“URMs are hardly “taking up all of the admission slots”, they only make up about 20%-30% of any freshman class”
Does that correlate with their percentage in the population or the applicant pool
Let’s shy away from turning this into a debate over URM status and admissions please 
I think the important point that the article mentions is the fact that elite schools like harvard tend to cater to the privileged - tough cycle to break because the most privileged do have the best resources to succeed in high school and thus consistently appear to be the better applicants vs lower income counterparts.
Maybe no one realizes that when you give a bright student access to a great education, they in turn become the next generation of “elites”, wanting their children to have the same opportunities they got hold of.
Maybe we could stop this cycle by offering admission to more qualified applicants who might not have had a privileged upbringing. The rub would be that they would have to sign a contract agreeing that their offspring could neither seek nor accept an elite university admission.
Maybe no one realizes is that these bright students work pretty damn hard to get these SAT scores, do their ECsw while many of their classmates are spending their time with Grey Goose and Mary Jane and are content to go to University of no one ever heard of. Plus for every bright kid who with tutoring and hard work got a 2400, there are 3 more who had just as much tutoring and tennis lessons and could not break 1900. The problem is there are just too many of us who ALL have the stats or close to it
Maybe they should make the SATs and APs harder so that ONLY the absolute best can get a 2400
My children didn’t apply to Harvard. I would be surprised, though, if Harvard encourages alumni interviewers to access students’ applications. Really?
None of my kids’ interviewers asked to see their “admissions packets.” Does he mean some sort of information Harvard sends to interviewers?
I believe few Harvard clubs require extensive pre-interview forms that serve as resumes prior to a student’s interview.
I’m glad the interviews don’t count for much, because they are all over the place! My son’s Harvard interview was informal and conversational, and his interviewer, while wanting to see his resume, made it clear that it was not to contain his GPA or test scores. Another student from our district had a different interviewer, who filled out a detailed 4-page questionnaire on her, including all her grades and scores. If there isn’t a consistent methodology, you can’t compare apples to apples, so I’m just as happy that the interviews carry very little weight. My son also had Yale interview with a guy whose boredom with the process and inability or unwillingness to engage in the conversationwas evident, so how can that possibly have gone well? Again, just as happy it won’t count for anything!
This article lost all its credibility when an alumni interviewer decided to name himself a “gatekeeper” to Harvard. Alumni interviewers have very little influence unless the person they interview turns out to be a psychopath.
I’m sorta bothered by the notion of “working hard” to get an SAT score. Since it’s essentially an IQ test, the data shows that familiarization can help, but “studying”, not really, (despite what you hear people saying).
@Tperry1982 I’d love your perspective on this.
I reread this article this morning and I was again astonished – enough to write this comment – regarding the things this Harvard interviewer “claims” he does. From my own, lengthy experiences interviewing Duke applicants and from much written by volunteer alumni interviewers for other first tier LACs and National Research Universities, I find a number of the author’s “statements” to be most unusual, if not clear apocryphal self-aggrandizement.
I wonder if other alumni interviewers have a similar reaction to his “assertions?”
The most appropriate response to this supposed “interviewer” is DELUSIONAL and inappropriate and unfounded “self-importance”! May have had too much time in between his barista jobs to post at gawker…
First, bears repeating: It hates people who can’t sort out fact from opinion from exaggeration. Or assumption or hearsay. Or “But I read it somewhere!”
And second, yes, interviews matter. They’e a first-hand, live reaction to an applicant. But no, you can’t control for the alum you get. My D’s Ivy interviewer was an ass. Retired alum and she was his first-ever meet. If you read alum reports, you can tell who’s on track and who’s distracted- and adcoms react accordingly.
As for the article, nonsense. At least it’s in gawker, not more crap from NYT. Agree, he’s a lousy rep of what a Harvard education should achieve. I wondered if it was even meant to be sincere.
LF, assuming you are not awful personally in some way, you really think interviews matter at all at elite schools?
Yes at certain places like Wash U they can be really important but at Brown or wherever (again assuming applicant is not a psychopath). My sense with the Ivy interviews was it could be held against me if I was rude but would not help me even a little.
