In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Anna Hicks-Jaco is joined by Spivey consultant Meg Krishnan, former Director of Admissions and Programs at UChicago Law, for a conversation about preparing for law school admissions interviews. Meg spent nine admissions cycles at UChicago Law, ultimately running the school’s interview program and personally conducting thousands of admissions interviews. She shares what admissions offices are looking for in interviews and how applicants can prepare in a way that feels confident, natural, and intentional.

They discuss the different roles interviews can play in the admissions process and the different formats applicants may encounter (3:51); what an interviewer may review from your application before speaking with you (6:55); how to prepare your “why law” answer using Meg’s “ghosts of Christmas” framework of past, present, and future (9:08); and how to start researching and preparing for “why this law school?” questions well before receiving an interview invitation (12:18). Meg also shares a simple method for keeping track of school-specific research over time (15:52); what to prioritize once you actually receive an interview invitation, from logistics to reviewing your own application materials (19:35); and why applicants should practice from bullet points rather than scripting and memorizing their answers (24:28).  

Anna and Meg also dive deeper into what makes a strong “why X” answer and the importance of connecting what a law school offers back to your own experiences and strengths (28:54); common interview mistakes and how to recover when something goes wrong (31:55); strategies for building confidence before an interview, including an exercise from psychologist Dr. Guy Winch (41:09); and practical ways to reduce distracting filler words and become more comfortable with pauses (43:36). They close with advice on taking care of yourself throughout the process, learning how to reset after a difficult moment, and remembering that receiving an interview invitation itself means the law school is interested in you (51:43).    

A note on interview formats: Much of the advice in this episode is most directly applicable to invited interviews and one-on-one interviews with a human interviewer. However, many of the preparation strategies discussed also apply to other formats, including Kira and other prerecorded interviews.

Related resources: For a broader overview of law school interviews, including different interview formats and additional preparation advice, see our Interview Strategy Deep Dive with Former Law School Admissions Officers podcast. For more on the types of questions applicants may encounter, listen to Five Categories of Law School Admissions Interview Questions & How to Answer Them, with former Harvard Law Director of Admissions Karen Buttenbaum—including a bonus sixth category of curveball questions.

For more advice and resources on researching individual law schools and developing a strong, differentiated “why X,” see our Why X Essay Deep Dive: Advice from Former Law School Admissions Officers podcast episode. Anna also references our earlier conversation with psychologist Dr. Guy Winch, Dr. Guy Winch on Handling Rejection (& Waiting), which includes the confidence exercise discussed in this episode.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

Originally published in 2021, this conversation with Dr. Gabor Maté explores self-doubt, stress, anxiety, addiction, and the pressures that can come with pursuing ambitious academic and professional goals.Mike Spivey speaks with Dr. Maté, world-renowned physician and author of In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts, When the Body Says No, and The Myth of Normal, about how these challenges can affect prospective law students and others navigating high-pressure environments.One of Dr. Maté’s insights for prospective and incoming law students:“You're going to look at all your confident classmates, and you're going to go in there with all manner of self-doubt. You're making the big mistake of comparing their outside with your inside. You have no idea what their inside is like. And believe me, you're not the only one.”This episode is a re-release of our 2021 conversation with Dr. Gabor Maté.You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube: https://lnkfi.re/D5f5vv

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike is joined by Dr. Milana Hogan, Chief Talent Officer at Sullivan & Cromwell, and Rob Baker, a former law firm hiring committee member and BigLaw attorney, for a conversation about the increasingly front-loaded BigLaw recruiting process and what prospective and current law students should know about navigating it. Rob has held recruiting roles at large, medium, and boutique-sized law firms, while Dr. Hogan has spent nearly two decades at Sullivan & Cromwell working in talent, associate development, and recruiting.  

The group discusses how law firm recruiting has shifted earlier over time and the market pressures driving that change (7:41); whether hiring could move even earlier and why first-semester law school grades may serve as a practical stopping point (13:48); whether 0Ls should already be reaching out to firms and how to approach those conversations from a learning rather than a “will you hire me?” posture (17:13); the value of LinkedIn, low-pressure outreach, and building relationships before recruiting formally begins (20:53); and why the current system may create new opportunities for 2Ls and 3Ls who missed out earlier in the process (24:39).  

They also discuss how AI is affecting BigLaw work and hiring, including Sullivan & Cromwell’s use of AI as one part of its holistic hiring process (28:34); what can turn hiring partners off in an interview and why trying too hard to demonstrate how smart you are can backfire (31:47); the importance of curiosity, humility, and a willingness to learn from more experienced lawyers (34:45); and why students should take ownership of their careers, seek out opportunities, and practice interviewing before the real thing (37:52).

