Online Master's Degree in Engineering

[QueHuong]

I'm currently working as a systems engineer and am considering getting an online Master's at Penn State or Stevens Institute of Tech:

http://www.worldcampus.psu.edu...stemsEngineering.shtml in Systems Engineering

http://webcampus.stevens.edu/masters.aspx in either Mechanical or Systems Eng.

One primary reason for going this route is to compensate for a respectable, but not impressive, 3.0 gpa in engineering undergrad so I can try to get into a top law school for patent law. Additionally, it's been recommended that an IP lawyer should have a Master's to stay competitive.



Here is what a FAQ states on their website:

Will these courses appear as online courses on my transcript?

No distinction will be made on your official Penn State transcript that your courses were completed at a distance. The credits you receive are exactly the same as those awarded to on-campus students. Penn State values distance education as highly as it does resident instruction.

That sounds great. But assuming law school admission officers will question that how was it possible that I was taking classes in PA, while my resume states working full-time in NY, I would have to admit it was an online course.

So how are online degree programs (especially ones from Penn State) viewed nowadays by admission officers, potential law firm employers, and potential engineering employers (in case I decide not to pursue law school and stay an engineer)? Is online learning becoming more accepted and seen as legitimate?

And can anyone comment on the difficulty of getting into either of these online schools?

 

[Babbles]

I can not speak at all about online degrees, but I do live in State College where Penn State is located (I'm not an alumni, but the wife is wrapping up her PhD here) and some of my best friends here are winding down on their PhDs in engineering. From what I gathered Penn State's engineering programs are among the best out there. I'm not sure how well the "actual" engineering programs compare to their online stuff; I do know they do some crazy research here, though.

 

[CanOWorms]

Law schools don't care about graduate degrees. They only care about your undergraduate GPA, LSAT, and whether or not you're an under-represented minority.

A law school would rather take in someone with a 3.8 undergrad GPA from Jethro Tech University with a degree in Masturbation Technology over someone with a 3.5 undergrad GPA from MIT and a PhD who also cured cancer for fun. (that's if their LSAT scores are the same)

 

[QueHuong]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Law schools don't care about graduate degrees. They only care about your undergraduate GPA, LSAT, and whether or not you're an under-represented minority.

A law school would rather take in someone with a 3.8 undergrad GPA from Jethro Tech University with a degree in Masturbation Technology over someone with a 3.5 undergrad GPA from MIT and a PhD who also cured cancer for fun.

I'm assuming it's to boost their avg class admission GPA? Not to doubt you CanOWorms, but does anyone else find this to be true?

 

[esun]

I never applied to law school, but had a bunch of friends that did directly out of undergrad. Basically, the ones that got into the best law schools had really high GPAs and excellent LSAT scores, and that's basically what they focused on (aside from writing excellent personal statements). However, I can't comment on the weight of a graduate degree since they were all undergraduates.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: QueHuong

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Law schools don't care about graduate degrees. They only care about your undergraduate GPA, LSAT, and whether or not you're an under-represented minority.

A law school would rather take in someone with a 3.8 undergrad GPA from Jethro Tech University with a degree in Masturbation Technology over someone with a 3.5 undergrad GPA from MIT and a PhD who also cured cancer for fun.

I'm assuming it's to boost their avg class admission GPA? Not to doubt you CanOWorms, but does anyone else find this to be true?

Yes. It's because of the US News Rankings and obsession of lawyers to rank everything. You can go to a website like lawschoolnumbers.com and look at the graphs of students who applied to a particular school. You will see a clear cut-off on the GPA/LSAT data. US News doesn't care about graduate degrees, so law schools don't care about them.

You will find that you are disadvantaged with your engineering GPA in getting admitted to law school. However, you will also find that it will help you in getting a job, especially an EE degree and work experience for IP.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Law schools don't care about graduate degrees. They only care about your undergraduate GPA, LSAT, and whether or not you're an under-represented minority.

A law school would rather take in someone with a 3.8 undergrad GPA from Jethro Tech University with a degree in Masturbation Technology over someone with a 3.5 undergrad GPA from MIT and a PhD who also cured cancer for fun. (that's if their LSAT scores are the same)

I took the LSAT a few years ago and shopped around at some law schools (my attorney step-brother talked me out of it, though!) and what I found is that most of them will essentially ignore Master's degree however PhD (and to that extend MD) are a different deal.

The point being that getting a Master's to make a better application package for law school may be only a marginal improvement. However getting a doctoral degree would indeed be a very significant asset.

 

[sjwaste]

This is only partly correct. LSAC recalculates your gps based on some factors that include rigor. Then again most of my classmates did have some bullshit liberal arts degrees...

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Law schools don't care about graduate degrees. They only care about your undergraduate GPA, LSAT, and whether or not you're an under-represented minority.

A law school would rather take in someone with a 3.8 undergrad GPA from Jethro Tech University with a degree in Masturbation Technology over someone with a 3.5 undergrad GPA from MIT and a PhD who also cured cancer for fun. (that's if their LSAT scores are the same)

I took the LSAT a few years ago and shopped around at some law schools (my attorney step-brother talked me out of it, though!) and what I found is that most of them will essentially ignore Master's degree however PhD (and to that extend MD) are a different deal.

