So, I've had a few questions since my last post, and they invariably run along the lines of, "This comes up when I search for my name/facebook account/website. Do you think it's bad?"
Let me give you a mantra. If in doubt, take it out.
See? It even rhymes. But in all seriousness, folks, if you have to ask, it probably shouldn't be out there. The point isn't whether or not I think calling someone "fucking awesome" is an inappropriate thing for a seventeen year old to say. (Personally, I don't.) The real litmus test is - would you intentionally say it during your interview? Or write it in your essays? If the answer is no, just make it private, password protect it, or delete it. Easy peasy.
Moving right along. Interview season is mostly wrapping up across the country, applicants are receiving their admissions letters, and everybody else is gearing up for application season 2011. I'm planning on shifting gears to more general application questions. If you have some that you'd like me to address, leave it in the comments... or send it my way via email.
Showing posts with label interviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interviews. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
New versus old?
A question from a student getting prep'd for her Harvard interview. She writes:
During the interview, should I discuss "new" information (things that weren't covered in-depth on my application) or reinforce what's already on the application?
Here's what I mean. My interviewer has said that they (the interviewers) do not see my Harvard application. So during the interview, should I go over things that were on my app (the topics I wrote my essays on, things I really stressed, etc.) or should I use the interview as a chance to give Harvard MORE information about myself that I couldn't fit on the app?
For example, on my Harvard application, I really stressed my volunteer work, my eBay business, and my future dreams (to create a successful charity--this sort of ties in with my volunteer work). I didn't really mention my passion for statistics and academics in general. I only briefly mentioned ballet, which I've been doing for 12 years and counting. So in my interview, should I repeat my stories about my volunteer work/eBay/future dreams or should I discuss my passion for ballet/statistics/etc?
The interview is a way for Harvard to get to know the applicant even better. So I thought perhaps it would be better for me to talk about ballet etc. because Harvard doesn't really know that part of me. If I were to talk about my eBay business in the interview, the interviewer would write that into their recommendation. However, Harvard would already know about eBay and it might become redundant.
But at the same time, I thought that maybe it would be better to reinforce my volunteer work/eBay/future dreams in the interview, since those are really what make me unique and those are the ones that have the best "stories" behind them. After all, those topics were "meaty" enough that I could write essays about them, whereas I don't think I have enough to say about ballet that I could write an essay about it.
And if you recommend a balance of both, should I talk about 50/50 old information & new information, or 70/30, etc.
This is a problem that is nice to have! This student obviously has a few different narratives about her life that she has successfully developed into what I imagine is a strong application. Rather than getting distracted by dozens of extracurriculars, she has chosen to focus on a few activities where she has excelled. This is smart. But now her problem is she has other narratives that she wasn't able to fit in. What to do?
The answer is easy, but will probably frustrate you. I recommend forgetting any sort of ratios, but instead focusing on connecting with your interviewer. You may hope that your interviewer is taking copious notes and will provide Harvard with an exact transcript of your conversation, but this is not the case. We have the option of talking about specifics:
"Jennifer shows exceptional perseverance by continuing with a demanding ballet schedule even as she excels in her academics. She has performed in half a dozens acclaimed shows and has been invited to travel to NYC to audition for a number of companies upon graduation."
But we are just as likely to write:
"Jennifer is bright and talented. She shows great commitment to activities she is passionate about, and perseveres even when it is not easy or immediately gratifying. She would be a terrific fit at Harvard. This is the kind of person I would have liked to be friends with when I was a student there. I think she can be both a leader and an inspiration to others in the student body."
See? No mention of ballet at all. But still a great recommendation. So, if you're counting on your interview to fill in the missing gaps on your application, don't. That's (kind of) the bad news. The good news, however, is that this is not the point of the interview. The point of the interview is for Harvard to get to know you as a person. So do that as best you can. Come into your interview with a few set "stories" about yourself - the Ebay business is a great one - but be flexible enough to shift gears if you need to.
