<p>For those of you how have enough difficulty with the topic in question and are looking for something slightly “lighter” I would suggest the following thread from the College Admissions Forum:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/424935-favourite-awkward-interview-moments-43.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/424935-favourite-awkward-interview-moments-43.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I have had female friends in this exact situation, and they have always preferred male roommates. They prefer living with men – and they are not looking for romance, nor has romance happened. And the male roommates were not gay, either. </p>
<p>Go figure.</p>
<p>Legitimate, though it is tempting to be assuaged by the ‘authoritative title’ of alumnus, as a parent, I would find out the name and status of the ‘interviewer’ and I would do all I can to verify this man’s status as being bona fide. Then I would ask to be directed to the proper office within the university who could verify the man and whether it was ‘proper’ to hold interviews at a private home. If it is considered normal protocol, I personally would call this into question and disagree vehemently with such practice and would do all I can to ensure any interviews with my daughter were done at the school and not someone’s private residence. She would have no legal protection. If something inappropriate did take place the burden of ‘rational reason’ would be put on the parents allowing their daughter to attend a private residence. All he would have to do is deny it. All I see in this is nothing but potential ‘moral hazard’.</p>
<p>“It’s an ivy league alum. What are the odds they’re a pedophile?”</p>
<p>A reminder that pedophiles are people interested in having sex with children, not 17, 18 or 19-year-old teens. I think that people interested in preying on 17, 18 or 19-year olds could find easier ways of doing that than by volunteering to be alumni interviewers.</p>
<p>" I don’t think any of the Ivies actually consider them interviews."
Harvard considers them to be interviews, and tries to interview all U.S. applicants. I’ve had admissions officers contact me with questions about my reports. While I don’t think the interviews are the most important factors, I think that bad or especially good ones can tip a solid applicant out or in.</p>
<p>At first blush I would imagine it is a safe and legitimate situation. This meeting, after all, was arranged by an organization which wants to make you a customer. If your daughter is uncomfortable with the situation then she should ask for a different location. Since they are trying to earn your business (even at an Ivy they still need to please customers) this wouldn’t bother them too much. I do agree with some of the other comments though, the question really ought to be how does your daughter feel about this? When she is at college she will have many opportunities to meet new people (aka, strangers) and she will need to develop the skills needed to ensure her own comfort and safety in those situations. While your concern for her is completely understandable, this opportunity is probably the safest way in which you can let her spread her wings with regard to this topic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cold January winters where there is snow on the ground increase the probability of someone being a molester? Relative to if it had been summertime and 80 degree weather during the day and 70 at night? I don’t get it, mummom. I understand that you weren’t comfortable with your S being at this gentleman’s house, but I"m failing to understand what the cold January winter with snow on the ground had to do with it.</p>
<p>
Honestly, I don’t get this. If you think this is a moral hazard, how can you possibly contemplate letting your child go away to college at all? Folks, there needs to be some reasonable evaluation of risk.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a different situation. It is a group event. There is safety in numbers. I think, though, that serving alcoholic beverages at such an event is kind of stupid.</p>
<p>RacinReaver…whoa MOST are 2 hours! You must be a very thorough interviewer. My D’s have all been in the 1 hour range so far. I’ve been reading on CC a lot and seems like an hour is pretty average. Of course there are 30 minutes, and I heard of 90 min…and I’m sure there are 2 hours as well. I imagine a person tends to let down their “guard” after that length and you probably really feel like you get to know them more, eh?</p>
<p>Clearly, a male interviewer forcing himself on female teen is the most interesting to talk about. It is easy to argue the liklihood of such a thing is unlikely. Even most of us that are apprehensive of such a meeting agree it is unlikely. And gosh, if that were absolutely the only concern that existed for me, I might have been swayed by some arguments here. But it isn’t.</p>
<p>Factors that are still in effect for me:
the arrogance of any interviewer that says interviewee must come to his house on the grounds that since he is volunteering to help school with interviews, he insists on being at his most comfortable and refuses to go to a neutral location. An attitude that says <em>you’ll come see me, my way, or you won’t get in</em> He’s a volunteer interviewer, not the Chief Admissions Counselor. Naturally to offer his house isn’t arrogant, but to require it, is.
I am concerned a guy might say his family will be home, but may not be.
I am also concerned of other violence, thefts, as well as claims of violence or theft- true or false- that could be weighed against either party. Such claims would be seriously damaging to anyone whether true or not. Any person attending such an interview could easily be accused of a theft.