Related resources: Mike references NALP Executive Director Nikia Gray’s article, The “Cruel” Recruiting Timeline, which examines the history of OCI and the market forces behind the increasingly accelerated law firm recruiting process. He also references a South Park episode parodying Black Friday’s increasingly early start as an analogy for how BigLaw recruiting has continued moving earlier.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike has a conversation with Simone Stolzoff, an author and journalist whose work explores uncertainty, ambition, and our relationship with work. Simone is the author of How to Not Know and The Good Enough Job. His latest book examines why uncertainty feels so uncomfortable and how developing a healthier relationship with not knowing can create opportunities for learning, growth, and possibility.

Simone discusses why our tolerance for uncertainty is declining (1:05), why uncertainty itself is not necessarily the problem (4:42), and why even experts are often poor at predicting the future (7:29). He also explains how applicants can avoid becoming overly attached to one particular school, job, or future by focusing on what they can control, preparing for multiple outcomes, and finding healthy ways to cope with waiting.

Additional topics include the three “certainty traps” of comfort, hubris, and control (10:22), how expertise can make people more vulnerable to overconfidence (14:47), practical ways to build uncertainty tolerance and trust your future self (16:36), why uncertainty can give life meaning and possibility (20:01), how rejection from a dream school or job may ultimately open unexpected doors (27:08), career changes and “unanswered prayers” (29:51), and why your job can be an important part of your life without becoming your entire identity (33:02).

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on Apple Music, Spotify, and Youtube. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Anna Hicks-Jaco is joined by three experienced law school financial aid professionals: Dalmarie Lawrence, Director of Financial Aid at the University of the District of Columbia School of Law; Montré Everett, Director of Financial Aid at UC Davis School of Law; and Matt Wakeman, Assistant Dean of Financial Aid at the University of Virginia School of Law.

Together, they discuss how the student loan changes included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act are affecting current and prospective law students, particularly following the elimination of Grad PLUS loans and the introduction of new federal borrowing limits.

The group explains what has changed for incoming law students, how part-time students may be affected, and why simply lowering law school tuition may be more complicated than it sounds. They also discuss how law schools are responding through scholarships, institutional aid, tuition freezes, loan repayment assistance programs, and other resources designed to help students manage the cost of attendance.

The conversation also covers how applicants can use ABA 509 reports to evaluate scholarship opportunities and identify financial safety schools, what students should know about private student loans, and how credit history and cosigners may affect their ability to borrow. The guests also explain why private loans may sometimes offer lower interest rates than federal loans, while emphasizing the risks they may create for students pursuing public service careers and Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

Additional topics include financial aid considerations for veterans and military dependents, the impact of the new rules on transfer and dual-degree students, the importance of borrowing only what is necessary, and practical strategies for reducing law school expenses through scholarships, budgeting, and early communication with financial aid offices.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike, joined by LSAT experts Graeme Blake and Ellen Cassidy, discusses the changes coming to the LSAT this August and the federal class-action lawsuit that LSAC is currently facing over CAS fees.

Graeme has been teaching the LSAT for over 15 years and is the founder of LSAT Hacks, and Ellen is the author of The Loophole in LSAT Logical Reasoning and founder of Elemental Prep.

The group discusses the specific changes that are being made to the LSAT starting with the August 2026 administration (2:09), whether the changes will result in fewer high scores and a leftward shifting of the LSAT score bell curve (8:26), what you should know about the changes being made to the LSAT test-taking interface (16:48), tips for individually customizing the new interface (25:01), the most difficult part of the modern LSAT (29:06), the questions of whether the Logical Reasoning section has gotten harder since the Logic Games section was removed (27:44) and whether the LSAT is getting harder in general (29:06), hopes for the future of the LSAT (31:52), and a discussion of the federal class-action lawsuit that LSAC is currently facing over CAS fees (38:04)—plus, the LSAT score threshold where you should probably stop retaking (14:30).

There have been two highly relevant updates since we recorded this episode:

First, the final changes to the new LSAT user interface were completed earlier this month. LSAC expects no further changes to be made this cycle.

Second, LSAC’s motion to dismiss the federal class-action lawsuit being brought against them in Risner v. Law School Admission Council, Inc. was denied, and the case will now move forward to discovery.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Legal Education Access Pipeline (LEAP) Founder & CEO, Cindy Lopez, joins us for a conversation with Paula Gluzman, Spivey’s Director of Diversity & Inclusion and a J.D. Admissions Consultant. Cindy is a retired career Deputy Attorney General for the State of California, served as Board President of a college access nonprofit for underserved young women, and founded LEAP in 2019. Paula is a former admissions officer at UCLA Law and the University of Washington Law, a former attorney, former law school career services professional, and has been an integral advisor for LEAP since its inception.

