<p>I would like to know how you feel about an interviewer asking if/where you applied EA or ED. My D has been asked that question at every single interview for RD. She was deferred at her ED school and now she is working on her RD schools. What do you think the best answer should be? I personally think it's an awkward question and we have not found a good answer. Obviously she didn't apply ED/EA at that school or she wouldn't be interviewing now. I think it's perfectly fine to ask, "What other schools are you applying?" But to ask about a student's EA/ED is too personal.</p>
<p>Just lie and say that you didn't apply ea or ed and the school you're interviewing with is your first choice.</p>
<p>I agree with waterfall. Also, I think it is very inappropriate to ask an applicant where he/she applied early.</p>
<p>lie? You recommend lying? Really?</p>
<p>oldfort, the question is awkward and needs to be answered diplomatically. I'm sure you can think of a tactful response. Please don't suggest that an applicant should behave unethically. It's just wrong.</p>
<p>I asked my son (a terrific interviewer, by the way), and he didn't see any reason why not to answer the question. I would personally feel awkward. Other questions that my kids were asked that I thought were tough was whether THIS school was their first choice school, and what were their first choice schools. My second son had no qualms telling every school that they were his first choice as he has no qualms telling every girl, she is his first choice, and with him, it is the truth at the moment of speaking. Unfortunately, it is entirely possible these types of questions are asked, and often how you carry off the answer is more important than the answer itself. My good friend's son did let the Dartmouth interviewer know that Harvard was his first choice school, and it did not change the outcome of the decision, as he was accepted. He did not get into any of the 13 schools where he applied for joint BA/MD programs, and many of them did ask if he applied to any schools that were not such programs and which schools they were. They also asked him if he would go to Harvard if accepted there over such a program. He said at the time he really did not know, that he vacillated over the subject. His father wonders to this day if those answers did not negatively impact those decisions.</p>
<p>There's always the answer a question with a question gambit: "Why do you ask?" .... or a simply statement, "I'd rather talk about THIS college" -- followed by a comment or question related to college the interviewer works for.</p>
<p>My daughter wouldn't lie. Yesterday, at her Harvard interview, she said, "I applied to Rutgers." She said the look on the interviewer's face was priceless. The interviewer recovered very quickly and then said, "I assume you got in?"</p>
<p>She has more interviews coming up and we are trying to find a tactful way of answering that question. This question has been asked 3 out of 3 interviews.</p>
<p>Oh goodie, I'm in the position of stating that my safety was my early school, too. Hadn't thought of giving that answer 'til now.</p>
<p>I agree with waterfall.</p>
<p>I don't think it's unethical to lie in this situation.</p>
<p>It's a question that shouldn't be asked -- not only because it's none of the college's business but because one of the common answers, "I didn't apply anywhere ED because my family needs to be able to compare financial aid packages in April," requires the student to reveal financial information that should be confidential.</p>
<p>If you're asked a question that shouldn't be asked, I don't think you're obligated to provide an honest answer.</p>
<p>I am an alumni interviewer, and I would never ask that question. I also don't ask what other schools the student is applying to. I don't think it's the interviewer or the school's business. If my daughter were asked that question, I would be tempted to call the school and ask whether this is really information the interviewer or admissions needs to know. </p>
<p>I heard a presentation from James Miller, the director of admissions at Brown, a few months ago. Alumni interviewers asked him the value of knowing which school was a student's first choice. He said that information is not at all considered in the admissions decision. He said that the mere decision to apply to Brown was evidence enough that the student wanted to go there; that the acceptance rate at selective schools is so low that students are likely not to get into their first choice; and that these are 17- and 18-year-olds whose opinion is likely to change by May anyway. So at Brown, anyway, any indication of "School X is this kid's first choice" is typically ignored. And I know firsthand of interview situations where the student brings up their first choice unprompted, it is mentioned in the interview write-up, and the committee still decides to accept the student. And I've seen that happen even if the student is a legacy at that No. 1 school.</p>
<p>As to what you should say? Lying is never good. How about: "School X was my ED choice, but I've learned so much more about your school in the last few weeks and I really like this and that about it and I realized how much I would like to go there." For EA: I applied to school X early action, but only because it was a nonbinding application and an acceptance early on is/would have been nice. But I don't have to decide where I am going until May, and I love this and that about your school (etc.)"</p>
<p>Frankly, I wonder if these questions are signs of lazy interviewing, people who don't know what else to ask and figure this is more interesting information about the kid.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Alumni interviewers asked him the value of knowing which school was a student's first choice. He said that information is not at all considered in the admissions decision.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't doubt this is true, or mostly true at Brown, and at a handful of other schools. Except for those who say frankly that they are more willing to take risks on students who apply ED because they know they are those students' first choice and that the students will attend if accepted.</p>
<p>But I think it does make a difference at the next tier down, or in slightly different contexts. One of my cousins is a long-time department chair at a well-known LAC. He loves the school, and is an unabashed advocate for it. He is always happy to talk to prospective freshmen, and if he is decently impressed to intervene for them with the admissions office (often -- usually -- successfully). But on one condition -- if he intervenes for a kid, he wants to know that the kid will come there. He is very up-front about it. He's generous with his time and all for kids who are interested but not willing to commit like that, and he doesn't ask for a commitment signed in blood regardless of financial aid like ED. But he's not going to push for anyone who doesn't make the school his or her first choice.</p>
<p>He can't be the only person who feels that way, either. I suspect at the tier-down-from-Brown schools, especially LACs, interviewers may have a lot more impact on the process than they do at Ivies and their equivalents. I doubt that any great candidates get turned down for saying the school is their second choice behind [Clearly More Prestigious But Impossible To Get Into] University or College, but if an interviewer is going to go to the mat for a kid, he may want to know that it means something other than a notch in the gunbelt for the kid.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Frankly, I wonder if these questions are signs of lazy interviewing, people who don't know what else to ask and figure this is more interesting information about the kid.
