At this point, how bad is too bad of an interview?

[artist27]

---

Members don't see this ad.

i was fortunate enough to have an interview this week at a school I really love. I received the invite back in July a few days after submitting, so I don't think my stats will be holding me back.

Although I don't think the interview went terribly, it just seemed very mediocre. I had a lot more that I wanted to say but ended up cutting my answers short. Will mediocracy keep me out at this point? One of our tour guides said since the interview is so early they clearly want us and the interview was just to make sure we're not crazy, but does timing really matter that much? I just keep rethinking parts of the interview I could've done much better on lol.

I know there's nothing I can do at this point besides wait, but just wanted to get more transparency on the process.

 

[Isoval]

As per LizzyM’s “stairs” analogy, it is highly likely that those who interview early will have a bit more leeway in the interview given that they are likely beginning on a higher ‘step’.

Although, yeah, if it went poorly, it could totally drop you out of the top.

It doesn’t seem like yours went poorly, though.

 

[Ad2b]

Most people...babble on too long without adding to the answer.

This is my struggle. I practice this skill every job interview I have. Hope it works for me if I get an II as well.

 

[Goro]

i was fortunate enough to have an interview this week at a school I really love. I received the invite back in July a few days after submitting, so I don't think my stats will be holding me back.

Although I don't think the interview went terribly, it just seemed very mediocre. I had a lot more that I wanted to say but ended up cutting my answers short. Will mediocracy keep me out at this point? One of our tour guides said since the interview is so early they clearly want us and the interview was just to make sure we're not crazy, but does timing really matter that much? I just keep rethinking parts of the interview I could've done much better on lol.

I know there's nothing I can do at this point besides wait, but just wanted to get more transparency on the process.

Without being there, it's impossible to judge. And see gonnif's wise observation above.
This interview is over. Now forget about it and on to the next one!!!!

 

[DBC03]

Without being there, it's impossible to judge. And see gonnif's wise observation above.
This interview is over. Now forget about it and on to the next one!!!!

Good to see you back! I have a question along the lines of the OP that I think the wise goro can help with. Are some interviewers fairly hard on interviewees because of personality or the desire to see how the interviewee responds under pressure or specific other reasons? I had a fairly combative interviewer that first told me there were no right answers - so answer with what I really think - then questioned each answer every time I gave it. I started wondering if I wasn't actually answering the questions asked or if there were literally no right answers. Everything I said was wrong and was questioned. I've experienced interacting with people like this quite a bit professionally and during my volunteering, so I wasn't squirming and simply discussed, but at one point I even asked, "what do you mean by that question? because I thought I had answered it correctly, but the first two answers were not sufficient. I'm concerned that I was answering everything incorrectly (ie not answering the question) based on the continual repeating questions and interruptions during my answers. I also worry that, as gonnif mentioned, I may get a little too long worded at times (my "why medicine" isn't exactly a one-sentence answer).

 

[sss1219]

Good to see you back! I have a question along the lines of the OP that I think the wise goro can help with. Are some interviewers fairly hard on interviewees because of personality or the desire to see how the interviewee responds under pressure or specific other reasons? I had a fairly combative interviewer that first told me there were no right answers - so answer with what I really think - then questioned each answer every time I gave it. I started wondering if I wasn't actually answering the questions asked or if there were literally no right answers. Everything I said was wrong and was questioned. I've experienced interacting with people like this quite a bit professionally and during my volunteering, so I wasn't squirming and simply discussed, but at one point I even asked, "what do you mean by that question? because I thought I had answered it correctly, but the first two answers were not sufficient. I'm concerned that I was answering everything incorrectly (ie not answering the question) based on the continual repeating questions and interruptions during my answers. I also worry that, as gonnif mentioned, I may get a little too long worded at times (my "why medicine" isn't exactly a one-sentence answer).

