<p>I have an interview at the University of Chicago next week and was wondering what to expect. It's the first time I've ever interviewed for a college, so if anyone has advice (even very general advice, though I do know to forgo to the shredded jeans), I'd been very appreciative.</p>
<p>Make sure that you have articulated the reason you think Chicago is right for you. Remember, your interviewer knows the school well, and they will probably be less impressed with someone who only has a vague understanding of why they want to go there. Chicago's got some unique features (Core, "quirkiness," etc.) and applicants who end up here because of USNWR rankings and have no appreciation for its institutional particularities are often times truly unhappy. it would definitely help to have researched and be able to explain how you'll fit into that environment (the same, of course, goes for other schools as well). Good luck!</p>
<p>Do think about why you want to come and what you liked about your high school, and be ready to articulate that. It is important for everything else though not to be trying to give a speech. Just chat.</p>
<p>I agree with CTDreyer completely. "Because it's prestigious" or "because I think I can get an i-banking job after graduation" are not good primary reasons to choose the U of C.</p>
<p>Remember to talk positively... if you hate high school, don't say "the kids stink because they're all dumb" but rather "It's not challenging enough for me."</p>
<p>Another tip: if your interview is after 10:30, you can probably sit in on a class beforehand. If not, visit a coffee shop (there are a bunch right near Rosenwald, where the admissions office is, the closest one is in the basement of Swift Hall). Or visit the Oriental Institute on 58th and University, also a few blocks away from the admissions building. Any of these things will provide you with some conversation material.</p>
<p>(If you need course selection advice, PM me).</p>
<p>Another other tip: Don't overprepare. I recently interviewed somebody for a position who spoke like a pageant queen. She was very qualified for the position, but I think her insecurities made her go a little too cutesy and hyper-prepared in the interview. She had answered all of the questions I asked her many times before, and she more or less enthusiastically recited her responses to me. It wasn't authentic, and I didn't like it.</p>
<p>Questions I would ask if I were your interviewer:</p>
<p>-- What has been your favorite high school class and why?
-- What sorts of activities do you think you would engage in here and why?
-- If you could travel to anywhere in the world that you haven't been before, where would you go and why?
-- If you were a superhero and could choose one cause to fight for, what cause would you choose and why?
-- How would your friends describe you?
-- What is your favorite book/movie/piece of art?
-- Why do you want to come to Chicago?</p>
<p>Thanks everyone for your replies. I spent three weeks at the University of Chicago last summer, so I guess I have the advantage of already being in love with it. I'll have no trouble at all talking about what I like. </p>
<p>I'm relieved that the sample questions you provided are fairly abstract, unalove. Not that I thought they would hand me the SAT or something, but I think I can handle talking about my favorite book.</p>
<p>I'm just sort of culling what I know are common interview questions (in college interviews and in job interviews) and what sorts of things you should be prepared to ask. I don't think the interviewer would ask you SAT/ACT scores or grades, as they can look that information up. They probably wouldn't ask you a yes or no question, either, as that also sort of derails the conversational flow of an interview.</p>
<p>I think you have a major advantage having spent time on campus already. You have a lot to talk about, just relax and have fun in the interview.</p>
<p>Chicago indicates that their interviews are informational, yes?</p>
<p>How does this differ from an evaluative interview? Does the admissions office still get a write-up on how the interview went to use in their decision?</p>
<p>Sorry, can anyone explain this? ^</p>
<p>It's a euphemism; it's informational insofar as your performance gives them information which can be used against you (or in your favor, I suppose).</p>
<p>Information that can be used against me...that's an encouraging thought.</p>
<p>Mine was definitely evaluative.</p>
<p>"Informational" would mean that the primary purpose is for the applicant to ask questions and to gather information about the university. "Evaluative" would mean that the primary purpose is for the interviewer to make an assessment of the character and abilities of the applicant for purposes of assisting the admissions committee in deciding what to do in his or her case.</p>
<p>Of course, the interview serves both functions.</p>
<p>In every interview -- and I'm not just talking about college admissions interviews -- both the interviewer and the interviewee have their own agendas, which are partly the same, and partly not. And, in most cases, each one's agenda is multiple. The interviewer is engaged both in marketing the college to the interviewee, and in trying to figure out what sort of person the interviewee is and whether that's one of the good sorts of person the college would like to admit. The interviewee wants to over-satisfy the interviewer on the second point, maybe even to impress the interviewer, but the interviewee is also trying to figure out something about this college as opposed to others from the character of the interviewer.</p>
<p>The main general inteview advice I would give is (1) know your agenda, (2) have a plan for executing it in the time available, and (3) make certain that plan is flexible so that you can achieve your agenda while being responsive to the interviewer. Really responsive, not fake responsive -- interviwers rarely like it when interviewees effectively ignore them. They accept it grudgingly if the interviewee has all the power -- is a celebrity, or a high office holder, etc. -- but not otherwise. If all you do is follow the interviewer's lead, you are going to come across as weak and uninteresting, and you are not going to accomplish your agenda. The trick -- as illustrated to a fare-thee-well on every Sunday morning interview show -- is to take the interviewer's questions and to make certain your talking points are the main part of the answer. Also -- since you are supposed to have questions, too -- make certain your questions support the theme you want to communicate.</p>
