Advisory Opinions – Getting Into Law School

Interview: Miriam Ingber (Yale) and Kristi Jobson (Harvard)
Date: August 5, 2025
Hosts: Sarah Isgur & David French
Guests: Miriam Ingber – Dean of Admissions & Financial Aid, Yale Law School; Kristi Jobson – Dean of Admissions, Harvard Law School

Episode Overview

This episode offers a deep-dive into the realities of law school admissions with two of the nation’s preeminent experts: the admissions deans from Yale and Harvard Law. Hosts Sarah Isgur and David French lead a wide-ranging, candid conversation about how applications are read and evaluated, the role of interviews, the impact of standardized testing (LSAT, GRE), ongoing trends like grade inflation, the rise of AI in applications, financial aid, strategies for waitlists, and key advice for aspiring law students. The episode is packed with practical tips, pointed critiques, and memorable anecdotes—an essential listen for anyone thinking about law school.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. How Law School Admissions Work: Process, Committees, and Decision Makers

[02:53–06:41]

• Application Processing: Submitted via LSAC, reviewed in the order received; takes a few days for processing before a reader sees it.
• Reader Questions: Assessing academic fit, reasons for attending law school, sense of direction, and potential community engagement.
• Decision Points:
  • At Harvard ("HLS"): First and second reader model, then selective interviews.
  • At Yale: Similar reader system, but with a highly structured interview and rubric.
  • Faculty committees often only review "edge cases" or tough calls, not straightforward admits or rejections.
• Quote (Kristi Jobson, Harvard):

  “If you get an interview, it shows that we're serious about the application.” [05:08]

2. The Role and Evolution of the Interview

[07:43–15:18]

• Making the Cut: Getting an interview at Yale or Harvard is a strong sign, but admission rates differ:
  • Harvard: 60–70% of interviewees are admitted.
  • Yale: Just under 1 in 3 interviewees admitted.
• Interview Dynamics:
  • Some applicants are likely a “yes” unless they flop.
  • For others, the interview is their chance to stand out.
• Preparation is Key: Yale gives applicants all interview questions in advance to “level the playing field” ([10:07]).
  • Quote (Miriam Ingber, Yale):

    “One of the ways that you can get start to go on the path towards knocking it out of the park is being really prepared.” [10:07]

• Sample Questions:
  • “Can you give me an example of a time when you disagreed with a rule or policy and how you handled that?” [11:26]
  • Focus on navigating conflict, achievement, mistakes, and personal growth.
• Trend: More emphasis now on applicants’ ability to handle disagreement and conflict—mirroring trends in undergrad, driven by societal and political polarization.

3. Changing Standards: LSAT Modifications, Grade Inflation, and Rising Subjectivity

[19:35–41:39]

• LSAT Adjustments:
  • COVID times saw shortened exams (five sections to three) and recent elimination of "logic games."
  • Result: Increased high scores and higher applicant volumes, especially in presidential election years.
• AI’s Impact:
  • Recognition that AI is being used for essays—schools are explicitly requiring disclosure.
    • “We want people to disclose any use of AI tools ... becomes an ethics issue if they fail to disclose,” Miriam Ingber [26:06].
• Transition to Subjectivity:
  • The rise of grade inflation and "grade compression" (almost everyone has an A or 4.0 GPA) means more weight is placed on subjective elements: essays, letters, and interviews.
  • Quote (Kristi Jobson, Harvard):

    “I've kind of instructed my team like 3.97, 3.82, like just disregard it completely... You have to dig into the course selection, the trajectory of grades and what letters of recommendations are saying.” [37:48]

• Concerns:
  • Questions about fairness and how privilege can game the system—ranging from test accommodations to ability to obtain influential recommendation letters.

4. Accommodations, Extensions, and the Disconnect with Legal Practice

[33:48–38:45]

• Controversy Over Test Accommodations:
  • Sarah raises the issue of some students gaining extra time through privilege and diagnoses.
  • Miriam emphasizes legal barriers (ADA) prevent schools from questioning accommodations, but suggests moving the LSAT from a "speed test" to a "power test" to lessen these disparities.
• Extensions in Education:
  • Shift in attitude: More professors are declining non-emergency extension requests to better simulate real-world legal practice.

5. Advice for Applicants: Subjectivity, Waitlists, and Distinguishing Yourself

[41:39–46:13]

• Waitlisting:
  • Not random—admissions teams have “fan favorites” they root for on the waitlist.
  • Key: Express sincere continued interest, follow each school’s waitlist instructions.
    • Quote (Miriam Ingber, Yale):

      “Our waitlist folks are our admissions team fan favorites.... It feels like you get one more bite at the apple.” [43:04]

• Subjectivity & Knowing “the Bunnies”:
  • Admissions officers know applicants quite well, especially those on the cusp.

