Of course they’re being watched. You don’t think a receptionist is going to let the big boss know that the interviewee was rude to her? And you don’t think the big boss (if s/he’s halfway decent) is going to take that into account?
You want a position, whether it’s in grad school or at a job. I think it would behoove you to make the best impression possible, and that does NOT include bringing along a child and changing a diaper in the conference room.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Waitso, you think dumb is the same thing as socially inept?
[/QUOTE]
It depends. The behaviour described in the OP is so far past socially inept that it’s quite comfortably into wilfully dumb territory. I don’t care how sheltered someone is, they should be able to look at that behaviour and say “wow, what massive dicks.” You say “socially inept” and I think of someone being a bit shy, stumbling over words, etc. - inoffensive, easily ignored mannerisms. I deal with a whole bunch of students like this. Swanning up like you’re the kings of the world, and expecting everyone to literally put up with your shit is a whole different category, and deserves no special consideration.
As for warning people that they’re “being watched” - well, again, anyone who doesn’t realise the importance of making a good first impression with what is, in effect, a prospective employer is not “socially inept”; they’re flat-out dumb.
Are they told?
Not in so many words. But when most people meet with an “admissions person,” I think they realize that that person might have something to do with their “admission.” Most people I see are definitely on their most winning behavior. Initial emails are impeccably written, people come prepared with questions and take notes on my answers, and sometimes thank-you cards are mailed.
Their behavior isn’t specifically “watched.” Like I said, most of the time I don’t say a word to the departments about people. It’s only on the departments’ specific request that I warn them about any real nuts.
They were late for an interview, acted resentful that they were called on it, and they were extremely unprofessional during.
They obviously didn’t want the graduate appointment very badly, so fuck 'em.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Waitso, you think dumb is the same thing as socially inept?
So you think if someone is stupid, they are ipso facto socially inept?
And you also think if someone is socially inept, they are ipso facto stupid?
Are you not aware of any of the numerous counterexamples to both of these claims? Or do you not understand that these two claims are what your own claim amounts to?
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
I would counter by pointing out that there are different kinds of stupidity. Someone can be very stupid at one thing, and very smart at another. In truth, there are very few people who are stupid about everything. Almost everyone is good at something. For that matter, almost everyone is stupid at something, too. This thread is about the social stupidity of these two people, so for the purposes of this thread, they are stupid. They may be brilliant at other things, but that’s immaterial for our purposes here, which is about the impression these people left on someone who has considerable influence over wether or not they are able to pursue something that they are interested in. In that regard, they were stupid.
People.
They were 45 minutes late for a professional interview.
That should be the end of all possible objections.
[QUOTE=ivylass]
Of course they’re being watched. You don’t think a receptionist is going to let the big boss know that the interviewee was rude to her? And you don’t think the big boss (if s/he’s halfway decent) is going to take that into account?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think of the people a quarter of the way across campus in my School’s administration (i.e. the School of Humanities, of which my department is only one among several) as having any particularly direct input with my department about prospective graduate students. It doesn’t strike me that things work that way around here at my University (or at least my part of my University). But maybe I’m wrong, and even if I’m right, maybe different Universities and different Schools work differently, and that’s okay. It just don’t think the “of course” in your post is quite justified.
-FrL-
[QUOTE=Miller]
I would counter by pointing out that there are different kinds of stupidity. Someone can be very stupid at one thing, and very smart at another. In truth, there are very few people who are stupid about everything. Almost everyone is good at something. For that matter, almost everyone is stupid at something, too. This thread is about the social stupidity of these two people, so for the purposes of this thread, they are stupid. They may be brilliant at other things, but that’s immaterial for our purposes here, which is about the impression these people left on someone who has considerable influence over wether or not they are able to pursue something that they are interested in. In that regard, they were stupid.
[/QUOTE]
I was asking what this person’s social stupidity had to do with their qualifications as a grad student. Someone else said it was relevant because stupid people aren’t qualified to go to grad school. I tried to highlight my original point–that social stupidity and academic stupidity are dfiferent things, not necessarily relevant to each other. In your post, quoted above, you explain the same point.
Their social stupidity may “disqualify” them in some practical, scare-quote-worthy sense, but it doesn’t disqualify them in the strict sense. That’s why I asked my question–I wanted to know what the OP’s official capacity was, such that it allowed the OP’s judgment about the person’s social stupidity to have adminstrative relevance to judments about their competence for academic work.
-FrL-
I wonder if, in the future, a lucky biographer of some famous genius finds this thread in some obscure archive and goes “Aha! The mistery of why [famous genius] initially failed to get into Grad School is finally solved - he/she annoyed the admissions officer with boorish child-minding behaviour and lack of punctuality!” 
[QUOTE=TheMerchandise]
Are they told?
Not in so many words. But when most people meet with an “admissions person,” I think they realize that that person might have something to do with their “admission.” Most people I see are definitely on their most winning behavior. Initial emails are impeccably written, people come prepared with questions and take notes on my answers, and sometimes thank-you cards are mailed.