As I said before this whole article is so counter my experience interviewing at HYPS that I am not sure I believe it. There was only one where I had any real choice as to where to meet (the multinational headquarters sounds odd and if it happened it was probably because it was in the middle of nowhere and the interviewer should not have allowed it if it was in the middle of LA, after all he is the interviewer, what does he have to lose if he says no?), the rest I went to their office or there was a central place (such as a youth center) where eveyone had to come between 12-3 on a Sunday, this happened with H and there were a bunch of interviewers and interviewees. My friend’s sister who was a more desireable candidate (won X) did get an interview at someone’s house locally a few years ago (and got rejected to her shock).
No one knew my stats and almost no one even looked at my resume. One woman when I offered said, tell me what is on it instead
Sapphire, ime, they do matter at elites, where so many kids are so strong in many ways. But as with everything, “how much” can depend. Even if a kid screws up, ime, the app review process is more about finding reasons to like a kid, then weighing that, than the opposite. Sometimes, from the written app, you can’t get a full picture and the interviewer catches things between the lines. Other times, the picture is the opposite of what a kid was so obviously and patently “selling” in the written app. Each elite has its own flavor and looks for what matters to them. I think most of the conventional CC advice about interviews is good.
It’s nuts for the author to think he had some extraordinary pull. If he is real, he was only part of a team. I don’t know about all colleges, the interviewers on this thread may comment, but most have some sort of team manager. They aren’t lone wolves out there, waiting to sprinkle fairy dust and declare a kid “in,” as the author seemed to think.
Harvard and one other Ivy were obviously done in a team, the rest seemed kind of lone wolfish to me, as in I got an email requesting to set up time to come to office or coffee shop, showed up, spoke to the person and never saw anyone else.
One thing I still wonder about, I am sort of in the if they happen to see something in my application they will take me but I would have to get lucky category, my stats are in line but not exceptional (by Ivy standards) so does it mean something that I got interviews at the HYPS and other Ivys but not at others. For example I did not get an interview at Dartmouth (friend who got in ED had a lovely interview) but did at all the HYPS. I applied on the deadline for RD. I am in a populated area with lots of other HYPS and I graduates. I also did not get any interview requests from elite schools except one (and screwed up the reply), eg not from Tufts, Vanderbilt.
Would the C/1700 student WO hooks also have gotten interviews or does it mean something when you do? I keep being told that if the last kid in my class applied they would get an interview, it is first come first served?
I also know for a fact if you do not get an interview at the Is it does not matter as I know people who were accepted who never were asked for an interview and they were not future nobles, stronger than me but not obivous definites
Actually, at my Harvard interview, we talked for over 2 hours just about the randomest things. My interviewer was so knowledgeable on so many things and I just wanted to learn more from him. I got book recommendations, connections with people to help me practice the languages I’m currently studying, restaurant recommendations, etc. We got along very well. Same with my Yale interview. That one lasted about an hour and we chatted about a lot of different random things, and he told me about himself and his own interested. As we were walking out, he asked me for advice on something regarding theater and costume changes because I’m involved in that and he was just cast in a local musical. Again, very comfortable and I felt like we got along really well. It’s not always stuffy and stuck up!
JustOne, it is absolutely NOT an IQ test and can be studied for. I will admit I did not study as hard as I could but my score from my the first time I took a practice ACT to my one and only real test was 6 points better on the composit, 4 points better on R, 10 points better in English and 6 points better in math. Plus it is very arbitrary, I know at least two people who went up 130 and 150 points to perfect scores based purely on a better curve. One took it 3 times and went up around 250 points or more from his first to his last test. However, it seems the English sections are easier to study for, the math is harder to master if you are not a math person, a boy in my class just never got it even though he is an amazing writer and really bright. One of my friends used to go to a GT school so knew his IQ but is a slacker. His IQ to get into the school was above 97%, his SAT score was not and he took it a bunch of times, just never did much to prepare. The SAT 2 Math 2 can be completely taught, it is about letting the calculator do the work for you and then using very simple math to answer the questions. Finally percentile wise some people do significantly better or worse on the graduate entrance exams. Does that mean you got smarter/stupider while in college. I doubt it