(Good) Judgment Day

(upbeat music) - Welcome back to Navigating Law School Admissions with Miriam and Christy. I'm Miriam, the Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid at YLS. - And I'm Christy, the Dean of Admissions at Harvard Law School. Our topic today is judgment. The good, the bad, and the ugly. We will be covering things like when and how to use a denda, character and fitness issues, and judgment writ large. I am especially excited that we have a very special guest star with us today. And Konya Yawarabon, the Associate Dean of Admissions at Columbia Law School. She has been a tremendous mentor to both of us and is the absolute epitome of good judgment. And Konya, welcome to the podcast. - Hi, Miriam. Hi, Christy. Hello, everyone. I'm in Konya Yawarabon from Columbia Law School. I have been in admissions for 18 years. After graduating Columbia Law School, I worked at two law firms in Chicago before transferring to the New York office of one of them. I started out as a litigator and ended up as a transactional lawyer. My fun fact for today is that I drove eight hours on a whim from Chicago to Graceland with four friends in a small car. We spent less than three hours touring and then headed right back to Chicago. - Are you a big Elvis fan? - Not really. (all laughing) - I like to be even more fun. I love it. - Well, welcome. We are so excited to have you. All right, let's get to it. - Okay, and Konya, so we start every episode with a game and we are going to start this one with an admissions themed version of one of my favorites. Would you rather? And by the way, all of these questions are based on true stories. So this first one is for you and Konya. Would you rather read an addendum describing in gruesome detail and applicants gastrointestinal distress during the LSAT, which caused a lower test score, or read an addendum describing in gruesome detail and applicants roommate's relationship difficulties, which caused a GPA drop? - Oh, both of those sound unappealing and unnecessary. I guess if I'm forced to pick, I would go with the relationship. I like human interest dramas, but the real answer is that you should use better judgment. You really shouldn't be talking about either of these things in any level of detail in an addendum. And maybe not at all. This one's for you, Christy. Would you rather admit someone who discloses academic discipline for an unlit candle in their dorm room or someone who discloses a misdemeanor due to a failure to use their turn signal? - The famous unlit candle. These are both really common addendum. I think I've gotten to the point where I've read dozens of these over the last two years. So first I'm going to commend both of these applicants for airing on the side of disclosing. It is important to disclose things that may seem minor or even a little silly, better to air on the side of disclosing it rather than navigating a potential issue with a bar later. Between these two though, I'm going to go with the unlit candle. So if you read the Harvard Law School application form carefully, the character and fitness section makes it very clear that a misdemeanor due to a failure to use a turn signal is not necessary for a disclosure. All right, Miriam, last one is for you. Would you rather admit someone who is disrespectful to your front desk staff or someone who has numerous serious typos in their application? - This one is easy, but also a little bit heartbreaking. I will take the typos any day. I am totally put off by applicants who are disrespectful to anyone, especially if I think they are kissing up and kicking down. But that said, I also really, really, really hate those kinds of typos. So please try to avoid them if at all possible. Being professional in your application and avoiding typos is a way that you can show good judgment. It's really important in the legal profession and it's something that we really do look for. All right, let's turn to today's discussion topic. I think that bad judgment often comes into play when applicants get anxious about a weakness, either real or perceived in their application, and then they struggle a little bit with how to address it. I want to start by dispelling the myth that you won't get into law school if your application has a flaw in it. Cristianne Imkonyi, myth or reality? - Absolutely a myth. Almost every applicant and every application has strengths and weaknesses. That's what makes our job so interesting, sorting through the competing information with an application and coming to a conclusion, despite signals that pull you in a different direction. - I feel the same way. There's some easy decisions, either admit or deny, but those are really quite few and far between. - I totally agree with that. I think it's extremely unusual to have a really easy admission decision. And I struggle much more often than not with the decisions that we're making. - All right, Imkonyi. So since we all agree that almost every application has at least a weakness or two, what choices then do applicants have in terms of how to address those weaknesses in their application? - I'd say they're basically two choices. One is to write about the weaknesses and try to explain it away, usually through an addendum, or ignore it. They're definitely pros and cons to each approach. - Yep, so the pro of writing an addendum is that you face your weakness head on, you kind of go to sleep at night, you know that you've said something to the admissions officer, you maybe feel like you've addressed it, and you have the chance to tell your side of the story. - The con is sort of, by definition, you're drawing more attention to a negative aspect of your application. So really, there are no easy choices, and you should