Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They champion their "candidates" to the board. If their candidates are chosen, its kudos. Also they get free or reduced fees (depending on the school) for their own children, who they get to see during the day and speak to.
And some of them like the process and some of them get a power kick.
You really need a whole range of folks from admissions to answer. Why not ask directly, if you're going t through the process?
I don't really agree with the quoted poster's formulation. First, I am not sure what the poster means by "board" -- these schools have admissions committees. Also, this is not like colleges where regional reps do champion candidates from their regions. The full-time admissions people read all the files (faculty sitting on the committee might read a smaller number of files) and therefore do not have some sort of vested interested in any particular candidates. At many day schools (as opposed to boarding schools), there is not full or partial tuition remission, either.
Most admissions people I know are friendly, enjoy the challenge/creativity of the marketing aspect, and like meeting the prospective students and their families. They like being in an educational environment, and some are interested in some day running a school (admissions/financial aid/enrollment is an area of importance for school heads and being an Admissions Director is seen as a significant stepping stone).
Every admissions person I know says that it can feel agonizing in committee when there are more qualified applicants than spots -- it's hard to make choices and know that kids/families will be disappointed. However, sometimes families are sure a school would be great for their child and the child herself/himself doesn't feel it, or it's clear it wouldn't be a good fit academically. Admissions people tend to be optimistic and have a pragmatic streak, and do not over-dramatize the idea that a rejection from their particular school will be a crushing blow. They know there are lots of schools in the area and the odds are that the student who got squeezed out of School X will be enthusiastically welcomed to School Y and have a great experience.
This is a nice, balanced perspective. The only difference I'd offer based on experience is that being an admission director is seldom a path to school head. (I say "seldom" because one of the most talented school heads I know did take that path — but of the scores of school heads I've known, I can think of only one other who did.)
Admission officers are almost always extroverts with very strong social/emotional intelligence, passionate about their schools, good at making people feel at ease. I have known some people who have left admission work because of the factors the OP cites (it can be hard having to turn down most "clients"), but people make their peace with all kinds of downsides in all kinds of jobs. It's easy to dump on anybody whose path is different from our own, and hardly a challenge to assume low motives in others, but I've enjoyed talking with every admission officer I've ever met. Each has been smart person doing, in most cases, a job that's tough in one way or another.
Peter
_____________________
Disclaimer: The anonymity here makes me uncomfortable; it's easy to be uninformed, personal, or simply mean-spirited if people don't identify themselves. For that reason, I have an account so you know whose words you're reading. I have more than 20 years' experience as a teacher and administrator in independent schools, and I hope I can be helpful to some folks. If you don't like something I've said, you're in good company — there's a long line of past students ahead of you.

If you want to chat further, please feel free to contact me offline: peter <at> arcpd <dot> com