Adcoms, what makes an interviewee "good" or an interview "good"?
- Thread starter veryborderlineapplicant
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 72,623
- Reaction score
- 115,667
Go dig up my Guide to Interview s post in these threads. But in a nutshell,
Be articulate
Listen well
Be thoughtful
Be able to think on your feet
Display grace under pressure.
Be articulate
Listen well
Be thoughtful
Be able to think on your feet
Display grace under pressure.
We look for (in MMI) :
1. ability to appear compassionate, as expressed subjectively in the interview
2. understanding of cultural differences (a lot of people actually fail here, particularly with anti-vaccine parents) and ability to educate respectfully
3. Did you even answer the question or just talk a lot?
4. EYE contact (are you sociopath?)
5. SMILE (I am more likely to like you if you're smiling and/or chuckling)
6. It's okay to say "I don't know." Just say it and then continue with "I would image...."
7. Why would you, Mr. Boston/New York/, want to come to this state university on the west coast? We look to predict if you'd actually come here.
EDIT: we don't care how you dress (color of suit or tie), just be professional with NO CLEAVAGE if at all possible. No cologne/perfume.
1. ability to appear compassionate, as expressed subjectively in the interview
2. understanding of cultural differences (a lot of people actually fail here, particularly with anti-vaccine parents) and ability to educate respectfully
3. Did you even answer the question or just talk a lot?
4. EYE contact (are you sociopath?)
5. SMILE (I am more likely to like you if you're smiling and/or chuckling)
6. It's okay to say "I don't know." Just say it and then continue with "I would image...."
7. Why would you, Mr. Boston/New York/, want to come to this state university on the west coast? We look to predict if you'd actually come here.
EDIT: we don't care how you dress (color of suit or tie), just be professional with NO CLEAVAGE if at all possible. No cologne/perfume.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2014
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 41
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2014
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 41
Will do. Can talking a lot (what may be seen as rambling) be seen positively if you genuinely have a lot to say and perspectives to consider about a topic, especially in the case of an ethical question? I'm a person who thinks outloud. I've also gotten very careful to notice when the interviewer wants to talk so I don't go on super long. How could I improve this? Ideally responses should be given clearly and concisely is what I've heard.
Talking a lot is fine, just make sure you're answering the question. Sometimes feedback from the interviewer states "did not address question" and they rate you low. What I meant by talking a lot is when we ask you how you would respond to parents who refuse to vaccinate their kid and you start talking about going to congress and asking for a law to be drafted requiring everyone to get a vaccine. If you didn't tell us how you would respond to the parent, you didn't answer the question.
The way you talk, thinking out loud, stuttering, laughing, smiling while you're thinking of a response, asking to clarify, and asking if there's a follow-up question are all okay and can make you seem more personable.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2013
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 19
Lack of eye contact does not indicate that someone has antisocial personality disorder. It isn't even a symptom.
So you'll be the no-fun serious kid in the back of the classroom.
Correct. But if I interview you and you can't even look at me, no bueno.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2014
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 41
but it makes a conversation awkward and impersonal. Imagine being a patient and having the doctor avoid eye contact with you, or look away while talking to you.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2014
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 41
I have some questions for you. Why would perfume be considered bad? if it's obnoxious I can totally understand, but just something simple bc we're in the same outfits the entire day, so smelling nice is important.
Also, what would you consider to be a good answer to "why this school?" Some people try and spin elaborate answers, but if I can pick out a few unique things (3) and match them with my interests then would that suffice?
Ones that seem really overdone that everybody uses and I try to avoid saying are "PBL, collaborative atmosphere, level 1 trauma center, pass/fail curriculum" because it makes pretty much anyone can say this about any given school.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2013
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 19
I wasn't disagreeing with the importance of eye contact
1. "Why would perfume be bad?"
I've seen on many occasions instances where I found a scent pleasant and the second interviewer found it obnoxious. If you smell, use it, but it's just a suggestion to avoid the chance that it could offend someone. Ideally we would smell like nothing. A faint hint of something super subtle and fresh is not an issue in my opinion.
