<p>A page or 2 back, I saw the idea that one’s personal perspective on this issue may be affected by one’s experience(my wording) I think I see a lot of truth in that. Some here, who do interviews in their home are good and honorable people, I presume, and they see no problem with an in home interview. Some other parents who do interviews but not in their home, as well as some parents who do not conduct interviews have more concern than the first group. I suspect this has been true for me, with my experiences influencing my opinion.
As I’ve said here, I’m in the landlord business, and I’ve told how careful I am meeting with single adult young women. An acquaintance of mine(a Maint man) works at an apt complex. He was accused of inappropriate touching of an adult female tenant while there on a scheduled maintenance task. I don’t know him, or the tenant well enough to sort the truth. But I do know he was cautioned on his job, and kept his job. There was no proof beyond the “he said-she said”; and was the first allegation, so really, no action could be taken. But now, the allegation has spread throughout the complex and it causes problems for him to do his job. It causes problems for the complex to send him on jobs. It is like he has a target on his back now, if he doesn’t do his job well enough to suit a tenant, or if a female tenant gets mad at the complex, it is too easy to make a false claim against him in hopes of gaining leverage elsewhere. I would not hire him for a job, alone, in a female’s home I lease because of the allegation.</p>
<p>In light of that, I can see people here that have no experience with allegations of an inappropriate inteview(for many reasons, as I have repeated) thinking it is foolish to believe an interview could be inappropriate. Similarly, I can see people that have had such experiences saying- how could a person NOT be concerned of the possibility of something inappropriate alleged? It is one of those deals that: there is nothing wrong with it, unless something goes wrong.</p>
<p>I liked your thoughtful post, JHS, but I’m wondering: Given the situation (an interview with someone much older than yourself whose report on you could have a substantial impact on your future, i.e., which college you attend), how would you suggest that a 17-year-old deal with an unwanted sexual advance from a college interviewer? I ask this in all seriousness because I faced sexual advances from authority figures (a step-relative and a boss at a part-time job) at exactly the same age, and I have always felt that I dealt with the situations ineptly.</p>
<p>I do see what JHS has been saying since the start of this thread, in somewhat lone voice. If so many parents make their own choice of fearing what is not a threat, it boxes most everyone else in to living in a more mechanical, stilted way. </p>
<p>Examples: While most everybody, with differing degrees of grumbling, accepts the need for SOME form of airport security, that’s because we see evidence of actual harm occurring on a regular if erratic basis around the globe at airports. If we start saying, for example, that because of the 1:4 possibility of date rape that we will no longer allow girls to be present alone in boys’ dorm rooms without a wastebasket to keep the door open…hey wait, that was the rule when I was in college! </p>
<p>Really, does everyone want to go back to all-girl dorms with the nasty-faced secretary in the parlor who’d ring down the girls when a boy came a-calling? </p>
<p>Somehow we can educate and equip naive young people to know what they should already know about personal safety, plus recognize that many are NOT naive. They already know the escape moves so don’t need our mini-lessons as much as we think. Also JHS’ point that it insults smart young women to cordon them off from being alone with adult single men until when…their wedding night? That’s kind of retro.</p>
<p>Otherwise life has no grace, fun, spontaneity, chance for adventure. I see JHS’s argument here.</p>
<p>If students requesting a neutral location is idiosyncratic, irrational, illogical, and, regarding parents, a moral failure of courage in letting one’s child go (to loosely sum up most of the attitudes here), I have to wonder why so many schools specify that their alumni interviews be held in a neutral venue. I have not done a study, but judging by posts here it seems that more do than not.</p>
<p>As I read JHS’s post 498, I was going along with him, and then Wham! He said something I didn’t see coming. When he said this: “It seems that with some parents, it’s more of an honor thing:” I though he was going to follow the colon with an alum thinking <em>I am an honorable man, and I am insulted by anyone that will not send a teen girl into my home.</em> or similar wording. I thought that was what he was going to see as the honor thing- an honorable alum wanting to interview. I think he’s hit upon part of the problem; that it is an honor thing. But I think that problem lies more with the interviewer who knows he is honorable, but can’t grasp that a stranger may not know he is honorable and so desires a neutral location.</p>
