<p>Well? How can they see our personal qualities from our short app? Is it our Essay? Is it the EC's we chose to do? (That would fall under EC though) Its not our interviews, thats for sure. So, what do they do?</p>
<p>The interview and the letters of recommendation would be two sources.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don't understand how interviews don't show your PQ's; I thought that was their primary purpose. I always thought that interviews were a fairly important part of the process, although nowhere near as important as grades and boards.</p>
<p>Nope, Check out the common data sets of Yale, Princeton and Stanford (Harvard doesn't release a common data set). The interview makes for a very small aspect of the admissions process, Stanford doesnt even take interviews into account. Interviews might help a little bit, but not much when considering that not everyone gets an interview. Interviews are used more to help the school win the cross admit battle. Still, I guess a postive interview will help you, if you're borderline. Conversly a negative interview won't hurt you very much unless you are borderline.</p>
<p>You are incorrect, Shark Bite, about the significance of interviews at HYP - and particularly at Harvard, where they expend a great deal of time and money to assure that virtually <em>every</em> applicant is interviewed.</p>
<p>Now, even Stanford, which has lagged in this respect, has vowed to begin gradual implementation of the Harvard model.</p>
<p>The moral: in these days of grade inflation at the high school level, meaningless letters of recommendation, essays of dubious authorship, and SAT scores with questionable predictive value for the "diverse" student bodies the elites lust after ... the inteview has become a necessary and critical element in the selection process.</p>
<p>I only wish interviews counted for more.</p>
<p>I wouldnt be shaking if they did.</p>
<p>^ agreed with byerly</p>
<p>good thing my interview went so well!</p>
<p>No one has yet mentioned the negatives of the interview. Not all interviews are created equal. One completely formal, difficult interrogation on the top floor of a large buisness may be much tougher than the casual chat over starbucks downstairs. There is no way to ensure that the interviewer will provide a fair evaluation, no matter how many guidelines are set.</p>
<p>Furthermore, only one person gives the interview. Only one person gets to judge the applicant. The only thing the admissions committee gets is a sheet filled with arbitrary notes and and numbers circled. While one interviewer may give an applicant a 1, another interviewer may give the same applicant a 3. </p>
<p>I agree that letters of recommendation have their faults. People write their own, teachers exaggerate, etc.</p>
<p>Harry Bauld in his book says that both the interview and letters of reccomendation are useless when compared to the essay, but even essays have their faults as you pointed out earlier. They might not reveal as much of an applicant as needed, or they might be written by someone else.</p>
<p>Therefore, there are faults in every way colleges use to judge personal qualities. Colleges recognize this and are using all of these methods to give themselves partial views of the candidate, which will hopfully add up to a complete view.</p>
<p>Still, I also wish that interviews counted for more. I am good at interviews and than at least then I would have something to counteract my abysmal GPA...</p>
<p>OH Byerly, </p>
<p>you have me worried. i still havent been contacted for my harvard interview yet. EEEK! But then again, I'm CDN. so....</p>
<p>and the other RD applicants from my school havent been contacted either. what's up with that?</p>
<p>Call the admissions office and ask. You should get an interview ... if you're not in the Yukon.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The moral: in these days of grade inflation at the high school level, meaningless letters of recommendation, essays of dubious authorship, and SAT scores with questionable predictive value for the "diverse" student bodies the elites lust after ... the inteview has become a necessary and critical element in the selection process.
[/quote]
The interview is no less subjective than high school grades. Just as different schools have different standards for an A, some interviewers are decidedly more casual/friendly/etc. than others. Applicants are hardly given equal opportunities to express themselves. If HYP really valued the interview as much as you claim, the admissions officers would conduct the interviews themselves. But if they're taking the word of an alumni, they understand that there's a certain subjectivity involved--and thus the interview cannot serve as much more than a "screening."</p>
<p>What you need to understand, "conker", is that many alumni interviewers are quite experienced, having interviewed hundreds of applicants over the years. Not all the admissions officers have equivalent experience - with a few notable exceptions.</p>
<p>All measures have some problems with them. That is why colleges use multiple ways of determining the quality of the applicant. Still schools like Yale and Stanford have said that the letters of reccomendation and essays are more important than the interview. Still a positive one can't hurt. I only wish it counted for more. Still, hopefully Byerly is right, and the interview will count for more at all the top schools.</p>
<p>letters of recommendations should count more than the interview.</p>
<p>time spent with your teachers = 1-4 years.</p>
<p>time spent with your interviewer = 1-2 hours.</p>
<p>you tell me who can make the better judgment.</p>
<p>I think what can be gleaned from an interview is whether an applicant is outstanding or abysmal. If the applicant doesn't fall in either of these categories, the interview is kind of lost among the many other factors. However, a great interview or a poor interview says a lot. And if you're not one of the best, being decent in everything prob. isn't going to cut it at Harvard.</p>
<p>"letters of recommendations should count more than the interview.</p>
<p>time spent with your teachers = 1-4 years.</p>
<p>time spent with your interviewer = 1-2 hours.</p>
<p>you tell me who can make the better judgment."</p>
<p>The letters of recommendation do count more than the interview.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What you need to understand, "conker", is that many alumni interviewers are quite experienced, having interviewed hundreds of applicants over the years. Not all the admissions officers have equivalent experience - with a few notable exceptions.
[/quote]
Whether they are experienced or not is irrelevant. Alumni interviewers have different opinions on their roles: some treat the interview as a casual conversation, while others take it more seriously and take notes. The effect this difference of styles has on applicants cannot be underestimated. On the other hand, if the admissions office were conducting the interviews, the interview could be more standardized, ensuring that all applicants receive similar treatment and that the admissions office is able to glean the information they really want.</p>
<p>namkim - I think the problem with teacher references is some teachers have a preference over certain pupils, whether good students or not, and as you will be going to teachers you get on with they might be far more likely to over-exaggerate to try and get you a spot in Harvard. Also elite private schools have a duty to the parents who pay big fees to get their kids into top-notch universities, and thus there will be more incentive for them to exaggerate your qualities.</p>
<p>conker - you make some fair points but I think they are problems with interviews full stop, not just alumni conducting interviews. You'd get exactly the same in terms of differing styles amongst admissions officers as you would with alumni. Also alumni are, I would say, better qualified to judge candidates because they actually attended the universty and know what the place is all about and the kind of people better suited to a Harvard environment.</p>
<p>The Ace is Back, your statement about elite private schools is either outright incorrect or at least scewed. Teachers at such "elite private schools" do not owe anything back to the parents. They are more of professionals who teach because of their passion, and most of them could not care less about pleasing their students' parents. I assure you that there is almost no exaggeration at most "elite private schools." </p>
<p>Also, just for the general information, there are 2 types of off-campus interviewers at Harvard: alums and employees of the admissions office. The latter conducts approximately 40 interviews each season, while the alums, who are merely unpaid volunteers, reviews 2 or 3 applicants each year.</p>