I've read somewhere around here that some schools have specific algorithms about how many conversational and stress interviews they need per interview date. I've also read that for other schools it's totally dependent on how quirky of an interviewer you get assigned, but the adcom is aware of how each interviewer's preferred style varies and takes it into account when making decisions

 

[Goro]

Are some interviewers fairly hard on interviewees because of personality or the desire to see how the interviewee responds under pressure or specific other reasons?
Yes.
In reality, some people are hardasses, and some people are softies. I'm in the former category. And no, we don't play "good cop, bad cop".


I had a fairly combative interviewer that first told me there were no right answers - so answer with what I really think - then questioned each answer every time I gave it. I started wondering if I wasn't actually answering the questions asked or if there were literally no right answers. Everything I said was wrong and was questioned. I've experienced interacting with people like this quite a bit professionally and during my volunteering, so I wasn't squirming and simply discussed, but at one point I even asked, "what do you mean by that question? because I thought I had answered it correctly, but the first two answers were not sufficient. I'm concerned that I was answering everything incorrectly (ie not answering the question) based on the continual repeating questions and interruptions during my answers. I also worry that, as gonnif mentioned, I may get a little too long worded at times (my "why medicine" isn't exactly a one-sentence answer).

There are several ways to look at this.

1) While there might be no right answers to questions, there are definitely some wrong answers.
2) You were having your thought processes challenged. This is a competency you will need as a med student and a doctor. One of the major goals of an interview is to see how well you think on your feet. I myself have a bank of questions that are like flow charts...any answer flips you down one tree, and in turn down the line, with each answer triggering a followup question. No, I'm not sharing.

 

[ReapPremed]

Many applicants babble on too long without adding to the answer so dont assume saying more would have helped as it could hurt you as well.

What's the difference between babbling and elaboration? I've usually been coached to back up anything I say with some kind of anecdote or parallel with my experiences.

(These are just hypotheticals and I've got a sandwich in my other hand!):

1) "One reason I want to be a doctor because I want to help poor people get care" is obviously insufficient.

2) "One reason I want to be a doctor because I want to help poor people get care. I staff a health fair a few times a year and less wealthy people from urban centers really seem to benefit from the screenings they offer. I'd really like to have a greater depth of involvement as a physician" -- more elaboration. You could probably squeeze this into your 120 second pitch easily. It seems sort of bland.

3) "One reason I want to be a doctor because I want to help poor people get care. When I was shadowing Dr. Physician I remember this elderly patient with high cholesterol who insisted that he was 60 years old and he was going to enjoy his food and that lipitor was a conspiracy to make him deaf. And I was really inspired that Dr. Physician sat with him and explained..." I've often heard interviewers like stories, but something like this really seems to be laying it on too heavy and go into babbling territory.

Where do we lose you?

 

[Goro]

The same difference between talking, and saying something.
What's the difference between babbling and elaboration?



(These are just hypotheticals and I've got a sandwich in my other hand!):

1) "One reason I want to be a doctor because I want to help poor people get care" is obviously insufficient.

2) "One reason I want to be a doctor because I want to help poor people get care. I staff a health fair a few times a year and less wealthy people from urban centers really seem to benefit from the screenings they offer. I'd really like to have a greater depth of involvement as a physician" -- more elaboration. You could probably squeeze this into your 120 second pitch easily. It seems sort of bland.

With this answer, you do set yourself up for the inevitable "So why not just be a social worker, or a policy maker??"

3) "One reason I want to be a doctor because I want to help poor people get care. When I was shadowing Dr. Physician I remember this elderly patient with high cholesterol who insisted that he was 60 years old and he was going to enjoy his food and that lipitor was a conspiracy to make him deaf. And I was really inspired that Dr. Physician sat with him and explained..." I've often heard interviewers like stories, but something like this really seems to be laying it on too heavy and go into babbling territory.


That's fine. Others have written in these fora about how you should have your PS discuss about how the thing sin Medicine you've seen affect you. I agree with this approach and your example fills that need.

The babbling idiots I abhor tend to just go on and on without actually saying anything.

