Does Princeton interview mean anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, Princeton aims to interview everyone. An interview means something at Yale.

I was told and the AO blog says as much---Yale only interviews 20%. If you are a clear admit--you won't get an interview. If you are a clear decline--you won't get an interview. If you are somebody they are unsure about and they want more info.-you will get an interview.

Princeton & Harvard try to interview everyone-- it doesn't mean anything. Brown did away with interviews in favor of video submissions.

Does that mean if you decline, they don't care?

If you decline, that means something (i.e., your chance of getting in just went from slim to zero). If you are invited, that doesn't mean anything.

Got it. I think maybe there are two definitions to "mean anything".

In the Yale example, it means you are in the 20% where you aren't a definite Yes or No, so the interview could make a huge difference


In the Princeton example, it doesn't signal you are in any bucket...but the interviewer report I gather could factor into the decision in some small way

Interviewer report would only factor in if the interview was horrific.

and you happened to be in the "20% yes" bucket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting an interview doesn't matter. Doing well on it, doesn't matter. Raising a red flag by declining or bombing the interview matters.

This. Declining to do one that is offered isn't going to look great either. Especially since the interviewers tend to be very flexible. Some even do video interviews.

Our DS didn't want to do an interview so he had a "scheduling conflict" until the alum went away. Didn't affect his admission at all and didn't have to chat with some rando. We toured the school when we wanted information.

You and your child sound so wonderful. Such school spirit referring to alum as randos and declining any interviews.

[Anonymous]

Princeton periodically solicits alums to interview interested students, but I decline because I graduated long enough ago that I don't feel like I can convey what it's like to go there now, which is what it seems like most interviewees - particularly if they know the interview won't have any impact on their admission odds - would want to know. The school is close enough to the DC area that I'd just encourage interested students to visit and, if possible, try and snag an on-campus interview.

[Anonymous]

From the Princeton admissions page: "Princeton offers optional alumni interviews. Interviews take place after the Admission Office has received your application. You may choose to opt out of the interview in the Princeton Supplement, and this choice will not put you at any disadvantage in the admission process. If you do not opt out, you may receive an email inviting you to interview with a member of our Princeton Alumni Schools Committee. If so, we encourage you to take advantage of this opportunity...."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Princeton periodically solicits alums to interview interested students, but I decline because I graduated long enough ago that I don't feel like I can convey what it's like to go there now, which is what it seems like most interviewees - particularly if they know the interview won't have any impact on their admission odds - would want to know. The school is close enough to the DC area that I'd just encourage interested students to visit and, if possible, try and snag an on-campus interview.

Don't think there are on-campus interviews any longer.

[Anonymous]

A colossal waste of time on both ends. Just do away with it.
It barely factors in decisions (like PP said, only on the margin for the self-immolators). In very rare instances will some superman or superwoman become ordinary man or woman. And likewise very rare that ordinary will not become superordinary.
But you have to take the time to do 35000+ interviews. That is a colossal waste of time and resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A colossal waste of time on both ends. Just do away with it.
It barely factors in decisions (like PP said, only on the margin for the self-immolators). In very rare instances will some superman or superwoman become ordinary man or woman. And likewise very rare that ordinary will not become superordinary.
But you have to take the time to do 35000+ interviews. That is a colossal waste of time and resources.

I'm sure they looked at the PR benefits (willingness to interview and share positive information) against the PR costs (raising false hopes or making kids feel obligated) and decided it was worth it. But when you're running admissions you can change the policy.