he probably enjoys it.

i do it because I like giving back and enjoy meeting students who are interested in going to the same school and normally program I went to.

for my school, i've never had to deal with a parent but it's been an issue in the past. during the training they mention to never have meetings at student's homes. instead a public place like a starbucks or a library is always preferred.

couldn't you say the same thing for interviews in general? what if you give a bad impression or are the perfect candidate but have a bad day or bad vibe with the interviewer? it's just part of life. some students suck to be around--I've had a few. I will say, even though my interview is informational, I can normally tell if the student will get in or not and I don't even get to see their resume. I can throw the student into 3 buckets--highly likely to get in--I would say 80-90% likely to get in--not many students get this bucket (maybe 10%). Then there are coin flips (maybe 20% of the students) and then there are a bunch of students who literally have no shot (70%). Sometimes the last group isn't their fault (could be their school or upbringing) that they're there but if you're for instance applying to the engineering program at Cornell, you can't be taking pre-calculus in your senior year.

Seems about right, for both. Good luck to your daughter.

Answers are usually unspectacular, which is fine, although sometimes you can get truly heartfelt responses, which I find impactful not so much because of the emotional quotient but more so due to the maturity in giving the answer and window into them as a person. Honestly, what I'm looking for as much as their specific answer is how they can think on their feet and provide a window into themselves as opposed to safe/boring trope. I also like to see people give answers which aren't too laconic yet not long and meandering.

I think college interviews - as opposed to job interviews - are useful because otherwise it's just a numbers game. As I've said, I feel like I provide the story behind the story, bringing a candidate to life. My interviews usually last only 30 to 45 minutes but often I take up to 2 hours to do my write-ups.

I like giving back to my university and I care enough to want to do a good job. Why do you waste your time making useless posts on 2+2?

Oddly no. I suspected that helicopter parents might not only reach out to me before or after the interview but could actually try to engage with me during it, under the auspices of just happening to be there dropping off or picking up their kid. But no - never once has a parent said anything. Actually, I can't say that completely, since my mother takes a course at a local college, which is something a lot of seniors do, and her instructor was the grandmother of a student I interviewed who got it, so I heard from her indirectly.

Not that you asked, but probably the most surprising thing to me is that in the last two or three years I've seen about 50% of the kids either bring a copy of a "resume" with them or ask me if they should. I'm not a fan, but I try not to hold it against them.

She seemed entitled, like she knew she was so great academically that her time was more important than mine and that the interview process was tantamount to checking a box. She gave terse answers or just pivoted to talking about her many awards and achievements. It was highly offputting.

Keep in mind this was only a couple of years ago, so I'd already interviewed hundreds of kids by then. I've had others who I knew were likely to get in or who I could tell felt they walked on water, but she was just particularly obnoxious.

Thanks for the kind words on the questions.

I used to interview kids at my office, since it was in the same town and I had glass walls and doors. But then my office moved and I work from home, so now I just reserve a room at the town library. I'd never have one at my home or theirs.

In 15 years, the numbers of kids who I interview and get in each year has been exactly zero or one every year except for a couple of years ago when they somehow decided to admit 4. In truth, unless you go to one of the top public schools in the US you're probably getting only 1-3 kids at most into any of the top 15 colleges. Every year each freshman class of my school is comprised of 25% valedictorians, to give you a good idea of the competition level.

As to the point about knowing who'll get in, I can almost always tell that at least 50% of the kids I interview have no shot. And some years I can tell that the crop I interview seems better as a whole than usual, yet more than a couple of times a great bunch of kids yielded no admits.

There was a stretch of 4 years in a row where no one got in and I almost stopped interviewing kids since I felt like I couldn't look these kids in the eye if I felt there was no chance they could get in. But then one got in and for 8 years there was 1+. So I've given up trying to spend time guessing about who might or might not get in, and I find it helps me be better at doing the interviews and, in particular, the reports.

That’s the smart way to do it.

I know somebody who interviews over 100 internship applicants a year. First interview is always 1-on-1 because it’s too expensive to have a second person in there for that many interviews. After one unfortunate ‘incident’ they introduced a new guideline that every 1-on-1 interview has to be held in the lobby or cafeteria.

FWIW, it just sounds crazy to me that young people even have a resume before graduating from high school. I think I didn’t even have a real one until after I had my masters degree.

Nice thread.

Rizzee, capone, and others, do you have any insight into the admissions process beyond interviews?

Obv there's stuff I could look up, but was just wondering about any personal insight via connections to the admissions office. Beyond grades and test scores, what is the best way to get into top tier schools?

Kids today have a lot more experience than I had almost 20 years ago when applying for college. But then again the competition is a little more fierce to get into big time colleges for a number of reasons--namely it's so much easier to apply to all of them through the common application.

The whole process isn't necessarily to find the best students but to find the students that will be good/great fit for the school both academically and beyond academics.

Tips to get into top tier colleges other than grades/scores. Well the easiest way is to win some big time competition or be famous. If you can't do that, then work hard in one area for extra curriculars--I for one was on the trivia/knowledge bowl team. I also spent a few of my summers doing engineering and science programs which probably didn't hurt. I think unless you're coming from a top tier school, the fact that you live in an area that might have less applicants is advantageous to your chances. The other big thing is make sure your kid works hard to impress a few teachers to get their recommendations.

