Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No interview, means not being considered

Generally true for Yale.

Anonymous wrote:No interview, means not being considered

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid has had interviews for Harvard, Princeton, Dartmouth and Penn.

Yale was the only one he did not get one from.

I’ll let you know how it turns out.

From what I saw reading and their recent podcasts - Yale used then when they need more information. I did see many accepted kids saying they did not get one on Reddit and other college forums last year.

“Princeton could use a man like Joel.”

Anonymous wrote:My kid has had interviews for Harvard, Princeton, Dartmouth and Penn.

Yale was the only one he did not get one from.

I’ll let you know how it turns out.

From what I saw reading and their recent podcasts - Yale used then when they need more information. I did see many accepted kids saying they did not get one on Reddit and other college forums last year.

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth interviews are based 1”0% on interviewer availability

I’ve talked to some great candidates and some kids who i knew had no chance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Yale interviewer. All interviews in this region have already been assigned, so if your child hasn’t been contacted, the AO doesn’t need more information to make a decision (ie the decision has already been made). That does not mean it’s a no (although statistically most will be no’s). From what we have heard, in many cases it’s that they want to confirm that the candidate that they see on paper actually resembles the actual person. Maybe they think the essay sounded too canned. Maybe a teacher rec didn’t match up. The interviewers do not see anything in the file other than a name and a school, so our impressions are relatively unbiased in terms of presentation. The questions we have to answer boil down to variations of “what does this person seem like?”

I know interviewers who get discouraged when they meet one great kid and they don’t get in because they are looking at that kid in isolation. I felt that way in the beginning, but now that I’ve been doing it for many years and do more and more each year, most of them meet that “great kid” standard but fewer and fewer stand out. Now think of an AO who has that problem x30000 relatively unhooked kids. Under this newer process, I’m actually seeing more kids on my list get in, because I must have confirmed something that the AO was wondering about - yes this kid matches the paper version that they saw.

Tell your kid to hang in there and no matter the outcome, they did nothing wrong. They will be fine wherever they go and where they get in is not who they are.

In a letter to alum parents, it said kids w/out an interview get submitted in the sane numbers as those without an interview. It also says they are used now primarily for additional information.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No interview, means not being considered

Generally true for Yale.

But FAQ regarding interview on their website has the following

Is my application disadvantaged because I was not offered an interview?

No. Interviews are not required, and many successful applicants are not interviewed

Yale AO on podcast says Yale apps are put in 3 piles:
1. Absolute yes; exceeds all metrics; maybe a likely letter (will not get interview)
2. Definite no (will not get interview)
3. On the cusp….unsure. Will get interview if interviewers are available in region.

My kid didn’t get a Yale interview either. He was not a #1….

If your kids’ friends with lower stats got interview, I’d assume your kid was not a #1?

But who knows? And lots of Yale Interviewers in DC

Anonymous wrote:I am a Yale interviewer. All interviews in this region have already been assigned, so if your child hasn’t been contacted, the AO doesn’t need more information to make a decision (ie the decision has already been made). That does not mean it’s a no (although statistically most will be no’s). From what we have heard, in many cases it’s that they want to confirm that the candidate that they see on paper actually resembles the actual person. Maybe they think the essay sounded too canned. Maybe a teacher rec didn’t match up. The interviewers do not see anything in the file other than a name and a school, so our impressions are relatively unbiased in terms of presentation. The questions we have to answer boil down to variations of “what does this person seem like?”

I know interviewers who get discouraged when they meet one great kid and they don’t get in because they are looking at that kid in isolation. I felt that way in the beginning, but now that I’ve been doing it for many years and do more and more each year, most of them meet that “great kid” standard but fewer and fewer stand out. Now think of an AO who has that problem x30000 relatively unhooked kids. Under this newer process, I’m actually seeing more kids on my list get in, because I must have confirmed something that the AO was wondering about - yes this kid matches the paper version that they saw.

Tell your kid to hang in there and no matter the outcome, they did nothing wrong. They will be fine wherever they go and where they get in is not who they are.

Anonymous wrote:I am a Yale interviewer. All interviews in this region have already been assigned, so if your child hasn’t been contacted, the AO doesn’t need more information to make a decision (ie the decision has already been made). That does not mean it’s a no (although statistically most will be no’s). From what we have heard, in many cases it’s that they want to confirm that the candidate that they see on paper actually resembles the actual person. Maybe they think the essay sounded too canned. Maybe a teacher rec didn’t match up. The interviewers do not see anything in the file other than a name and a school, so our impressions are relatively unbiased in terms of presentation. The questions we have to answer boil down to variations of “what does this person seem like?”

I know interviewers who get discouraged when they meet one great kid and they don’t get in because they are looking at that kid in isolation. I felt that way in the beginning, but now that I’ve been doing it for many years and do more and more each year, most of them meet that “great kid” standard but fewer and fewer stand out. Now think of an AO who has that problem x30000 relatively unhooked kids. Under this newer process, I’m actually seeing more kids on my list get in, because I must have confirmed something that the AO was wondering about - yes this kid matches the paper version that they saw.

Tell your kid to hang in there and no matter the outcome, they did nothing wrong. They will be fine wherever they go and where they get in is not who they are.