It kills me because law school is way too expensive and way too long, and may well be unnecessary for a lot of people. But I understand the need for some kind of meaningful credentialing, since the harm one can do as a bad lawyer is usually more dangerous than what can be done by a bad engineer. (Mostly because any law grad can go and hang a shingle the day after they are admitted.)
[1] I don't mean to imply that failing the bar means one is incompetent! Extreme incompetency is a sufficient, but not necessary, condition.
After I got my EE degree I took the GRE and GMAT and aced them, getting 95th+ percentile, without studying at all. I then enrolled in a MBA program and was shocked at how easy, and unrigorous, the courses were compared to EE classes.
In later years during weeks with a large portion of lab work it wasn't uncommon to have 40+ hour weeks.
While I was an undergrad I rented a flat with a good friend of mine who was doing a B.A. (majoring in creative writing). He would complian if he had more than 7 hours a week.
There was a certain element among engineering students who reveled in the percieved difficulty of the degree there was a lot of 'machoness' about how hard the course was etc and there was a tendency to disparage other faculties particularly the Arts faculty. Which of course is nonsense.
It's also true that the non-quantitatively inclined do find some of a good MBA core curriculum pretty hard. I did some tutoring and in economics, among other things, and I had students who couldn't a simple equation. One once asked me to "explain how graphs work," i.e. basic x-y axis price elasticity, etc. Every few years there seems to be a book written by someone who really struggled with basic math in business school.
As pre-med isn't an undergrad degree in the states, we'd probably find pre-meds with engineering undergrad degrees outscore other majors on the MCAT. The engineering grad is also a bonus for admission (given way too many chem/biology applicants). Not that this happens very often, however.
Somewhat relatedly, it's been well known that for CS PhD admissions, at least with native English speakers, the GRE Verbal is a better predictor of PhD performance than the GRE Math. It's unclear how much of this is top-end compression in math though (almost everyone going to a top CS PhD school gets a 790 or 800 on the GRE Math, so there's no signal left there, whereas verbal has a higher spread. A 720 on the verbal is 98th percentile).[2]
[1] I know this because in 2009 as a college senior, I took some practice LSAT tests, and found the logic section endlessly delightful and challenging in a timed setting - I was this close to applying to law schools before I changed my mind and did a CS PhD instead. I know it sounds like a weird choice, but 2009 was a weird soul-searching year for me for various personal reasons.
[2] All of this has changed since 2011 when the GRE scoring system changed to a 130-170 scale from the old 200-800 scale, along with changes to the test itself. All of my points are probably obsolete.
There are samples from both sections here for comparison: http://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/about-the-lsat/
I too found analytic reasoning delightful, both during practice tests and during the actual test. One thing about the actual test that kicked it up a notch over practice tests (aside from the pressure of it being for real) was that you could not bring scratch paper to the real test. There was a fair bit of empty space in the test booklet so you had room for truth tables, graphs, and such, but if you botched one and had to start over you might find scratch space tight.
I aced analytic reasoning. Shortly after the test, I saw a magazine at the supermarket full of those kinds of problems. The shelf position and the ads in the magazine indicated it was aimed at older women. I bought it, because I enjoyed that part of the test so much, but didn't have much hope because I aced that part of the LSAT! How are puzzles for Grannies going to be a challenge? So I tried a level 3 difficulty puzzle (range was 1 to 5 with 5 the hardest).
It DESTROYED me. I could do level 1 reasonably, and level 2 with a lot of effort.
I vowed that if I did become a lawyer, I would not take cases that would pit me against old ladies. (I did not become a lawyer. I decided near the end of law school that I would rather be a programmer who knew a lot about law than a lawyer who knew a lot about programming. My policy of not going against old ladies in battles of wits remains in force).
The GRE verbal is a great predictor of success in CS grad school and any kind of science grad school because it's so heavily g-loaded. Verbal scores are very hard to game and correlate well with raw IQ even when people try to study for the test and artificially improve scores. Antonyms, vocabulary, and reading comprehension are very good measures of the same mental ability that deep cutting edge research requires.
Of course, that doesn't work for non-fluent English speakers.
But then, so's engineering.
Work sample tests might work better but at least in the UK they do multiple rounds of structured interviews followed by free form interviews after filtering by class of degree/university prestige. I bet their false positive rate on hiring is very low even if the false negative rate is high.
With that in mind, it's not as if all students from all majors are required to take the exam- the data represents those people that self-selected to take the lsat.
http://www.potsdam.edu/academics/AAS/Phil/upload/LSAT-Scores...
Engineering graduate students, on the other hand, almost always have a background in their field of graduate study. This is often very substantial - for instance, an EE major doesn't need a grad degree in EE to get to work. And even if a student is using grad school to build some general knowledge of a new field (such as a physics or math major going to grad school in CS), they're much closer than a history major would be to law [1].
In this case, the growth in grad enrollment might understate the transition, since a student who wanted to be a lawyer who instead decides to become an engineer might just change majors and avoid grad school altogether.
[1] I actually think that if people were allowed to take the bar without attending law school, you'd find that a lot of people could become extremely talented lawyers without the graduate degree.