<p>While I was out driving to a meeting tonight I thought about the premise of the original post some more, and I am becoming still more sympathetic to this question, "Where else are you applying?" as a question in a college interview. Going to a good college is all about doing research to gain information. What does a high school student research more thoroughly than where to go to college? (Never mind, I can think of some answers to my rhetorical question that would be FAR less appropriate in a college interview than a question about other colleges applied to. ;) ) But in all seriousness, just as a question such as "What do you have to offer to Alma Mater?" is a legitimate question about fit, "Where else are you applying?" is a legitimate question about how much the applicant has thought ahead about going to college, and about how much self-examination and, yes, library and Internet research the applicant has done to consider an important question. That helps demonstrate who is "college material" and who is not. Not perfectly, just as NO criterion applied to admissions decisions is perfect, but meaningfully.</p>
<p>Tokenadult...the thing you mention is indeed important but the process by which you find that out is what I think we are talking about. I am an alum interviewer. I ask every applicant what their college criteria is in evaluating a college. I ask how they have gone about selecting colleges. I asked who has helped them with this process. Have they done college visits? I ask what they expect of a college. I ask how they learned about the college they are there to interview for. I ask if they know any current students or alumni. I ask if they have visited and what they did and what was appealing. I try to get at why they want to go there. I try and give them an opportunity to ask me questions about the school (amazing how many kids cannot come up with one!). So, ALL of this is indeed important. I do not think it is necessary to ascertain the rest of their college list. If we talk about that in our conversation in a natural way, so be it but I am not recording the other college names. It is more about their actual college criteria and preferences about fit and then about THIS certain college too. </p>
<p>I do not see a need for a college to ask on a form to list in ORDER of preference where else you applied. I do not think someone should ask why you have not applied to a competitor or specific "higher" college. I think they can get at the right information by asking what you want out of a college, what's important to you and why you want their particular college and what you've done to investigate it as deeply as possible. That is my opinion.
Susan</p>
<p>Another way to think about it is...if you were at a job interview....you might expect them to ask what you can contribute to their organization/business, and why you want to work there. They can ascertain if the applicant fits that work place but also if the work place is a place this person is truly interested in and knows about. I don't think an employer should ask where else the applicant is interviewing. I can't imagine that actually. Does that happen?</p>
<p>soozievt, your list of questions gets to the important points of the college selection process for the student and helps you learn more about them without probing their actual application list: very well done!</p>
<p>soozievt (Susan in VT) wrote, "I do not see a need for a college to ask on a form to list in ORDER of preference where else you applied."</p>
<p>I think the NACAC document mentioned in the earlier post by Wharf Rat makes it clear that it is bad form to ask for a rank-ordered list of colleges from an applicant. Maybe that means that the college asking such a question on an application form should review its obligations as part of College Board/NACAC membership. To me, it seems crazy to ask in any case, because I would expect the rank-ordering to change during the application process, as the applicant interviews and considers other sources of information. </p>
<p>I fully agree with your description of questions that get to the heart of an applicant's college search process and what that says about the applicant and about what college would be most suitable for the applicant. I by no means think it should be mandatory, or even commonplace, for a college interviewer to ask an applicant what other schools the applicant has applied to in so many words, but merely want to assure the original poster that there is no evil plot going on here, and to help onlookers be psychologically ready for a possible future interview question.</p>
<p>I'm an alumni interviewer for Dartmouth and I always used to ask the "where else" question. This was not a question Dartmouth tells us to ask. There is no spot on our form to fill in that info. I was just curious. However after reading threads like this over the last few months, I changed my tune. I've interviewed many kids over the last month and I didn't ask the where else question once. It does strike me as unfair and stressful for the kids. I also think that I wrote a better report without having asked the question. My sympathy for the kids really came to head when one poster reported that her daughter was asked "Did you apply anywhere EDII?"
