All In: Expanding Access through Nationally Competitive Awards

3. Enough about Me, What Do You Think about Me?

19 3 EnoughaboutMe,WhatDoYouThinkaboutMe? SurvivingtheTrumanInterview tara YGlesias Tara Yglesias has served as the deputy executive secretary of the Truman Foundation for the past eight years and has been involved in the selection of Truman Scholars since 2001. During this time she had the opportunity to study the trends and characteristics of each incoming class of scholars. She used this knowledge to assist in the development of new foundation programs and initiatives, as well as the design of a new foundation website and online application system. An attorney by training, she began her career by spending six years in the office of the public defender in Fulton County, Georgia. She specialized in trial work and serious felonies but also assisted with the training of new attorneys. A former Truman Scholar from Pennsylvania, she also served as a senior scholar at the Truman Scholars Leadership Week and the foundation’s Public Service Law Conference prior to joining the foundation’s staff. 20 • Tara Yglesias Few things can derail an accomplished candidate or an otherwise reasonable faculty advisor quite like an interview experience that turns out to be unsuccessful. This disappointment is acute and often lasting. for candidates the experience can sour everything they learned during the process. for advisors an unsuccessful interview, particularly for a favored candidate, can lead to a full-blown existential crisis. The Truman foundation often deals with the fallout from these experiences—most often in the form of faculty advisors who call us to find out what they might have done differently. In most cases the answer is the always unfulfilling nothing. The difference between a Truman finalist and a Truman scholar is often one of tiny margins wholly outside the control of the advisor and, in some cases, the candidate. Understanding the uncontrollable nature of the interview process is vital to understanding both how best to prepare candidates for the experience and how to deal with the outcome. This essay discusses the nature of the interviews, provides suggestions for candidate preparation, and offers advice for dealing with the aftermath . Though much of this material is generic to many interview situations , the lessons learned are mainly drawn from the Truman interview process. The Interview: Fickle Food on a Shifting Plate If a school is able to produce finalists with some regularity, the institution ’s Truman program is both identifying the right candidates and presenting the students in the best possible light. The Truman foundation considers having finalists, not scholars, to be a true marker of the success of an individual institution. We realize universities may feel differently. We make this distinction because once advisors have (repeatedly) hit the submit button on a student’s application, their part in the process— the part that is controlled, monitored, and knowable—is over. Advisors can work with students to craft prose of heartbreaking quality. recommendation letters can provide compelling and vibrant details. The Truman faculty representative can write the single-best letter of nomination ever, moving the committee to rapturous tears. Advisors can even channel lydia Grant during mock interviews (“you want the Truman? Well, the Truman costs. And right here is where you start paying—in Enough about Me, What Do You Think about Me? • 21 sweat”), but advisors are controlling only the preparation of the candidate . Preparation will go only so far and does not guarantee results. Even the best-prepared finalist is at the whim of the inherently subjective interview process. yes, I used the s-word. Although we provide our panelists with explicit instructions about our criteria, do our best to guard against interviewer bias, and endeavor to give each finalist the same consideration, the process necessarily has subjective elements.1 Understanding the nature of the Truman interview begins with a thorough and, likely, somewhat dull explanation of the interview process . our panelists receive the applications about two weeks prior to the interview date. Along with the applications, we send guidance from the foundation, a list of suggested questions,2 and a copy of our Bulletin of Information.3 We provide a schedule and a blank form to allow the panelists to write comments or, if they wish, score the materials. The guidance given to the panelists begins by reminding them that they are the foundation’s “investment committee.” The choice of words is deliberate. By naming a student as a Truman scholar, the panelists will require the investment of a good deal of foundation...