Can anyone who has insight into the college admissions process share with me how important a good or bad interview can be in accepting vs rejecting someone. Also, are interviews more important at certain schools, like LACs, even in comparison to Ivies? Thanks so much.
I feel like interviews do not have any pull on whether a college accepts you or not. Most of the time they’re more for informational purposes for potential students. Your testing, GPA, E.Cs, and essays will matter a lot more.
Totally depends on the school. Some schools don’t offer interviews at all. Some are just informational. Ivies and other top schools often have alumni interviews that likely don’t carry a ton of weight unless you really bomb. Some of the LACs my kids have looked at didn’t interview, some just did admissions interviews, one set m son up to talk at length with the department head of the major he’s interested in as well as the head of the Honors program - I expect those interviews to have some weight. If you look at the common data set for schools you are interested in, section C shows how the schools weight different factors when deciding admission. Many schools have their common data sets available on their web sites.
Yes, Google " Common Data Set", and that will help you find out how they consider interviews. BUT, unless you are a knock-it-out-of-the-park interviewee, consider sitting them out unless they are required by a school. I have one kid who is a GREAT interview. She interviewed at the college she ended up attending, and got a larger merit scholarship than her stats and their website indicated she should be eligible for. I am convinced the interviewer decided they HAD to have her. 
But D2 is the opposite end of the scale on interview skills. Quite brilliant in test scores and accomplishments, but socially awkward and an introvert – just awful at interviews. She chose to skip the interview process, and got in everyplace she applied (U of Chicago, Swarthmore, Harvey Mudd, Carleton, and a handful of other LACs with nice merit aid). For her it was best to skip the interview process.
If you are just interviewing to “show interest”, there are other ways to do that. Visit and tour, go to information sessions held in your city, sign up on their websites for emails/mailings. Don’t interview unless you KNOW you are good at it or you have to.
@intparent: With considerable respect for your many wise posts, I’m not certain I agree with your “sitting them out” recommandation, for two interconnected reasons:
-
As has been repeatedly indicated in this, and other, threads, at many of the most highly selective schools, the interview is a comparitivey unimportant evaluation element, unless – and this truy is rare – the applcant’s performanceis almost offensively poor.
-
However, declining an offered interview could be perceived with some degree of negativity; yes, I know many top National Research Universities and LACs indicate this is untrue, but most of these same schools accept only approximately 10 percent of their candidates AND probably have 75+ percent whose credentials are distinguished, who are entirely deserving of matriculation, and who would be essentially indistinguishable from those accepted. Under these circumstances, I wouldn’t want an AO to feel, “why accept a, when b. c, d, e, and f are every bit as excellent and deserving of admission AND they cared enough to be interviewed?”.
This is solely one individual’s opinion, but I have been deeply involved with a top-ten NRU, including applicant interviewing, for several decades. In addition, you may recall a current CC thread that thoroughly discussed the issue of a socially awkward applicant’s interviewing with Princeton, where the clear majority of participants agreed with point #2, above: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/17991400#Comment_17991400.
A very tiny number of schools contact students and ask them to interview. If one of those schools contact the student to interview and they turn them down, then it could hurt the student’s chances slightly. But it in no way damages a student who simply chooses not to sign up for interviews. And a poor interview can definitely damage a student’s chances. 99.9% of the colleges in this country will not directly contact a student with an interview offer (but I know it is all about Duke for you all the time and you draw conclusions for all colleges from your viewpoint – but in this case, it is not useful for most other colleges).
Hey, @intparent, I made it EXCEEDINGLY clear that post #4 strictly discussed only the most competitive undergraduate programs, simply because the OP specifically asked about the “Ivies.” Had he not done so, I would not have provided any information. Pardon me for attempting to assist this kid. Incidentally, when were you anointed as the arbiter of CC appropriateness? Further, are you certain that 99.9 percent figure is correct (I’d guess 90+ percent, but not 99.9)?