My heart was pounding for that girl just reading the post. Kids qpply to lots of school. The admission offices should decide whether they want to offer admission to this kid. Where else they applied is none of their business. And I have no problem with giving a selective answer to that question, if asked. My little experiment with myself convinced me that the answer does influence the perception of the candidate. I for one would love to see it forbidden.</p>
<p>What does it mean when the interviewer starts suggesting additional colleges you could apply to after you tell them where you are applying?</p>
<p>I believe this is a tempest in a teapot. Selective schools know their competition and will ultimately enroll a class that's very close to their target numbers. If the adcom is relying on data from 17 or 18 year olds, he/she will be sending out resumes before too long.</p>
<p>Between my son and daughter, I think we did about 16 interviews. The "where else" question was asked in each of them. Both kids were straigthforward with their responses which, several times, led to dialogue about what they were really looking for in a school (particularly since each kid had at least one outlier on their lists). I doubt there was anything devious going on. In several cases the discussions that followed the question were helpful to them. They came away with new insights into their college selection criteria. Selective colleges don't want to enroll kids who will be potentially less than completely satisfied. Freshman retention rates are also part of the ratings numbers.</p>
<p>Similarly, kids shouldn't want to attend a school where they have any doubts they'll thrive. Of course, it's easy for me to say - we were fortunate to not have to go through the experience of dealing with a rejection letter and both kids are well entrenched in their respective colleges. If I could only make those semi-annual bills disappear...</p>
<p>soozievt - We routinely ask where else prospective employees are applying for positions. We understand our competition and, if the applicant is someone we want, it provides us an opportunity to distinguish ourselves from other companies. We can emphasize certain benefits, career progression opportunities or working environment. In other cases, when we don't believe the candidate is an exact fit here, we offer suggestions on where else to look. </p>
<p>I see this as beneficial to all parties involved.</p>
<p>I don't see a problem with giving a partial list of schools. When you answer any question, you don't necessarily give a full and complete answer. In an assessment situation, it would be ponderous to do so. But regardless of how we feel about the question, be aware that it is being asked, so that the student is prepared for it. Sometimes it is the reaction the the question that is more telling than the answers. </p>
<p>Also, as far as an interview goes, I really do not recommend it for kids who do not interview well. It is very unlikely to help the student unless some real gem of info comes out of it, even if the kid is excellent at interviews, and there is a real chance it can hurt at the most selective schools as they are looking desperately for culling factors as they are getting towards the finish line. Too many applicants well qualified for the spaces left. I have personally known several people who bombed an interview. One, my brother's girlfriend, was waitlisted from an ivy because of the interview. This all came to light because she was moved from that status to an "in" due to intervention from a well known professor who wanted her in the school, and he asked point blank why she was not accepted in light of his strong rec on her behalf. He actually marched down to admissions and confronted the director of admissions. It was the interview, and the young lady is not an obnoxious person, but on the quiet side. That really hurt her. </p>
<p>As for job interviews, Susan, some of the high stress time companies do ask where else you are looking. To make it more unnerving they'll mention the HR or contact person other firms by name just to let the applicant know they are in contact. They often do this just to make it a pressure interview and to watch the reaction of the candidate. And it does work in getting people uncomfortable. In academia, since everyone knows everyone in certain fields, the question is often asked, as well, but H says it really has no effect on the decision as it is assumed that anyone on the ball willl have heard about the position at CMU and Casewestern that is similar to the Rochester one. but he has stopped asking the question for employment purposed since it makes applicants uneasy, and he is truly more interested in getting them comfortable so he can assess their ability to do some technical work for him, and the rest does not matter in the least. When he is asked to consider a job, it is no big deal to discuss what ever else is out there, and even compare particulars, but in his case it is always a true 50/50 relationship where he is truly looking to consider the job as much as they are considering him, sometime even more so. H sees no big deal in the question at all. But the problem with asking these kids, is that the questions seem to be getting more invasive. My S, too, was asked to comment on some other programs. And to ask a kid who is interviewing RD if he as applied ED2 or ED1, is really crossing a line as the motivation for asking does become questionable. </p>