Cindy and Paula discuss LEAP, what it offers, and how it originated (2:35); Cindy’s story from applying to law school without help to a career as a California Deputy Attorney General to founding LEAP (12:59); advice for how to find a mentor (17:13), Cindy’s top three tips for how to be a good mentee (19:37), and the one question Paula always tells people to ask their mentors (21:15); how Cindy has seen admissions change in the wake of the 2023 Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard (22:42); the funding challenges that LEAP is facing under the new administration in a changing political climate (28:40); what gives Cindy hope in a time when diversity efforts in higher education are under attack (30:50); Cindy’s best advice for prospective law students today (35:00); and the importance of having fun and celebrating your wins (37:18).

You can find more information about LEAP, including eligibility criteria, application information, and volunteer opportunities, here.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike has a conversation with Orin Kerr, a prominent law professor and legal academic who currently serves as a Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and a Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution. In his 25+ years as a law school faculty member, Professor Kerr has written 75+ law review articles, authored casebooks, and been cited in 4,500+ academic articles and 500+ judicial decisions, including several U.S. Supreme Court opinions. He has held tenured positions at Stanford Law, GW Law, USC Law, and UC Berkeley Law, and he has been a visiting professor at UChicago Law, Penn Law, and Yale Law.

In addition to his career in academia, Professor Kerr completed two clerkships, including a Supreme Court clerkship with Justice Anthony Kennedy, argued before the Supreme Court, and practiced law for a number of years, including as a trial attorney for the Department of Justice in the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. He has a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering from Princeton University, a master’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from Stanford University, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. 

Professor Kerr discusses how law schools try to balance preparing students to be practice-ready with teaching how to think like a lawyer (5:49), what Professor Kerr sees as the “ideal” legal training (11:27), what professors actually think when someone messes up a cold call (37:58), how and when he knew he wanted to become a law professor (1:47), the “old way” and the “new way” that law schools hire faculty (3:41), advice for prospective law students who want to become law professors (12:32), the different types of law professors (12:51), every professor’s least favorite part of the job (23:12), the built-in advantages that some students enter law school already having (32:48), Professor Kerr’s most-read law review article (33:50), and more.

They also discuss a video that Professor Kerr recorded last year, “So You’re About To Start Law School: A Law Student’s Guide with Stanford Law Professor Orin Kerr.” You can watch that video for free on YouTube here.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Anna Hicks-Jaco discusses the strategy of reapplying to law school, joined by former law school admissions officers and Spivey consultants Sir Williams and Julia Truemper. They give a great deal of insider insights and strategic advice, including common reapplication mistakes (8:11, 17:57, 34:26), how to explain why you’re reapplying (32:15), whether admissions officers review reapplicants’ previous applications (2:31), whether they hold a previous denial against reapplicants (5:25), how discrepancies between the previous application and the current application can be problematic for reapplicants (3:52, 30:06), whether and how you need to revise and create new materials for a reapplication to the same school (6:32, 16:06), how to critically assess your previous application (10:43, 17:57), how you should change your school list (23:07), advice for the sometimes difficult process of rewriting your personal statement (25:42), how law schools look at reapplicants who were previously admitted (and how to mitigate potential negative impacts of that) (30:41), advice for reapplicants who weren’t admitted anywhere the previous cycle (40:01), and more.

You can find Part 1 of this two-part series, “Should You Reapply to Law School,” here.

Other resources mentioned in this episode:

• Law School Application Resume Deep Dive 

• Personal Statement Deep Dive

• Experience/Perspective Essays (Diversity Statements) Deep Dive

• “Why X” Essay Deep Dive

• Addendum Deep Dive

• Law School Admissions Interview Deep Dive

• Making Your Law School List: Advice & Resources for Deciding Where to Apply

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike has a conversation with Vincent Sheu, an attorney and AI startup founder with a JD and a Master's in Computer Science from Stanford (in addition to degrees in Statistics, Molecular and Cell Biology, and Bioengineering).

Mike and Vincent discuss how he uses AI in his legal work today (19:20, 22:20), how he expects to be using AI in legal work in the future (37:23), how important his human contributions are vs. the contributions of AI (25:32), whether AI will be able to learn EQ (27:12), the sorts of AI tooling skills that employers are (and will be) looking for (29:19, 42:45) and how they screen for those skills (33:39), the benefits of using AI for legal work as well as the risks (24:04, 31:21, 44:23), how the next generation of lawyers will be advantaged and disadvantaged in the new landscape of legal practice (30:03), whether Vincent would hire a new lawyer who was brilliant and likable but has no familiarity with AI (32:52), Vincent’s recruiting process out of law school (14:03) and what his hours looked like in biglaw vs. as an in-house general counsel (19:36), how Vincent went 23 for 25 during his law school admissions cycle as a “super splitter” (3:32), and more.

Near the beginning of the episode, Mike and Vincent chat about a viral video from 2014 in which Vincent rapidly completed a Rubik’s Cube at a college basketball game. While the original video is now private, you can find the referenced SportsCenter article here.

Mike also mentions the recent case of a defendant attempting to use an AI avatar to make their opening argument in court. You can find that video here.

You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode with timestamps here.