What Dean Z Wishes Every Applicant Knew | The 7Sage Podcast

Main Ideas

How Law School Admissions Has Changed

• Dean Z says the applicant pool has become more diverse over her career: it is now closer to gender-balanced, includes more applicants of color, and includes more applicants who are open about their LGBTQ identities.
• Technology has transformed admissions work, from the near-absence of email when she began to today’s challenges around AI-generated writing.
• Dean Z used public communication—first a blog, then videos—to explain admissions and make the process more transparent. She also wanted prospective students to learn about Michigan Law and its community.
• The number of law school applicants has risen in recent years amid uncertainty about other career paths.

Think Carefully About Whether Law Is the Right Path

• If someone is unsure whether they want to study or practice law, Dean Z recommends gaining experience in a legal setting and observing what lawyers actually do.
• Legal work varies substantially. Someone who enjoys research may prefer academic work, while some legal roles are more client-focused and involve less long-form writing.
• Applicants should consider whether a law degree is truly necessary for their goals, or whether another path—such as policy or a PhD—would be a better fit.
• Going straight from college is not inherently a problem, but applicants should use their undergraduate years well and understand what law school and legal work involve. Work experience can provide perspective and maturity, and may improve school and scholarship outcomes.
• “I can’t get a job” is not a good reason by itself to attend law school, given the time, cost, and demands involved.

The Pressure of Early Law-Firm Recruiting

• Law firms have moved recruiting earlier, contacting students before they have completed their first semester or received law school grades.
• This puts pressure on students to express preferences for specific practice areas—such as litigation, M&A, or corporate finance—before they have enough experience to understand what those fields entail.
• The early timeline can disadvantage students who take longer to adjust to law school or whose grades improve after their first semester. Dean Z and the hosts describe it as a stressful system that many involved—including law firms—dislike.

Application-Review Lessons

Resumes

Dean Z’s general advice is to make a resume easy to understand quickly. Admissions readers move fast, and unclear or unexplained details can create a misleading first impression.

• Prioritize clarity and context.
  • Explain employers or organizations that may not be familiar to a U.S. reader.
  • Avoid unexplained jargon, specialized terminology, and local terms.
  • Make dates and timelines easy to follow.
• Emphasize the employer as well as the role. Job titles can be hard to interpret across organizations. Make the organization’s identity clear rather than relying on a title to convey significance.
• Use categories purposefully. Dividing experience into categories can help, but avoid distinctions that do not clarify the applicant’s background. Do not sacrifice chronological clarity just to emphasize one job.
• Include relevant experience in the resume. If an essay discusses a substantial job, military service, study-abroad experience, or another major period of activity, the resume should account for it too. A mismatch can confuse the reader.
• Be selective with skills and interests.
  • A list of generic traits such as communication, management, and attention to detail does not prove those skills.
  • Common software skills usually do not need to be listed.
  • Make language proficiency clear and understandable.
  • Interests should be specific enough to give the reader a real impression; a shorter, more vivid list is often better.
• Do not include unnecessary information. A GPA generally need not appear on a resume if it is already available in the application record.

Personal Statements

The essay should be a deliberate piece of communication, not merely a collection of meaningful experiences. The reader is asking: What did the applicant want me to take away, and did the essay achieve that?

• Choose one story and tell it well. Applicants have limited space; trying to cover too many stories and ideas can leave the essay without a clear point.
• Use concrete details and explain the process. A claimed accomplishment is less engaging than a precise account of what the applicant actually did, thought, or learned.
• Avoid overcomplicated or self-conscious prose. Writing that seems designed to sound impressive can come across as unclear or inauthentic. Revise favorite phrases if they distract from the story.
• Connect past experiences to the present. A childhood story may be compelling, but the essay must show who the applicant is now and how the earlier experience connects to that person.
• Do not make the “why law” explanation mechanical. An essay does not necessarily need to announce, “This is why I want to go to law school.” A well-told story can make the connection clear. But the applicant should still leave the reader with a convincing sense of why law is a fitting path.
• Be careful with dramatic framing. If an event is dramatic, straightforward description can carry its weight; added theatrics may feel forced.
• Show maturity and self-awareness. Tone communicates a great deal about the writer’s judgment, perspective, and ability to understand how they come across.
• For an obstacles-overcome essay, emphasize the overcoming. Dean Z’s shorthand is roughly one sentence about the obstacle and five paragraphs about how the applicant responded. The essay should not dwell on hardship at the expense of growth, choices, and action.
• Confessional essays can work when the writer is self-aware and the issue is clearly in the past. The disclosure should be relevant and should not leave the impression that the applicant has not reflected on the behavior.
• Avoid the “work hero” essay. An account that presents the applicant as the sole person who solved a problem can sound self-aggrandizing and ignore other people’s contributions. Show how the applicant worked with others and understood the broader situation.
• Let the story demonstrate qualities. The essay should reveal how the applicant thinks, solves problems, or relates to others without forcing claims about their virtues.

