Just had my Columbia Interview

<p>I was being sarcastic, even with my limited expereince as a first time parent with a kid applying to colleges, I know the weight of interviews for each school (some more than others). I am a lot older than you, therefore I am not going to exchange words with you on this. It is very nice that you are taking the time out to share some of your wisdom with these kids. But do it with kindness and consideration, these kids do not need to be belittled for their "silly questions."</p>

<p>columbia2002 go screw yourself.</p>

<p>Question:</p>

<p>When you get an interview, what knowledge does he or she have of you beforehand? Do they have but a blank slate? If so, then how can they verify your ECs, as some posters have seemed to imply they do.</p>

<p>Columbia2002, can let us know what Columbia is looking for?</p>

<p>
[quote]
When you get an interview, what knowledge does he or she have of you beforehand? Do they have but a blank slate? If so, then how can they verify your ECs, as some posters have seemed to imply they do.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>"Verify your ECs" isn't the best way to put it. The interviewer isn't there to determine if you're lying about ECs. It's much more that he/she can comment on your commitment to your ECs -- whether you just joined a bunch of clubs to impress colleges or whether you're extremely devoted to them.</p>

<p>The interviewer basically has all the info on your Part I, and that's it.</p>

<p>
[quote]
columbia2002 go screw yourself.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fine, but it is my honest advice to you that you do not send Columbia a letter complaining about your interview because you will be screwing yourself if you do so.</p>

<p>
[quote]
these kids do not need to be belittled for their "silly questions."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>A silly question is fine. It's pretty dangerous when misinformation is spread under the guise of "this is what an admissions officer told me."</p>

<p>
[quote]
Columbia2002, can let us know what Columbia is looking for?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Some things that come to mind, but this isn't an exhaustive list by any means:</p>

<p>Are you mature? Smart? Articulate? Passionate about your academics? Passionate about your ECs? Do you have good reasons for wanting to go to Columbia? Do you know a lot about Columbia? Will Columbia be a good place for you? Will you add something to Columbia?</p>

<p>Can someone get jerseygirl some prozac? I'm serious; at least keep her away from sharp objects. You know what? Send that letter in, and see what happens. Columbia 2002 hit the nail on the head. God Forbid he doesn't sugar-coat it for you. I guess someone with the emotional capacity of an 8 year old might be able to misinterpret blunt speech for malice. It's no one's fault that your interview "sucked" but your own! Grow up.</p>

<p>Thank you for your considerate response, Columbia2002. My main question is that the EC lists are in Part II of the application; if the interviewer sees them, then do they see the essay as well?</p>

<p>The main reason I care about that is because the essay is profoundly personal, and I want to have the maximum amount of pertinent information so to enter the interview with as solid poise as is possible.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When you get an interview, what knowledge does he or she have of you beforehand? Do they have but a blank slate? If so, then how can they verify your ECs, as some posters have seemed to imply they do.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm too lazy to search for the link, but one parent is an interviewer and s/he had an interview with a girl. The girl claimed to be very active in X (I forget if it was a political campaign or volunteer work) and the parent just so happened to be very active in the same activity. The parent had never seen the girl before and asked her some questions which the girl answered incorrectly. The parent told the college that the girl lied about an EC, so who knows what else she lied about.</p>

<p>I guess the same thing can happen if you are in X out of school activity and the interviewer's child was or is part of it too. If the parent asks you some basic questions about it and you give answers contradictory to what the interviewer knows, it probably doesn't look good. If you answer those questions correctly (can't think of a better term and feel really bad about it) then it may help you (can't hurt to have stuff in common with an interviewer's child).</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm too lazy to search for the link, but one parent is an interviewer and s/he had an interview with a girl. The girl claimed to be very active in X (I forget if it was a political campaign or volunteer work) and the parent just so happened to be very active in the same activity. The parent had never seen the girl before and asked her some questions which the girl answered incorrectly. The parent told the college that the girl lied about an EC, so who knows what else she lied about.</p>

<p>I guess the same thing can happen if you are in X out of school activity and the interviewer's child was or is part of it too. If the parent asks you some basic questions about it and you give answers contradictory to what the interviewer knows, it probably doesn't look good. If you answer those questions correctly (can't think of a better term and feel really bad about it) then it may help you (can't hurt to have stuff in common with an interviewer's child).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Once again, the purpose of the interview isn't to cross-examine you to figure out what on your application you've lied or exaggerated about. I'm sure kids who have a lot of BS on their application get tangled up in lies, but the odds are pretty slim that your interviewer happens to have grounds to catch you in a red-handed lie. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Thank you for your considerate response, Columbia2002. My main question is that the EC lists are in Part II of the application; if the interviewer sees them, then do they see the essay as well?</p>

<p>The main reason I care about that is because the essay is profoundly personal, and I want to have the maximum amount of pertinent information so to enter the interview with as solid poise as is possible.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The interviewer doesn't have your Part II (your essay, ECs, etc.).</p>

<p>I never meant to say that an interviewer was there to catch your lies (didnt even want to say that applicants lie) but it happens sometimes and it hurts chances at admission.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Thank you for your considerate response, Columbia2002. My main question is that the EC lists are in Part II of the application; if the interviewer sees them, then do they see the essay as well?</p>

<p>The main reason I care about that is because the essay is profoundly personal, and I want to have the maximum amount of pertinent information so to enter the interview with as solid poise as is possible.