think very carefully about whether the weakness is something you want to write about or something you want to ignore. - Let's get into the weeds a little bit more, and let's talk about when an addendum is appropriate. So Miriam, can you give us your philosophy, just in general terms, to start? - I am so glad you asked, because this is one of those things that I have a beat in my bonnet about, and I feel very strongly about, and I know that others feel differently, so I'm glad we're gonna have a discussion about it. So I am an addendum minimalist. I think they are tremendously overused by applicants, and very often show poor judgment. I think addenda are appropriate if a significant external event had a substantial impact on a pretty major part of your application. So something like a test score or your GPA or some other pretty major part of your application. In that case, you should, indeed, you almost must include an addendum. But anything less than that just sounds like you're making an excuse, and that can be really harmful. So that distinction between explanation and excuse is one that I think is pretty clear. There's some gray area between explanation and excuse, but I don't think as much as people think there is. All right, I know I'm a little bit of an outlier on this, and probably feel more strongly than others, so I'm really interested in what both of you think. - I agree, I too am an addendum minimalist when it comes to the substance of your explanation. Be succinct. However, I'm more of a maximalist about submitting one when you are in doubt or when there is doubt generally. I suggest using addendum to fill in gaps. If you know, we'll have questions about something, explain it. Don't leave us guessing, or worse, making up our own stories about what may have happened. So for example, if your GPA map looks like a roller coaster, you know, ups and downs, let us know what happened. If you are not as involved in extracurricular activities as much as some of your friends, for example, give us a hint as to why this may have been. - Significant is probably the key word for me, particularly when it comes to addendum related to GPA or academic performance or test scores. - All right, so I think it may be easier to understand each of our approaches if we stop talking in generalities and we get into some specific examples. So maybe we can each talk about one, definitely yes, that's addendum worthy, one no way, never include it, absolutely not, and one that's a little bit closer to line, maybe in the gray area that I spoke about earlier. So let's talk about something that, you know, we think is definitely addendum worthy in all circumstances. So Nconia, why don't you start with one of those? - Sure, I'll go first. Like I said earlier, climbing grades, for example, over the course of college from basement to decent or even honors or vice versa, or if there are significant gaps in your resume post college is another example. - Can I ask you Nconia, what if the answer to that is, I just kind of was parting too hard my freshman year and didn't really study and then I started studying, to me that's not a great explanation. And I would prefer them not to say that 'cause it just draws attention to the fact that they weren't really giving best effort. Would you still want someone to include that? - See, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with self-awareness. I'm okay with the fact that you're letting me know that you actually did not make any effort at all. And when you realize that more effort was required or that you became aware of the importance of college and the overall trajectory of your life, I think it's okay to share that with the admissions committee. - Okay, I'm gonna poke you one more 'cause I'm curious as to where you fall on this one. What about the very common major switch? I used to be pre-med and I sucked at science or wasn't doing as well and then I switched to a totally different major. To me, that's obvious. You suck at organic chemistry. I don't need a page long to then know. - I agree. So we take a lot of time to look through your transcripts and we will see that you actually did do terribly in the sciences and when you switched over to the arts you did so much better. So that's pretty obvious. Again, it's a question of whether you want people to fill in the gaps or not, right? So if the gaps that will be filled in are pretty obvious, then don't bother. But if they're not as obvious, I would strongly recommend that you do so with an addendum. - All right, Christy, what's your example of an obvious addendum? - I'm going to give an example that I've only seen twice so far but I expect to see more often in this coming cycle. And that is technological difficulties related to the GRE at home or the LSAT flex. So you are taking the GRE at home. There is a technological issue and you don't receive any extra time. You take it again another time. You've figured out your computer system or your virtual proctorist figured out their computer system and your performance is more in line with what we might expect to see based on your academic record. Short, sweet to the point. I think that one is addendum worthy. - Yeah, even I would agree with that, says the addendum. (laughing) All right, so let me give an example of one that I actually like to see and really encourage people to submit. That's people who have significant caregiving responsibilities. And those have really impacted either their GPA or their ability, for example, to participate in extracurricular activities. I think it's really important that if you had those kinds of responsibilities to work or to provide support to your family that you really tell us about those. How about that? Definitely