<p>Absolutely. I am not aware of any EC’s anywhere in the world out to “trap” candidates. To the contrary. I am looking for how the candidates come before me exemplify the traits that MIT is looking for, and how I can present them in their best possible light. </p>
<p>Even if someone really interviews poorly, offering monosyllabic grunts to most of my questions, then that does not mean that they should not go to MIT. Again, I am completely unaware of the rest of their application. I do not know that they (for example) have 6 patents and wrote their first solo article for NATURE at the age of 16, all I know is that they offer monosyllabic grunts, and are uncomfortable talking about themselves (or anything). That is not enough for me to write a letter suggesting that they be kept out of MIT. It may prompt a letter suggesting that they are poor verbal communicators, and that their application should reflect other strengths, but it does not prompt a “anybody but this guy” letter."</p>
<p>I have had to write several “keep them out” letters in my time as an EC. One for a candidate who could not name ONE SINGLE book that he had read in his time on earth that had not been assigned to him by his school, not one trashy novel or nonfiction work of any kind. This demonstrated a lack of intellectual curiosity that I considered to be inappropriate for MIT. One for a candidate who mentioned at interview that he had cheated on his SAT’s and indicated that he had committed a wide variety of intellectual dishonesty offenses in getting through secondary school that far. He viewed it as a point of honour that he had so managed to game the system that he could achieve A’s despite doing no work, but being a very good cheat. I again felt that he was an inappropriate candidate for MIT (note to other cheaters out there - this is a bad topic to raise as a source of pride at an interview).</p>
<p>Both of these are telling, as they would not necessarily have shown up anywhere else on the application but at the interview. Both of these were sufficient red flags that I felt that I needed to write a “keep 'em out” letter. Another application killer that I have personally never experienced but I have heard from a colleague was of a candidate whose English was only at the “See Spot Run” level, which is challenging if you wish to attend a university where almost all of the courses are taught in English. But application killers of this sort are also very, very rare. </p>
<p>Most of the candidates that I meet receive neither glowing testaments to their wonderfulness nor critical pans. Rather they receive a report that reads something like “this is a fine candidate who would be a worthy admit to MIT, admit them if the rest of the application is strong” There are many variations on this theme. It being MIT I need to provide evidence for all that I say, and I should note that MIT, particularly internationally, attracts a very high level of candidate. In most of the international pool, the “typical” candidate for MIT, should be admitted. However, given the realities of the numbers game (and a 3.38% International acceptance rate last year), many of the typically great students will not be admitted.</p>
<p>The point that was raised about the weak correlation between the interview report and admittance is still valid. There are hundreds of EC’s out there, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. Given that, and the wide range of great applicants, the interview matters most at the margins. If you really excel, or really screw it up, it can matter. For most candidates, it will not make the difference between getting in and keeping out. Nor, in my opinion, should it.</p>
<p>There are other exceptions of things that can come up at interview that can seriously affect admissions but the other way. About five years ago, I had a candidate who had achieved a wide variety of exceptional things, many of which they had not put on their application because they “did not want to brag”. This was from a very self-effacing candidate, and it showed an ignorance of US university admissions procedures as opposed to those in her own country (which were almost entirely based on scores) as I rushed to assure them that if there was anywhere where it was appropriate to brag, then it was on a US university application. In that case, I pushed her to submit a supplemental note to the admissions office and I prompted them that they would receive it and why. Again, I do not think she would have known to do this without the interview.</p>
<p>An MIT interview is not a “normal” interview. The purpose of it is very different from a job interview or a university selection interview (such as those for Oxford) where the role of the interview is to decide who gets in and who does not. The purpose of an MIT interview is to try to take a picture of you as a human being, to provide colour and context for the application folder, so they have a sense of how to interpret your achievements, as well as to give the candidates a forum to get their questions about MIT answered. A number of the questions that come up on CC, also come up at interview, as most applicants have never heard of CC.</p>
<p>MIT is interested in the whole person. But whole people do not apply to university, rather applications folders do, and MIT is not just interested in solely in how candidates look on paper. Ideally, the admissions counselors want to learn about the real person - their interests, their secret ambitions, the things that make them laugh - all things that don’t come through in the test scores and transcripts. That is the purpose of the interview, and all of that is good stuff, but it should not be scary stuff. Relax, be yourself, and the interview should go fine. Most EC’s that I know work very hard to put their candidates at ease, because it makes for a more pleasant as well as a more useful interview. Most candidates report that they were nervous before the interview, but that they found the interview fun. And it is fun. At the end of the day, all the EC’s that I have ever met love to talk about what made their MIT experience memorable and why it was ultimately their choice. At a basic level we are there to sell the MIT experience. The admissions office regularly hears from students who say that talking with their EC was when they realized that MIT really was a place they’d like to be.</p>
<p>Sorry for the long post, but there is such confusion and misunderstanding about the interview process. The EC’s are there to help. The interview should be fun at some level or we are not doing our jobs. I can only point you to Kim Hunter’s blog posts on the interview at the MIT site for more information, and I will continue to try to answer questions here, but of all of the myriad parts of the application, the interview should not be the part to spend time worrying about.</p>