<p>“But I think that problem lies more with the interviewer who knows he is honorable, but can’t grasp that a stranger may not know he is honorable and so desires a neutral location.”</p>
<p>Bingo. I think this closes in on the reason I have felt so uncomfortable on this entire thread. I think it’s that I find astonishing that an adult who has been put in the position of evaluating a teenager could be so lacking in empathy regarding her/his feelings about this issue. I would think that any adult who has been given this responsibility should be used to sympathizing with a wide range of teenagers’ reactions, most certainly without taking umbrage. Maybe it’s my experience as a high school teacher that is informing my opinion, but many of these highly emotional reactions to something as simple as a change of venue make me queasy.</p>
<p>I suggest that as a general rule the person with the elevated level of concern be the one to “box themself in.” I believe that the “my concern must (1) be your concern or (2) be addressed by everyone else” philosophy does result in stiffling everyone’s existance rather than letting the concerned person deal with their concern. And, IMO that general rule applies to the college interview situation. </p>
<p>It is no more the responsibility of the interviewer to interview the way the applicant desires it than it is for the professor to teach only what makes every student comfortable or for the college rules to make every student feel safe.</p>
<p>I do think the experience you have had in the rental business and some posters have had as alumni volunteers are not quite comparable. First, there are many stories of rapacious/unethical/neglectful landlords. Of course, not all fall in that category, but there are enough for potential tenants to want to take precautions, just as there are enough weird potential tenants for landlords and their employees to want to take precaution. At any rate, your situation is analoguous, if at all, to that of interviewers, not interviewees, which was the perspective of the OP.
The OP suffered a great loss, and my heart goes out to her. But that loss was unrelated to college interviews or meeting with strangers. Nonetheless, I do understand that experiences such as hers do make one more fearful and cautious across the board.
It is worth repeating that so far no one has offered an anecdote showing that an interviewer acted inappropriately and the risk of encountering one who would is minimal, compared to many other types of risk. As Soozie pointed out, the risk of a car accident is greater (she should know!) but she still allowed her child to drive.
We all react differently to risk and to bad experiences. If, after reading these many pages, the OP still does not feel comfortable with the idea of an in-home interview, by all means her child should ask if it is possible to find another venue, or failing that, ask for a different interviewer. I am sure that alumni interviewers have more important things to do than sit at home feeling offended if a student turns down an interview with them.</p>
<p>This thread brought back memories of an Ivy League interview I had at my house when I was a 17-year old, back in the stone age.</p>
<p>The guy showed up looking quite distracted, nervous and sweating like a sieve. He barely made eye-contact throughout the entire event. I kept asking myself, ‘what’s his problem?’ Our neighborhood didn’t have any mansions and was kind of pleasantly unremarkable (some neighbors had great views of the lake!!!) but there was no reason for the guy act like he was cornered in a dark and blind alley behind a saloon. I and the local alumni chairman laughed about it afterwards.</p>
<p>Mummom, a request for change of venue would not really bother me (as an interviewer). But if you feel queasy about reactions of parents and interviewers about the perceived risks others seem to have about alum interviews in homes…WE feel “queasy” about your notions that the student is doing US a favor (it is the other way around), the notion that these students are too busy to have to be bothered by interviews (they should desire such an opportunity), the notion that alum interviewers are narcissistic (what do we have to gain??)…all things you brought up.</p>
<p>07Dad…I agree…the student can OPT to not take the offer of the interview. It is optional. If they don’t like what is being offered, that is their prerogative. I don’t think as an alum interviewer, that I have to change the venue now for ALL my students because someone out there does not like it. I have yet to ever have anyone hesitate at my offer, by the way.</p>
<p>“nobody’s being mean on the OP for her unique set of thoughts.”</p>
<p>So glad that you’re concerned about the feelings of the OP but not the other parents here that you continue to assault and deny that you’re insulting. It seems to be ok for those of you in favor of in-home interviews to insult those of us not in favor while all the while acting as though you’re the insulted party. I don’t get it.</p>
