For me it was at a big house in a wealthy suburb, and we talked one on one in the living room. There was no real guidance or explanation other than here is the time and place.
From what I could remember, the alumni interviewer was kind, I just couldn't articulate answers to his questions as I was unprepared and didn't know what to expect. With some insight on the process, I probably could have done better, but it doesn't really matter.
I ended up on a different path and am content with where it lead.
My larger point is that there are many little ways where legacy advantages can leak through even if you have an explicit policy of not considering it.
I think alumni interviews are such a possible mechanism of still factoring in legacy status or making this advantages stand out without it being on the application.
> My larger point is that there are many little ways where legacy advantages can leak through even if you have an explicit policy of not considering it.
I mean, if we are going down this rabbithole, your "legacy advantage" definition can be shoehorned into literally anything.
I moved to the US midway through high school, with very barebones english and zero understanding of how college admissions process works. I didn't know what SAT was until about a year before I had to take it. Is it a legacy advantage if someone grew up in the US and was familiar with the process ahead of time and was able to optimize for it?
Is having plenty of time to dedicate to studying, instead of spending your time helping parents [who lack any english] translate documents and help with tons of basic life things, like opening a bank account, a legacy advantage?
What about some wealthy first gen international students who have great tutors and know all ins and outs of the american college admissions processes? Is this a legacy advantage, despite their parents never having attended a college in the US (or, very often, not having attended a college at all)?
There is a clear definition of what legacy admissions is when people talk about it, and what you are describing ain't it.
From what I could remember, the alumni interviewer was kind, I just couldn't articulate answers to his questions as I was unprepared and didn't know what to expect. With some insight on the process, I probably could have done better, but it doesn't really matter.
I ended up on a different path and am content with where it lead.
My larger point is that there are many little ways where legacy advantages can leak through even if you have an explicit policy of not considering it.
I think alumni interviews are such a possible mechanism of still factoring in legacy status or making this advantages stand out without it being on the application.