Let's say your interviewer is a former ballerina herself. You really connect with her on that front - by all means, mention ballet. But do it for the right reasons - to connect with your interviewer, not because you want her to put a check mark somewhere. Also, you kind of answer your question yourself - you say there is not enough in ballet for you to write an essay about. If that's truly how you feel, then a brief secondary mention is all it deserves. Personally, I think if you've been engaged in something for twelve years, there is probaby a story there. Remember, not all stories have to be about you being successful. It sounds from your email like your "tangible" accomplishments in ballet (winning awards, being cast in shows, performing in professional troupes, are limited). So are you a ballerina despite the fact that you're not as good at it as you are at other things (like statistics?) That's a story, and frankly says something very good about you. I'll let you draw the conclusion.
You throw in "passion for academics" - honestly, this is a given. Everyone applying is passionate about academics. If there is something that sets you apart, talk about it. Otherwise, leave it alone. There was a girl years ago who was homeless while she was in high school, but was passionate enough about her academics to maintain her grades even while she slept in homeless shelters and train stations. That's a rare instance of where you may want to talk about it. You mention statistics - is there a story behind this? Have you done some work in the field that sets you apart? Are you using statistics to improve your Ebay business? (If you can combine two narratives, even better!) Dig deep inside yourself and find the reason why you love it and how that makes you different.
There is one exception to everything I've said here - if something has changed significantly between the time you applied and your interview. Have you won a Novel Prize? Did the non-profit you founded just raise ten million dollars to build schools in Afghanistan? Did you sell a script to Disney? These are over the top examples, but you get the idea. If this is the case - do find a way to talk about it. Explicitly tell your interviewer that you did not write about it on your app because it hadn't happened yet. Oh, and if it *is* something seriously huge, it may be worthwhile calling the admissions office to let them know.
During the interview, should I discuss "new" information (things that weren't covered in-depth on my application) or reinforce what's already on the application?
Here's what I mean. My interviewer has said that they (the interviewers) do not see my Harvard application. So during the interview, should I go over things that were on my app (the topics I wrote my essays on, things I really stressed, etc.) or should I use the interview as a chance to give Harvard MORE information about myself that I couldn't fit on the app?
For example, on my Harvard application, I really stressed my volunteer work, my eBay business, and my future dreams (to create a successful charity--this sort of ties in with my volunteer work). I didn't really mention my passion for statistics and academics in general. I only briefly mentioned ballet, which I've been doing for 12 years and counting. So in my interview, should I repeat my stories about my volunteer work/eBay/future dreams or should I discuss my passion for ballet/statistics/etc?
The interview is a way for Harvard to get to know the applicant even better. So I thought perhaps it would be better for me to talk about ballet etc. because Harvard doesn't really know that part of me. If I were to talk about my eBay business in the interview, the interviewer would write that into their recommendation. However, Harvard would already know about eBay and it might become redundant.
But at the same time, I thought that maybe it would be better to reinforce my volunteer work/eBay/future dreams in the interview, since those are really what make me unique and those are the ones that have the best "stories" behind them. After all, those topics were "meaty" enough that I could write essays about them, whereas I don't think I have enough to say about ballet that I could write an essay about it.
And if you recommend a balance of both, should I talk about 50/50 old information & new information, or 70/30, etc.
This is a problem that is nice to have! This student obviously has a few different narratives about her life that she has successfully developed into what I imagine is a strong application. Rather than getting distracted by dozens of extracurriculars, she has chosen to focus on a few activities where she has excelled. This is smart. But now her problem is she has other narratives that she wasn't able to fit in. What to do?
The answer is easy, but will probably frustrate you. I recommend forgetting any sort of ratios, but instead focusing on connecting with your interviewer. You may hope that your interviewer is taking copious notes and will provide Harvard with an exact transcript of your conversation, but this is not the case. We have the option of talking about specifics:
"Jennifer shows exceptional perseverance by continuing with a demanding ballet schedule even as she excels in her academics. She has performed in half a dozens acclaimed shows and has been invited to travel to NYC to audition for a number of companies upon graduation."
But we are just as likely to write:
"Jennifer is bright and talented. She shows great commitment to activities she is passionate about, and perseveres even when it is not easy or immediately gratifying. She would be a terrific fit at Harvard. This is the kind of person I would have liked to be friends with when I was a student there. I think she can be both a leader and an inspiration to others in the student body."