no, never include this in addendum. Never, ever, ever. Christy? - I've got one. Okay, the unfair professor. So picture an addendum that says. You may notice that my grade is lower in philosophy 250, the Stoics. That's because this professor is a monster. I went to them to complain about my midterm grade and they wouldn't increase it, even though I presented all these important justifications. And then I performed better on the final and provided that to my professor as evidence of why my grade should be higher, but he refused and it goes on and on and on. I've seen some variation of the unfair professor addendum. I do not consider that a significant external event that is worthy of an addendum. Just accept the B plus in the Stoics. - I will just say the Stoics, Epictetus, et cetera, are very hard and I did have a lower grade in the Stoics. So I do have a little bit of sympathy, but not addendum worthy, I totally agree. - More generally, whenever I see an addendum like that, I worry that the person will be a complainer and I can say that our faculty committee have very strong reactions to the unfair professor addendum. - That's the person who's gonna be in the office quibbling about grades every single semester. - Right, we don't enjoy winers in general. I think that's a definite no. Okay, so this one was a little tougher for me 'cause sometimes it's hard to know what you don't know. And so one more obvious one to me is if someone took the LSAT or any standardized test on an accommodated basis, they do not need to disclose this. They do not need to disclose it because it's not really any of our business. And as far as the LSAT is concerned, we can't tell the difference anyway. - Yeah, I agree. Please don't tell us. I think it's inappropriate for us to know that information. - Yeah, that's a great example. All right, I've already mentioned one of my pet peeve, no-nose, which is my LSAT score went up because I studied more. And sometimes that's accompanied by this long litany of all the ways in which the studying changed. And this month I started using this LSAT trainer book and then I did this and then I don't need to know if your score went up because you studied. I am great, that's awesome. I think that's exactly why LSAT score should go up and I'm impressed by the increase in the score. No need to mention it going up just because of a study, just because you studied. - I read an addendum last year, if someone who went from a once, I believe it was a 172 to a 173 and they provided an addendum. I was like, I didn't, no, it's fine. Save us that minute of reading, please. - I will say that if you take the LSAT and you get a 174 the first time and then, or even a 173 or two, something up there, and then you take it again and you get a 179, I actually kind of want to know why you feel the need to take it. - Can we take it? - Yes, I do. I have questions about such people, but we'll leave that for another conversation. - I saw someone who retook a 177 last year and I was like, why man, why? - If you're retaking a 177, that's an addendum. - Maybe a red flag. - Of a different guide. - Of a different guide, yes. - All right, so finally the close call and I actually, this is one that I think is a close call, but I think that if done right and well and very succinctly, which I think is a theme here, succinct is always better, can sometimes be effective. If someone has a lower LSAT score and they also have a lower standardized test score for college, I've sometimes seen it be successful and I think it depends on the reader to say, my ACT or SAT score for college was also significantly below the median or the 25th percentile of my colleges, SAT or ACT score, but I am performing, I'm Summa Cum Laude, I got high honors, I have a 398 at my college and I don't think that standardized test scores are predictive of how I will perform in law school either. If very succinct and done well, and sometimes people will even submit the college standardized test score, although I don't think that's strictly necessary. I think that's a close call, but sometimes can be effective if the facts really line up with that story. All right, I'll offer another close call related to testing. This is a medical issue on testing day. It can be a close call depending on the severity. So I've read a denda that suggests that a test score was lower due to stomach jitters, nervousness, a little bit of anxiousness going into the test. That airs more towards the no for me. Everybody is nervous going into, most everybody is nervous going into the test. I've also read really severe medical issues, so I'll share a very specific example. This is from my first year in this role. A individual was biking to their LSAT testing center and they were hit by a car and they fell off the bike, obviously. They broke their arm and they limped their way all the way to the testing center and sat down and took the LSAT, which shocked me. They then took the LSAT later with a arm that was no longer broken or perhaps in a cast and as you might expect, they performed much better. That to me was a medical issue that rose to the level of severity that warranted an addendum, much more than the stomach jitters. I remember that application and that LSAT and I actually looked at the writing samples and there was a market difference in the handwriting from the broken arm LSAT and the non broken arm LSAT. And then I had that individual on a webinar and I was using that as an example of addendum worthy and he typed into the chat box. I was so worried about writing that, I'm so glad you mentioned that that was okay, so that I agree, I think that's an addendum worthy one as well. - What do you think about an addendum where someone says that a squirrel