6. Shifts in Applicant Pools, Cross-Admitting, and Demographics

[46:45–50:48]

• Increased Randomness:
  • As applicant volume grows, there’s greater unpredictability in where high-performing students land.
• Cross-Admit Phenomenon:
  • Used to be: Get into Yale, also in at Harvard/Stanford—no longer guaranteed due to more holistic, subjective review.
    • Quote (Jobson):

      “The preferences and biases and school-specific features of the process dominate more.” [48:19]

7. Non-Traditional Applicants and Diversity of Backgrounds

[50:48–55:27]

• Work Experience:
  • About 10–15% of incoming classes are straight from undergrad, the rest have work or advanced degree experience.
  • Non-traditional backgrounds (e.g., firefighting, military, arts) are rare but highly valued.
    • Quote (Ingber):

      “We do love a non, quote, unquote, non traditional applicant. I think they can bring something very, very special to the class.” [53:25]

• Distinguishing Yourself:
  • Unique occupations or life stories can help applicants stand out, especially as traditional metrics lose significance due to inflation.

8. Financial Aid & Choosing Where to Go

[55:27–61:15]

• Cost vs. Opportunity:
  • Both deans stress: Law school is a major investment; considerations should include long-term career plans and loan repayment programs, especially for public interest careers.
• Personal Factors:
  • Decisions are highly individualized—family financial dynamics play a role.
    • “Money is really personal...lives inside of all of us,” (Ingber) [57:31]
• Prestige vs. Fit:
  • General advice: Attend the best law school you’re admitted to—unless you have a specific career path or location in mind, in which case a free ride or in-state school may be optimal, especially for regional practice.
    • “Law schools are regional, and I think there are a few schools in Yale and Harvard... that are national.” (Ingber) [61:15]

9. Should You Go to Law School?

[62:18–68:47]

• Miriam Ingber:
  • Admits she went for the “wrong reasons” but found value nonetheless.
  • You should go if you think you want to be a lawyer, but a law degree can have broad value.
    • “If you're 100% sure you never want to be a lawyer, I would think long and hard about whether you should go to law school.” [63:56]
• Kristi Jobson:
  • Unless you have unlimited time and money, only go to law school if you have intent to practice.
    • “Only go to law school if you think you want to be a lawyer, you think you want to practice law.” [64:10]
• Hosts’ Takes:
  • David favors the “law school opens doors” view.
  • Sarah’s advice: Go to law school only if you’re serious about law as a career.

10. The “Conveyor Belt” to Law Firms and Shortcomings of Elite Legal Education

[68:47–71:08]

• Recruiting Starts Early:
  • Law firm recruiting occurs before students even start 1L, tempting many to follow the default law firm path by inertia and for financial reasons.
    • “There’s a large law firm that has applications open right now for incoming students who have not started 1L orientation.” (Jobson) [68:50]
• Reflection:
  • Both guests and hosts caution that law school is not a cure-all; new lawyers may feel “funneled” into careers they don’t love.
• Swag Anecdotes:
  • A moment of levity: fuzzy flip flops and slinkies as highlights of the law-firm recruiting war [69:43].

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Interviews:

  “We'll send all the questions in advance... So that people can prep into feeling confident and giving us their best substantive answers.” – Miriam Ingber (Yale) [10:07]

• On Subjectivity in Admissions:

  “It just feels like we've lost the plot where I think it’s... hurting the top people to favor the mushy middle.” – Miriam Ingber (Yale) [36:00]

• On Financial Decisions:

  “It is an investment. The question is: will this financial investment pay off? Not just in terms of my experience during three years of law school and the education I receive, but my long-term career.” – Kristi Jobson (Harvard) [56:01]

• On Non-traditional Applicants:

  “If anyone out there is listening with years of firefighting experience, would love to see you in the applicant pool next year.” – Kristi Jobson (Harvard) [53:25]

• On Elite Schools and Regional Practice:

  “Law schools are regional, and I think there are a few schools in Yale and Harvard...that are national.” – Miriam Ingber (Yale) [61:15]

• On Early Recruiting:

  “We joke about just sending a list of our incoming 1Ls to the law. Soon they’re going to ask us to just send them straight to the law firm.” – Miriam Ingber (Yale) [69:11]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Law school admissions process explained: [02:53–06:41]
• The role and significance of interviews: [07:43–15:18]
• Standardized testing, grade inflation, and subjectivity: [19:35–41:39]
• Test accommodations & extensions: [33:48–38:45]
• Waitlists and “fan favorites”: [41:39–46:13]
• Changing landscape: randomness, cross-admit rates: [46:45–50:48]
• Non-traditional applicants and what stands out: [50:48–55:27]
• Financial aid and decision-making: [55:27–61:15]
• Should you go to law school?: [62:18–68:47]
• Recruiting pipeline & law firm anecdotes: [68:47–71:08]

Tone & Takeaways

The conversation is candid, practical, and lightly humorous, featuring both empathy for applicants and clear-eyed recognition of the systemic challenges in modern legal education. Both guests dispel the myth of a purely objective process: admissions today demand context, judgment, and institutional fit, not just metrics. The blend of hard truths (about inflation, privilege, process) and encouragement (“there are many ways to succeed”) makes this a must-read (or must-listen) for aspiring law students and anyone curious about the future of the legal profession.