later inteview date = lower chance to get in?

[djsahand]

---

Members do not see this ad.

hey guys,
if you set up your interview date for later in the game, towards to end of interviews months, does it decrease your chances of getting in to the school?
thanks

 

[polarnut]

that seems to be the logical explanation. however, it all depends on what the cutoffs are for each school. they may cluster all the interviews done from september-october into first batch and october-november into second batch.

i'd want to be in the first batch.

 

[Rezdawg]

The earlier, the better.

 

[spc213]

I agree. Earlier is definitely better. You can check with the school to see if earlier dates open up (but don't be annoying). Slots don't open up too often early in the process, but it's quite common after the first round of acceptances on DEC1.

Some schools will tell you if you are interviewing for a slot in the class or an alternate slot, and some don't.

For example, I was invited for an interview by a school in OCT, but when I called to schedule, the first available date was in March, how frustrating. But they also told me on that call that it was for a seat in the class, essentially meaning it was mine to lose at the interview. So even though I would have interviewed late in the process it was still for a seat in the class. So a late interview is not neccessarily bad.

Shortly after 1DEC I called them back and was able to get an early JAN interview, and was accepted by Mid-Jan. So it all worked out just fine.

Good luck!

 

[ItsGavinC]

hey guys,
if you set up your interview date for later in the game, towards to end of interviews months, does it decrease your chances of getting in to the school?
thanks

I'm going to say yes, especially if the school truly operates on a rolling admissions (ie, they meet after each interview day and determine who to admit).

 

[VClovesteeth05]

I'm going to say yes, especially if the school truly operates on a rolling admissions (ie, they meet after each interview day and determine who to admit).

In a way I believe yes interviewing earlier is better. But, they can't tell anyone until december 1st, that doesn't mean people can be moved on and off the acceptance list. A school isn't just going to accept early people especially if they get really strong applicants. Obviously later than December 1st isn't best, but if they are asking you they haven't filled the spots! good luck!

 

[Gulch]

earlier the better. I am presently in the process of reapplying. Last year I submitted my aadsas November 12, then interviewed at 8 schools, resulting in positions on 7 waitlists, none of which proved fruitful. All my interviews were between Jan 30 and March 20. Pretty much all the schools on a rolling admissions basis and trust me, the spots left in those later months get filled by much higher than avg applicants. My two cents: if you're an avg candidate or even a little better, like me you'll want to do everything in your power to secure the earliest int'vw date possible.

 

[ItsGavinC]

In a way I believe yes interviewing earlier is better. But, they can't tell anyone until december 1st, that doesn't mean people can be moved on and off the acceptance list.

The year I interviewed (2002), Case told me they met after each interview session and determined who to give an acceptance to. They said this list was static, not dynamic. I would assume that other schools operate in a similar fashion, although all certainly do not.

 

[billermo]

The year I interviewed (2002), Case told me they met after each interview session and determined who to give an acceptance to. They said this list was static, not dynamic. I would assume that other schools operate in a similar fashion, although all certainly do not.

In regards to Case's "interview session", is this each day, week, month? Someone who interviews early with lower stats and is placed on the static list won't be bumped by someone who interviews later with higher stats?