<p>I can tell you that when a kid is being recruited for athletic purposes, not only is the question asked, but they want to know exactly where the college is on the list. And often being honest can lose you the points on the coaches' list. Coaches are very clear that they do not want to waste their preferences on kids that have other schools higher on the list. Because I have found that in many ways coaches are the most direct on admissions critieria, I wonder if other assessors feel the same way. </p>
<p>The other aside I want to add, is that when my son applied to HPY, his performing arts teacher at the school told him to keep those schools off of the MT list, as there are some in the field that don't like kids mixing those schools, and have an issue about commitment if they see this.</p>
<p>
This is part of what was in the back of my mind when I wondered aloud whether fewer applicants should do interviews. So glad jamimom (the "last word" imho) has responded.</p>
<p>It's true that an excellent interviewer can draw out a nervous/shy/quiet applicant, but not all interviewers are so excellent, nor do all interview situations come alive equally for the two parties.</p>
<p>Although the process is over for me (at least until grad school? let's not even go there), I think, with a somewhat quiet son who I'm guessing did "ok not great" on his interviews, I would minimize that aspect in the future. He did only two interviews and chose not to complete apps at those two schools. I wonder if a feeling that he didn't "ace" it played into his decision to go no further.</p>
<p>The interview must have very different meaning at different places. </p>
<p>I can only speak to the Brown interview, which is not critical to acceptance. I doubt the worst interview of one's life would kill a pending Brown acceptance, unless the interviewee committed a felony during the interview. </p>
<p>Remember, people who are dull, uninteresting, dumb, or obnoxious are going to have very lackluster recommendations from teachers-- & this <em>will</em> sink you-- so the interview will just be more of the same. On the other hand, if the teacher recs are stellar and incredible, you are probably interview proof. (Why would Brown trust a negative one-hour alumni contact more than the opinion of someone who worked closely with a kid for a year, on a daily basis?)</p>
<p>I have asked about the weight of the interview and was told that it is rare for an interview not to "match" the rest of the application. If it does not, the adcom would want to take a closer look at the rest of the application to verify the 'picture' that they have of the kid-- for example, if the interviewer RAVES about a kid who is so-so based on the application, the kid could get a little bit of a second look.</p>
<p>I do not discuss where else kids are applying unless they volunteer it. I feel like my job is to put the kid at ease and get to know his/her strengths, quirks, passions-- not freak him/her out about being 'dinged.' A shy applicant would get a report saying "This person was a little difficult to draw out..." which would be the truth; no school class is balanced with 1000 aggressive extroverts, so I doubt being a quiet type would sink anyone who was an academic standout either.</p>
<p>I disagree about dull, lacklustre kids getting bad recs from teachers. If the kid goes to a competitive highschool that knows the scoop about college admissions, the teachers know what key words to avoid in their recs. At the larger schools, many of the recs are so bland and uniform, that they neither hurt nor help the student. So you get a kid with sterling grades and test scores, academic awards, some great academic kudos, a good smattering of ECs and big on the community service. Maybe an impressive musical commitment including a prestigious solo appearance. If he gets the wrong interviewer, he is sunk. There was a post on the Yale site that someone quoted from what Yale interviewers get from the college. You can see easily how such a kid could be sunk for the interview. Without an interview, they have to go with what is in front of them. They may surmise that the kid fits the profile of 500 other kids and is not so exciting, but if 300 of them have that confirmed from the interview, he at least makes that cut. I do a lot of work with Asian kids, and it seems to make no difference how boring and typical their essays are, or if they identify themselves as Asians or not, but the ones who interview and do not present well, do get cut. No contest on that. </p>
<p>Even if you have a kids who interviews decently, you are taking a chance on the type of interviewer you get. These alums are not vetted as the adcoms are in their jobs. They are volunteers. Some may well have their own ideas on who should be admitted to their alma mater. They figure out awfully quickly that great recs from them will not necessarily get them in, but they can sink a kid with some well chosen key words that will dovetail with the application. I cannot get a kid into a college, but I know I could sink him easily without giving an overtly bad rec. In fact, some of these interviewers inadvertantly sink kids by just choosing the wrong set of words.</p>
