Student Advice on College Interviews

When students think about college applications, there’s a natural list of things they all start stressing about: college research, financial aid, college essays, recommendations, and college interviews. Each element of the application may not be equally important, but they should all combine to make the most compelling application. One of the elements that is regarded with less importance is the college interview. Not every university conducts alumni interviews, and not every applicant will receive on either. So, don’t let this be a top concern of yours. In fact, they are usually very human conversations, and a chance for you to find out more about the university you applied and the alumni network. Take it from these students at Brown, Yale, Middlebury, Stanford and Georgetown who went through the application season just last year! mouse43Yale University ‘20I interviewed on-campus at Yale and had a disheartening experience. I showed up wearing jeans because the dress I had packed and planned to wear ripped last-minute in a rather inappropriate location. My interviewer also asked only one question about me. I had to force information about myself into the conversation - and maybe testing my assertiveness and resilience was his very intent -, but it was overall a very unproductive, non-educational experience and a waste of thirty minutes. But, I still got in early. Dont lose hope, and never count yourself out. Katherine2020 Brown University ‘20 I began to regret applying to Princeton after my interview. My interviewer was kind of a jerk, he came late and then, after hearing about my interests he was completely fixated on talking about my post-college plans. After I mentioned I was interested in Rabbinical school, he told me that I dont need to go to Princeton. And after talking to him, I certainly didnt want to! Naomi Cutler Middlebury College ‘20 I only interviewed with Middlebury because I was reluctant to reach out to other schools when visiting. Middlebury contacted me after my application was turned in and I accepted because I did not want to hurt my chances in any way. Although I have no idea if my interview had any influence on my acceptance, it was definitely a good life experience. I would recommend that students reach out at least to their top choice schools. Its also great practice for a job interview someday!Gw1998Stanford University ‘20I interviewed with most of the schools I applied to, but giving my experience for specific interviewers probably wont help because every interviewer is different! Overall, I think the interview should be a place where you can show your personality and your passion. Dont focus on your application details or just re-stating your EC list. Show why you joined those activities, what you feel about those activities. Demonstrate your interest in your major, or your intellectual curio sity. In my personal experience, the interviewers who are nicer are often less helpful because theyll let you get away with comfortably regurgitating your application details. If your interviewer doesnt push you to go further in exploring your interests and passions, make sure to bring it up yourself!Emmarhodes Georgetown University ‘20 I interviewed with Pomona, Georgetown, Brown, and Tufts. My Georgetown, Tufts, and Pomona interviews lasted about an hour. For the Georgetown one, we mainly talked about my extracurriculars, why I wanted to go to Georgetown, and any questions I had about the school. Tufts and Pomona were similar, but my Pomona interviewer asked some more unexpected questions like If you could give a TED Talk, what would it be? and What is your educational philosophy? which I was not really expecting. My Brown interview went the best because one of my extracurricular activities related to my interviewers job, so we bonded over that, and because my interviewer was just really nice! Before getting my decisions back I thought interviews were a big deal, so I was really worried that I missed the deadlines for signing up for a few of my interviews. In the end it didnt seem like the interviews made much difference, so I would look at them as a friendly conversation with someone getting to know you and not s tress about them! Use it as a chance to show them your personality and try to bring out stories that arent included in the rest of your application! Are youjust starting to build outyour college list? Make sure to search through profiles of students accepted to see essays, stats, and advice. See how they got in, and how you can too!

