Biology background Forum

[biotechlaw123]

Hi!

I am about to take the June LSAT and I am having a nervous breakdown because this will be my second time taking the LSAT.

I searched through the LSN site but there weren't any profiles that matched mine and I want to hear from as many people as possible.

Here are my stats. I am not sure what "non traditional" means but here are my stats:

-BS in Biology (GPA 3.0)
-Working in biotech industry for 5 years now
-MS in Biotechnology (GPA 4.0)
-First LSAT score: 141 (2 years ago)
-Practice LSAT scores: fluctuating between low to mid 150s (taking the real one in June)
-2 LORs submitted to LSAC already from the graduate school professors (where I had the top grade in their class).
-Won several awards at the workplace for excellence in performance.
-Coordinator/volunteer for the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) program for middle school students.

I read in one of the blog that if you have been out of school for a long time, GPA has less impact but the LSAT score will be especially important because that is most current and it will tell the school how you would do academically in school.

I have been out of college for 5 years now but I just graduated from Johns Hopkins with masters and I have 4.0. So I am hoping that it would be able to show the school that I am capable of doing well in school.

However, my LSAT score is horrible. I already took one like 2 years ago and I am taking another one! I feel that I need to get 170 and above but I am failing hard and getting 150-155 on my practice tests.

I talked to people who are in law school and they kept telling me that I have a good chance in getting into GW but I really don't think that's right. They said don't pay too much attention to the general school stats b/c GW likes applicants with the science background and that the top ip law firms have tendency to come to GW specifically to find those with science background.

My interest is in the IP law and my #1 choice is GW. I visited the school and I talked to professors as well. I was seriously thinking about doing the early decision but apparently it is more competitive than the regular cycle?

I am posting this so that I can get honest and non biased opinions from many (hopefully) of you. I want to know if you have any comments on the following:

1. if the talk about the "science background" is true (esp at GW)
2. if I do end up getting 150-155 on my second LSAT, would I have any chance at all in getting into GW?
3. How else can I strengthen my application?

I sincerely apologize in advance for such a long post. I really appreciate that you read my long rambling post. I am just freaking out in the middle of the night.

[dnptan]

Bio background here; 75/75 at Columbia still only waitlisted Definitely not a sure shot.

[KMart]

Not sure if I can answer 1, but the single best thing you can do for your application is improve that LSAT score. How did you study the first time? There are a lot of guides here designed to improve your score and a lot of relatively cheap materials online for self studying. You've done well in your field, there's no doubt you can succeed on the LSAT.

What you've heard before is true regarding gpa being less important the farther you are out of undergrad. While a 4.0 is mice, law schools out less weight on Masters gpa.





The increase in score is huge. It'll be very difficult to get into GW with a 155 LSAT. A 170+ will get you fantastic scholarship options.

[mpellenberger]

Post Removed.

[KMart]

I'll piggy back this thread for a question (I'm sure I'll have to start my own thread) - I'm a biochemistry undergrad with extensive (NIH) research experience, but only a 3.1 GPA from a top-10 undergrad (big, private research university). LSATs incoming, but I was averaging about 174. Do I stand any chance at t-5? t-10? t-15? I'm pretty new to all of this....

MyLSN does not seem to be working at the moment so it's hard for me to answer without using that as a resource. Try the link yourself, maybe it will work for you: here.


Edit - got it to work. With splitters, it becomes very difficult to predict but here is a general history of other applicants.

[mpellenberger]

Post Removed.

[Mack.Hambleton]

No GPAs are weighted differently

[collegebum1989]

I searched through the LSN site but there weren't any profiles that matched mine and I want to hear from as many people as
1. if the talk about the "science background" is true (esp at GW)
2. if I do end up getting 150-155 on my second LSAT, would I have any chance at all in getting into GW?
3. How else can I strengthen my application?

GW student currently working at a biglaw IP firm as a Patent Agent. Thought I'd share some of my thoughts:

1. A "science background" really isn't that special at GW. About 15-20% of the class is full of engineers, more if you count science backgrounds like Biology, Chemistry, etc. Although GW definitely benefits from the employment prospects of its IP students, it's usually the engineers (especially the EEs) that have the strongest employment prospects. Your background in Biology isn't going to give you much advantage over others that express interest in IP. Even though you're technically patent bar eligible, that doesn't necessarily mean your background is marketable. As such, i don't think your background alone will allow you to overperform your numbers.

2. I think it's slim to none. I couldn't get in with a 161 and similar GPA the first year I applied and I have a BS/MS in engineering plus research and work experience. I retook and applied with a 167 and got in. A co-worker of mine at my firm was waitlisted with a PhD in engineering and has been practicing patent law over 6 years. Not sure what his LSAT was, but I venture its in the range you've mentioned. The point is, science background alone is no where near sufficient to get into GW without the numbers.

3. Retake the LSAT or just don't go. I'd hate to be so critical but Biology is just not that marketable in patent law. We have zero Biology patent attorneys in our DC office, and nationwide, the only ones that have Biology backgrounds have PhDs. DC is not that strong for Biology patent work since most of the work is geared towards CS/EE. Don't fall into the trap that most GW students think that having a "science background" and the GW law degree means you'll land a job at a big law IP firm. If you had an engineering background, that may be slightly more true.

[collegebum1989]

I searched through the LSN site but there weren't any profiles that matched mine and I want to hear from as many people as
1. if the talk about the "science background" is true (esp at GW)
2. if I do end up getting 150-155 on my second LSAT, would I have any chance at all in getting into GW?
3. How else can I strengthen my application?

GW student currently working at a biglaw IP firm as a Patent Agent. Thought I'd share some of my thoughts:

1. A "science background" really isn't that special at GW. About 15-20% of the class is full of engineers, more if you count science backgrounds like Biology, Chemistry, etc. Although GW definitely benefits from the employment prospects of its IP students, it's usually the engineers (especially the EEs) that have the strongest employment prospects. Your background in Biology isn't going to give you much advantage over others that express interest in IP. Even though you're technically patent bar eligible, that doesn't necessarily mean your background is marketable. As such, i don't think your background alone will allow you to overperform your numbers.

2. I think it's slim to none. I couldn't get in with a 161 and 3.2 GPA the first year I applied and I have a BS/MS in engineering plus research and work experience. I retook and applied with a 167 and got in. A co-worker at my firm was waitlisted with a PhD in EE with a 3.75 GPA and has been practicing patent law over 6 years. Not sure what his LSAT was, but I venture its in the range you've mentioned. The point is that science background alone is no where near sufficient to get into GW at your numbers.

3. Retake the LSAT or just don't go. I'd hate to be so critical but Biology is just not that marketable in patent law. We have zero Biology patent attorneys in our DC office, and nationwide, the only ones that have Biology backgrounds have PhDs. DC is not that strong for Biology patent work since most of the work is geared towards CS/EE. Don't fall into the trap that most GW students think that having a "science background" and the GW law degree means you'll land a job at a big law IP firm. If you had an engineering background, that may be slightly more true.

Ultimately, with a Biology background, the only way you'll get biglaw is if you pursue patent litigation because your background isn't marketable enough for patent prosecution. However, because litigation doesn't require the patent bar, you'll likely be competing with other non-science students, so you'll either need to go to a T14 school or be in top 10-15% of your class. In my honest opinion, if you don't get into a T25 school, law school is not worth it with a Biology degree.

[CanadianWolf]

OP: I may be wrong, but I believe that GWU ED is more difficult than regular admissions because all ED admits receive substantial scholarship money if accepted ED.

Also, did you prepare at all for your first sitting of the LSAT ?