<p>some people are bizarrely restrictive
fear-ridden parenting style
they probably don’t mean that to be as insulting and disrespectful
Parents and students who object to in-home interviews should remember that their position is not the universal norm and may be viewed as hostile
If so many parents make their own choice of fearing what is not a threat</p>
<p>For all of you who are concerned about having your kids go to alumni’s houses for interviews, maybe we as interviewers should be concerned about these stranger kids we are inviting into our homes! I never have been but it is not all that different. Yes, the adult is older/stronger. A kid could do something untoward in some fashion too. Frankly, I find the risk close to zero of that happening either as this is all arranged in advance with a record of it, and both parties would have lots to lose if either acted inappropriately. Again, these are not random meetings among strangers.</p>
<p>mummom: What “so many” schools are you talking about? I count Cornell and the military academies on your side, and no others. And the military academies are certainly something of a special case, since my understanding is that they attempt to visit the candidate’s home and parents in every case, consistent with their regulations for non-academy recruitment of underaged soldiers. So that leaves . . . one school. That doesn’t mean Cornell is wrong – I think it’s clear that Cornell is taking the safe, corporate position, and that more colleges would do the same if they thought about it much. But it tends to show that the norm is still otherwise. Home interviewers for at least 7-8 colleges are represented in this thread alone (maybe many more).</p>
<p>As for students requesting a neutral location being idiosyncratic: Of all the students who have posted here, by my count two have said they “would”, and none has said they did. One of them, the most articulate, attends a college that does not interview and may not have applied to any colleges that did. The other I’m not sure about. Every other student has said things like “no problem”, “I preferred the home interviews”, “no one has had any problems”. From the get-go, this has been a parent issue, not a student one. And you have treated it consistently like that – a matter of parental prerogative.</p>
<p>On the parent side, my last post reflected moving past viewing the position you take as a moral failure.</p>
<p>I’m also in disbelief over the notion that the interviewers are doing the student a favor with no regard at all for making the situation a comfortable one. Center of the universe mentality, imo.</p>
<p>SV: Well those are other issues that were brought up tangentially. Perhaps they had no place in this thread and I was wrong to bring them up.</p>
<p>It also occurs to me that the essence of good manners is making the other feel comfortable. Since there is such an age and power differential, I would think the onus should be on the adult to make the young person feel comfortable in any way possible.</p>
<p>It should not matter if the teens “issues” with a home interview are cultural, due to prior bad experience or for whatever other reason.</p>
<p>“It is worth repeating that so far no one has offered an anecdote showing that an interviewer acted inappropriately.”</p>
<p>marite, I was the one who posted hundreds of posts back (!) about the interviewer opening the door in boxers and offering the drinks. Inappropriate. Although afterwards it provided great entertainment for his HS friends. I was actually OK ahead of time with son going to a home interview. But I have to say, that afterward I really thought that maybe this isn’t such a good idea. Not sure how I would coach my next son, who will be going through process in a few more years, but I believe a neutral site is preferable.</p>
<p>dcarea, thank you. I remembered reading your post and couldn’t find it. I bet at least 30 posts have said not one example of an inappropriate interviewer has been given.</p>
<p>While offering the drink was inappropriate, that could have easily happened at any public meeting location where alcohol may be served. Again, not saying that it was okay, but my minor kids have been offered alcohol numerous times in their lives by friends, strangers who thought they were of age, and relatives who knew they were not of age. It really was not a big deal as my kids knew to say “no.”</p>
<p>Here is the bottom line folks - If you (or your daughter) are slightly uncomfortable at having your 17 year old daughter interview at the home of a man she has never met - she is simply not fit to attend that school. This is apparently the first test.</p>
<p>If you or she are assertive enough to request a more public place, your wish MAY be granted but please know that the interviewer will be insulted. Perhaps so insulted you might as well kiss your application and interview good-bye for you have failed “the test”.</p>
<p>BTW - I still have not read of another single circumstance where it would be appropriate for a 17 year old female to enter the home of an adult male she does not know.</p>