<p>does the person who you got interview by make a difference?
like would it make a difference if you were interviewed by the director of admissions or if you interviewed by an admissions officer???</p>
<p>k thanks</p>
<p>I don't think it does.. because you don't really have a choice in which adcom you'd like to do your interview with. I think the chances are the same since the application don't solely depend on the interview. If interviewing with the direction made difference, everyone would just go and ask the director to do their interviews...</p>
<p>If you had a really great interview with the Director of Admissions, it might give you a small push, but as long as it's an adcom, the difference is probably small.</p>
<p>If your question is whether you can get some insight into how wonderful they think you are if the Director or Dean of Admission personally interviews you (as opposed to a faculty stand-in or the lowly "third vice-assistant to the deputy admissions counselor") the answer is "NO." </p>
<p>I don't think the Deans or Directors of Admissions are spending valuable time sorting through applications to pick the real gems -- the no-brainers -- so that they can personally take charge of the file. Unless that person thought all the other interviewers in the office were complete screw-ups who can't be trusted to impress the top applicants. So it's not even logical for such an effort to be made...and it would be a huge waste of time during a very busy period. </p>
<p>Not that I think this happens, either, but there might be special attention given to applicants who have ambiguous objective data (such as high grades and low SSATs or vice-versa) -- the kinds of black-and-white information that an office worker who opens the mail could be trusted set aside. In theory, I can see how an AdCom might want to give those applications a little more attention to see what's going on with that applicant...but even if that happened, I wouldn't think that the interviewing job would necessarily fall on the top person in the office.</p>
<p>However, I agree with those who posted before me that a super (or abysmal) interview that happens to be with the top admissions person might cut ever so slightly in favor of (or against) an applicant (as opposed to the same performance with anyone else), simply because there's some degree of clout that the chief admissions person can flex. But -- if I may check back to the real world -- the top admissions officer probably is mature enough and sophisticated enough to know that it doesn't help morale among his colleagues for him to throw his or her weight around...certainly not to help a total stranger when too much pushing could strain the dynamics of the office s/he's charged with making run smoothly and efficiently. </p>
<p>In the end, my advice is that you should simply be pleased that you think you did your best in your interview. There's really no need to sweat out the hidden meaning or profound implications of the title of the person who happened to interview you (or who didn't).</p>
<p>Are big legacies and development candidates pre-screened and assigned to the dean of admissions for interview? In that case their preference in admission is arising because of their legacy or development status not based on who interviews them. Instead the interview assignment is just part of giving a desired applicant a bit of bear hug by the school.</p>
<p>no.</p>
<p>deans of admissions deal with a certain group of applicants (eg, female PG boarders, 10th grade male day students) that is deemed tougher (often times controversial students so that someone of such stature will take the heat if soemthing goes wrong (eg, at tabor, the dean deals with day students because then he takes the heat if the mayor's kid or a the police chief's daughter isn't accepted, etc.)..</p>
<p>no bear hugs.</p>
<p>Fair point about taking the responsibility for tougher admissions.</p>
<p>Still seems to me though that showing the love to multiple generation legacies or deep pocketed applicants would be part of the sales job. While sitting in admissions offices for visits I saw what looked like that type of interaction occurring.</p>
<p>I will second that, especially at SPS, or maybe it was just a coincidence that there were so many of them when we visited.</p>
<p>Last year my son was interviewed by 2 Deans of Admission. In both cases, I commented on what an honor it was. In both cases they said that during the busy interviewing season, everyone (including the Dean) interviews. There was nothing unusual about his application that it would warrant extra attention.</p>
<p>hmm, thats a good point.
idk id be very nervous tho, to think that my interviewer was the dean or something. id rather just have a regular alumni or something:)</p>
<p>I don't think so, Blairt. I'm a regular, nineth grade boarding applicant, and I was interviewed by the Dean/Director of Admissions at at least four of eight schools, and I believe at one or two others.</p>
<p>Deans of Admissions and senior advoms definitely interview "VIP" candidates. Wealthy legacies and development candidates. I saw a case of an interviewer being changed from a teacher to the director at a school when the realized the candidate was connected.</p>
<p>This is the order:</p>
<p>Dean 5*
Adcom 3*
Teacher 0*
Old senile alum -3*</p>
<p>I guess I just got lucky, then.</p>
<p>yeah plenty of normal kids get dean interviews. i planned one today.</p>