Work or Attend Grad School 1 year prior to Law School? Forum

[confusedprelaw]

Since it's about time to finally decide what to do next year, I have two different options, both of which look fairly appealing, and though I'm leaning one way, I'd like confirmation. I'm currently a senior graduating with a double degree (BS in Molecular and Cellular Biology & BA in Economics) with ~3.83 GPA. I scored a 166 on my LSAT and I probably won't retake it, though it is something I'm considering. The schools I'm realistically considering are UT-Austin, UCLA, USC, and University of Colorado.

I have two options available, one more accessible than the other:

1) I could take a year off to work in either an economics consulting firm or in a biology research lab. I'm having trouble finding a job in the former, so it would probably be working in the latter. I'd hopefully be able to find a generic internship working with the local government. Additionally, I'd be ideally teaching at a prep-course company just for some additional money. Finally, I'd have plenty of free time to shadow lawyers in the city.

2) I was recently accepted, and could attend a Masters in Public Health (MPH) program that I could complete in one year with ease. I could probably get a 4.0 GPA in the masters program. I would be a TA in a couple of courses so I could get a complete tuition waiver and have some extra money. Instead of working on an internship with the government, I'd be focused on doing a public health policy related internship. The extra time would be spent on teaching at a prep-course company and shadowing lawyers around the city.

When considering my situation, where I'm fortunate enough to know that paying for law school is not going to be a concern, which of the aforementioned paths should I take and why? I'm personally leaning towards option 2, but I honestly don't know what law schools would prefer, so perhaps all of you will be some insight. Thanks in advance!

[Wholigan]

Since it's about time to finally decide what to do next year, I have two different options, both of which look fairly appealing, and though I'm leaning one way, I'd like confirmation. I'm currently a senior graduating with a double degree (BS in Molecular and Cellular Biology & BA in Economics) with ~3.83 GPA. I scored a 166 on my LSAT and I probably won't retake it, though it is something I'm considering. The schools I'm realistically considering are UT-Austin, UCLA, USC, and University of Colorado.

I have two options available, one more accessible than the other:

1) I could take a year off to work in either an economics consulting firm or in a biology research lab. I'm having trouble finding a job in the former, so it would probably be working in the latter. I'd hopefully be able to find a generic internship working with the local government. Additionally, I'd be ideally teaching at a prep-course company just for some additional money. Finally, I'd have plenty of free time to shadow lawyers in the city.

2) I was recently accepted, and could attend a Masters in Public Health (MPH) program that I could complete in one year with ease. I could probably get a 4.0 GPA in the masters program. I would be a TA in a couple of courses so I could get a complete tuition waiver and have some extra money. Instead of working on an internship with the government, I'd be focused on doing a public health policy related internship. The extra time would be spent on teaching at a prep-course company and shadowing lawyers around the city.

When considering my situation, where I'm fortunate enough to know that paying for law school is not going to be a concern, which of the aforementioned paths should I take and why? I'm personally leaning towards option 2, but I honestly don't know what law schools would prefer, so perhaps all of you will be some insight. Thanks in advance!

Dude, definitely get the work experience if you are set on doing law school. Law firms and even some law schools prefer the work experience. You will have plenty of education by the time you graduate from law school. While most people's UG major doesn't matter much for law school, you have a double major in what are generally considered the two best categories for law - hard sciences, and math/econ/finance. I think that, combined with the work experience you will get, will give you a big leg up when it comes to competing for jobs with your peers with similar grades at the school you eventually end up attending.

[homestyle28]

Since it's about time to finally decide what to do next year, I have two different options, both of which look fairly appealing, and though I'm leaning one way, I'd like confirmation. I'm currently a senior graduating with a double degree (BS in Molecular and Cellular Biology & BA in Economics) with ~3.83 GPA. I scored a 166 on my LSAT and I probably won't retake it, though it is something I'm considering. The schools I'm realistically considering are UT-Austin, UCLA, USC, and University of Colorado.

I have two options available, one more accessible than the other:

1) I could take a year off to work in either an economics consulting firm or in a biology research lab. I'm having trouble finding a job in the former, so it would probably be working in the latter. I'd hopefully be able to find a generic internship working with the local government. Additionally, I'd be ideally teaching at a prep-course company just for some additional money. Finally, I'd have plenty of free time to shadow lawyers in the city.

2) I was recently accepted, and could attend a Masters in Public Health (MPH) program that I could complete in one year with ease. I could probably get a 4.0 GPA in the masters program. I would be a TA in a couple of courses so I could get a complete tuition waiver and have some extra money. Instead of working on an internship with the government, I'd be focused on doing a public health policy related internship. The extra time would be spent on teaching at a prep-course company and shadowing lawyers around the city.

When considering my situation, where I'm fortunate enough to know that paying for law school is not going to be a concern, which of the aforementioned paths should I take and why? I'm personally leaning towards option 2, but I honestly don't know what law schools would prefer, so perhaps all of you will be some insight. Thanks in advance!

It sounds like option 2 is a real option right now, while 1 is just what you expect to be able to find? So, a bird in the hand...I wouldn't count on the teaching a prep-course thing w/a 166, I thought most want 95th percentile (could be wrong here). Finally, I suspect your own enjoyment might be greater at option 2 and that you'll hit LS happier after a year as a grad student and I think that matters.

[Bumi]

I would be a TA in a couple of courses so I could get a complete tuition waiver and have some extra money.

I'm fortunate enough to know that paying for law school is not going to be a concern

I'm personally leaning towards option 2

[BoriquaEsquire]

I actually went through two law school admissions cycles. My first one, I applied to during my senior year of college, my second one I did my applications after a year of working as a paralegal for a small boutique law firm in DC.

The differences were INCREDIBLE. I applied to basically the same schools but the first time around I only got into my safety and the second time around I got into 3 amazing schools. Law schools really look for meaningful work experience and firms like it, too. Especially if that work experience is law-related (but it doesn't have to be!).

[aspire2more]

Are you actually interested in doing something with economics, because both of the other ideas seem to center around science and health?

If you do not think you will be using your MPH in the future, do not bother. Get a job.