<p>epiphany, in that case ^^ the advice of many others to contact the university is sound. I would apply a version of the Golden Rule here, and maybe help prevent other applicants from going through what your student did. I can’t imagine this behavior would be condoned by the school.</p>
<p>That’s new info, epiphany. I think we were imagining something where a wife was there and may have been a little over eager, but what you’re describing is well beyond well-intentioned. </p>
<p>“Or colleges arrange for a public space so local alum interviews take place in a centralized location with a few vetted alum liaisons to oversee the entire operation. Around a dozen or so alum interviewers could be conducting interviews in such spaces.”</p>
<p>That’s a lot of effort in coordination. You really think most colleges will have the volunteer manpower to oversee?</p>
<p>Epiphany, if you are not the school counselor, please go and SEE the school counselor. You should be contacting the college. They need to know that someone who is NOT an alum is conducting their interviews, and the student was TOLD that both parties would be doing the write up.</p>
<p>I have to wonder…is the interviewer perhaps elderly, and having some cognitive issues? It doesn’t make what happened right but maybe the wife is trying to prevent others from seeing an issue with her husband. </p>
<p>In any case, THEY should not be doing interviews any longer.</p>
<p>You only gave specifics on the 13th page of this thread, and even at this point, I’m left wondering, if all the wife did is “grill” the student on other colleges on the list, how is it that “Alum could barely get word in edge-wise.” Out of 30 minutes, how long does it take to mention the other 8 or so colleges? What happened in the other 29 minutes, to keel the alum from talking since you haven’t mentioned to this point any other questions the wife asked other than what colleges the student applied to?</p>
<p>If the wife asked most of the questions, that does make it weirder. The issue of whether the questions themselves are appropriate is really a separate issue.</p>
<p>As originally presented, I still say no big deal. As amended at 2:10 AM 2/5/2014 - I think this interviewer has a problem. I do understand how “Where else are you applying?” can come up in a conversation. It gives clues as to what the applicant is looking for. All urban colleges? All tech colleges except this one? In at least one interview my older son had, it led to the interviewer to try to sell why his college was better than the other ones my son was applying to. At this point in the year the applicant can’t do the usual deflect, of “I haven’t finalized my list yet.” Given the weirdness of the dynamic, I think a tactful word with the admissions office as suggested upthread by Blossom I think, would be in order.</p>
<p>Well I looked and looked for the example of how you would nicely phrase the question, but I couldn’t find it. It might not have been Blossom.</p>
<p>To me, it feels like what really happened is being doled out in dribs and drabs – sorry, epiphany, but that’s how I see it. </p>
<p>At the beginning, it was presented in a way where one could have easily thought - ok, it’s someone who needs a wife to drive him or provide physical assistance getting in and out of a coffee shop, and most of us thought not too much of it - that’s how things go sometimes, go with the flow, kid.</p>
<p>Then, it was presented in such a way that the wife had some interaction with the student - but it seemed like it was just pleasantries and while the wife probably should have kept pleasantries to a minimum and sat elsewhere for the actual interview, it didn’t seem that bad.</p>
<p>Now it’s coming out that the wife dominated the conversation entirely and the alum said nothing. </p>
<p>It’s hard to know how to feel when the story seems to change. Not accusing you of lying or anything, epiphany - just saying that the particulars got doled out over time and it makes the situation hard to react to.</p>
<p>I am at a loss to understand why this thread is like the Energizer bunny.</p>
<p>Lots of assuming - assuming that it was pleasantries and why couldn’t the student just suck it up since “what’s the big deal”. Lots of presenting the student as somewhat of a whiny crybaby in this thread. When the wife shouldn’t have been in on the interview in the first place - at all - no matter how ‘casual’ or ‘informal’ the interview was supposed to be and no matter how ‘lucky’ the student should consider themselves to get an interview. Pretty sure my D isn’t likely to matriculate at a college that requires interviews but yeah, she’d be a little put off by this (and she might not mention it to me since I’m more likely to take really dramatic offense over it and blow it out of proportion and say something stupid to the school that might get her dropped from consideration). </p>
<p>It’s unusual enough to be distinctive. Yes, the college should know. Epiphany, I don’t think the student would suffer by reporting this to the college. An alumni interview should leave a positive impression with the student; I can’t see how this would. It does explain why you were spitting mad in your OP.</p>
<p>Pizzagirls said:
"To me, it feels like what really happened is being doled out in dribs and drabs – sorry, epiphany, but that’s how I see it.</p>
<p>At the beginning, it was presented in a way where one could have easily thought - ok, it’s someone who needs a wife to drive him or provide physical assistance getting in and out of a coffee shop, and most of us thought not too much of it - that’s how things go sometimes, go with the flow, kid.</p>