kept them all night the day before? - Oh, the squirrel, I know the squirrel! - I have the squirrel. - I don't know. - I've had a squirrel one. - I think, I'm a no on the squirrel. - Is this a thing? Because this happened many years ago. We actually admitted this person, so I'm guessing that she, he, they did well, ultimately. - No, I don't want to hear about the squirrel. - I don't think, I don't think so. That is significant external event? - No, no. - It's certainly external, but is it significant? - It was humorous. - Yes. - It was humorous and I think that is why they shared it. We do have a sense of humor. - Is your squirrel your close to the lion in Coday? (laughing) - I think I'm going to go with a consensus on that one. Don't bother. Okay, so mine would be, you know, it's one of these, it depends kinds of responses. So it would be taking classes past fail or withdrawing from classes. I think, again, it depends on sort of how many of these there are and how often this occurs and what the rationale is for them. So in most instances, I don't think you need to report that you took a class past fail or even that you withdrew it from a class, but it really will depend on whether this becomes a pattern or whether it was just something that occurred from time to time. - And I will say that in this very unusual year where I think a lot of people are going to have due to COVID, some semester that is either optional or mandatory past fail. - Sure. - I don't think there is any need to have an addendum about that. We totally understand how unusual this year was and possibly the fall as well. I don't want to read thousands of COVID related past fail addendum. I think it's totally fine. We do get it. We're very sympathetic to that situation. - Sure, and similarly, there are schools, undergraduate colleges that historically have permitted, encouraged people to take classes past fail in the first year or so. So we don't need it for those either. It's just in the other circumstances where it can become questionable. - So let's assume an addendum is appropriate. Is there a specific length or style you like to see? I know I have my preferences. - Sure, I'd say an addendum is not an essay. It's not another essay. Usually it should be short and sweet. If the issue you're describing is serious enough to require an addendum, it usually can be described sufficiently in a short space. And I think the word that we have used throughout all of this is succinct. And I think that that would be most appropriate. - I agree completely. I think short is almost always the right answer. Of course, sometimes there are very complex circumstances that require a little more length. So I don't want to say every circumstance, it must be succinct, but I think it should be as succinct as possible for the circumstances. - And if you're looking for a hard and fast rule, I think typically three sentences will cover it. Explain the issue in one sentence. You'll notice my sophomore spring grades are lower than my academic performance in other semesters. Sentence two, explain the circumstances. My sister underwent extensive chemotherapy during that semester and I traveled back and forth to home each week in order to spend time with her and be supportive. And then finally the resolution. Thankfully my sister's health improved and by the following semester, I resumed full-time focus on my studies and no drama. So do not do the, I tossed and turned and then the pillow as the squirrel yelped outside and I cried out, please squirrel. I have the LSAT tomorrow. No, I don't need it. - Yeah. Say that with a personal statement or not. Or not in an incentive. - Or not, or never. - But never in an incentive. - Yeah, and I would say also as a general matter in admissions, we think that the thinner the application actually, the weightier it is, the more persuasive it often is. And the thicker the application, if you can visualize paper, the more likely it is to contain a lot, a lot of drama and a lot of unnecessary information. - Let me ask you and Konya and Christie how you feel about this. When someone adds in as an addendum, their undergraduate thesis or a paper they wrote, how do you feel about that? I generally feel, no, I don't wanna read that. I don't wanna read an extra 30 pages or 20 pages or even five pages of work for you. It feels like an unfair advantage and an unfair imposition. - I feel free to ignore it. - I just think, why? No one asked for it. I guess maybe there's some school out there that wants you to submit a significant writing sample. Fine, go ahead. If no one asked for it, we don't wanna see it. We sort of have a rule in our office that we read everything. We read the application front to back. So I actually do tend to read them. And then I usually just feel tired of the applicant by the end. - Yeah, I feel free to ignore it as well. Sometimes we'll skim, but then I usually feel imposed upon. - Yeah, I would recommend that unless it was requested, people not add it because while we all endeavor to read applications from beginning to end, we might tire in between and may not get to the more significant and important and persuasive aspects of your application that are relevant to the undertaking here, which is to see whether you will fit into our community one way or another. - So changing topics a little bit, let's spend a few minutes discussing character and fitness issues. In Konya, you have so much experience and you must have seen it all. How do you advise applicants to approach these CNF disclosures? - Yeah, we've seen a lot. I've seen a lot over the years. The most important principle is that you must disclose the information requested in the character and fitness questions. If there is any doubt, any