Is this normal: the local Harvard alumni association sent my kid a google form to fill out. It asked preferred interview times but also asked many detailed questions including "what is your GPA " and “what is your SAT? Give scores by section.” And SATII and so on.
It seemed inappropriate somehow. If the school doesn’t provide this to the interviewers why should my kid?
Harvard is unusual in that this has been their practice. As a long time interviewer with a Harvard peer college, I feel info like GPA and SAT falsely skews the interviewer and I think the practice sucks, frankly. I never know my interviewees’ stats. I’m glad of it. Less chance of confirmation bias.
But unfortunately, this is par for the course for Harvard interviews.
The Harvard interviewer requested a full transcript from my DD for her interview. We, too, thought that was inappropriate.
It gets this kind of stuff out of the way. The interview isn’t about stats, or even academics (apart from interests) so this way the topic doesn’t have to even come up. I understand about possible bias, but it didn’t work that way in our experience.
We know GPA s vary by school. We know that SATs even, can and often should be viewed in context. And you can’t tell me that if I had three students lined up, and one had a 2400 SAT, that I’d be free from advocating for that kid over the other 2 given the fact that statistically, I see only one out of twenty admitted . I think it serves to pile confirmation bias on confirmation bias.
Many with 2400’s are rejected from Harvard. Differences in scores past a certain benchmark really aren’t that significant.
@compmom – what you state is true. But I assert that volunteer alumni interviewers, knowing that one has a 2400 and 2 others don’t will bend their evaluations and favor the higher scorers regardless of the actual interview. That’s what I meant when it becomes confirmation bias piling on confirmation bias.
THAT"s why I find Harvard interviewers’ asking of student scores and GPAs to be a very poor policy with an easy solution. But who am I?
I cannot imagine anyone differentiating students who have 2400 versus 2100. I really don’t think that is how it works.
I disagree. Even on CC I have seen a lot of people make sweeping judgements about the difference between those two scores. I myself strongly disagree with that point of view but some people do seem to form a snap judgement about point differentials.
@compmom – true story. Years ago, i was tagging along w/my Ivy’s regional rep as he visited schools in the large school district which is my alma mater and continue to recruit. He was a junior admissions officer but we had worked together 1or 2 years. He said he had proposed a new practice. It was somewhat like this: Rather than have raw scores (ACT or SAT) available to the committee, top scores (35 or 36, +2350) would be in band 1, the next would be in band 2 and so forth. This would blank out a 2400 and place that student in the same category as a 2350 scorer since the school said they recognized that it was statistically insignificant. By blanking out the actual score, the committee would be forced to treat statistically insignificant students the same. The committee didn’t adopt it. They still wanted to see who were the 36s or 2400s
While we can all vigorously nod that a 36 is virtually indistinguishable from a 35, in reality, even fully committed admissions officers hold to their biases. I’ve been around alumni interviewees for almost 30 years. They WANT their interviewees to get in. It becomes personal. With the additional bias of the “deservedness” of a 36 or 2,400 scorer? You bet they’ll push that person more than a 2,100 scorer.
I wonder if this was more true “years ago” than in the present. I don’t go into personal experience here but I know that scores are not always as important as people think- after a certain benchmark. I also don’t want to make too personal an observation about interviewers but the one I do know about in more depth couldn’t care less about scores and grades in terms of the goal of the interview: the whole point is to get a feel for a student beyond the stats.
I do think “character” is important in admissions (essay, letters of recommendation and interview contribute to knowledge of this). . I don’t think that is empty rhetoric. And various talents and interests may supercede scores.
You obviously have decades of experience in this field. I am not trying to disagree so much as reassure some people who may feel nervous about the form for this kind of info before an interview. Young people do get in with less than perfect scores and grades, obviously.
And the main goal of the interview is to have an interaction that reveals more about the applicant than is on paper and also to reveal more about Harvard than is in popular lore 
So hoping everyone who is worried about interviews can relax and be themselves, and also use the time to decide if Harvard is a good fit for them .
I completely agree with the philosophy of the person you know and I’m glad he/she looks beyond the stats. I just think that H shoots its own foot when they allow/promote the interviewers’ access to GPA and test scores.