 

[Davemed]

Hi Goro - So glad to see you on this forum again. I have an II at one of my favorite schools. Is it OK to tell the Dean of Admissions that I am really looking forward to joining that school or does that sound ridiculous? I do like the school. Thanks.

 

[gyngyn]

Is it OK to tell the Dean of Admissions that I am really looking forward to joining that school or does that sound ridiculous? .

At this point, it presumes facts not in evidence.

 

[Goro]

Hi Goro - So glad to see you on this forum again. I have an II at one of my favorite schools. Is it OK to tell the Dean of Admissions that I am really looking forward to joining that school or does that sound ridiculous? I do like the school. Thanks.

S/he will think you're either lying, or are desperate.

 

[artist27]

It's ok guys I got accepted!!! Special shout out to @Goro who has helped me out over the past two years even though he probably doesn't remember every post/question he's helped me with

 

[DBC03]

Are some interviewers fairly hard on interviewees because of personality or the desire to see how the interviewee responds under pressure or specific other reasons?
Yes.
In reality, some people are hardasses, and some people are softies. I'm in the former category. And no, we don't play "good cop, bad cop".


I had a fairly combative interviewer that first told me there were no right answers - so answer with what I really think - then questioned each answer every time I gave it. I started wondering if I wasn't actually answering the questions asked or if there were literally no right answers. Everything I said was wrong and was questioned. I've experienced interacting with people like this quite a bit professionally and during my volunteering, so I wasn't squirming and simply discussed, but at one point I even asked, "what do you mean by that question? because I thought I had answered it correctly, but the first two answers were not sufficient. I'm concerned that I was answering everything incorrectly (ie not answering the question) based on the continual repeating questions and interruptions during my answers. I also worry that, as gonnif mentioned, I may get a little too long worded at times (my "why medicine" isn't exactly a one-sentence answer).

There are several ways to look at this.

1) While there might be no right answers to questions, there are definitely some wrong answers.
2) You were having your thought processes challenged. This is a competency you will need as a med student and a doctor. One of the major goals of an interview is to see how well you think on your feet. I myself have a bank of questions that are like flow charts...any answer flips you down one tree, and in turn down the line, with each answer triggering a followup question. No, I'm not sharing.

Honestly, if I didn't know you were at a DO school, I would have thought you were my interviewer. For those who are not softies (Such as yourself), do you stil give fairly good reviews of some candidates or are you generally harder on everyone?

 

[Goro]

Honestly, if I didn't know you were at a DO school, I would have thought you were my interviewer. For those who are not softies (Such as yourself), do you stil give fairly good reviews of some candidates or are you generally harder on everyone?

I accept most of the people I interview.

It's ok guys I got accepted!!! Special shout out to @Goro who has helped me out over the past two years even though he probably doesn't remember every post/question he's helped me with

👍😍😍😍😍👍👍👍

 

[Ad2b]

@Goro is back!

 

[Goro]

@Goro is back!

 

[bioboy23]

Are some interviewers fairly hard on interviewees because of personality or the desire to see how the interviewee responds under pressure or specific other reasons?
Yes.
In reality, some people are hardasses, and some people are softies. I'm in the former category. And no, we don't play "good cop, bad cop".


I had a fairly combative interviewer that first told me there were no right answers - so answer with what I really think - then questioned each answer every time I gave it. I started wondering if I wasn't actually answering the questions asked or if there were literally no right answers. Everything I said was wrong and was questioned. I've experienced interacting with people like this quite a bit professionally and during my volunteering, so I wasn't squirming and simply discussed, but at one point I even asked, "what do you mean by that question? because I thought I had answered it correctly, but the first two answers were not sufficient. I'm concerned that I was answering everything incorrectly (ie not answering the question) based on the continual repeating questions and interruptions during my answers. I also worry that, as gonnif mentioned, I may get a little too long worded at times (my "why medicine" isn't exactly a one-sentence answer).

There are several ways to look at this.

