Interviewer Importance

[after_the_flood]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Do schools deferentially assign interviewers to students they find more/less competitive for the school? For example, do highly competitive applicants ever get purposefully assigned to a "big wig" interviewer? Just curious.

 

[mimelim]

No.

 

[Ismet]

Nope

 

[Lost in Translation]

Inversely, if you had a "big wig" interviewer does their input carry more weight than say if you had a random faculty?

I know the process is supposed to be unbiased but let's face it, there is a chain of command.

 

[SnakeDoc9497]

Yep, all those 4.0 36+ folks get this big wig

 

[pyrrion89]

Do schools deferentially assign interviewers to students they find more/less competitive for the school? For example, do highly competitive applicants ever get purposefully assigned to a "big wig" interviewer? Just curious.

No. You're overestimating how much effort the school can really place in its flood of applicants. Also even if they could, I doubt they would. If he is really that non-competitive as an applicant, why even bother interviewing him? Or, why not assign a "better interviewer" to the marginal interviewee who needs closer scrutiny to evaluate whether he or she is just above--or just below--the mark?

 

[Goro]

No.

Do schools deferentially assign interviewers to students they find more/less competitive for the school? For example, do highly competitive applicants ever get purposefully assigned to a "big wig" interviewer? Just curious.

 

[moemoekyun]

For a school I interviewed at, the admissions director stated that interviewers were generally assigned to applicants based on having stuff to talk about, open interview. I mentioned an interest in social health on my applications, one of my interviewers is involved in that.

 

[y123]

For a school I interviewed at, the admissions director stated that interviewers were generally assigned to applicants based on having stuff to talk about, open interview. I mentioned an interest in social health on my applications, one of my interviewers is involved in that.

I think so. Most of my interviewers have connections with my region.

 

[TheOtterpop]

I have had interviewers that had very closely related experiences to parts of my application at some schools. For example, one school had me paired with a former paramedic (I worked in EMS as an EMT) and a faculty leading a rural medicine track (my application shows my high interest in rural medicine).

I couldn't say whether this was just coincidence created by a entering a field that has a generally universal "path" to admittance or whether it was by design. But, nothing to do with importance.

 

[whatever5]

I have nothing meaningful to contribute, I just keep misreading the title as "Interviewer impotence" and then get disappointed when I open it.

 

[Lost in Translation]

Inversely, if you had a "big wig" interviewer does their input carry more weight than say if you had a random faculty?

I know the process is supposed to be unbiased but let's face it, there is a chain of command.

Gunna quote myself and tag some pillars @Goro @LizzyM

 

[Goro]

At our school, the opinions of Deans and Dep't Chairs who interview are equal to those of the Ass't Professors and students.

Even the wily old Admissions Dean himself gets outvoted on candidates.

Gunna quote myself and tag some pillars @Goro @LizzyM

 

[NorthOfBroad]

I have interviewed with lots of pediatric specialists (I have worked a lot with children) and students who do both a lot of long-distance running and basic science research it has been weird.