<p>I've read in Northstarmom's post that Harvard interviewer will rank you on a scale? For Yale I've heard from authority that interviewer will rank you on a 1-9 scale, so does Harvard interviewer rank on the same scale as Yale intervier does? Does the number that the interviewer put down really matter?</p>
<p>My impression is that interviews count for more at Harvard than they do at most other schools, but still far less than most other parts of the application (GPA, SATs, ECs, etc).</p>
<p>I would prefer some current or ex-Harvard interviewers to answer this question.</p>
<p>@aegsch: just<em>forget</em>me IS a current Harvard interviewer. </p>
<p>As to a scale, the H version goes from 6 to 1, with 1 being the best, and 6 being basically hopeless. There are gradations at each level, +/neutral/-. Frankly, as far as i can tell, because different interviewers are likely to interpret the scale differently (i.e. some may give out lots of 1s, where as some are hesitant to do so) the admissions office doesn’t really give a lot of credence to the scale. Even ‘2s’ given my the same interviewer may mean different things, depending on the mood of the interviewer on a particular day and so on. The thing that really matters is the written portion, and only if the interviewer writes down relevant things. As always, the admissions office recommends ‘show, not tell’. Interviewers are people, and bring a load of biases to the interviews, just like any other sentient being. The more ‘facts’ and ‘observations’ a report contains, the better. </p>
<p>With that said, I tend to be a bit more cautious with my ratings; I’d like them to mean something. I’ve interviewed a decent number of candidates–with a few rather impressive ones–between the last two admissions cycles, but my overall ratings have hovered in the range of 5+ to 3+. I’m trying to save the 1s and 2s for genuine superstars.</p>
<p>Thanks, Windcloud.</p>
<p>I didn’t describe the interviewer’s ranking scale, because I see no way that it could be at all relevant to an applicant. I think you did a good job of explaining both the system, and why it doesn’t really matter if you’re on the applying side :-).</p>
<p>aegsch: Yale does rank from 1-9. Their instructions say 1=unrealistic candidate, 5= competitive in the Yale pool, 9=one in a million candidate.</p>
<p>As a starting point, they say most fall in the 5-6 range and any fours and below are immediate red flags. I interview for them and this year have had 2x4, 2x5, 1x6 and 1x7. My seven withdrew his app due to an ED acceptance at another LAC. The two fours were SCEA rejected applicants. I imagine that none of the others likely will be admitted given the odds, frankly.</p>
<p>Thank you so much for all the clarifications from the current interviewers! I assume the interviewers know nothing other than the school and names of the interviewee before they meet. But I also heard the argument that sometimes the interviewer will know that his/her interviewee will have a bettter chance at Harvard if the admission people reminded him/her that the interview must be done at a certain date or something like that.</p>
<p>^just<em>forget</em>me</p>
<p>Why does interview at Harvard count more than it does at other schools? Very interesting to know that Harvard interviewers rank their interviewee on a 1-6 scale, even though it depends a lot by the interviewer, but it probably give a little tip to the application if the interview was rated 1+.</p>
<p>
Perhaps they’ve so many excellent applicants that they just can’t decide.</p>
<p>I don’t think that’s the case since the consensus is that most school’s evaluative interview won’t really affect one’s application. Anyone can respond to my post at #7?</p>
<p>Here is what the Harvard Interviewer’s Handbook says about the interview report:
“Your goal in writing a personal interview report should be to help the [Admissions] Committee see the applicant as a human being and to determine whether or not the student has the important intangible strengths that might distinguish him or her in the admissions process . . .” I really can’t imagine that for the other schools that also interview that this goal is not important for them as well, but I don’t know for sure.</p>
<p>That’s the goal of every interview: see the applicant as a human being. So, sometimes, the interview report will bring to light information about a student not otherwise available in the applications. Probably much of the time, the interview confirms the other information contained in the application. Until all the applications are considered in full, no one can predict with total certainty which interviews will matter (ie, factor into the final decision) for which applicants.
The committee also knows that every candidate may not be able to be interviewed, and they are very practiced in how to deal with that situation: an applicant’s chances of admission will not be penalized for lack of an interview.</p>
<p>The bottom line for students is that the local alumni clubs do their very best to get applicants in their area an interview. If you are an applicant, and you have an interview, you should consider it another opportunity to present your own best case for your admission. Comments on CC that interviews don’t really matter come from people who have in reality no idea of the interviews’ importance one way or the other - because these are from people who do not sit on the admissions committee. Even those of us who have interviewed for years can’t be sure which of our interviews really factored into a final decision. The point is that the process matters, and each report matters for that applicant’s file.</p>
<p>^^^ Completely agree. Often we don’t know the impact of our interview reports until after the fact. Three years ago, 2 seemingly strong applicants from an urban school in my area made the admissions committee take note. However, both of them had non-substantive teacher rec letters – they were positive but just lacked any meat. Admissions suspected that this was more due to the teachers’ lack of writing meaty rec letters than any implication of the students. After glowing alum interview reports were submitted, which confirmed the many positives about the students, the admissions committee felt compelled to finalize their decision to admit. In that scenario, both interviews were tipping factors – filling in gaps of the profile.</p>
<p>How common is this? Who’s to know?</p>
<p>Thank you so much, dar5995 and T26E4! Will the interviewer ever tell the interviewee his/her interview rating?</p>
<p>…and do you guys always have the means to find out which of your interviewees got admitted…or rejected?</p>
<p>aegsch: I would never disclose that. And I delete my writeups immediately after submission. I can imagine some over-enthusiastic alum might tell someone “I gave you the highest ratings!” But that would be bad form, IMHO.</p>
<p>nine9knives: Yes, we (Yale interviewers) are informed of those whom we have interviewed 2-3 days after the students hear. For admits, we’re part of the “sell” campaign to get them to matriculate.</p>
<p>Harvard interviewers in Chicago get the entire list of admitted and waitlisted applicants from our area. So we know what happened to our interviewees, and we can also see what’s going on overall with various high schools, etc.</p>
<p>I never tell interviewees my rating, but I generally tell them that I liked them and that I will tell Harvard to let them in – which I do – but that doesn’t mean I gave them 1’s. 2 is defined as “a clear admit – one to recruit.” I have given two 1’s, and told both of them I thought they were likely to get in, and both got in.</p>
<p>For experienced interviewers, they probably give out 1+ to less than 10% people of whom they interviewed. So fewer than 3,500 applicants will get a 1+ rating on their Harvard evaluative interviews.</p>
<p>aegsch: I dont’ think H compiles that data.</p>
<p>I have thought that what sealed the deal for my son was his interview–he writes ballet music and the interviewer said that she didn’t really fancy the ballet. My son took a Pound coin from his pocket and put it on the table and said that she could have the Pound if he couldn’t tell her the one thing she thought about when she thought of ballet. She said that she would take that bet. He said, “Nutcracker.” She replied you’re right–he put his Pound back in his pocket.</p>
<p>When he told me about that after the interview I was aghast. I figured he either blew up his chances or made them stronger–and most likely the former. I, thankfully, was wrong.</p>
<p>@etondad. Haha. Well. Lucky your son didn’t get me as an interviewer. I would’ve said Stravinsky and Le Sacre Du Printemps. But then again, I like ballet. And I write music. So I guess that bet never would’ve came up.</p>