Some ivies plus maybe Stanford (?), MIT, and apparently Duke (or you wouldn’t be posting about it). What other schools contact students directly to ask them to interview? Might be a few, but can’t be many. With a very high volume of apps these days, I honestly think most colleges consider interviews a bit of a nuisance, and only offer them because they keep alumni happy and involved (and possibly contributing because they feel connected to the school because they “help” with interviewing). I would say that means 99.9% of schools are NOT contacting students directly to ask them to interview.
@intparent: If one assumes ONLY four Ivies, four other top universities, and four LACs have “contact interviews” – and 12 is, in my opinion, an EXTREMELY conservative guess – there would have to be 12,000 colleges for your 99.9 percent (.999) figure to be correct. I believe there aren’t even one-third that number of four year colleges in the United States.
What four LACs have “contact interviews”? Swat does not… I have not heard that Williams and Amherst do. I believe MIT does – who else? What “top universities” do? U of Chicago does not. Michigan and Berkeley don’t. I am seriously interested in a list, because I think the number is very small. Let’s say there are 12… then it is actually 99.5% of the four year colleges. I think alumni who interview (like you) like to think it is a valuable part of the process and it hurts a student who doesn’t participate. But for almost all colleges, including many “top” schools, it is really not relevant unless the student performs poorly,and most students aren’t really great interviewers. So as I said in my first post – unless you KNOW you are a great interviewer, or you are applying to one of that teeny tiny slice of colleges that ask you to interview, don’t do it.
I’ll bet serious money that I’ve posted at least fifty times on CC that interviews are almost always inconsequential in the admissions decision. You state: “alumni who interview (like you) like to think it is a valuable part of the process.” I cannot speak for others, but for me that is entirely erroneous and you’re again simply spewing unsubstantiated garbage. So, @intparent, here’s a challenge: please find one CC thread where I indicated the interview’s results (not the unwillingness to interview, they are quite different) are important. You won’t be able to do so.
@intparent: I spent only about ten minutes researching your question concerning “contact alumni” interviews. Based on this minimum research – I simply googled X admissions interviews – I found that over 67 percent of the schools I checked conducted “contact” alumni interviews – a FAR, FAR larger percentage and number than you indicate. Include among those who do so are:
- Cornell (I was surprised by this, and I do not know if all Cornell undergraduate schools do so)
- Northwestern
- Claremont McKenna
- Middlebury
- Clark
- Duke
- MIT (interesting statistic: MIT states that 10.8 percent of those who interview are accepted, whereas only 1.0 percent of those who do not are)
- Bryn Mawr
- Smith
- Harvard
- Yale
- Princeton
- Brown
- Columbia
- Dartmouth
- Penn
- W&L
- Stanford
- Washington University (StL)
- Vassar
- Holy Cross
- Kenyon
- Union
- Oberlin
Obviously, this was not exhaustive research; I simply tried randomly to pick several private schools from each prominent category (LACs, Ivies, other first-tier universities, former-“Seven Sisters,” etc.) and was surprised that most, in fact, conduct alumni interviews. This clearly contradicts your assertions. Moreover, I would guess, based on extrapolation, that dozens (perhaps hundreds ??) more institutions do so.
You can REQUEST an alumni interview. But a small number of students at those schools do so, and it isn’t actually going to help pretty much any of them to interview. Why take the risk? I never said interviews weren’t available. What I said is that only a tiny number of schools require them or reach out and ask a specific student to schedule an interview. My position is that if they don’t come to you, you shouldn’t go to them unless you are sure you are a very, very strong interviewer. Which hardly any high school students are. There are plenty of lower risk ways to “show interest” or learn about the school.
Interviews are far less important than teacher LORs. Unless your interview blatantly thinks “what an arrogant, self congratulatory brat!” you are fine. This may not be inaccurate, but my UPenn interviewer(terrible one, must have been a party freak in Upenn.He was wearing a JUMPSUIT!!!) said it’s only 2% important.
Is 2% big? No. However, considering that top schools are very very selective, I would still have an interview.
Just one data point suggesting that the applicant should interview if they would like to improve chances of acceptance. Note that MIT does not contact students for interviews. They are optional and student-initiated.