2. "What would you consider to be a good answer to 'why this school?'"
To generalize, but understanding I've only seen how my one state school does it, I would say we want to see that you did some research to see what opportunities (free clinics, clubs, organizations, local community involvement) are available at the school, but also if you have family/friends in the area, if you've done research or a summer program here before, if you've traveled here and liked it, if a family member is an alumnus, or some connection that may help us understand why someone from a fancy city would want to come to some Midwest school.
When we look at your answer to the "why this school" question, we want to have some confidence that you are actually interested in our school and we're not just a back-up. This is not only because if we accept you and you turn us down, it messes with our stats that all premeds on earth use to evaluate how "competitive" we are, but we would also rather accept someone with a 3.5 who has a real tie to this state and loves it here over someone with a 3.7 who hates it here but we were their only acceptance. It leads to better outcomes all around.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 72,623
- Reaction score
- 115,667
Not for me. I abhor babbling.
Can talking a lot (what may be seen as rambling) be seen positively if you genuinely have a lot to say and perspectives to consider about a topic, especially in the case of an ethical question? I'm a person who thinks out loud.
You've answered your own question!
I've also gotten very careful to notice when the interviewer wants to talk so I don't go on super long. How could I improve this? Ideally responses should be given clearly and concisely is what I've heard.[/QUOTE]
Can talking a lot (what may be seen as rambling) be seen positively if you genuinely have a lot to say and perspectives to consider about a topic, especially in the case of an ethical question? I'm a person who thinks out loud.
You've answered your own question!
I've also gotten very careful to notice when the interviewer wants to talk so I don't go on super long. How could I improve this? Ideally responses should be given clearly and concisely is what I've heard.[/QUOTE]
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,129
Agreed. In fact, we had an applicant that came through our committee earlier this week, and the faculty interviewer the applicant spoke with also served on the committee. The faculty member lamented that the applicant spent 10 minutes answering two questions when a much shorter answered would have sufficed.
My tips:
1) Be genuine.
2) Do not sound rehearsed. Do not use a script. Do not memorize answers. This almost universally comes across as fake, and I hammer applicants down that I see that have these comments in their interview evals.
3) Don't be overexcited. If you're the kind of person that talks 90 mph, practice slowing down. It makes people uncomfortable.
4) Remember that this is an interview for professional school. You must be professional. If you have a student interviewer, don't mistake that as an opportunity to "let your guard down." I've seen many applicants that have great interviews with faculty/staff but say some questionable things in front of the student. I don't know why this happens, but depending upon what's said that can absolutely sink you.
5) Be well-spoken. Be able to hold a conversation. Be able to pick up on subtle social cues and respond appropriately.
6) Be able to talk about any portion of your application in a meaningful way. I don't go out of my way to ask applicants about "unimportant" parts of their app in a "gotcha!" kind of way, but sometimes things stick out to me or I just may be curious about something. Not being able to talk about that experience isn't a good thing. It makes me wonder why you included that point on your app in the first place.
7) Don't drone on forever in an answer, but also don't give one sentence answers. Remember, interviews are conversations. Have you ever tried to talk someone that makes extremely direct, short points in conversation? They generally aren't much fun to talk to. On the flip side, I have a series of questions that I want to get to during in an interview, and giving extremely long answers can hamper that effort. That in and of itself won't harm you - I don't dock applicants on their evals if I don't get the chance to ask the questions that I want to - but it does generally limit how much I get to learn about you and, thus, how strongly I can advocate for you on my eval.
I think people way overthink the interview. It's really not that difficult. As long as you're not rude, weird, or off-putting, you will more than likely do fine.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2014
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 41
I have a question for you and for other ADCOMs as well (@Goro and @gyngyn) about "3) Don't be overexcited. If you're the kind of person that talks 90 mph, practice slowing down. It makes people uncomfortable." I'm definitely a person who is in this category, and I've practiced slowing down a lot, but could this overexcitement ever be seen as positive thing? I mean I had multiple short interviews at one of my top choices for med school a few weeks ago and I was extremely excited and had so much to say in a short period of time, and it really excited me, so I did have a tendency to talk fast, but I tried to make sure that interviewer followed me, even by asking, and watched for signs the interviewer wanted to say something. Would this still be considered a bad thing? One interviewer even jokingly challenged me to talk about my complicated background in 2 minutes.
