<p>^^ Jaimeleschevaux (haha) we must be twins but not. I got deferred SCEA at Yale, didn’t you too? Now I’ve had a Princeton interview and a Harvard interview and my Princeton interview was fantastic and my Harvard interview not so good. I felt like the Harvard old white guy really didn’t know anything about the school today and was kind of rude. The Princeton woman was about 25 super smart and really nice. I also visited the campus and even though it was buried in snow I fell in love with it. Now Princeton is at the top of my list (if I get accepted), Yale is second and Harvard isn’t even on the list or at least not toward the top. We really had different experiences.</p>
<p>But… it IS the applicant who needs the school, not the school who needs the applicant. So… what’s your point?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nevertheless, he’s an experienced interviewer for a peer institution, and also a very resourceful poster here on CC. Why would we not take his word? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They probably do. Still the interview serves the college as well. True, the interview also serves the applicant , but I doubt that alums would commit so much of their time if it had nothing for their institution.</p>
<p>@climbingrose: Hahahaha we are almost twins! I got deferred SCEA too. My Yale interviewer and your Harvard interviewer sound similar - my Yale interviewer was seriously ancient (like, before the coed days) and couldn’t tell me anything relevant about the school. </p>
<p>Our stories have an interesting point, though. I’d love to be able to compare our acceptance letters/where we enroll versus how we thought the interview went.</p>
<p>toughyear: May I address your umbrage at my sentiment? Indeed, I’m an interviewer and recruiter for a Princeton peer college. Let me give some context to my statement. I know that positive and informative interview sessions serve students in this way:</p>
<p>1) they (hopefully) get a positive view of the college (I feel terrible for poster #18. If I were your parent, I’d be POd at the interviewer too)</p>
<p>2) students can get more info to perhaps make their decisions clearer (if they get accepted)</p>
<p>3) students can interact w/an alum of their target college and get some good interaction and perspective and advice</p>
<p>4) I plainly tell interviewees beforehand that this is an opportunity for them to tell my admissions office anything more about themselves that’s not contained in the app file already. Often, they take advantage of this opportunity and I’m happy to be the vehicle for this information.</p>
<p>However, do not be mislead into thinking that, while the student can often be served greatly by the interviews, that underlying the whole venture, the college doesn’t seek to advance itself.</p>
<p>1) knowing of the inherent limitations to a subjective 45-60 minute interview by an untrained alum volunteer, the colleges nonetheless can sometimes glean nuggets of information that usually confirms other areas of the student’s file. Sometimes this is positive information that nudges the student to acceptance. And sometimes this is NEGATIVE information that nudges the student to being rejected. I’m not saying this occurs often – but it occurs. Each year, I get one or two students whom I leave saying to myself “What are they thinking? Seems like a good kid but not competitive at all.” I have a friend who is a Harvard interviewer who was aghast at one student’s poor social interaction (read: noticeable personal hygiene issues) and noted quite prominently in her writeup.</p>
<p>2) having done this for 21+ years, I realize that I’m an advocate for my college first and foremost. I put on my PR hat and try to represent it well, in college fairs and interviews. I know most people I meet will not apply or among those who do, will be rejected. That’s just the fact. However, I want them to remember me as a positive about their interaction with my college. I profusely thank each applicant I meet – sincerely. Sometimes I meet students whom I find myself being an advocate. I submit my write up and, come April 1st, have my fingers crossed. I celebrate with those who get in, I’m quietly disappointed at those who don’t – but I don’t second guess my college. I trust the system and am content with their decisions – especially since I know I have only a limited slice of information, unlike them.</p>
<p>“Remember, the interview serves the college, not the applicant.”</p>
<p>Again, I re-state this so students aren’t so oblivious to the fact that some level of scrutiny is being done during the interview. </p>
<p>I find no incongruity between my statement and the fact that we, selective colleges, are very grateful that students such as yourselves, desire to go to our colleges. I know it can be an excruciating process and personally, try to make it as comfortable as possible. </p>
<p>Cynically, one could say that positive interview experiences soften the blow of the many rejections that follow – and the college doesn’t want legions of angry people out there afterward. I don’t subscribe to this theory as frankly, I want to treat others as I’ve been treated.</p>
<p>On a side note toughyear: your thoughts on Yale’s aggressive courting of sci/math kids is notable. To be honest, I haven’t been following the chatter about it. Your analysis gives me something to look out for.</p>