject it. (Jul 2003) # Public taxpayer funding for federal candidates. (Nov 2004) # Raise prominence of art and NEA. (Nov 2003) #
# Supports universal health coverage. (Sep 2003) # Promote good health through public health measures. (Sep 2003) # Healthcare safety net works in the army. (Jul 2001)

And if Obama was two steps from Lenin, I assume Nixon WAS Lenin (his healthcare policy was RADICALLY more to the left of Obama's...as was Dole's) and Reagan was Stalin (immigration amnesty)...

Sorry to interject, but these political views are a LR double fail---they simply make no sense

[rdcws000]

I am a University of Phoenix graduate applying to law school for the fall of 2009. UGPA: 3.95; LSAT: 159. I majored in accounting, and all of my classes were taken on ground, as opposed to online. How will law school admissions officers view the fact that I attended UoP in light of the schools poor reputation as a diploma mill (though it really is not)? Do I have a chance at a low tier 1 or tier 2 school? Are there any law students or alum that attended UoP that have insights to share?

I understand why UoP gets the bad press that it does; however, after 4 years in the Air Force, I didn't want to wait 6 years to earn a degree from a state school (while working full-time). UoP allowed me to finish a degree in three and half years while working full-time. I've emailed the schools that I plan to apply to; naturally, they say that they take graduates from any regionally accredited school. Of Course they say that... they want the application fees.

Yes, they can.

http://www.bakerbotts.com/lawyers/detai ... 249422eb8b

http://www.bracewellgiuliani.com/index. ... ignano.cfm

Well at least these guys did. (quick search of 2 houston Big Law firms)

UoP could do alot to improve it's image. I think the primary criticisms of the school revolve around:

-no admission standards (valid criticism, but irrelevant to law school admissions)
-For profit institution (valid criticism, but irrelevant to law school admissions)
-Reputation as online diploma mill (I know this not to be true, but unfortunately, the degree from UoP for a student who attended 100% online is identical to the student who attended 100% in classroom).
-Massive grade inflation (in my opinion, this is the most valid criticism of UoP, and is probably highly relevant to the law school admissions process. In other words, a 3.95 at UoP will be almost entirely discounted. This is because UoP does a horrible job in this area. They have a massive attrition rate and a poor graduation percentage, but for those students who do barrel through and graduate, they practically give away the A's. They do not do their students any service by doing this. This is related to the for-profit model, i.e. give the customer what he wants.)

That being said, Law school admissions is about numbers and if the LSAT is high enough, law schools will gladly hold their nose while accepting the inflated GPA. The LSAT is the equalizer. It shows that just because UoP hands out easy grades, doesn't mean some people were not capable of earning them fair and square. The LSAT can bring this to light.

UoP should work to improve it's image, but they won't, because they are still making quite a bit of money. There are a lot of high quality doctorate level professors at UoP campuses, currently working in their field. Many graduates of UoP learn practical skills that they take immediately into the companies they are already working for. It's also very popular for the military. They have got to overhaul the online program though. No one should be able to obtain a degree 100% online, with no admissions criteria, and no final exams. It ruins the whole school.

[CyLaw]

Really? Do people even look at the time stamps of post? You are responding to a two year old post. General responses are probably fine for those that would like to find out more information about it and to help people down the road, but I think OP has long since gotten the answer they are looking for, so responding directly to OP seems kinda silly.