<p>I steered away from the personal questions and generally tried to put people at ease. NorthStarmom, Harvard is probably right about the Mississipi River-type question. I thought both kids had taken AP Chemistry and were taking AP Physics with Calculus so they would have the tools to say something. Not so. In the future, I'll drop that from the repertoire.</p>
<p>mathmom and Northstarmom, my pursuit of passion was really simple. There are something like 17000 applicants for 1200 slots. Based upon what I've read on CC, around 30% of the class is filled by athletes, URMs, and legacies. [Maybe I have that number wrong]. Then maybe there are 100 kids who've already done amazing things -- discovered cure for ovarian cancer; have patented inventions, performed at Carnegie Hall as a soloist -- or have celebrity parents (all of the kids in this category that I know get in pretty much every place). But, that leaves 700 to 750 slots and over 16000 applicants. Assume that half are not strong enough. That leaves 8000 applicants for 700+ slots. And all of these applicants will be like my interviewees: good or great grades, good or great board scores, members of or captains of sports teams, play musical instruments, do social service, win prizes, are reasonably socially presentable (at least they don't drool in public), etc. What the adcom therefore is looking for, if I read CC correctly as well as their forms, is something that makes a particular kid really interesting. Why choose them from among all of the others who otherwise look roughly the same on paper? What is he/she going to add to the class other than being bright and hard-working? Some admissions person said, "We're not looking for well-rounded people. We're looking for a well-rounded class made of angular people." I assume that is why, in addition to assessing whether they could do well at a school, the schools are interested in their particular passions/talents. So, I'm trying to give these kids a chance to make their passion prominent. Then again, you are right -- these kids are 17. Most 17 year-olds, even those who are bright and hard-working, have not yet developed passions and probably shouldn't be expected to. [Of course, that leads to legions of college consultants who prep the kids to have a series of activities that demonstrate their "passion/accomplishments." Gag] </p>
<p>muffy333, on locale, I have an office in the same town. It is nice but not super-fancy -- our clients always ask us to fly to them so we've never felt the need to have an office that is more than functional. I have been having the interviews there. I had not thought about the connotations of wealth/power. Not sure it is a big deal. I'd say it is better than Starbucks -- it is quiet and they won't see someone they know -- or my house --we have two teenagers and both of this year's interviewees have been in classes with my son (who is not applying to college this year). I'm not sure our house would intimidate kids from our town. It is generally a pretty affluent town and they've undoubtedly been to much grander houses of classmates with media rooms and gyms etc. </p>
<p>afan, I do recall going to an interview myself back in the Dark Ages at an extremely elegant house of a clearly wealthy Ivy League alum. My family was definitely not in the same economic league. I probably was a bit awed, but I figured, hey this was the Ivy League I was applying to. I was sort of used to it, though. I was a Jewish kid and son of Jewish academics in a town of WASPy execs. Realtors in the town wouldn't sell to Jews and would steer them to other towns until a few years previously. I was one of four Jewish kids in a HS class of 400. Apparently, I was the first Jewish kid ever invited to the local debutante ball, which was held at a country club that didn't admit Jews (and who knows, it may still not). So, I guess I was somewhat used to feeling out of place.</p>