@intparent said
MIT’s admissions website directly contradicts these assertions (i.e., they state that “many” schools contact the applicant for an interview, and they state that being accepted correlates strongly with attending the interview). From http://mitadmissions.org/apply/freshman/interview:
MIT is different, you can’t draw conclusions from them. I have a ‘STEM’ kid – MIT really wants to make sure they aren’t accepting someone who is going to make meth in a bathtub, create their own batch of Agent Orange in their room, or try to build their own nuclear reactor on the side. Emotional stability has been an issue there in the past, too, partly due to the huge workload and academic pressure. Their admissions department does strongly recommend interviews, but for somewhat different reasons than most other schools.
Also, note that there is a process at MIT to have your interview “waived”. And they give you the person to contact for your interview in the portal after you apply. This adds up to “mandatory” at MIT.
I never said a kid applying to a school with a “mandatory” or " nearly mandatory" process should skip it. I am saying that it is hard to help yourself and easy to hurt yourself in the process. So if it is optional, stay away unless you are sure you are very strong.
OK, I will step out @intparent. You are redefining terms to bastion your position and being defensive. MIT explicitly DOES NOT require interviews. They are optional. The student must actively request them.
Emotional stability has been studied and found NOT to be a particular problem at MIT; it is more publicized than at some other schools, but not more prevalent.
I have never heard, except from you, the reasons for an MIT interview that you espouse. A rich imagination does not directly translate to facts.
The interview at MIT serves the same purpose as with any other school. I highly doubt that a one-hour meeting with a stranger would ferret out someone like this. Really?
That was really a fantastic post.
Ah… you are so literal. There are a tiny number of schools who essentially “require” interviews even though they may not say “required”. A few Ivies, MIT, and ?? not sure who else, maybe Duke based on the other posts here. If they say only 1 in 10 students are admitted at MIT without the interview, that they strongly recommend the interview, and they give you the connection to your interviewer on the portal, then “duh”. You would have to be dumber than a rock to not interview there.
Don’t tell me how stable MIT students are and how that has nothing to do with why admissions might want someone to meet applicants face to face:
http://web.mit.edu/~sdavies/www/mit-suicides/
And I do know that other tech schools have had those specific problems I have listed in past years. I am pretty sure given the bright but heavily-male-and-likely-somewhat-immature population at MIT, they have these things going on as well, and would like to avoid them if at all possible.
But the OP originally did not ask about MIT, of course. OP, if the college does not provide you with a contact for an interview or explicitly state that it is required, think long and hard about whether to seek one out. I think many posters on this thread either (1) are alumni interviewers themselves, or (2) are students or parents who have blithely assumed that interviews are something you just should do. You can keep better control of your application and message if you DON’T interview in MOST situations UNLESS you are very sure that you are a strong interviewer.
@intparent, I categorically reject this assertion. It is not supported by data:
Why more immature than other schools? I don’t get it? And longstanding 55-45% Male/female is “Heavily male”? Are you a politician? Where do you get these statements, really?
It is conjecture, just like the meth-lab and agent orange culture you (singularly) are privy to. Why do you make this stuff up?
You said that MIT cannot be seen as a model of how admissions departments view interviews, then proceeded to make up your own theory (with no substantiation). The data are only available for MIT, no other schools have provided it. There is no reason to assume that other admissions processes are vastly different, unless one thinks, as you do, that MIT uniquely screens for social deviants and mentally unstable applicants, which besides being preposterous, has no factual backing.
MIT admissions use of interviews is likely a good proxy for interviews from any “elite” school. If I were an applicant, I would heed the published advice on an elite school’s admissions website before I would take unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unreasoned opinion from a discussion board.
Ah… where do you get your assertions? If I read your posts correctly, you have not even had a kid get through the admissions cycle. Did the OP even ASK about MIT? You have been derailing this discussion by nit picking over whether they “require” an interview. What does it matter if the OP is not asking about MIT? We visited 40 colleges with our kids, and have put 2 through the application process. These were not state universities, but top colleges and LACs. I KNOW whether the colleges tell kids who have applied who their interview contacts are and state on their websites that 9 out of 10 students admitted have interviews. MIT is no proxy for any other school in the country (they would tell you themselves that they are unique in many ways, and it is true, both good and bad).