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,129
Could be, but that's not the kind of interaction I would want a student to have with patients. There's nothing wrong with being excited. It's a little concerning if you don't have the ability to compose yourself.
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2011
- Messages
- 28,440
- Reaction score
- 54,200
Over-excitement is not a positive.
Clarity and enthusiasm are positives.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2014
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 41
Thank you for your response. Would you say that being scripted basically means an autorejection and is probably one of the most serious flaws an applicant could make in an interview? From my personal experience I know it's a huge flaw though It can be hard for premeds such as myself to get away from the "I need to prepare for every common question and know my application by heart" through really practicing, and once in that mindset I found it very hard to get out of it, especially after being at multiple interviews where they all asked the same/very similar questions. I really worked through this by giving things a break and taking the time to stop planning and just enjoy myself and have a nice conversation, but I just wanted to know how serious of a flaw you perceive being scripted as.
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,129
It's not an "auto-rejection," but it gives off the impression that you're not genuine and worries me that you may not be able to interact with people in a natural way. It strikes me as "try hard" and is not the kind of quality I look for in students.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2015
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 15
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 151
Is not agreeing with parents who refuse to vaccinate their children really a cultural difference?
Sure, because "culture" includes religion and family/personal values.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 72,623
- Reaction score
- 115,667
I'd have to be there to judge. Exuberant is OK; hyper is not.
Maybe not capable of provoking a rejection, but definitely will land you on the waitlist. We can tell when one is giving canned answers. And people who try to veer from one answer back to their script merit rapid rejections.
Would you say that being scripted basically means an autorejection and is probably one of the most serious flaws an applicant could make in an interview? From my personal experience I know it's a huge flaw though It can be hard for premeds such as myself to get away from the "I need to prepare for every common question and know my application by heart" through really practicing, and once in that mindset I found it very hard to get out of it, especially after being at multiple interviews where they all asked the same/very similar questions. I really worked through this by giving things a break and taking the time to stop planning and just enjoy myself and have a nice conversation, but I just wanted to know how serious of a flaw you perceive being scripted as.
Maybe not capable of provoking a rejection, but definitely will land you on the waitlist. We can tell when one is giving canned answers. And people who try to veer from one answer back to their script merit rapid rejections.
Would you say that being scripted basically means an autorejection and is probably one of the most serious flaws an applicant could make in an interview? From my personal experience I know it's a huge flaw though It can be hard for premeds such as myself to get away from the "I need to prepare for every common question and know my application by heart" through really practicing, and once in that mindset I found it very hard to get out of it, especially after being at multiple interviews where they all asked the same/very similar questions. I really worked through this by giving things a break and taking the time to stop planning and just enjoy myself and have a nice conversation, but I just wanted to know how serious of a flaw you perceive being scripted as.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 151
I find that questionable. When your personal values put others at risk for contracting dangerous contagious diseases I don't think is unreasonable to disagree with them.
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,129
By that metric there would be no possible way to ever disagree with someone because of purported differences in values. You shouldn't get in an escalated disagreement in a MMI scenario, but it's perfectly appropriate to hold a different position and state that tactfully.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2015
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 15
But in the case of anti-vaccine parents, what are you supposed to answer? I would of course say that I'm fine with whatever they do with their child. If you went on some tangent about how contributing to herd immunity is a citizen's responsibility, even I would see you as intolerant.
And yes, if a patient refuses a service because of their religious or cultural beliefs, the most you can do is explain to them the dangers of not having it, and then respecting their wishes.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 151
Not really. You can refuse to treat that parent's kids, as many doctors do in the real world. 1) It puts your other patients at risk, including those too young to be vaccinated. 2) Is this parent going to listen to your advice at all if they won't listen to you on such a key issue? This isn't just a matter of personal preference.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2015
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 15
What do you meant treat? I'm speaking from the point of view if an adcom asked what would your response be to a parent who is unwilling to vaccinate their child.