The point being that getting a Master's to make a better application package for law school may be only a marginal improvement. However getting a doctoral degree would indeed be a very significant asset.

It's a very significant asset to employers (especially for biotech IP), but not the schools. A graduate degree would be a slight positive mark, but it would be very minor compared to the three big factors.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: sjwaste
This is only partly correct. LSAC recalculates your gps based on some factors that include rigor. Then again most of my classmates did have some bullshit liberal arts degrees...

I think it recalculates the GPA based on how the undergraduate institution awards an A-, B+, etc. Some schools have 3.33 while others might have a 3.3 or so. It will scale them to the same level. I don't think it scales based on the rigor of the degree.

 

[QueHuong]

So if having a Master's will make marginal impact, then my revised strategy could be to rack up some achievements at work, study for LSAT for a year and apply. Then as a practicing IP lawyer, get the online degree later.

When law schools have applicants who are professionals in the workforce, what are they looking for?

And before this topic gets permanently off track, I'd like to ask again what are the perceptions of online degrees.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: QueHuong
So if having a Master's will make marginal impact, then my revised strategy could be to rack up some achievements at work, study for LSAT for a year and apply. Then as a practicing IP lawyer, get the online degree later.

When law schools have applicants who are professionals in the workforce, what are they looking for?

And before this topic gets permanently off track, I'd like to ask again what are the perceptions of online degrees.

From my understanding - and I would highly recommend hunting down a practicing attorney yourself with whom to speak - is that IP law is sort of different in that graduate studies is preferred. They even have an entire bar exam to take seperatly from the "normal" state bar exam.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: QueHuong
So if having a Master's will make marginal impact, then my revised strategy could be to rack up some achievements at work, study for LSAT for a year and apply. Then as a practicing IP lawyer, get the online degree later.

When law schools have applicants who are professionals in the workforce, what are they looking for?

And before this topic gets permanently off track, I'd like to ask again what are the perceptions of online degrees.

I doubt you would get the online degree after your law degree because your BSEE would be sufficient enough. An electrical engineering background is the most sought-after patent law background. Your work experience is already an impressive technical credential compared to a kid straight from undergrad.

Professionals in the workforce are subject to the same admissions criteria: undergrad GPA, LSAT, URM status.

Would your online degree be coursework-only or would it include research/projects?

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Would your online degree be coursework-only or would it include research/projects?

I think this can be important. A non-research science/engineering degree may not be viewed with very much positive consideration.

 

[QueHuong]

My undergrad wasn't EE, it was in Biomedical Engineering. And will the name of the company help? I work for a large firm that's a direct competitor and almost has the same recognition as GE (but I don't know if law schools would know or care much about engineering companies). The degrees would be most likely be coursework only.

It would really be unfortunate if law schools don't factor in the rigor of your major and look only at GPA. I think I would come in better prepared than Poly Sci / History / Psych majors with 3.5+ or other majors seen often in law schools.

 

[Safeway]

GPA assumption posted above is correct.

I have an Engineering degree and am currently enrolled at a Tier 1 law school, focusing on intellectual property.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: QueHuong
My undergrad wasn't EE, it was in Biomedical Engineering. And will the name of the company help? I work for a large firm that's a direct competitor to GE (but I don't know if law schools would know or care much about engineering companies). The degrees would be most likely be coursework only.

It would really be unfortunate if law schools don't factor in the rigor of your major and look only at GPA. I think I would come in better prepared than Poly Sci / History / Psych majors with 3.5+.

Oops sorry, I thought you said you were an EE. I'm not sure about biomedical engineering. Maybe your work as a systems engineer would open you up in the eyes of prospective employers if BME is not sought after.

They truly do not factor in the rigor of your major and profession. They mainly look at undergraduate GPA, LSAT score, and URM status. It's pathetic, you will go through the same shock as I did. I have a BSEE, MSEE, and professional work experience. You'll still get into a good top-tier program, but not an elite institution (top ~14) with your GPA.

 

[QueHuong]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: QueHuong
My undergrad wasn't EE, it was in Biomedical Engineering. And will the name of the company help? I work for a large firm that's a direct competitor to GE (but I don't know if law schools would know or care much about engineering companies). The degrees would be most likely be coursework only.

It would really be unfortunate if law schools don't factor in the rigor of your major and look only at GPA. I think I would come in better prepared than Poly Sci / History / Psych majors with 3.5+.

Oops sorry, I thought you said you were an EE. I'm not sure about biomedical engineering. Maybe your work as a systems engineer would open you up in the eyes of prospective employers if BME is not sought after.

They truly do not factor in the rigor of your major and profession. They mainly look at undergraduate GPA, LSAT score, and URM status. It's pathetic, you will go through the same shock as I did. I have a BSEE, MSEE, and professional work experience. You'll still get into a good top-tier program, but not an elite institution (top ~14) with your GPA.

