Difference between interviewers

[pedneuro6894]

I recently had an interview where one of my interviewers told me verbatim "I'm going to write you an amazing review" and essentially said he really hoped I go to the school. Really cool gesture by him. However, my second interviewer was SUPER dry. No follow-ups, asked his questions and moved on, and had no reactions whatsoever. (He just seemed like that kind of guy so I didn't take it personally, and he sorta did warn me in advance). I think I did fine in the second interview, but it's really hard to get a read on people like that. My question for adcoms/interviewers is: Let's assume I did badly in the second interview. If you have two interviewers, one writes the best review ever, and one writes an average-to-bad review, what does that tell you/how does that affect your decision on this applicant? Does that = WL, or do you focus more on the amazing review?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

We look at their comments and try to decide which ones make the most sense, based upon the writer.

Or, we may do nothing and just go with the averag of the scores.

 

[LizzyM]

We know the personalities of the interviewers and often know the one who loves everyone and the one who tends to be the interview equivalent of a hard marker. As my mother would say, "consider the source". We take that into account when we get discordant interview reports.

That said, you have no idea if you did poorly in the second interview or if they interviewer had a poker face.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

As @LizzyM notes, we consider the source. "Good cop, bad cop" happens.

 

[ClashRoyaleKing]

I had this recently too. I wouldn't worry too much about it, I would assume it is pretty common as everyone has a unique personality. Admissions commitees know their interviewers and how to interpret their notes when reviewing your application. Best of luck!

 

[pedneuro6894]

For anyone wondering, I got into this school lol