UChicago should not have replaced interviews with videos

With college application season around the corner for seniors, students are beginning to take note of changes in the application process, most notably from some of the more prestigious schools. Among these was the University of Chicago’s decision to start accepting video presentations from applicants in place of traditional alumni interviews — a decision that seems questionable at best. 

Over the years, the college admissions process has changed drastically. Colleges now place less emphasis on standardized test scores and GPAs; instead, they are focusing more on extracurriculars, essays and letters of recommendation.

These changes do make sense in an era of grade and test score inflation. Admissions officers must instead turn to intangible criteria such as character and grit to determine who they give their limited seats to.

Essays, extracurriculars and letters of recommendations all give admissions officers qualitative information about a student’s interests and personality much more effectively than raw numbers can. For some schools, alumni interviews can be another important piece of gaining more personal insights about applicants. By sitting down and having a brief conversation, interviewers get to see the more unpolished but authentic side of an applicant. 

While essays and letters of recommendation may reveal a lot of information about a student’s background, a sit-down interview can show colleges whether students corroborate what they say in their essays and have the manners and qualities of a person that they would want to commit to for the next four years.

For its part, the University of Chicago says it is replacing interviews for good reasons. For one, they lack the resources for all the requested interviews: Doing a large number of interviews is not easy and practical, especially if an admitted student ultimately decides to go to another school. 

Moreover, college interviews can last for hours, while the University of Chicago wants applying students to submit videos that are around 2 minutes. No doubt this new format will certainly save admissions officers a lot of time. 

Despite these benefits, replacing the interview with a video profile is still an decision that does not seem well thought out. Although the university says that a more informal selfie-style video is just as good as a professionally lit and shot video, one can imagine that a cleaner and better shot video would subconsciously give a better impression of an applicant. 

Furthermore, videos can be edited and rehearsed, so that negative aspects of a person can be hidden. This makes videos an arguably “glorified” essay as both showcase a select portion of an applicant’s background and personality. The 2 minutes depicted in a video cannot exhibit much about the applicant, so the unbiased opinions of a physical interviewer should be weighed more heavily than what an applicant will record about himself. 

Finally, students who have experience in working with videos, or whose parents have the wealth to hire professional help making them, have huge and unfair advantages. Although Chicago may think that a video profile may be more important in this day and age, an old fashioned interview is the better choice to discover an applicant’s true personality. While there is still room for improvement in many aspects of the college application process, the alumni interview is one that should be left alone.