<p>Then, it was presented in such a way that the wife had some interaction with the student - but it seemed like it was just pleasantries and while the wife probably should have kept pleasantries to a minimum and sat elsewhere for the actual interview, it didn’t seem that bad.</p>
<p>Now it’s coming out that the wife dominated the conversation entirely and the alum said nothing.</p>
<h2>It’s hard to know how to feel when the story seems to change. Not accusing you of lying or anything, epiphany - just saying that the particulars got doled out over time and it makes the situation hard to react to."</h2>
<p>No. You’re accusing me of having the apparent irresponsibility not to spy on three people whom I had no business spying on, following them to some location over an hour from my house, to an event I was just as unassigned to attend as the non-alum, and not having the foresight to know that parents on CC would demand information from someone who was absent from the event. . It came out in bits 'n pieces because I DON’T LIVE WITH THE STUDENT. The very first piece of information I got was what I first posted in the thread. Because others came up with wild theories and radical reasons, I clarified some important missing information. ONLY LAST NIGHT DIDI I HEAR MORE FROM THE STUDENT.</p>
<p>Geez, Louise. Apparently now I’m on trial, both as to my credibility and as to my position. Thank you for assuming the best of your fellow human being. </p>
<p>epiphany, the point is simply that if you had <em>known</em> and posted what you most recently posted in the first place, many of us who said it didn’t seem like a big deal at first would have instead opined that it was indeed weird. </p>
<p>Nothing against your credibility. :)</p>
<p>BTW, I don’t think that “maybe he needs help and it isn’t obvious” or “maybe he is observing a rule that an adult should never be alone with a minor” are wild theories, but in fact attempts to assume the best of one’s fellow human being.</p>
<p>Epiphany, I am not “accusing” you of anything. </p>
<p>I am just saying that because the story came out in dribs and drabs, that may be why the gamut of reactions varied so much all the way from “no big deal” to “call the school and report it.” </p>
<p>No one expects you to spy on these people. But can you understand that the “meat” of the issue - that the non-alum wife dominated the conversation fully, well beyond token social pleasantries and chit-chat – was not fully disclosed until what is (by my settings) page 12 of this thread? </p>
<p>I wish we had post numbers, as I’d show you exactly what posts are giving me this impression.</p>
<p>Epiphany = your very first post is just at the level of “interviewer told student his wife would be along, isn’t that a little odd”? To which many of us said - well, it’s possible he needs driving assistance or other physical assistance, or maybe he doesn’t want to be alone with a female student for fear of accusation, or maybe the wife is just good at putting people at ease. Don’t blame us for not reacting strongly when at that point we didn’t know that the wife had apparently dominated the conversation. We just found out early this morning on page 12. </p>
<p>Sorry, a little late to this party. I interview for Brown. Interviewers have to agree to a confidentiality agreement in order to interview (every year we have to reread and agree to this before we are assigned students) where we promise not to share ANY information about applicants with anyone. A Brown alum who brought his non-alum wife to an interview would be breaking this agreement, and I am positive that TPTB would not be happy at all. The alum would either have to change his behavior or he would not be allowed to interview. I don’t care if wifey drives hubby to the interview, if she sits at a different table at Starbucks, but she should not be talking to the applicant. Students should learn to adapt to various interview scenarios. But I would think some colleges would have a problem with this situation. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If the college concerned has enthusiastic alums who believe in their college’s mission, this is not only possible, but also optimal as it avoids the issues being related by OP. </p>
<p>Moreover, the centralized location, if well selected, allows for the convenience of both the prospective applicants in the area and the alum interviewers. That and it facilitates stronger bonding between alums and the college as this can turn into a minor social bonding event among alums during breaks or at the end when they gather for drinks/dinner afterwards. One could even go so far as to term it a “working/volunteering alum social gathering”</p>
<p>Cobrat. This is completely impractical in the vast majority of situations. Maybe in some fantasyland, but not in a practical situation. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not fantasyland. I know of several colleges, including my own who make such arrangements. </p>
<p>“Isn’t that a little odd?” Yes. It started out being odd and got more odd as more information was added. Not odd that the wife came along as needing a driver for whatever reason isn’t odd but it’s odd that she sat at the table and then just downright inappropriate that she actively participated in the interview. Strange, odd, inappropriate, crossed the line, should be reported to the school and I wouldn’t blame the student if she crossed the school off her list. The school is lucky to have the child it’s not the other way around.</p>