does a PHD help for law school admission?
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:32 am
Currently I'm sitting at a 3.2 from UCSD with a 171 LSAT (which I think I can improve to 174 if that turns out to help a lot) but its very back loaded (after leaving school to work for a year I averaged a 3.7 over the last 92 units units). My question is will going to grad school in Duke or UCSD's philosophy/Cognitive Science program to receive a PHD help if I continue to get grades in the 3.8 average range? So far in taking classes with grad students I haven't done worse then an A- in any of them so 3.8 is very doable for me now. Would that PHD help for a top 6 law school?
I primarily am interested in going into a practice and eventually teaching in the biomedical ethics realm (hospital and pharmaceutical law, mental fitness tests, medical and scientific ethics cases ect) hence the need for a top tier school. I would say as much on my application so it didn't appear that I was just getting a PHD for a GPA boost (I would probably get a PHD after law school anyway, but maybe through part time attendance over 6 or 7 years).
My question is would a very high PHD GPA help significantly in getting to a top tier school? (taking more undergrad classes for a GPA boost is having quickly diminishing returns)
Tangentially related (and far more embarrassing) much of the mid school crisis (I started and ended with a 3.8 avg GPA with some 2.2-2.5s in the middle, all the Ds I received I retook and got As) was related to the early 20s onset of bipolar disorder. The onset greatly contributed to me doing badly, then leaving school temporarily, in the first place to work. Once I got a handle on it I came back a year and a half later with much stronger post return performance. When some schools ask for an essay of explanation of poor grades is it better to use something like an increase in motivation some other general story? Should I speak about the rather uncomfortable topic of being bipolar (which I have shown I can control with the 3.8 through the last 92 units) and seeking treatment after diagnosis as a catalyst for improvement?
Technically I would contend that a severe mood disorder should be a URM designation (bipolar is only around 1% of the population, even lower in terms of the population thats even in the running for a T1 undergrad or post grad school I'm sure), but I'm not sure that schools wouldn't just hold it against me even more then me just pretending the failed quarters happened without cause. There's a strong bias against those who have any kind of mental illness since it makes any investment in them seem risky and useless. This seems to occur even if they work to prove they have a handle on it. Sorry for the long post if anyone read it, my situation probably isn't as complex as I make it sound.
I primarily am interested in going into a practice and eventually teaching in the biomedical ethics realm (hospital and pharmaceutical law, mental fitness tests, medical and scientific ethics cases ect) hence the need for a top tier school. I would say as much on my application so it didn't appear that I was just getting a PHD for a GPA boost (I would probably get a PHD after law school anyway, but maybe through part time attendance over 6 or 7 years).
My question is would a very high PHD GPA help significantly in getting to a top tier school? (taking more undergrad classes for a GPA boost is having quickly diminishing returns)
Tangentially related (and far more embarrassing) much of the mid school crisis (I started and ended with a 3.8 avg GPA with some 2.2-2.5s in the middle, all the Ds I received I retook and got As) was related to the early 20s onset of bipolar disorder. The onset greatly contributed to me doing badly, then leaving school temporarily, in the first place to work. Once I got a handle on it I came back a year and a half later with much stronger post return performance. When some schools ask for an essay of explanation of poor grades is it better to use something like an increase in motivation some other general story? Should I speak about the rather uncomfortable topic of being bipolar (which I have shown I can control with the 3.8 through the last 92 units) and seeking treatment after diagnosis as a catalyst for improvement?
Technically I would contend that a severe mood disorder should be a URM designation (bipolar is only around 1% of the population, even lower in terms of the population thats even in the running for a T1 undergrad or post grad school I'm sure), but I'm not sure that schools wouldn't just hold it against me even more then me just pretending the failed quarters happened without cause. There's a strong bias against those who have any kind of mental illness since it makes any investment in them seem risky and useless. This seems to occur even if they work to prove they have a handle on it. Sorry for the long post if anyone read it, my situation probably isn't as complex as I make it sound.