Feedback on the Three Sample Applications

Cassandra

• Profile: 163 LSAT, 4.1 GPA; University of Toronto student considering U.S. and Canadian schools.
• Resume: Dean Z found it well-organized and was impressed by the range of Cassandra’s activities and responsibilities. She advised clarifying Canadian organizations and terms, avoiding unexplained technical language, making the timeline clearer, separating distinct jobs, and reconsidering the resume’s experience categories. The GPA could be removed.
• Essay: Cassandra wrote about immigrating from Korea to Canada as a child and helping her family address a landlord’s security-deposit increase. Dean Z found the topic familiar and the essay too broad, with some overly ornate language and a “work hero” quality. The specific claim that Cassandra researched a residential tenancy law at age ten was intriguing, but needed more detail and a credible account of how it happened. If retained, the childhood story would need a strong bridge to who Cassandra is now.

Mr. P

• Profile: 177 LSAT, 4.0 GPA from Berkeley; applying to highly selective schools.
• Resume: Dean Z liked his associate’s degree and transfer path, which suggested initiative and persistence. She noted that his resume omitted the IDF service central to his essay, making his timeline difficult to understand. She also recommended clarifying his work hours, reconsidering a skills section of generic claims, and making his interests more specific.
• Essay: The opening about his military service and conscientious objection was compelling, but the essay never explained the circumstances behind the key event. Instead, it moved quickly into academic interests and abstract claims about law. Dean Z felt the story’s most important and distinctive material was left out. Applicants should not assume readers know the professors or scholars they mention; unfamiliar names need context.

Landon

• Profile: 165 LSAT, 3.4 GPA; applying to Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Penn State.
• Resume: Dean Z saw gaps and an unclear timeline, compounded by a nonchronological presentation. She questioned whether a volunteer law-firm internship deserved such prominence and encouraged clearer information about his paid work. Short-term club memberships and generic skills added little.
• Essay: Landon wrote about a recent marijuana overdose and his decision to study for the LSAT. Dean Z thought the dramatic opening, recent timing, and focus on the LSAT worked against him: they did not establish enough distance or demonstrate sustained growth. The essay risked making him seem immature and insufficiently informed about law school or legal work. The LSAT is common to applicants and is not, by itself, a compelling personal-statement subject.

AI, Authenticity, and Voice

• Dean Z said none of the sample essays struck her as AI-generated, while acknowledging that admissions readers cannot always reliably identify AI writing.
• Her focus is whether an essay is effective: whether it contains interesting detail and communicates the applicant’s perspective. She does not believe AI generally produces strong personal statements, and said applicants are usually better off using their own writing.
• Applicants should ask someone who knows them whether the essay sounds like them and feels genuine.
• Authenticity does not mean ignoring how writing will be received. Applicants should understand the impression their tone creates and make deliberate choices about how to present themselves.

Speakers and Sources Featured

• Dean Z — Michigan Law admissions leader and alumna who reviewed the sample applications and discussed admissions practices.
• Alex — Host; the name is inferred from another speaker addressing him.
• Ethan — Host and 7Sage admissions-resource coordinator.
• Paulina — Host, practicing attorney, Yale alumna, and 7Sage law school consultant.
• Application materials reviewed: Cassandra’s, Mr. P’s, and Landon’s resumes and essays. The applicants are discussed but do not speak in the subtitles.
• Bailey is mentioned as a regular co-host but does not appear as a speaker in this episode.