doubt at all, disclose. Please, not only can the information you disclose be important to the review of the application, it's absolutely critical to the bar admission process after you graduate. Any failure to disclose requested information on your application is viewed very negatively by the bar association. - All right, but what makes this tricky, I think, is that every school asks slightly different questions. So you do want to read the character and fitness session very, very carefully. Utilize those reading skills you've got from studying for the LSAT. So for example, at Harvard Law School, our character and fitness questions are constrained by a Massachusetts law. So there's very specific laws in Massachusetts about what educational institutions and employers can and cannot ask related to discipline in prior employment related to criminal adjudication. And our questions are actually much narrower as a result than questions in New York, for example, for the New York bar. So again, you just have to read every application form very carefully. - And you also have to remember that most applications, perhaps all of them, but certainly ours included, require continuing and ongoing disclosures. So if anything material changes, either related to caring for fitness or anything else, you are obligated to update the admissions office. So here's an example. If you were an NCAA athlete and you ran a race, and then I hope this doesn't happen, but you had that record taken away from you because you were found to be cheating, if that's on your application, you have to disclose that that was taken off because that ongoing disclosure obligation keeps going after the moment that you apply until the moment that you matriculate at the law school. - Miriam, should applicants worry if they have a character and fitness disclosure? - This is the good news part. So now we said disclose it all, but the good news is that you almost never have to worry about the things that you disclose. We very regularly admit applicants with both justice involvement and academic discipline. The vast majority of the disclosures we see are completely immaterial to our decision. And even the most serious disclosures that we see are not outcome-determinative. So we've admitted people with quite serious criminal records and even quite serious academic discipline if they're disclosed appropriately. - Now, has everyone admitted someone with an unlit candle in the dorm room? - Well, that one's tricky. (both laughing) Who's people with those unlit candles? I don't know about that. - What length of the unlit candle? I would say, yes. - Yes, yes to the unlit candle. Just close it, but don't worry about it. All right, Christy, can you give applicants some advice on how best to draft to these character and fitness disclosures? - Definitely, definitely. So in terms of length, the more serious the underlying conduct, the longer the addendum should be. So if it's something very minor, isolated incident of underage drinking is probably the most common example, more common than the unlit candle in the dorm room. Keep it very short. It's also very important that the applicant take full responsibility for their misconduct. That's where I see addendum really go awry, actually, is when someone starts to shift responsibility. Nikonie, what do you think about length? - Totally agree. Totally agree about that and also about taking responsibility. I would really like to underscore that applicants should not take, prospective applicants should not take themselves out of the application process simply because there is a transgression in their past. How they emerge from the experience matters a great deal and will be taken into account. So here's my advice. Describe in an appropriate level of detail, take full responsibility and make it clear to the extent possible that you have moved past and learned from the incident. - Before we turn to a few listener questions, do you two have any tips on how applicants should show good judgment in terms of their interactions with admissions offices? - Yes, I have many thoughts on this, but I'll try to keep it simple. It's really important to be respectful and to recognize that we are leanly staffed and are often working very hard, especially during peak admission season. Don't overengage, it really wouldn't help and it may actually hurt. What about you? - I totally agree with that. I often think that applicants should use the following test. If every applicant did the thing that you're about to do, would the admissions office be able to function? And if the answer to that is no, it probably isn't a great thing to do and may even show bad judgment. - Absolutely, and here's a specific example. Admissions offices are generally not able to connect prospective applicants to alumni or faculty. Those are important stakeholders for us and we have to protect their time. It just wouldn't be feasible for us to connect 7,000 plus people to faculty members and it would be inequitable to connect only a few and sort of pick and choose which connections we made. - And just one more tip is to use an appropriate level of formality. Sometimes people will email me or even my faculty members, "Hey, first name," and it just feels so disrespectful. There's just no reason why you shouldn't start the email with a tier professor so-and-so or a tier miss so-and-so and just wait until you're invited to use someone's first name. I think that's just a general tip in professional life generally and certainly in this process as well. - Now it's time to get to your questions. So thank you for submitting these listeners. So first question for the group. Let's say that you are on the wait list at a school or you've been waiting quite