[/quote]
Okay, I’m just failing to concieve of what your role in the process is, which is my fault, not yours. But clearly it’s one most people understand to be important to the University’s admission process.
Sorry, the thing is, I concieve of myself as socially inept, and I have a tendency to fail to pick up on some of the kinds of cues other people here are calling obvious (though I’m nowhere near as bad as the person described in the OP) so I have a tendency to sympathize with the idiot in situations like this. Because I myself am one. You see. 
In particular, I know for a fact I am likely not to understand the administrative significance of an interview with someone like you, because I just don’t get administration and beaurocracy. I don’t know who cares about what or why, and its hard for me to concieve of myself as talking to an entity and not just to an individual. I would totally do something stupid in an interview with you (wouldn’t change my kid’s diaper because that’s just rude and weird in general regardless of the identity of the innocent bystander) because, well, I tend to be just that clueless.
Yet, for all that, you see, I am a total genius. 
-FrL-
(who once failed to get a position because he failed to dress appropriately for the interview. I showed up in a t-shirt. The HR guy said all the comments on my interview were great, but they couldn’t get passed my inappropriate clothing! I just didn’t know that kind of thing mattered!
[QUOTE=Frylock]
I don’t think of the people a quarter of the way across campus in my School’s administration (i.e. the School of Humanities, of which my department is only one among several) as having any particularly direct input with my department about prospective graduate students. It doesn’t strike me that things work that way around here at my University (or at least my part of my University). But maybe I’m wrong, and even if I’m right, maybe different Universities and different Schools work differently, and that’s okay. It just don’t think the “of course” in your post is quite justified.
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
This is exactly how the undergraduate admissions office works at my school. The counselors have very little daily contact with the undergraduate departments. But then again, undergraduate admissions is far more “rule oriented.” SAT score must be BLAH. GPA must be BLAH. THIS MANY extracurricular.
The graduate admissions office is fairly autonomous from the university at large and works very closely with individual departments. I’ll talk to coordinators from various departments several times a day. Most of them work in the building next door to mine. We’ll grab drinks after work. It’s all very close-knit.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
(wouldn’t change my kid’s diaper because that’s just rude and weird in general regardless of the identity of the innocent bystander)
[/QUOTE]
That you identify as socially inept and yet realize this is not okay (and, presumably, would realize that being 45 minutes late to an interview, any interview, without a good explanation is also not okay) should tell you that these people were well beyond merely “socially inept”.
Ah, well, that’s easy. If they let the socially stupid people in, they’ll have to spend more time around the socially stupid people. Which is unpleasant because socially, they’re quite stupid. In any sort of job interview type situation, you’ve basically got two things to worry about: making the interviewer think you can do the job, and making the interviewer like you. If he doesn’t like you, he’s not going to want to hire you, because odds are, there are plenty of other qualified people who aren’t social idiots, and who won’t make going to work everyday the equivalent of chewing on a big ol’ ball of tin foil.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Their social stupidity may “disqualify” them in some practical, scare-quote-worthy sense, but it doesn’t disqualify them in the strict sense.
[/QUOTE]
Anybody who takes the time to investigate the admissions process should be aware of what a highly competitive process it is. Anybody who take the time to investigate the admissions process should also be aware that every single contact they make with a potential institution, be it an e-mail or a telephone call to set up an appointment, is going to reflect on the credibility of the candidate. One cannot successfully be a graduate student without also possessing a sense of responsibility and professionalism, as these potential students have so clearly demonstrated, they lack both.
There are those of us who care so much about our future education and career that we pore over every detail of what is expected and desired of us, and we make every conceivable effort to prove that we possess the intelligence and the professional capacity for serious graduate work.
If someone cannot take 12 goddamn minutes of their time to grok that graduate school is serious fucking business, they don’t fucking deserve to go to graduate school. They are just taking away time and precious resources from the rest of us. I don’t feel sorry for these people at all, I only feel sorry for the OP who has to wade through the trail of shit they leave behind.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Okay, I’m just failing to concieve of what your role in the process is, which is my fault, not yours. But clearly it’s one most people understand to be important to the University’s admission process.
Sorry, the thing is, I concieve of myself as socially inept, and I have a tendency to fail to pick up on some of the kinds of cues other people here are calling obvious (though I’m nowhere near as bad as the person described in the OP) so I have a tendency to sympathize with the idiot in situations like this. Because I myself am one. You see.
In particular, I know for a fact I am likely not to understand the administrative significance of an interview with someone like you, because I just don’t get administration and beaurocracy. I don’t know who cares about what or why, and its hard for me to concieve of myself as talking to an entity and not just to an individual. I would totally do something stupid in an interview with you (wouldn’t change my kid’s diaper because that’s just rude and weird in general regardless of the identity of the innocent bystander) because, well, I tend to be just that clueless.
Yet, for all that, you see, I am a total genius.