Traits Theory in Leadership

Traits Theory in Leadership Introduction Leadership was first used by Greeks to refer to those who were known as first among equals. The term involved operations on the platform of accountability which was used in enhancing equity within the society. Assertiveness, courage, and imitation were some of the traits considered to be responsible for leadership effectiveness amongst individuals (Zaccaro, 1991).Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Traits Theory in Leadership specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The success of any group is attributed to the kind of leadership it has or operates under. Successful leadership entails delegation of group interests with respect to individuals’ association with specific policies. Thus leadership involves combination of traits that could be incubated and propagated through an organization and includes all members. Qualities of a leader Leadership means ability to influence and extend necessary suppor t to others making them work towards achieving specific goals. A leader posses various qualities which include being dynamic, tactful, motivator, orator, futurist, good analyzer, social, supportive and should have job related knowledge. A leader should be the kind of person capable and ready of taking any risk amidst controversial issues. He should have the ability of putting his juniors on toes for the purposes of achieving important goals. Good communication forms part of leadership since messages and objectives need to be articulated through clear and well understood means. Interractiveness form part of socialization where a leader is required to mingle with his subordinates and even offer them support within different areas of need (Zaccaro, 1991). Traits of leadership Hypothesis shows that history has since been shaped by extraordinary leadership; this forms critical starting point for the trait theory of leadership (Zaccaro, 1991). Trait theory argues that leadership fully dep ends on the personal qualities of the leader. Some researchers were acknowledged earlier for the manner through which they applied trait theory, one of them being Bowden 1926. Cowley 1931, summarized by indicating that understanding of leadership required the study of traits. Table 1 below, gives the level of interractiveness involved in traits of leadership. Self confidence appears in all but two of the reviews, whereas other traits including adjustment, sociability and integrity tend to appear in multiple reviews though not consistent (Anderson, 1978).Advertising Looking for critical writing on psychology? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Dominance emerged as an important leadership trait within some major reviews. An important observation is the exclusive trait of self confidence; none of the traits emerged as related to leadership in the majority of these reviews (Mann, 1959). Table 1: Review of traits of effectiv e or emergent leaders Leadership Criteria There is general agreement that a five factor model of personality developed by some personalities in early nineteen sixties could be used to describe the most critical aspects of personality (Goldberg, 1990). Traits studied in the five factor model include; Neuroticism, nature of being open towards experiences, extraversion, agreeableness and Conscientiousness. However, several ways emerged on how leadership could be assessed explicitly. Two distinctive classes of leadership emerged which were referred to as leadership emergence and leadership effectiveness. The former refers to the nature of quality as seen by other people concerning leadership’s capability of an individual. This may not be such accurate since the analysis is based on limited knowledge about the leader. Personality traits of an individual leader are deeply explored before making any applicable conclusion. Neuroticism This could be referred to as the status where an individual posses weak emotions towards events. This leads to stressful emotional reactions and experiences. Reviews done by Bass (1990) showed positive correlation in studies on self confidence that showed low levels of neuroticism to leadership. Self esteem an indicator of low neuroticism is thought to be a factor in both senior and subordinate staff within organizations.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Traits Theory in Leadership specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Neurotic individuals as indicated by some authors are less likely to be perceived as leaders. In consideration of these facts, neuroticism is thought to be negatively related to leader emergence and leadership effectiveness. Extraversion An extravert person is thought to possess leadership traits which make him/her active, assertive, energetic, restless and not easily withdrawn from circumstances (Gough, 1988). According to Costa 1988, extrave rsion is strongly related to social leadership whereas other publications agree that extraversion leads to emergence of a leader within groups. Extraverts are viewed by others to possess unique leadership traits that are of great importance within the field. Leaders are more likely expected to be more energetic as compared to non leaders, they are required to have more stamina and be generally active, lively, and often restless, (Kirkpatrick and Locke 1991). Major facets among extraverts thought to be leaders comprises of dominance and sociability, (Gough, 1990). There is a general feeling that links extroverts to leadership emergence which is mostly associated with leadership effectiveness. Openness This represents the status where leaders are expected to be mentally alert and autonomous when conducting events. According to Bass 1990, openness is the most vital trait of leadership. Openness shows a positive correlation to personality based upon behavioural measures of creativity. T his trait also correlates with the ability to think widely beyond limitations placed by human will. Creativity appears to be an important skill to effective leaders. Research indicates that creativity is linked to effective leadership. There is a consensus belief which suggests that open individuals are more likely to emerge as effective leaders at any given place. Agreeableness This involves the status of being considerate towards situations and events. Zaccaro 1991 discovered that interpersonal sensitivity was related to leadership. Altruism, tact and sensitivity are hallmarks of agreeable personality and would suggest that leaders should be more agreeable.Advertising Looking for critical writing on psychology? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Agreeable individuals are likely to be modest and they tend not to be excessively modest as well as being affiliated to certain groups (Bass, 1990; Goldberg, 1990). Need for affiliation appears to be negatively related to leadership in some circumstances (Yukl, 1998). These factors suggest that agreeableness would be negatively related to leadership. In light of these conflicting justifications, the possible relationship between agreeableness and leadership appear little bit ambiguous. Conscientiousness This involves leadership with the end result in mind; the leader proves dependable in times of need and ensures tasks are appropriately completed. Effectiveness for the group and reinforcement of the tendencies all depends on the leadership positioning (Bass, 1990). According to Barrick 1991, conscientiousness is related to job performance which in turn depends on leader effectiveness. Kirkpatrick and Locke 1991 noted that leaders should be tirelessly persistent in their activities a nd follow through with their programs. Conscientious individuals should have more tenacity and persistence therefore expected to make excellently effective leaders that conscientious individuals will be more effective leaders (Goldberg, 1990). Trait theories have been used for the purposes of differentiating between leaders and non leaders. Qualities such as ambition, energy, eagerness to lead, honesty, integrity, self confidence, intelligence, and job relevant knowledge are those which differentiates leaders from non-leaders. Those who find pleasure in shepherding others are considered to make good leaders. Several theories were developed in the process of describing traits. Path goal theory This theory was discovered by Robert House. It involves the extraction of key elements on structure initiation and consideration from Ohio state leadership structure. Also the theory incorporates expectancy theory of motivation. The theory argues that it is upon leaders to help their followers and ensure that they achieve the necessary goals in life and within particular organizations. Four types of leaders’ behaviours are described within this theory; directive behaviours which enable followers easily imitate what is expected of them. Supportive behaviours which shows lots of concern to members, then there is participative behaviour which makes a leader be more consultative with those he/she leads. Finally, there is an achievement behaviour which makes the leader to challenge members through setting of higher goals. Leader Participation Model This is the kind of model which relates leadership behaviour and the level of his/her participation in decision making. This model provides rules which are helpful in the process of analysing leader’s contributions. The levels of participation are drawn against personality traits of the leader under review. Qualities such as ability to communicate effectively, ability to relate freely with members and other employees a nd also training qualities are considered within this model. Conclusion Barrick and Mount (1991), investigated the relationship of the Big Five traits to leadership pooling across the leadership criteria. Conceptually leadership effectiveness and emergence are distinct constructs. Effectiveness and emergence in leadership are analyzed through measures and observations by other people’s perception of leadership. There exists a strong link to ascertain that Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness are related to multiple leadership criteria and that these traits display significant relationships with leadership in combined analysis. Emphasis should be given on the importance of teamwork within the various individuals within any group. Leadership requires proper attention to team members through various means which includes providing appropriate advices on ways of improving the overall performances. Leaders should ensure that all the programs used appropriately towards strengthen ing of group members making them ready for any challenging task. At the same time leadership roles should be reinforced through delegation of some duties to individual members; this ensures that all employees and members are actively involved in the running of the team. Leaders should learn to engage the staff in open conversations and record every crucial matter that arises from the conversations. They should also be involved in teaching and guiding the team through various processes and showing them various ways of solving specific problems. Leaders should learn the importance of prioritizing events both on short term and long term basis. In this way it is easy to provide leadership towards utilization of available resources on areas which require immediate attention in the quest for providing quality services. They should be capable of selecting competent members having the capability of working towards achieving the laid down long term objectives. Leaders chosen in every departm ent should have the capability of playing supervisory roles ensuring provision of quality services. Trait theories have been effectively applied for the purposes of differentiating leaders. It makes it easier to identify and associate highly flexible people with leadership, this is since they have dynamic capabilities which enables them to adequately monitor others. References Anderson, G. Viswesvaran, C., 1998. An Update of the Validity of Personality Scales in Personnel Selection. Paper presented at the 13th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, TX; Dallas. Print. Barrick, M. R. Mount, M. K., 1991. The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, (44), pp.1–26. Bass, B. M., 1990. Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership. New York: Free Press. Bowden, A. O., 1926. A study of the Personality of Student Leaders in the United States. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, (21) , pp. 149–160. Costa, P. T. McCrae, R. R., 1988. Personality in Adulthood: A six-year Longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (54), pp.853–863. Cowley, W. H., 1931. Three Distinctions in the Study of Leaders. Journal of  Abnormal and Social Psychology, (26), pp. 304–313. Goldberg, L. R., 1990. An alternative â€Å"description of personality†: The Big-Five Factor Structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (59), pp.1216–1229. Gough, H. G., 1988. Manual for the California Psychological Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Hughes, R. L. Curphy, G. J., 1996. Leadership. Boston: Irwin McGraw Hill. Kirkpatrick, S. A. Locke, E. A., 1991. Leadership: Do traits matter? Academy of Management Executive, (5), pp. 48–60. Mann, R. D., 1959. A review of the relationships between personality and Performance in small groups. Ps ychological Bulletin, (56), pp. 241–270. Stogdill, R. M., 1974. Handbook of Leadership. New York: Free Press. Yukl, G. Van Fleet, D. D., 1992. Theory and research on leadership in Organizations. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, (3), pp. 147–197 Zaccaro, S. J. Kenny, D. A., 1991. Self Monitoring and Trait based Variance in leadership: An investigation of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, (76), pp. 308–315.