159/2.98... but I've got a rather... different... soft: Forum

[Archoholic]

I'm a licensed architect, with eleven years work experience and a Master's of Architecture degree.

Yes, I know I'm not a unique snowflake, but I'm too curious about TLS forum members' opinions to not post. FWIW, I checked LSN and didn't find any architecture grads in that database. The working lawyers I've spoken with think the architecture angle is worth a bump in terms of admissions, but they're also architects, and older (i.e. somewhat separated from the application process), so I'm taking their opinions with a grain of salt.

I'm looking at schools in the 20-60 range: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, SMU, Baylor, UConn, Arizona, ASU, Oregon, Washington, among others. I have a family, so moving for a 60+ school isn't happening. T50 or bust.

What say you, folks? Am I screwed for a decent school, or do I have a shot? I'd rather be shot down here than at the mailbox.

[ThomasMN]

First I have to ask, why law?

That being said, with your UGPA you should most certainly hit the books for the LSAT hardcore and at a minimum get something in the mid 160s. Otherwise you are probably not looking pretty for anything tier one.

[Archoholic]

First I have to ask, why law?

That being said, with your UGPA you should most certainly hit the books for the LSAT hardcore and at a minimum get something in the mid 160s. Otherwise you are probably not looking pretty for anything tier one.

Because I missed the boat on becoming an expert at one building type (which is what architecture employers are looking for). I've worked on a variety of building types, and can pick up anything given to me, but with the current economy and construction outlook, employers have their pick of 200+ resumes, and don't need me when they can get an "expert." Until the economy goes gangbusters, I'm screwed. Just yesterday I met an architect who is 10+ years older than me, and she said an architect she knows who's been working for 50+ years told her that right now is the worst it's been in our field over the past fifty years.

Additionally (and truthfully), I've thought about becoming a lawyer for some number of years now. I did some research recently, speaking with lawyers who had gotten their architects' licenses prior to going to law school, and with someone who specializes in construction law. Those conversations have supported my notion that construction law is a field in which I might excel, and one where my general (architectural) experience would not be a negative aspect for employers. There, my license would be meaningful.

[nygrrrl]

I came to law school with 15+ years' experience in a very "different" profession and while it might make people look twice at your application, I don't think your background will really give you a bump.
The most important thing is what ThomasMN already mentioned: with your UGPA you're going to need to get that LSAT up. Was this your first time taking the test? How did you prep? There are some fantastic threads on TLS about ways to study for the LSAT: I would strongly recommend reading those and (yes, I'm about to say that word) retaking. If you could gain 6 or 7 points it would change your options dramatically.
Best of luck.

[No13baby]

Study very hard for LSAT > 173+ > Northwestern. Or WUSTL.

[CanadianWolf]

With your background, you should be admitted to several mid to lower tier one law schools. Retaking the LSAT is recommended if you are willing to put in the time & effort necessary to raise your score by several points.

[romothesavior]

You need to improve your LSAT score 10-12 points to make law school a decent investment. No school is going to be worth it with your current stats, even with that soft. The soft probably won't do much for you, honestly.