See? No mention of ballet at all. But still a great recommendation. So, if you're counting on your interview to fill in the missing gaps on your application, don't. That's (kind of) the bad news. The good news, however, is that this is not the point of the interview. The point of the interview is for Harvard to get to know you as a person. So do that as best you can. Come into your interview with a few set "stories" about yourself - the Ebay business is a great one - but be flexible enough to shift gears if you need to.
Let's say your interviewer is a former ballerina herself. You really connect with her on that front - by all means, mention ballet. But do it for the right reasons - to connect with your interviewer, not because you want her to put a check mark somewhere. Also, you kind of answer your question yourself - you say there is not enough in ballet for you to write an essay about. If that's truly how you feel, then a brief secondary mention is all it deserves. Personally, I think if you've been engaged in something for twelve years, there is probaby a story there. Remember, not all stories have to be about you being successful. It sounds from your email like your "tangible" accomplishments in ballet (winning awards, being cast in shows, performing in professional troupes, are limited). So are you a ballerina despite the fact that you're not as good at it as you are at other things (like statistics?) That's a story, and frankly says something very good about you. I'll let you draw the conclusion.
You throw in "passion for academics" - honestly, this is a given. Everyone applying is passionate about academics. If there is something that sets you apart, talk about it. Otherwise, leave it alone. There was a girl years ago who was homeless while she was in high school, but was passionate enough about her academics to maintain her grades even while she slept in homeless shelters and train stations. That's a rare instance of where you may want to talk about it. You mention statistics - is there a story behind this? Have you done some work in the field that sets you apart? Are you using statistics to improve your Ebay business? (If you can combine two narratives, even better!) Dig deep inside yourself and find the reason why you love it and how that makes you different.
There is one exception to everything I've said here - if something has changed significantly between the time you applied and your interview. Have you won a Novel Prize? Did the non-profit you founded just raise ten million dollars to build schools in Afghanistan? Did you sell a script to Disney? These are over the top examples, but you get the idea. If this is the case - do find a way to talk about it. Explicitly tell your interviewer that you did not write about it on your app because it hadn't happened yet. Oh, and if it *is* something seriously huge, it may be worthwhile calling the admissions office to let them know.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Disabilities and academic performance
[Note: I use the term “disability” here to refer to a range of conditions ranging from stuttering and dyslexia to autism. I don’t really like “disability” because it implies a lack of ability, which is not true: students with these conditions tend to have more ability that they’ve worked harder to develop. If you have a better catch-all, please leave a comment and tell me!]
A question came in from a parent whose son was diagnosed with autism. He wants to know: should his son mention this in the interview, especially since it has affected his English scores and his social development?
Absolutely. Interviewers do not receive a copy of the application, so they go in cold. The only thing we know about a student’s background is what you tell us. The best way to bring up a disability is in the context of telling the interviewer about yourself: what has made you person you are today. Focus on what you’ve been able to accomplish, not on how it has held you back. Here are some good places to bring that up:
- Talk about your disability in the context of your family. Your parents have imbued you with strength by always believing that you could accomplish anything, and were willing to put in the extra work to help you do it.
- Talk about your disability in the context of what makes you a good candidate. Describe ways you were able to use what you learned with respect to your disability in other areas of your life. Maybe you were able to persevere where your classmates gave up because you have more experience working through obstacles.
- Talk about your disability in the context of your greatest accomplishment. Maybe your proudest moment was not taking first place in the regional Math competition, but finally mastering the concept of synonyms.
For instance, in this case if this student’s English scores are not high relative to Harvard averages, but have improved significantly through his hard work, this is what he should be talking about, not apologizing or trying to make excuses. If a disability has given you any unique insights into the world around you, talk about that. Have you met people with other disabilities through your experiences? Gotten involved with nonprofits that work with the disabled in developing countries? Acquired a depth of character that many people your age lack?
I talk a lot on this blog about the value of perseverance and fortitude. Talking about how you’ve overcome disabilities is a great way to showcase that. Done correctly, it can actually make your application stronger.
So, some parting thoughts:
1. Practice, practice, practice! If you’re shy or hesitant in bringing up your disability, rehearse so that it sounds natural and confident. Try to bring it up early rather than later on in the interview.