You can't force them to get vaccinated, and thus, there wouldn't be an "treatment." All you can tell them is the dangers of not vaccinating and let them go on their merry way.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,171
- Reaction score
- 863
I'm interested in how to answer such a question too.
Don't children need to be vaccinated to go to school? And don't children have to go to school by law?
What happens in such a scenario? Can a court order the child to be vaccinated?
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2015
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 15
I'm a Middle School teacher in Virginia and vaccination waivers vary from state to state. But, in our public schooling system, you can get a waiver for any vaccination based on religious/moral reasons. Kind of scary, but it's currently being practiced. In the entire school, I only know of one kid whose parents refuse to vaccinate him. And of course, during parent teacher conferences before the school year, their number 1 concern was, of course...autism. C'mon! Was mine and all of my colleagues' collective thought...
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 520
- Reaction score
- 442
I'll tell you what makes a good applicant, diversity. A good applicant is a first string quarter back who has a long standing history of balet. But, who also has a refined taste in watercolors. A good applicant is someone who escaped an international prison, swam across the Atlantic, and built a home out of sticks. And that's not even including appearance.
Yes, and yes. But you can get a "philosophical or religious exemption," which means your kid doesn't have to be vaccinated to go to school. (Side note: That's why vaccination rates in some LA-area schools are about the same as in some developing countries!)
So vaccinations certainly aren't mandatory, at all. But some doctors disagree so vehemently with this that they have decided to refuse to take on unvaccinated children as patients. As noted above, they usually give two main reasons: 1) It puts other children in their practice at risk and 2) if the parent can't get on board with the doctor about such a non-controversial idea, the parent isn't really looking for a doctor's expertise anyway, and the doctor-patient relationship is unlikely to work out.
I'm not an adcom member or a med student, so I can't say what interview response they're looking for, but that's the background for you!
So vaccinations certainly aren't mandatory, at all. But some doctors disagree so vehemently with this that they have decided to refuse to take on unvaccinated children as patients. As noted above, they usually give two main reasons: 1) It puts other children in their practice at risk and 2) if the parent can't get on board with the doctor about such a non-controversial idea, the parent isn't really looking for a doctor's expertise anyway, and the doctor-patient relationship is unlikely to work out.
I'm not an adcom member or a med student, so I can't say what interview response they're looking for, but that's the background for you!
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2011
- Messages
- 2,133
- Reaction score
- 674
I'm pretty sure that is dependent on the school district. I would think the "best answer" would be that you make sure you educate the family on the risks of not vaccinating your kids but that's all you could probably do, unless the law offers you some other options. You could also just tell the parents not to bring their child in your clinic anymore since it puts the rest of your staff, patients, and their families in danger (pretty sure I read an article about a doctor doing this not too long ago).
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 151
It depends on what your role is in this hypothetical situation. When I say that you can refuse to "treat" a parent's kids I mean that if you were a pediatrician you could tell them to find another doctor. See @jamcat 's reply.
what.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,171
- Reaction score
- 863
Would adcoms view that as "too harsh" though?
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 151
I took a similar perspective in an interview recently (w/o any mention of treating someone against their will) and the interviewer said that she thought that was insightful. It's not about giving the right answer, it's about showing that you have some ability to assess these situations.
Haha I completely agree. Just because something is cultural doesn't mean that it's good or bad. You don't have to accept or agree with all cultural differences.
To answer @NickNaylor:
By that metric there would be no possible way to ever disagree with someone because of purported differences in values. You shouldn't get in an escalated disagreement in a MMI scenario, but it's perfectly appropriate to hold a different position and state that tactfully.
I can certainly agree/disagree with different cultural values on a theoretical level and their practical consequences - and I agree with your second sentence. LMK if I missed your point.
Again with the disclaimer that I'm not an adcom member, I can't imagine that they would, as long as it's presented in the proper context. A lot of really respected pediatricians are doing this, so rejecting that conclusion would be rejecting the conclusion of a sizable portion of their peers.
