I'm a B.S. Chemistry and B.A. Molecular Biology graduating soon with 2 years of experience working in a Chem lab. I have tried pre-pharm, pre-med, pre-dental and research, but found that they are all not for me. I think law is right for me, but dont have much experience in it nor community service/leadership. I want to take a few years off before applying to law school, what kind of jobs should you suggest me looking into? I've been checking out Regulatory Affairs, Public Policy and Campaigning work and am not sure if I am on the right track... Please advice! Don't bother if your concern is improving your chances of admission. Whatever benefit you'll gain with some schools is marginal at best. If you just want to get a sense of what it's like to work in a law firm and spend time around lawyers doing the law-talking thing, that's a different story. intern at a law office or something. . No. Not unless you're itching to improve your photocopying skills. Do you have any idea what kind of law you want to work in? What is it about lawyering that is attractive to you? What the hell are you asking questions like that for? That's crazy talk. Don't confuse the poor kid with common sense questions. I have a bunch of friends who are intellectual property lawyers, they have backgrounds in science before law school. good money, less stress. This. Having specialized knowledge of this sort actually gives you more options as a lawyer than people (like me) with the sorts not-especially-useful liberal arts backgrounds that are traditionally considered "pre-law" (mostly, I think, that when we finish undergrad and realize we have few marketable skills, we think "what the hell, might as well try law school". (Kidding, sort of.) most people go to law school with no law experience. Yep. Although there are also plenty with some practical (by which I don't necessarily mean law-related) work experience as well. OP, I'm in law school with an engineering undergrad, so I was in your place not long ago. Read the post below. Read it again and again and again. Most people think law admissions are like other admissions programs where various factors add in to the decision. In law they do only to the tune of about the 5% below. It's all undergrad GPA and LSAT. It is this way because there are SO MANY APPLICANTS that they are weeded very mechanically. Experience is a very, very minor part unless your experience is so astronomically, incredibly special -- which yours will not be. This is not an MBA. It's all undergrad GPA and LSAT. Please don't forget this. Also, do you have any idea where in law you might want to use your background. And if you are serious, go get an LSAT logic games book and start practicing now -- yes, you should practice the whole two years until you apply. You really should. I was good at them, and even though I nailed the rest of the LSAT, and I mean nailed it, I did poorly on the logic games and wound up with only a 98th percentile score. In LSAT terms, 98% is good, but not great. Get that book. Start practicing now. Really. ~ H Listen to Huntsman we he talks. Unlike most of us, he doesn't spout off unless he actually knows what he's talking about. (Don't think less of him for it, he can't help it. It's some sort of character defect. And his encyclopedic knowledge of cocktails is sufficient compensation to make him worth putting up with.) Plus, he has direct and current experience charting the course you're considering, with at least a superficially similar background. How go the studies, H? How much does the prestige of your undergrad factor in? I'm sure it is a criteria, but probably not half way as much as I think it does. I'm assuming if that's the case, those that went to no name schools with stellar GPAs are standardized by LSAT score (most of them probably didn't do so hot) and thus the importance of prestige of undergrad diminishes. My sense -- totally anecdotal, so I'm sure there are better sources of information -- is that the extent to which it matters is roughly proportionate to the perceived prestige of the law school. Most "top tier" law schools have lots of folks with strong GPA's. On the margin, a 3.8 from Harvard is going to look better than a 3.8 from Central Bodunk State. But I think most schools make an effort to have at least some diversity of background among their students, so being from a smaller or less "prestigious" school isn't necessarily going to disqualify you. At my law school there were folks from schools I'd never heard of, and I certainly knew folks who did well at more highly-regarded schools that didn't get in.