2. Don’t apologize. Don’t present it as an excuse. You’re sitting at the same table (metaphorically) with Harvard applicants all over the country who’ve been selected from a very competitive pool. The admissions committee already thinks you’re qualified. But unlike everyone else, you’ve had to work much harder to be here. Be proud of it.
A question came in from a parent whose son was diagnosed with autism. He wants to know: should his son mention this in the interview, especially since it has affected his English scores and his social development?
Absolutely. Interviewers do not receive a copy of the application, so they go in cold. The only thing we know about a student’s background is what you tell us. The best way to bring up a disability is in the context of telling the interviewer about yourself: what has made you person you are today. Focus on what you’ve been able to accomplish, not on how it has held you back. Here are some good places to bring that up:
- Talk about your disability in the context of your family. Your parents have imbued you with strength by always believing that you could accomplish anything, and were willing to put in the extra work to help you do it.
- Talk about your disability in the context of what makes you a good candidate. Describe ways you were able to use what you learned with respect to your disability in other areas of your life. Maybe you were able to persevere where your classmates gave up because you have more experience working through obstacles.
- Talk about your disability in the context of your greatest accomplishment. Maybe your proudest moment was not taking first place in the regional Math competition, but finally mastering the concept of synonyms.
For instance, in this case if this student’s English scores are not high relative to Harvard averages, but have improved significantly through his hard work, this is what he should be talking about, not apologizing or trying to make excuses. If a disability has given you any unique insights into the world around you, talk about that. Have you met people with other disabilities through your experiences? Gotten involved with nonprofits that work with the disabled in developing countries? Acquired a depth of character that many people your age lack?
I talk a lot on this blog about the value of perseverance and fortitude. Talking about how you’ve overcome disabilities is a great way to showcase that. Done correctly, it can actually make your application stronger.
So, some parting thoughts:
1. Practice, practice, practice! If you’re shy or hesitant in bringing up your disability, rehearse so that it sounds natural and confident. Try to bring it up early rather than later on in the interview.
2. Don’t apologize. Don’t present it as an excuse. You’re sitting at the same table (metaphorically) with Harvard applicants all over the country who’ve been selected from a very competitive pool. The admissions committee already thinks you’re qualified. But unlike everyone else, you’ve had to work much harder to be here. Be proud of it.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Interviews for the Introvert
What do you do if you are painfully shy? Or not even so painfully, but shy enough to feel uncomfortable talking about yourself?
Are interviews purposefully weighted towards the kid starring in the high school musical, not the one building Da Vinci-esque sets behind the curtains?
These questions were posed to me by a curious parent on CollegeConfidential, finishing with, "I just wonder what you might say about this, and is it the case that Harvard's student body is made up primarily of extroverts?"
This is actually a fascinating question. Here's why. When I was a high school senior, I looked at the college interview as a close-ended event. You do your interview, hopefully you get in, and then you're done - you never have to do it again. Much like the SAT. A one-time hoop you jump through and forget about.
But of course, I was eventually disabused of that notion because it's not true. The interview is more like a gateway. Because adulthood is filled with lots of interviews. Some of them are formal, like job interviews. Others are more casual (a meeting with the company president, an elevator pitch to an investor, an research presentation). And at the end of the day, what you are always selling is yourself.
In Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, he spends some time referencing successful scientists and dissecting the elements of their success. He focuses on Oppenheimer's ability to be convincing and persuasive. And his conclusion is that Oppenheimer succeeded where others could have failed not because he was brilliant, but because he knew how to communicate well.
So, is Harvard filled with extroverts?
In some ways, that's the wrong question to ask.
Are extroverts more successful than introverts?
The answer is, I don't know. My classes certainly were not filled with the types of extroverts who always want to be center stage, tap dancing the lead in every show, whether metaphorical or otherwise. But those who were introverted also understood the importance of being able to present well, whether in an interview or otherwise, and they worked on it. Because it's a skillset that isn't single-use.
And by the way - I would also offer this for thought: just being extroverted and confident is rarely enough to have a good interview. Being able to communicate well is a skill that goes well beyond that. I've interviewed confident, extroverted candidates who gave terrible interviews. They weren't prepared, they weren't thoughtful about their answers, and they expected to sail by on pure bravado and likeability. And guess what - it didn't work.
