<p>Well, if she holds by her word and writes it tonight, it’ll be there for them to review tomorrow (Assuming she submits it by email). If they are in fact still reading these reports at this stage, then they will certainly read it by Thursday. Good luck to you sir.</p>
<p>^I always thought Stupefy was a girl. Am I suffering from gender confusion?? :o</p>
<p>IM A GIRL! ;)</p>
<p>check out my “gender” under location: pennsylvania</p>
<p><em>withers in embarrassment</em> This is the second time in less than 30 minutes that I’ve made a near-fatal error.</p>
<p>Ah, my apologies, good lady. I hope I have not offended you. :)</p>
<p>Hmmm. so someone who posted that reviews stop on the 20th was wrong. Ok, anyway if it went well it cannot harm your chances. Well done 
glad to hear that it went well!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t accuse me of being wrong. After all, I wasn’t the one who wrote the article. Whether Harvard adheres to what it claims is an entirely different matter.</p>
<p>^Phew, someone’s feisty! 
</p>
<p>^ My assertion was that the blame was not directed at the correct individual. It’s akin to blaming the speedometer of a car for a speeding ticket.</p>
<p>^
I don’t think anyone was blaming you, exactly. The Harvard Gazette probably provided the rough outlines of the selection process dates, which you proceeded to post here as absolutes. That was probably Idiosyncra3y’s point. </p>
<p><em>quickly extricates self from argument that will place said self in the path of mifune’s rage</em></p>
<p>No, actually you’re misinterpreting my mood; I hold no hostility. It is true that application evaluations do conclude at a point several days before decisions are released, although I do realize that interview evaluations may still be arriving. But considering the triviality of the interview in relation to other qualifications (excluding extreme cases, which are usually disfavorable) I find it very difficult to believe that an interview will actually break any equilibrium at this point.</p>
<p>^If they did request an interview and it’s not that the interviewer procrastinated horribly before calling Stupefy, then it can’t exactly be a bad thing; a weak application wouldn’t be enhanced by an interview, but a strong one could be pushed into the “admit” pile. Provided that the former situation I stated is the one under which we are operating, the interview will not “break any equilibrium,” as you in your awe-inspiring grandiloquence stated (I really do love the way you write lol), but it may certainly enhance certain aspects of what I’m sure is already a very strong application.</p>
<p>And I don’t know why I’m even bothering to discuss this. <em>goes back to reading manga</em></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, of course. Harvard attempts to accommodate all applicants regardless of their demonstrated qualifications (there are exceptions, particularly in certain foreign residences).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe; concerns regarding the evaluative worth of the interview are quite pervasive on this website but most agree that it isn’t that substantial relative to other qualities. Many will even claim that undergraduate interviews are merely instituted for the sake of enhancing student interest or to keep alumni/ae actively involved in the affairs of the university. For instance, I have been (fortunately) admitted to two “top 10” universities without an interview and I clearly believe that the lack of one ultimately has no negative bearing on one’s candidacy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure, if there are inconsistencies between what is stated on an application and what is reported during the interview, that may understandably raise some concerns. Conversely, if the student can provide any bit of effective and insightful commentary on what was written within the application, that will certainly reflect nicely and suit the admission committee’s desire to see that it is evaluating a genuine individual.</p>
<p>Don’t worry, be happy</p>
<p>
You are forgiven, sir/madam</p>
<p>CC is so sexually ambiguous. actually, I quite like being a man. it’s empowering ;)</p>
<p>HA jk im a total feminist</p>
<p>Excellent, I wouldn’t want an angry mob of feminists following me around on campus! 
Once again, all the best in your future pursuits.</p>
<p>my interview was on the 19th!!</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Unlike most other elite colleges, Harvard SAYS that its interviews are evaluative and that it pays attention to them. Harvard interviewers believe that, too. They may not be as meaningful as a Nobel Prize, but apparently Harvard interviews are not meaningless.</p></li>
<li><p>There is no chance, none, that people scrambled to do a meaningless interview on March 27. If Stupefy was interviewed on March 27, it’s because the interview could make a difference.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Well said, JHS.</p>
<p>Sorry mifune, I may have misphrased that to sound angry at you. (“How dare you tell me that evaluations ended on the 20th!”) Sorry about that. Unintentional I assure you.</p>