a while to get a response to your application. Is it necessary or valuable or impactful to provide additional information to the school? And if so, what should you submit? - I'll take that one to start. So I want to distinguish between a wait list and non-wait list and start with wait list. So I think every school probably asks for what they want when people are on the wait list and we're pretty explicit about it. We have an opt-on wait list so you should definitely opt-on to our wait list. We do request a letter of continuing interest and so that's what we want. That's it. We don't want more letters of continuing interest. We don't need more information after that unless there's a really significant update to the application. And it's not helpful to just continue to ping us every month to let us know that we're still interested. We assume that you are until the date when you roll off our wait list. I don't know about if you have a different idea in Coney or Christy. - I generally agree. If you have new and relevant information then you should update us with that information. I do not think sending us additional recommendation letters that don't provide anything different or new about your skills or capabilities will help in the process. In terms of letters of continuing interest, I can see how those can sometimes become stale, right? So if you were put on the wait list in March and it's August maybe or it's later, right? I can't say the number of months. You might think about just checking in with us without being obnoxious about it just to let us know that you're still, you remain interested. - I think it just goes to the fact that it's school specific and you should really follow the lead. I think schools are usually pretty explicit about what it is they want from their wait listed applicants. - I agree. We try to be very clear in our wait list instructions and I think let the content drive whether you submit another letter of continued interest. Don't let an arbitrary number of weeks drive your decision to submit another one. I'll say also for wait listed applicants or any applicants, no gifts. I've received fruit baskets. I've received specialized t-shirts and I've received some barrettes for my hair which felt odd. I received a personalized bookmark. - Why do you give gifts and I get nothing? Not that I want gifts, don't send me gifts. - I'm feeling a little envious. - I am feeling jealous now, but gifts are never appropriate. - Yes, I was gonna say that I used to receive gifts and somehow, I don't know, maybe word has gotten out but we're not even allowed to accept those gifts anyway. I did receive one that I found to be quite impressive. It was a handmade picture that was covered with blue and white M&Ms. So that was impressive, but still, no gift. (laughing) Didn't work. - Okay, here's our second question. How should an applicant approach a denda if they have a complicated background, e.g., they overcame addiction? And Kanya, you wanna take that one? - Yes, I think it goes to all the points that we made earlier. Disclosure is important. Talking to us, telling us what happened and how you overcame the addiction and that you are now in a position to attend law school in a meaningful and focused way. - Our third question. What if an applicant has an ongoing adjudication either at work, at an educational institution or in the criminal justice system at the time they apply, but it's not been resolved yet? Should they still disclose any pending matters? - I think that requires very careful reading of the school-specific character and fitness questions and it's probably gonna be a school-specific answer, but I do think that the when-and-doubt disclose really applies here as does the ongoing obligation to update. So it may be that at the time when you apply, you don't need to disclose it, but then the matter goes on and your status changes. Yes, at that moment, you may then have to disclose to every school. So I think that those two roles of when-and-doubt and ongoing disclosure are gonna be really important, especially in those circumstances. - Yeah, yes, my sense is that all of our applications require some level of disclosure for events that occur even after the application has been completed. And so based on that alone, it is important for people to disclose that kind of information. - All right, and Konya will give you the final word. Any parting advice? - Yes, so applicants often ask how they can make their application stand out, which is really a very difficult feat given how many applications we all receive. And truly applications are a reflection of who you are. And that's the best way to stand out. But I will say that judgment is the critical distinguishing factor of every application. It's not reflected in the quantitative factors or in your resume, but it is demonstrated through the totality of your application and what you choose to put in there, as well as the interactions with our respective communities, whether it's students, faculty, or administrators. It's definitely the X factor and can make all the difference in the outcome of your application. - I just want to say such a huge thank you to Konya for joining us today. It's been such an absolute pleasure to have you. - It's been a great being here, guys, thank you. - Thank you. Thank you for listening to Navigating Law School Admissions with Miriam and Christy. Do you have a question you'd like us to answer on this podcast? Send them along to [email protected]. That's [email protected]. You can write your question in the email itself, or if you'd like to hear your voice on this podcast, attach your question as a voice recording. - This podcast is produced by Ryan McAvoy from the Yale Broadcast Studio.