Are interviews purposefully weighted towards the kid starring in the high school musical, not the one building Da Vinci-esque sets behind the curtains?
These questions were posed to me by a curious parent on CollegeConfidential, finishing with, "I just wonder what you might say about this, and is it the case that Harvard's student body is made up primarily of extroverts?"
This is actually a fascinating question. Here's why. When I was a high school senior, I looked at the college interview as a close-ended event. You do your interview, hopefully you get in, and then you're done - you never have to do it again. Much like the SAT. A one-time hoop you jump through and forget about.
But of course, I was eventually disabused of that notion because it's not true. The interview is more like a gateway. Because adulthood is filled with lots of interviews. Some of them are formal, like job interviews. Others are more casual (a meeting with the company president, an elevator pitch to an investor, an research presentation). And at the end of the day, what you are always selling is yourself.
In Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, he spends some time referencing successful scientists and dissecting the elements of their success. He focuses on Oppenheimer's ability to be convincing and persuasive. And his conclusion is that Oppenheimer succeeded where others could have failed not because he was brilliant, but because he knew how to communicate well.
So, is Harvard filled with extroverts?
In some ways, that's the wrong question to ask.
Are extroverts more successful than introverts?
The answer is, I don't know. My classes certainly were not filled with the types of extroverts who always want to be center stage, tap dancing the lead in every show, whether metaphorical or otherwise. But those who were introverted also understood the importance of being able to present well, whether in an interview or otherwise, and they worked on it. Because it's a skillset that isn't single-use.
And by the way - I would also offer this for thought: just being extroverted and confident is rarely enough to have a good interview. Being able to communicate well is a skill that goes well beyond that. I've interviewed confident, extroverted candidates who gave terrible interviews. They weren't prepared, they weren't thoughtful about their answers, and they expected to sail by on pure bravado and likeability. And guess what - it didn't work.
Monday, March 8, 2010
What (not) to wear
Dress code for interviews is a pretty basic affair. Wear something respectful and formal. Make the interviewer see that you take college admissions seriously.
When I email candidates, I often tell them that dressing casually is fine if it is more convenient. One of the main reasons I say this is that I ask candidates to meet me early on in the day, and if they are coming straight from school, I don't want them to feel obligated to show up to class looking like they're going to a wedding.
Most candidates don't take me up on this, and still arrive decked out in business suits. I appreciate that they are so respectful and take the interview seriously.
What to do if your interview (like me) gives you the option of casual dress? Or if they don't say anything at all?
It doesn't matter where you are meeting - an office, a house, a coffee, or a circus... but if you don't get any guidance, dress like you would to a job interview, a debate tournament or formal affair. For men, this means a suit. For women, slacks and a white shirt or sweater is nice if you have it, if you don't own anything quite that formal then muted colors and conservative attire is fine.
If you do have the option of dressing more casually, try to stay within the more conservative edge of that range. Think about it as something you would wear to church. If in doubt, dress more formally rather than less. It can't lose you any points, and your interviewer will appreciate it, even if she doesn't say so.
When I email candidates, I often tell them that dressing casually is fine if it is more convenient. One of the main reasons I say this is that I ask candidates to meet me early on in the day, and if they are coming straight from school, I don't want them to feel obligated to show up to class looking like they're going to a wedding.
Most candidates don't take me up on this, and still arrive decked out in business suits. I appreciate that they are so respectful and take the interview seriously.
What to do if your interview (like me) gives you the option of casual dress? Or if they don't say anything at all?
It doesn't matter where you are meeting - an office, a house, a coffee, or a circus... but if you don't get any guidance, dress like you would to a job interview, a debate tournament or formal affair. For men, this means a suit. For women, slacks and a white shirt or sweater is nice if you have it, if you don't own anything quite that formal then muted colors and conservative attire is fine.
If you do have the option of dressing more casually, try to stay within the more conservative edge of that range. Think about it as something you would wear to church. If in doubt, dress more formally rather than less. It can't lose you any points, and your interviewer will appreciate it, even if she doesn't say so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