<p>Also, try to make your message at least a little interesting. "I am the smartest person at my high school" and "I test really well" are not very interesting, and that information will be available elsewhere.</p>
<p>You should also be aware of the limits of the interview as an evaluative tool. Chicago probably interviews 8-10,000 students in a six-month period. That would be a full-time job for a dozen people, except it isn't anyone's full-time job. The interviews are conducted by hundreds of people -- alumni, admissions staff, student aides. There is probably a (weak) protocol for it, but minimal training, and ultra-low interrater reliability. Plus, they aren't successful in interviewing all applicants. So, even if the interview is evaluative, fairness and rigor dictate that it can't be a strong factor in the ultimate admissions analysis. It's great if your interviewer loves you, and problematic if he or she hates you, but neither is likely to determine what happens with your application without a bunch of other supporting evidence.</p>
<p>I interviewed this year over winter break, after being deferred. I was ultimately accepted and I think the interview was a definite help:</p>
<p>As far as what they ask - it seemed that they ask questions which you can answer on two levels, one which answers the question, another which both answers the question AND provides insight into your perception of the world. Several questions were about books... what is your favorite? (to which you need to see you MUST also explain why) and a follow up question... what makes a good book/what is a book's purpose? Answer solidly and genuinely. After a question was asked I wouldn't just spew out an answer robotically, I spent time to think before speaking, and I think my interviewer appreciated a well-formulated response. She was a political science major, I am going into physics, and after asking me about books and general high school stuff she asked something I didn't expect - what do you think about religion and science? This led to deep discussion (she referenced Aristotle and Plato and philosophers quite a bit, which I'm not too fresh on), make sure to build on their responses to your answers - it will showcase your ability to improvise and process other ideas. I noticed she cited several philosopher/authors, so I decided to cite some myself. Another good point - make it a discussion, not a Q&A, if you can.</p>
<p>On response style - I can't emphasize honesty enough. Be very open about yourself, I focused on a couple weaknesses that I thought Chicago could help remedy, and she seemed very impressed I would mention them.
Be Mature: the first thing she said was basically a plea for me not to freak out about being deferred, that she had already had two applicants crying that day about it. I told her I was expecting to be deferred (as my h.s. record was one of gradual improvement), I was flattered Chicago would consider me, and that if it didn't go through that time, I'd apply for graduate school. She seemed very impressed with that too.</p>
<p>On what to wear - I'll be honest, I wore a nice sweater and darkish blue jeans. It was complete ignorance that I didn't wear a pressed suit with buffed shoes and all (I didn't read about interviewing beforehand), but I think I would wear something similar, if I interview again. Though I can't say for sure whether it helped or hurt, I will say that this is an overflow of that honesty principle I'm so stingy about; that my quality of thought is the same behind tweed, silk or denim, thank you, and any college that rejects me on the sole reason that I wore a presentable, but not stiflingly formal outfit, has priorities too incongruent with my own for me to want to attend etc etc. Though I understand that it's somewhat risky and dependent upon the interviewer and such. Your choice.</p>
<p>So, that's my advice. And think of this: I have a shoddy hs. record... Freshman year I had both a C+ in Algebra II Honors and a B in keyboarding among several other B's my fresh/soph years (can you say lack of motivation?). My SAT/ACT's I would say were good - around the top of the 25-75 bracket. I have not been the president of anything, lettered in any sports, or am part of any underrepresented race. Junior year I transferred to a public boarding school, classes were harder and my grades improved (a bunch) and I researched and everything went much better etc... but the point is this - don't be intimidated by all the 4.0/2400's on this website, remember UChicago is trying to inject some fun and energy into the world's perception of them (as opposed to that Morose/Depressing/Unsocial/Bookworm one). Use this to your advantage. If you show you're an engaging, outgoing, multi-talented individual motivated to learn and capable of both working and learning, you've got a darn good shot if you have half-way decent stats. Good luck!</p>
<p>Great reflection, but I just want to put out there that I do not think on-campus interviewers at Chicago standardize their interviews. When I was interviewed, I was asked extremely straightforward questions that were designed to reveal a lot, but I too built a conversation out of them, and I did my best to compress four years of high school in that one sitting.</p>
<p>I would suggest not to cite philosophers unless you either a) know your stuff, or b) admit that you're not very familiar with it. Like a, "was it Aristotle who said that the world could be broken down into four elements?" kind of way. You don't want to fall into the trap of name-dropping when you're not an expert, and the likelihood that the person interviewing you knows more on the subject than you is pretty high.</p>
<p>Also, knowledge of dead white philosophers is not a prerequisite for admission to the U of C, and in the case of people like Marx, the less you think you know going into it, the better.</p>