[/quote]

When I go to the page that has my interview candidates and I pop up some detail about one of them, it has:</p>

<ul>
<li>Their gender, home address and phone number, and an email address</li>
<li>Their school, and 2-3 academic interests (you know, like "biology")</li>
<li>A list of 2-3 ECs they like (newspaper, crew, ultimate frisbee, etc)</li>
</ul>

<p>that's basically it. And I bet the academic and EC things are just listed as conversation-starters.</p>

<hr>

<p>Also, while extremely blunt, C2002 is really just giving away basic commentary. I might not have phrased it the way he did, but he's being direct and curt, not personally insulting.</p>

<p>In any case, I disagree with him - I think that if your interviewer was rude or obnoxious, a brief note sent to columbia AFTER they make a decision on you is appropriate. But unless the interviewer did something truly extreme, I think the odds you come across as whining are greater than the odds that an admissions officer reads it and says "gee, this guy must be a real creep, let's ignore all the reviews he did".</p>

<hr>

<p>Also, a thorough discussion of what we're supposed to be looking for in interviews should probably be the subject of another thread. The most important two things to come into an interview with are:</p>

<p>1) a handful of good, non-generic questions for your columbia interviewer. If you can think of a few to ask in response to stuff that came up <em>during</em> the interview itself, all the better.
2) A well-thought-out response and evidence of deep thought on a few key subjects, like: why you want to go to college, why columbia is exactly the place for you, and what you'd take advantage of if you were there this fall, i.e. what you'd add to the community. Even if it comes off as rehearsed, a perceptive answer is better than an off-the-cuff but generic or poor one.</p>

<p>
[quote]
In any case, I disagree with him - I think that if your interviewer was rude or obnoxious, a brief note sent to columbia AFTER they make a decision on you is appropriate. But unless the interviewer did something truly extreme, I think the odds you come across as whining are greater than the odds that an admissions officer reads it and says "gee, this guy must be a real creep, let's ignore all the reviews he did".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm 100% on board with this. I'm not sure where we disagree. I didn't consider the possibility of a post-decision note (which is actually a good idea for the sake of other applicants even though it won't affect you), but with regard to a note pre-decision, you seem to agree with my view in its entirety.</p>

<p>well, i just don't think she'd be "screwing herself" if she sends a note. The most likely thing that would happen is nothing.</p>

<p>I can also easily visualize a recruiting event where jerseygirl (or someone in the audience) asks "what do you do if you get a rude interviewer?" and the admissions officer has to answer something that sounds accomodating and understanding, so they reply as stated earlier. My BS-o-meter just doesn't go off there like yours did, I find it perfectly believeable.</p>

<p>
[quote]
well, i just don't think she'd be "screwing herself" if she sends a note. The most likely thing that would happen is nothing.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Admissions decisions are really made at the margins, and with a <10% acceptance rate, they're looking for any reason to get rid of deadweight. And a whiny letter that your interviewer was a grouchy geezer is a surefire way to pi$$ off the adcoms.</p>

<p>Hey, this post might be too late on my part but...</p>

<p>Don't worry about it. My interviewer and I did not get along. She and I almost went at it in the middle of a Starbucks. I thought she was a privileged, unattractive phony, and she thought I was cavalier. We both were right, to some degree I suppose. She thought so poorly of me that she sent a scathing letter (my counselor told me) to the adcom, who fortunately liked me.</p>

<p>Point is, the interviewer holds very little power in the process. It's a vestige of an earlier system.</p>

<p>idk... now that i think back on it... my interview wasn't terrible ... i just accidentally interrupted him a few times... no biggie. he seemed impressed with my courseload, and my work and ex-currics. his daughter took the same AP gov class with the same teacher as me and we talked a lot about that... we saw mostly eye-to-eye... its just that i was kind of uncomfortable talking b/c i was always scared of interrupting him. incidentally, the next week i went to m cornell and harvard interviews and, unlike my columbia interviewer, they were both recent graduates (class of 05 and 06) ... and it went a lot better. </p>

<p>anyway, i'm not too worried about my columbia interview b/c its always been a supersupersuper reach school for me and i doubt that i'd possibly get accepted but if i do, i'll be supersupersuper happy. </p>

<p>i guess i just learned my lesson that different interviewers have different means of speaking and that i should be open to those discrepancies and be more tolerant. i'm really glad you guys have brought forth ur suggestions and i will definitely keep them in mind for my future interviews. thanks a lot :)</p>

<p>and especially, columbia2002, you do bring up a good point, even though ur cynacism was a bit mean :) and i guess ur right, it seems really childish to point out faults about ur interviewer like that. </p>

<p>i read somewhere that only about 10% of interviews actually hurt the applicant ... so i guess that's good. </p>

<p>i hope that those of you who still have interviews in the future have good luck :) break a leg.</p>