While I was a little naive when I was applying, doing research and knowing the school/program your applying to decently well definitely would impress me. A lot of times kids are applying to a lot of programs and likely not all of them have my school as their #1 pick; a least pretend for the interview that it is.

I think the first resume appeared three years ago. A kid just showed up and gave it to me when he walked it, like it was pro forma. For a minute I thought he was joking, but there it was - an honest to goodness full on resume.

Since then I'd say about 25% of kids either bring one or ask if they should. If they ask, I just say no and if they bring one I give it a cursory glance but don't dwell on it.

I've had one kid bring their resume, it was unbelievable. He easily got in--he was like 3rd in his class (at a very good school), had outstanding scores, played 7 instruments and some at the highest level at the state--took college classes. I'm not sure when he slept TBH.

7?! That's impressive.

Well, I wouldn't say that's easy but I agree with your point. For math specifically, do you know what things get special attention? Maybe Math Olympiad, any of the other competitions? Does being advanced more than usual count for much? (Not just Calculus in junior year + a year at a local JC, but Calc before high school and then multiple years of JC/State college advanced math.)

The process is more transparent than it used to be, with more information being shared about who gets in and what their scores/grades/achievements were. That being said, at my school they purposely don't tell us what they look for, since they fear it will pollute the interview process. With the benefit of hindsight, I've found that typical personality attributes of strong candidates are:

1) An ability to discern that they're special, but also that they haven't peaked yet. I can see a spark in them, from the way the express themselves or talk about life experiences. I can just tell that they're bound for greatness.

2) Having genuine passions. Anyone can talk about how they did such and such activity or sport, but some kids describe things they've done with a sense of real connection and zeal.

3) Being impressive without trying to impress. This can come from them being at ease during the interview, or the way they speak eloquently yet without trying too hard, or various other factors. Some kids just ooze impressiveness.

Sorry if these are a bit nebulous - like I said, a lot of this comes from having interviewed nearly 200 kids. I suppose I'm like a person who looks out for models or for fine art - you gain a sense for what separates the true best from the merely great.

This is what I mean when I say I worry about kids peaking early. Kids like these are at risk of burnout or of academic failure when they get into a good school and find they're merely average among other superstars. I won't hold it against them, but I do worry that some kids are at risk of not seeing their early success through into college, let alone beyond.

One of my buddies was top 75 in the country some math competition--might have been Olympiad (might have been Putnam--I was just google searching)--I can't remember but he was exceptionally smart at math. Funny story is at his wedding, he's Chinese, and people gave speeches. His dad who's usually quiet, likely due to the language barrier and his preference from Chinese, gives a 30-45 minute speech entirely in Chinese (I would say 30-40% of the people at the wedding didn't speak Chinese so it was a little awkward). But my friend was saying one of the funny things of the speech was his dad said my buddy was the "Yao Ming" of math.

I would say say taking calc before high school would be something that separates a candidate especially one who is interested in engineering, science or math type majors/schools.

I don't think there is any exact code or cheat code to getting in because you did XYZ but any national level competition that you do well on probably sets you above the competition especially if the rest of your resume is on par with the rest of the candidates.

I think for math of CS, things outside of school are what gets attention, since lots and lots of kids get great grades and max out on AP courses/scores. Doing a competition is never a bad thing, nor is finding a way to leverage ones skills at an internship of some sort. But this is why I try not to look for specific boxes being checked, since some kids might have connections to get an internship while others don't. But if you're a whiz in math and you just limit yourself to acing school stuff then you probably are selling yourself short if not with respect to the interview then certainly on the application itself.

This is all pretty much true. Good fit is key, and indeed the bar is set so much higher than when I was applying in the late 80s. Recommendations are useful, particularly from esteemed teachers.

Do you know a particular source or link that shows achievements/qualifications of those that got in, beyond scores/grades?

Not asking you to do my Google HW for me, it's just that I'm far away from that time for my own kids, so I haven't done a ton of research yet, although I've thought about it and casually perused things some. I'll eventually do more research, but was just asking since you might already know these things without really having to look anything up.

These are good qualities for an interview, and I can see why you list them. However, they all seem to come from already being an exceptional candidate. Meaning, I wouldn't say to try to have those qualities, but moreso that you try to do the things that make you an exceptional candidate, and then those qualities may follow naturally, or you can work on those afterwards.

Yeah, makes sense from a sorting standpoint.

This is true, I saw it in several friends and to some degree myself. Part of it, I imagine, is that a number of young high-achievers were pushed hard by parents, and when they stopped getting pushed so hard, in college and beyond, and had to find their own internal motivation, they weren't quite as driven.

Good story.


Thanks, I agree with both of these. Was just wondering if you knew of any things outside of school, for math, that get particular notoriety or distinction, other than maybe Olympiad at a national level.

If not, that's fine, I can look them up sometime, just thought there was a chance you knew. Thanks for the info you've given so far.