<p>
</p>
<p>I guess it is imaginable that it may be tough to get interviews to be a good part of the process. The unfortunate thing is that I don’t think any of us want good interviewers, we want people who’re really interested and committed to math and science, and people can just as well freeze in an interview for no apparent reason.</p>
<p>By what you’re saying though, it seems the one group of individuals who would be most adversely affected by this all are those into theoretical subjects. After all, generally it is most advisable for these students to just keep learning. When such individuals apply to graduate schools, they probably come from great institutions of learning, and their “learning” is conducted in a much more formal way and thus can be evaluated. But most of the learning that a high schooler enthusiast would do probably would be informal, although incredibly enriching. There is, of course, little I can think of that such students can do except write about their interests in an essay. I am willing to assert, however, that a mature statement of interest in theory should be given weight, and Caltech may be already giving such statements weight (only problem is, only a fraction of theorists, and not even necessarily the most successful ones, will have a mature statement at that naive stage). It’s not all that easy to fake something like that, and certainly not easier than it is to fake a lot of the other things the applications ask.</p>