<p>I have mixed feelings about that question being asked. However, my child was asked that question by an interviewer from a school that is at the top of my child's list. She was honest about the list, and the interviewer simply acknowledged that those were good choices and a good range (safety, reach, match), but then the interviewer went on to ask her top 2 choices. Of course, she mentioned the interviewer's school and another. So the interviewer, in part, went on to talk about the differences between the 2 schools, especially with relevance to her academic and extracurricular interests. And though my kid had done a lot of research on the schools and had even spent some time visiting each, she still found this sort of comparison incredibly valuable and helpful. Also, the interviewer pointed out some of the intangibles--personality fit--which was admittedly more subjective, but certainly answered some lingering questions. And the interviewer later passed along some useful data about particular interests my kid had..again, a comparison of the 2 schools. Now maybe that seems a bit unfair to the other school, but the interviewer was not only forthcoming and supplied good information, but also came across as a really knowledgeable and articulate representative of the school. In addition, my kid felt really wanted--which turned her on even more-- to a school that was already at the top of her list--and when you consider that the other school that is also at the top has <em>still</em> not contacted her for an interview...even after contacting the school twice, contacting the local alumni number that was given to her... well...in many ways, I think this interviewer was very smart. And the interviewer has stayed in touch.</p>
<p>when you get a good interviewer who "clicks" with the kid, it really does not matter what the questions really are, as he will likely be able to put things into a comfortable perspective and provide what he is supposed to do, which is to give information to the kid. Many of these interviews are really not supposed to be evaluative, but informative, and it is unfair that any assessment sheet on those be sent to the school when kids take the colleges at their word. But in any of these situations, getting some good is not the problem. A bad match could be a big problem, and some of these interviewers are not as impartial as they should be. Neither is anyone at some level, but my opinion is that most adcoms make every efffort to be impartial and understand that is an integral part of their job. Most are very resentful of kids trying to get a leg up in anyway that is gaming the system. They are trying to assess the student in context of the applicant pool and the what the school wants in building a vibrant community. It transcends a personal thing--so what, if you hate math. If engineering is expanding and will be taking extra students, you give the those kids a little variance cuz you want to fill that class. There is a supply and demand component to all of this and the adcoms generally have that whole picture described to them whereas that is not the case with the interviewers. My son who is a senior tends to interview very well, does well with adults, so for him it would be a bonus to interview. That he did not, was not to avoid the process, but there are kids who just do not do well on interviews.</p>
<p>Jamimom: Yes, I agree .. especially the comment about a "good interviewer who clicks with the kid." My child is also very comfortable with adults and a good interviewer; unfortunately, out of the 7 schools to which she applied, she has only had 2 interviews. One school doesn't interview, but the other 4? Who knows.</p>
<p>By the way at Brown we get name, address, HS, phone #, and the list of 3 areas of academic interest & 3 areas of EC interest from their app (so we can ask questions.) No scores, grades, rank, etc.</p>
<p>The real problem here is that interviewers don't come with tags identifying their motivation in asking about other colleges. Some are genuinely interested in helping HS kids as well as being proud of their U, and they ask about other schools to see if they can offer useful advice. Others are on-guard for their school and might seek on their own initiative to screen out those they think aren't sufficiently committed to their U. And some are acting at the behest of the U itself which has its own purposes for gathering the information.</p>
<p>If it were me I'd rather take the chance of missing out on some useful guidance than of disclosing information that would harm my application at that college. You can always ask for advice from other people ...</p>
<p>mikemac: I dunno..maybe I'm naive, but I don't consider where else you are applying to school as top-secret information, something to be closely guarded. Seems silly to me. Any student applying to top colleges (or any student applying to college) will be, most likely, applying to a range of schools. Everybody knows this, and my feeling is that if that particular bit of information hurts one's chances at acceptance to a particular school--if, indeed, it was the deciding factor for some adcom or interviewer, then my take is...it wasn't the school for me (you)..</p>
<p>It's not just the question, Jack. Then comes the follow ups--which ones are your faves, why do you like X over Y, etc. It leads into areas that really make one suspect that there is an ulterior motive, particularly when such terms as "demonstrated interest" and "Tufts syndrome" have come into college admissions vocabulary. My kids have no problems with the questions. S1 answers very directly and with no regrests and does not try to read into questions. S2 is as slick as they come. But my niece and third son would not want to go down that path, and for interviews that are supposed to be informational for the applicant, there is no purpose in making the kids uncomfortable.</p>