MIT’s Educational Council is much older and larger, and well managed, than equivalent interviewing teams at Ivy Schools. For instance MIT interviewed the majority of applicant students since at least the 1970s. MIT’s Educational council is well trained, with materials developed by the MIT Admissions Office. MIT grads take the job very seriously and the tasks are specifically outlined, for the interviewer. The interviewer is graded 1-5 on every report he/she writes, by the MIT Admissions Office staff. Educational Counselors who get poor grades on their reports are coached by more experienced Regional Coordinator Counselors, so the pool of interviewers is both very skilled and very good at assessing candidates per Admission office requirements and rules.
Students that don’t meet some basic criteria (GPA, scores, curriculum difficulty )
are eliminated based on that. Many students are accepted who
may interview relatively poorly as well, so I do not see it as an overriding factor in every case. Its helpful
in some cases I believe.
Given that the interviewer has one hour with a candidate, and your teachers have four years with you. What you and your teachers say about you is more important than the interview report. The interview does help distinguish students though that all may look very similar on paper, and from similar high schools.
I believe MIT Admissions is the best admissions office in the nation, because they actually spend a lot of time reading
applications. They are well staffed and understand what a good match to MIT involves. Yet, the decisions are difficult, given the number of applicants who are all very good students on paper.