When I say there is a risk, I don’t just mean a male interviewer will rape a schoolgirl unless someone keeps him in line. Not at all. I mean there are many more possibilities for harm-real or alleged- to come to both parties. I do not mean it will happen, or I would choose the word “certainty”. But I do not, I say “risk” and I refer to both parties. It is so much easier for the student to be independent enough to ask to meet in a public place, rather than a timid sheep that follows any suggestion.</p>
<p>I’d like to join our town’s council. I’d like to help our community. I’d like to volunteer my time. The council meets every Monday, early evening. I work every Monday evening. I cannot volunteer my time to the council, and expect them to change meetings to 4:00 a.m. to accommodate my schedule. As a result I cannot join the council unless my work hours change. I’ll have to choose to volunteer my time other ways.</p>
<p>“It is so much easier for the student to be independent enough to ask to meet in a public place, rather than a timid sheep that follows any suggestion.”</p>
<p>Exactly. As parents, we try to teach our kids to trust their instincts, to avoid situations that might (emphasis on the might) place them in danger, to use the “buddy system” for safety purposes. It’s just common sense to me that a kid should feel empowered enough to ask for a change in venue. Even if you perceive the risk as a small one, there is still risk.</p>
<p>If the interviewer would think less of anyone for requesting to meet in a public place, that doesn’t say much for that interviewer or that school in my opinion. I honestly don’t think most interviewers would think anything of such a request.</p>
<p>
Personally, I would be insulted by such a request, and would think that the student was irrational. I would probably try to get over it and give the student a fair interview. But to me, it would be like the student asking to bring a bodyguard along to the interview.</p>
<p>I’m wondering what exactly do the parents that are uncomfortable with a home interview anticipate might happen. Do they actually fear the possibility of physical violence or rape, in which case the perpetrator could hardly get away with it in such a setting? Or do they worry that the interviewer might make a pass at the 17/18 year-old interviewee? If it’s the latter concern, so what? I mean really, a person that age should absolutely know how to handle themselves in that situation by just saying no and getting up and leaving. If parents haven’t taught their kids how to react to unwanted advances, including by older people with some kind of authority, they had better do so fast before they are off to college. That kind of situation could happen anytime once they are on their own.</p>
<p>Younghoss, I think you don’t get what has been emphasized repeatedly on this thread, that these alums really are doing the kids a favor. It is up to the applicants to adapt to the interviewer’s needs or find some way to make arrangements for an alternative plan with someone else, including traveling to another region, if they don’t want to accept the conditions offered for an interview.</p>
<p>How about people who have their primary office at home (sometimes with a separate entry, or at least clearly delineated as a home office space)?</p>
<p>There’s an interesting common pattern in this and other threads about elite-college admissions practices. Both parents and children love the idea of the children going to elite colleges, in part because that offers the opportunity to be “in the club” of business and government elites. But they chafe at the values of the “club”, whether it be holistic admissions or in-home interviews.</p>
<p>Of course, it’s always fair to question an institution’s values, or to suggest better ways of doing things. In the end, however, fundamentally you can’t have it both ways – you can’t ask to be admitted to the club but refuse to behave like a member.</p>
<p>Great point, JHS – and I think part of the “club” that JHS references is handling social situations with ease. </p>
<p>Leaving aside the home-interview situation for a moment, the student who is supposedly “flustered” with the demands of meeting an interviewer in a Starbucks <a href=“and%20by%20flustered,%20I%20don’t%20mean%20coming%20on%20CC%20and%20asking%20questions%20such%20as%20%22do%20I%20order%20my%20drink%20before%20he%20gets%20there%22,%20but%20I%20mean%20truly%20flustered%20and%20clearly%20uncomfortable%20such%20that%20it%20impacts%20the%20interview”>i</a>* isn’t demonstrating the skills necessary to be in the club, IMO. </p>
<p>I understand some of the logistical reasons for home interviews if there aren’t public places readily available, the interviewer has other time demands, etc. but to argue that it’s preferable because the kid will be more at ease in a private home than in a Starbucks doesn’t fly with me, IMO. If the kid can’t handle a meet-and-greet at a Starbucks at this age, he’s not ready for college.</p>
<p>“…insulted by such a request and think that the student was irrational.” This is truly eye-opening to me. Though nsm mentions 17, 18 and 19 year olds, I’m not sure what high schools she is familar with. Most of these kids are seventeen. Seventeen years olds are minors. The egotism involved in being “insulted” because a senior in high school might want to exercise caution when meeting a strange man is astounding to me. By the way, pedophiles have sex with pre-pubescent children–yes. Why is that relevant? Teachers and scoutmasters who deal with high school students (whether they be seventeen or eighteen) are still background checked. If alumni interviewers are going to insist on meeting in their own home or being “insulted,” they most certainly should be background checked, imo. </p>
<p>Perhaps it would be easier to do away with alumni interviews altogether. Despite nsm’s claims about Harvard, how are other colleges able to let the great unwashed into their institutions sight unseen? Really they strike me as being an outdated anachronism and affectation, akin to interviewing for a spot at the country club. Even our local swim club did away with those several years ago.</p>
<p>Just saw JHS’s reference to a “club.” How apt. What the “club” should do is catch up to the times.</p>
<p>If I were an adcom communicating with alumni interviewers, I’d probably adopt the policy that Cornell has – that they should not occur in private homes, that they should occur in coffee shops, libraries, work offices, and such, precisely because of the liability issue.</p>
<p>If my spouse or I were to become alumni interviewers, we would conduct them at public places simply because we don’t want to have the liability issues of a false accusation. </p>
<p>If my daughter were to be invited to a private home for an alumni interview, I don’t think I would necessarily <em>like</em> it – I wouldn’t be jumping up and down about it versus meeting at the Starbucks – but realistically, I just can’t see the risk as being appreciable in the absolute to make it worth forbidding.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is exactly why, in the very early stages of this thread, I suggested that the student contact the interviewer and say that her parents were uncomfortable with the situation and that the student needed to respect her parents’ wishes. I even suggested that, if it were true, the student explain that her parents are from a cultural group that frowns upon one-on-one meetings between a man and a woman in a private setting. I felt that interviewers like you would be less offended by a student who was trying to obey her (perhaps misguided) parents and/or comes from a culture with standards different from your own.</p>
<p>But I also think you’re wrong to be insulted and to believe that the student’s caution is irrational. The posts on this thread indicate that quite a large number of people share the OP’s concern about interviews being held in the interviewer’s home. Others do not share this concern. But the proportion who do share it is high enough that it doesn’t seem reasonable to regard such a concern as “irrational.”</p>