-FrL-
(who once failed to get a position because he failed to dress appropriately for the interview. I showed up in a t-shirt. The HR guy said all the comments on my interview were great, but they couldn’t get passed my inappropriate clothing! I just didn’t know that kind of thing mattered!
[/QUOTE]
In general, it is always a good idea to treat everyone well and with respect. For one thing its nice, for another, even the lowly receptionist might put in a bad word (or a good one) with whomever you do need to impress.
Showing up 45 minutes late to an interview isn’t respectful. When you are only given the remaining 10 minutes of your hour, throwing a fit about it isn’t respectful. That doesn’t even go into the dirty diapers.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
Okay, I’m just failing to concieve of what your role in the process is, which is my fault, not yours. But clearly it’s one most people understand to be important to the University’s admission process.
Sorry, the thing is, I concieve of myself as socially inept, and I have a tendency to fail to pick up on some of the kinds of cues other people here are calling obvious (though I’m nowhere near as bad as the person described in the OP) so I have a tendency to sympathize with the idiot in situations like this. Because I myself am one. You see.
In particular, I know for a fact I am likely not to understand the administrative significance of an interview with someone like you, because I just don’t get administration and beaurocracy. I don’t know who cares about what or why, and its hard for me to concieve of myself as talking to an entity and not just to an individual. I would totally do something stupid in an interview with you (wouldn’t change my kid’s diaper because that’s just rude and weird in general regardless of the identity of the innocent bystander) because, well, I tend to be just that clueless.
Yet, for all that, you see, I am a total genius.
[/QUOTE]
I am a graduate admissions counselor. I facilitate the application process from initial interest until the day students start classes.
If you’re an international student and have no idea how the American higher education system works? You talk to me. I explain it a bazagillion times a day.
You want to get a GRE waiver? You talk to me. You can’t, but you talk to me anyway.
Want to know what should be in your personal statement? Want to know EXACTLY what is needed for your portfolio? Financial aid? Housing? Talk to me.
So, as you can imagine, a lot of people talk to me.
A lot of weirdos, a lot of socially awkward people, a lot of egotists, a lot of desperate folks. Most of the time, they are very nice. And that is the important thing. I like talking to people, it’s the best part of my job. I am kind, I am patient. I can be a great help to you.
Until you are so unaccountably dickish that it boggles the mind. Then I can offer you very little. It is at that point I become the “entity,” as you put it, and stop being an individual.
Be socially inept. But don’t be a dick.
Oh, and I don’t care what people wear! 
[QUOTE=Miller]
Ah, well, that’s easy. If they let the socially stupid people in, they’ll have to spend more time around the socially stupid people. Which is unpleasant because socially, they’re quite stupid. In any sort of job interview type situation, you’ve basically got two things to worry about: making the interviewer think you can do the job, and making the interviewer like you. If he doesn’t like you, he’s not going to want to hire you, because odds are, there are plenty of other qualified people who aren’t social idiots, and who won’t make going to work everyday the equivalent of chewing on a big ol’ ball of tin foil.
[/QUOTE]
I have the job I had before this one not because I was technically the most qualified, but because the most qualified guy they interviewed was an ass no one wanted to work with.
[QUOTE=olivesmarch4th]
One cannot successfully be a graduate student without also possessing a sense of responsibility and professionalism,
[/QUOTE]
Your point is taken, basically, but to quibble:
One can’t succssfully be a grad student without at some time acquiring a sense of responsibilty and professionalism. For example, I myself have only acquired such senses in the last year or so–I’m not really finished acquiring them in fact–and I’m five years into my graduate education!
[/quibble]
[/sort-of-hijack]
-FrL-
'S all right. I usually adore your posts, but this one seemed way out of left field. Reading about your own sense of social ineptness makes it more clear what POV you are coming from. It’s true that professionalism can be learned–no doubt you now know better than to wear a t-shirt to a job interview–but it’s also true that being a total jackass is often not worth the time and effort to reform. I would put the candidates in question into ‘‘total jackass’’ territory–it’s not social ineptness so much as out and out disrespect. I can’t imagine, even in your most socially awkward state of mind, that you would ever do something like that. And if you DID make a mistake, you wouldn’t cop an attitude. Your admissions officers must have understood this, or else you wouldn’t be where you are today.
(And yeah, I’m definitely freaking out over this one, because the level of pressure during the admissions stage is immense. People who just throw it away like that really piss me off when I contrast it with how hard I’ve been working to be considered a qualified candidate.)
[QUOTE=Frylock]
One can’t succssfully be a grad student without at some time acquiring a sense of responsibilty and professionalism. For example, I myself have only acquired such senses in the last year or so–I’m not really finished acquiring them in fact–and I’m five years into my graduate education!
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
Sure, but you had enough responsibility to fill out an application… take the required tests or complete the required portfolio. Did you investigate your school? Peer schools?
During this process, did you at any time, bring shit anywhere near my conference room table?
So basically, even if you aren’t the Mayor of Responsibility-ville, you had enough sense to know what was needed and how you had to proceed, and you’re doing much better than the couple in question