<p>Beo : The top colleges expend millions of dollars on outreach, recruiting and eventually, evaluating the applications. If they felt there was any more utility to be had by the volunteer alumni reports, they’d certainly do so. Interviews have gone on for many decades. Your assumptions must fly in the face of experience – or the relative weight of interviews would be greater than it is. </p>
<p>I’m not here to argue with you. I’m just saying that decisionmakers are logical and they wouldn’t eschew a valuable data source without reason during their very difficult task.</p>
<p>And the employment example is poor. You can actually whittle down 500 resumes to 4-5 applicants – and then send your HR people to google them to death – before having them come in. Plus, if the worker doesn’t fit, you drop him during the probation period and offer to the 2nd candidate or post again. You don’t send away college admitees.</p>
<p>The sheer volume and diversity of applicants create natural inequities – what does Princeton do with the Nepalese applicant? Or rural Wyoming applicant? How is that handled versus the kid from Long Island or Palo Alto?</p>