Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
There were never intended to help the student. The process is designed to keepe alumni involved so alumni give dollars.
The kind of alumnus who has big money to give isn't going to have time to interview prospective students (unless known to him personally). That guy is going to help his own kid, not rando kids.
The alumni interviewers who I met way back when sure didn't give off a big money vibe.
Agree with this. Many alumni interviewers are doing interviews in lieu of giving $$$s.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I had an alumni interview when applying to a college I really wanted to go to that is very prestigious. He scheduled it on a Sunday and wasn't of my religion. My father made me change the date because of church and it was important to him that I not miss this. I still was under his roof and he was paying for college, so I complied.
The interviewer brought it up and proceeded to give me a hard time about changing an interview for church.
I got rejected, the only college that rejected me.
I completely agree that alumni interviews are biased.
Doesn't matter if it's biased because it seems the AOs don't even bother looking at those interviews.
They do review them if they offer them, they read the reports.
Anonymous wrote:Two reasons. Equity or the appearance of lack of equity since not everyone gets an interview. Second reason, alumni complaining that the wonderful kids they recommend don’t get admitted.
In the same way COVID exposed the problems with K-12 education, October 7th and the resultant issues on college campuses exposed the problems with higher education in the US.
Alumni are rightfully angry and will withhold monetary and other support until these problems are corrected.
Anonymous wrote:Alimni interviews are just vehicles to feed the egos of alums
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I had an alumni interview when applying to a college I really wanted to go to that is very prestigious. He scheduled it on a Sunday and wasn't of my religion. My father made me change the date because of church and it was important to him that I not miss this. I still was under his roof and he was paying for college, so I complied.
The interviewer brought it up and proceeded to give me a hard time about changing an interview for church.
I got rejected, the only college that rejected me.
I completely agree that alumni interviews are biased.
Doesn't matter if it's biased because it seems the AOs don't even bother looking at those interviews.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Alimni interviews are just vehicles to feed the egos of alums
Exactly. They're long been an alumni engagement tool with little to no impact on admissions decisions.
+1 MIT interviewed my DS, but in the email, it stated that "you might not get an interview if we can't find an interviewer in your region, but this will not impact your application."
Then why have interviews at all? People who don't get interviews would be missing a data point on the application that those who did get interviews have. It's like an extra recommendation if the interview goes well.
Also, I do think think that equity has a role in this because the Harvard case showed that the Interviewers would give high marks for the applicant for "personality", but the AOs, who never met the applicant, would give low marks.
Getting rid of the interviews is a good way to side step the bias that the Harvard case showed.
There were never intended to help the student. The process is designed to keepe alumni involved so alumni give dollars.
You mean it's a way to make alumni feel that their kids might have a better chance? So, legacy and $$ is the reason so many kids have to go through this BS process? It doesn't benefit the college applicant so much as the Interviewer and the college for money?
What a load of BS these private college admissions is.
Anonymous wrote:I had an alumni interview when applying to a college I really wanted to go to that is very prestigious. He scheduled it on a Sunday and wasn't of my religion. My father made me change the date because of church and it was important to him that I not miss this. I still was under his roof and he was paying for college, so I complied.
The interviewer brought it up and proceeded to give me a hard time about changing an interview for church.
I got rejected, the only college that rejected me.
I completely agree that alumni interviews are biased.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They make it sound like an equity issue. Can someone explain what the issue is?
My guess is the implicit bias of alumni who don’t represent current day diversity. It would increase chances of selecting students of the same backgrounds as traditional alumni. It might also discourage diverse candidates.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
There were never intended to help the student. The process is designed to keepe alumni involved so alumni give dollars.
The kind of alumnus who has big money to give isn't going to have time to interview prospective students (unless known to him personally). That guy is going to help his own kid, not rando kids.
The alumni interviewers who I met way back when sure didn't give off a big money vibe.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Alimni interviews are just vehicles to feed the egos of alums
Exactly. They're long been an alumni engagement tool with little to no impact on admissions decisions.
Anonymous wrote:
There were never intended to help the student. The process is designed to keepe alumni involved so alumni give dollars.