My thoughts are that they'd want to see you be thoughtful and considerate. You could say that you'd first try to understand their objections to vaccines, and you'd take the time to talk to them about vaccine ingredients and the role of each component to try to allay their fears. You could talk to them about the current vaccine safety research and give them the background on the false research that lead to the alarm. And if they still didn't want their children vaccinated, you would have to consider whether your doctor-patient relationship would be a productive one.
I don't think that's overly harsh; it's considering their position as well as the effect that position could have on your relationship and your patients. I also think it shows a deeper level of thinking than somebody who just says "Well, their kid, their decision!" That decision comes with lots of consequences, some of which affect the doctor, so not considering those is rather short-sighted.
My thoughts are that they'd want to see you be thoughtful and considerate. You could say that you'd first try to understand their objections to vaccines, and you'd take the time to talk to them about vaccine ingredients and the role of each component to try to allay their fears. You could talk to them about the current vaccine safety research and give them the background on the false research that lead to the alarm. And if they still didn't want their children vaccinated, you would have to consider whether your doctor-patient relationship would be a productive one.
I don't think that's overly harsh; it's considering their position as well as the effect that position could have on your relationship and your patients. I also think it shows a deeper level of thinking than somebody who just says "Well, their kid, their decision!" That decision comes with lots of consequences, some of which affect the doctor, so not considering those is rather short-sighted.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 151
So when you say people fail at situations involving vaccinations what do you mean?
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2007
- Messages
- 6,874
- Reaction score
- 1,357
From the interviews that I've been a part of or conducted, there's no "right answer". What interviewers appreciate is showing that you are not dogmatic and understand nuance. That doesn't mean you have to waffle and equivocate on everything--medicine requires making difficult decisions but at least have some sort of framework in your head for why you're making them. With re to vaccines, you can acknowledge the rationale/barriers to why someone would agree to vaccinate their kid without saying you agree with that. If I were an interviewee I would go so far as to say that if I knowingly let the parent continue without making every effort I could to change their mind I'm knowingly allowing that kid and her/his peers to be exposed to serious harm needlessly. The implications are important enough that I would do what I could to figure out where the parent is coming from and what needs to be addressed to give me the best chance of getting that child vaccinated.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 392
- Reaction score
- 623
This was like watching somebody break their leg…it totally makes you cringe watching it yet is impossible to turn away.
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,129
What if you don't have any particular reasons in mind for picking a particular school? For me, a medical school is a medical school. I am more likely to be turned away from a particular school than drawn towards it. Unless, of course, a school has a Yu-Gi-Oh original card game dueling club or a bunch of mountains nearby. Then that school would be at the top of my list. But I would more likely say I don't want to go to a school for certain reasons. Plus, some things that I have heard people say in the past is "oh such and such has a great residency for such and such major". But isn't it generally looked down on or thought of as naive to have a specific residency locked into your head, with 4 years to go until you actually make that choice?
Plus, isn't modern medicine all about starting as broad as possible and ruling out rather than ruling in?
Unless someone is intimately familiar with an institution via some kind of experience there, I imagine most applicants know little about the schools they apply to and don't have much of an affinity there one way or another pre-interview. I know that was the case for me. However, you need to do your research and come up with things that you feel like are interesting from a curricular or experiential standpoint and link those to your own interests and aspirations. Those are the applicants that typically do well in the interview and come across as genuine in their desires to attend a particular school. Yes, it's somewhat fake, but that's just how the game is played.
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,129
So...be somewhat fake and you'll come across genuine??
You're completely right though. It really isn't that hard to do some research and figure out some particularly interesting or unique things to ask about.
Hah, touche. You would at least come across as interested in the school and perhaps considered how the institution's strengths, offerings, whatever would fit into your overall career goals and ambitions. For us, that kind of recognition is extremely important. The people that are more likely to do well are those who don't have to fake it at all; they've organically developed interests that would best be suited for our institution via their own experiences. People that fake those interests will do ok but not well. People that don't have any of those interests - or, rather, can't clearly state why the institution might be of benefit to them in their training short of bestowing a degree upon them - won't do well at all.
Similar threads
- Locked