[/quote]
While that is certainly possible, I think it happens way too often to be purely the invention of the individual interviewer. </p>
<p>The comments above about the combined BA/MD programs rang true with me. I think they are real sticklers. My D applied to only one such program , our only state school choice. We couldn't possibly commit blindly to the costs of any of the others. Had she been able to , she may have applied only to such programs. I think that hurt her chances as showing in their mind that she was not "as committed" to being a doctor as the other students who only applied to combined programs. It was crap but hey-whattya gonna do? </p>
<p>The other times I felt it may have hurt her was in competitions for the top scholarship at schools several rungs below her top schools. D had adopted a response of naming schools that were equal to or greater than the school where she was interviewing. Schools they were competitive with or thought they were competitive with or wished to be competitive with. I think that after hearing the top schools on her list some of her lower ranked schools probably failed to believe she was serious about attending and that hurt her scholarship awards at those schools (even when she had applied EA). </p>
<p>(Edit : Then again, maybe she just stunk in those interviews. LOL.)</p>
<p>celloguy and cpt, I'm with you. I wouldn't counsel my kid to lie and my D doesn't seem to have any qualms about answering such a question either. I don't know that it's actually been asked directly but she has been asked directly where she's applying. Since she has a particular and specific interest and since each school on her list is on that list because it offers something unique, she's easily been able to turn the discussion to the merits of and opportunities offered by the interviewing school.</p>
<p>I also agree with the scenario outlined by JHS in the last paragraph.
[quote]
but if an interviewer is going to go to the mat for a kid, he may want to know that it means something other than a notch in the gunbelt for the kid.
[/quote]
I think that happens , too. That is one thing I think we miss. These adcoms can become advocates, true advocates for certain kids. I know it happened to mine at some schools. I think many of them want to know that their heroic , above and beyond , efforts are not for naught.</p>
<p>Is that a common thing? Many of my friends interview for their alma maters and they uniformly report that their reports are largely irrelevant. One friend says that he's never had a kid he's recommended actually be accepted.</p>
<p>If it really is the case that an interviewer can go to the mat for a kid, wouldn't you think it's better to be honest that other schools are under consideration before allowing such a thing to happen? Allowing the interviewer to go to the mat and then declining to attend will only hurt future applicants from the same high school, no?</p>
<p>shoshi, D was honest about her other choices. I think at Yale she might have mentioned Duke, Amherst, Hamilton , and Scripps and the combined BS/MD program. She just didn't mention everybody else. ;)</p>
<p>I was speaking of adcoms, employees of the school but yes , D had an alumni interviewer at Yale who championed her throughout the process. I can't see how her admission and then failure to matriculate could have a negative impact on others from her high school as it was based primarily on what we considered poor financial aid from Yale (and stunning FA from another :)). </p>
<p>If it did have such an impact, then I would think that's kind of petty as she told Yale she needed FA from the start. It wasn't just a change of heart on her part. (Yale also failed to adjust FA after we appealed on 5 separate items and lost on every one. 0 for 5. :( We felt she gave them a fair shot but gee, she felt bad about the alumni interviewer spending his time. He is a truly great guy. )</p>
<p>While schools may profess that preference is not considered in admission, I think that runs contrary to reality -- about on par with "The jury will disregard the last question." Not happening . . .</p>
<p>Keep in mind that many, many schools have "demonstrated interest" as a factor in the admission process. If you have expressed a preference for another school through ED/EA application, it is bound to be considered. Further, I think it does come into play when deciding merit aid offered at admission time. </p>
<p>I think it is a totally inappropriate question for an interview, and would counsel active evasion. ;-)</p>
<p>Curmudgeon, that's very impressive, but maybe a pretty unusual case. I wasn't thinking of Yale or any school at that level, but more of the next tier or two down from there. I agree, decisions made based on financial aid packages--especially when the need for FA has been communicated--shouldn't factor into a school's attitude toward later apps from the same high school. </p>
<p>OhioGolfer, if you've demonstrated interest in the EA/ED round and have been deferred, aren't all bets off? Maybe I've got this wrong, but it's been my understanding that most deferred kids don't eventually get into their ED school. So the slate is clean and the regular round offers all sorts of new opportunities for favorites. Now if you've been accepted to an EA school and don't want to give that away, I can understand the reluctance to reveal the information. Even so, I still wouldn't counsel my kid to lie. I do think "active evasion" is appropriate; I'd talk animatedly about what's attracted me to this school and why I'd want to go there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd talk animatedly about what's attracted me to this school and why I'd want to go there.
[/quote]
Always good advice. :)</p>
<p>
Impressing somebody wasn't my objective but thanks. ;) I only have the data points that I have. In this case - One kid. LOL</p>
<p>I think alumni interviewers. adcoms, and the chair of the department mentioned above do regularly become champions of certain students at all levels of selectivity and in the merit aid process , so I don't think it is that uncommon or unusual.</p>