What did you end up doing? I know you put a lot of work in getting the EE degrees, so how come you didn't go to a slightly lower ranked school?

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: QueHuong

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: QueHuong
My undergrad wasn't EE, it was in Biomedical Engineering. And will the name of the company help? I work for a large firm that's a direct competitor to GE (but I don't know if law schools would know or care much about engineering companies). The degrees would be most likely be coursework only.

It would really be unfortunate if law schools don't factor in the rigor of your major and look only at GPA. I think I would come in better prepared than Poly Sci / History / Psych majors with 3.5+.

Oops sorry, I thought you said you were an EE. I'm not sure about biomedical engineering. Maybe your work as a systems engineer would open you up in the eyes of prospective employers if BME is not sought after.

They truly do not factor in the rigor of your major and profession. They mainly look at undergraduate GPA, LSAT score, and URM status. It's pathetic, you will go through the same shock as I did. I have a BSEE, MSEE, and professional work experience. You'll still get into a good top-tier program, but not an elite institution (top ~14) with your GPA.

What did you end up doing? I know you put a lot of work in getting the EE degrees, so how come you didn't go to a slightly lower ranked school?

I'm going to law school - a Tier 1 (top 50, there are like 4 tiers) school but not Top 14. I actually chose a lower-ranked school than the highest one I got in, but as you do research you'll find that rankings are a little different in law - you go to the best ranked school in the region that you want to work in if you can't get into the top 14 (which are considered the national schools).

Law isn't like engineering. Most wouldn't say that University of Minnesota (ranked 20th or so) is better than Southern Methodist University (ranked 49th or so). UMN is better if you want to work in the Midwest; SMU is better for Texas. In engineering, you can go anywhere and work anywhere in the country immediately after graduating. It's a tougher to do that in law. Recruiting for schools is very regional except the Top 14 schools.

One of the exceptions is patent law (especially patent prosecution - the filing of patents rather than litigation). Recruiting is a bit more wide because of specific technical talent that is required.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: sjwaste
This is only partly correct. LSAC recalculates your gps based on some factors that include rigor. Then again most of my classmates did have some bullshit liberal arts degrees...

No they don't. Some law schools do(I know Stanford and Cal do), but LSAC does not. Most scores a numbers whores because the ABA only requires them to report GPA and their highest LSAT score. Schools feel it important to keep their 25/50/75 precentiles moving upward so they will take whoever allows them to do that.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: QueHuong
My undergrad wasn't EE, it was in Biomedical Engineering. And will the name of the company help? I work for a large firm that's a direct competitor and almost has the same recognition as GE (but I don't know if law schools would know or care much about engineering companies). The degrees would be most likely be coursework only.

It would really be unfortunate if law schools don't factor in the rigor of your major and look only at GPA. I think I would come in better prepared than Poly Sci / History / Psych majors with 3.5+ or other majors seen often in law schools.

The vast majority of laws school are not hollistic. Most use a formula of consisting of LSAT and GPA and have a score(unpublished) that is more or less required for admissions.

 

[RabidMongoose]

It's going to be damn tough to get another degree while you're a new full time attorney. I don't even know why you would even think about doing that.

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: sjwaste
This is only partly correct. LSAC recalculates your gps based on some factors that include rigor. Then again most of my classmates did have some bullshit liberal arts degrees...

No they don't. Some law schools do(I know Stanford and Cal do), but LSAC does not. Most scores a numbers whores because the ABA only requires them to report GPA and their highest LSAT score. Schools feel it important to keep their 25/50/75 precentiles moving upward so they will take whoever allows them to do that.

Well, then every school I applied to adjusted, and did so identically. Maybe it's coincidence or there's a base formula that many schools use. I applied entirely within the same region, FWIW. Or maybe it was just different in 2005 when I applied.

In any case, its immaterial, I graduated and am taking the bar in a few weeks. I attended the best night program that I got into, on a pretty good LSAT but mediocre UGPA, which got adjusted upwards a bit because I took a lot of math in connection with my economics degree.

 

[sjwaste]

Man, there sure is a lot of talk about law school on ATOT lately. The economy must be in the can

In retrospect, from a graduate of a T2 night program who barely missed honors, I'd still call it a pretty rewarding experience. I'd say that the financial aspect of it certainly sucks, but I mitigated at least partially because I had a career prior to and during law school that would've paid me enough to repay my loans regardless of whether or not I finished at the bottom of my class. Thankfully, I did a little better than that.

It's not all roses, though, and I hope that some people take away from my mistakes. Namely, the legal employment market does not care what you did before or during law school, even if directly applicable to the type of law you want to practice. The only exception is work related to IP if you're going into IP practice. Second, I went in without the ambition to go to a big firm after graduation. I wanted to work in-house, and adjusted my expectations accordingly. If I could do it all again, I would've put myself in a better position to finish at the top of my class and take the big law job for a year or two. The money would pay off the degree, and then you could resume doing whatever it is you dreamt of doing.

 

[QueHuong]

Bump. Any comments on online degrees?