1) While there might be no right answers to questions, there are definitely some wrong answers.
2) You were having your thought processes challenged. This is a competency you will need as a med student and a doctor. One of the major goals of an interview is to see how well you think on your feet. I myself have a bank of questions that are like flow charts...any answer flips you down one tree, and in turn down the line, with each answer triggering a followup question. No, I'm not sharing.

What I would do to be a fly on the wall...

 

[Davemed]

S/he will think you're either lying, or are desperate.

Thanks Goro. Not committing that mistake.

 

[Davemed]

At this point, it presumes facts not in evidence.

Thanks gyngyn for a perspective from the other side.

 

[bootsandspooky]

Want to jump on this thread really quickly after my interview today... I was asked two questions: where am I from (I got to name the town, brief follow up sentence about where I work) and what do I do at work (maybe about 1 minute answer). The rest of the 45 minutes was almost exclusively him talking about his work/research and me listening (I got to ask maybe 3 questions during his ever-so-brief pauses about what he was saying but he still ended up interrupting my questions a couple of times because he would just continue talking again) and at the end I got to throw in a thing about liking some of the stuff he had said about the school. Is this normal??? How could he properly evaluate me by asking barely anything and only talking at me? It was bizarre and I can't see how this would work out positively for me unless he only cared about me being a good listener... Very disappointed because this was a top 10 school and I've generally enjoyed traditional interviews, though I probably wasn't going to get in here anyway. Any thoughts about the situation would be appreciated because I do not want this to happen again.

 

[DBC03]

Want to jump on this thread really quickly after my interview today... I was asked two questions: where am I from (I got to name the town, brief follow up sentence about where I work) and what do I do at work (maybe about 1 minute answer). The rest of the 45 minutes was almost exclusively him talking about his work/research and me listening (I got to ask maybe 3 questions during his ever-so-brief pauses about what he was saying but he still ended up interrupting my questions a couple of times because he would just continue talking again) and at the end I got to throw in a thing about liking some of the stuff he had said about the school. Is this normal??? How could he properly evaluate me by asking barely anything and only talking at me? It was bizarre and I can't see how this would work out positively for me unless he only cared about me being a good listener... Very disappointed because this was a top 10 school and I've generally enjoyed traditional interviews, though I probably wasn't going to get in here anyway. Any thoughts about the situation would be appreciated because I do not want this to happen again.

I'm interested in hearing what adcoms think, but I did this with one of my professors and got the best letter of recommendation from him. Sometimes listening is just an art form and he may be really impressed that you seemed interested in what he said.

 

[Goro]

Want to jump on this thread really quickly after my interview today... I was asked two questions: where am I from (I got to name the town, brief follow up sentence about where I work) and what do I do at work (maybe about 1 minute answer). The rest of the 45 minutes was almost exclusively him talking about his work/research and me listening (I got to ask maybe 3 questions during his ever-so-brief pauses about what he was saying but he still ended up interrupting my questions a couple of times because he would just continue talking again) and at the end I got to throw in a thing about liking some of the stuff he had said about the school. Is this normal??? How could he properly evaluate me by asking barely anything and only talking at me? It was bizarre and I can't see how this would work out positively for me unless he only cared about me being a good listener... Very disappointed because this was a top 10 school and I've generally enjoyed traditional interviews, though I probably wasn't going to get in here anyway. Any thoughts about the situation would be appreciated because I do not want this to happen again.

I strongly suggest that you complain to the Admissions Dean about this. it's the only way to get rid of bad interviewers. That said, it's possible that they paired you with this guy because of your research interests, and he though by giving you his spiel, he was recruiting you.

 

[bootsandspooky]

I strongly suggest that you complain to the Admissions Dean about this. it's the only way to get rid of bad interviewers. That said, it's possible that they paired you with this guy because of your research interests, and he though by giving you his spiel, he was recruiting you.

I kind of wondered that (the research thing) at first; we have a very broad field of interest in common but I don't think he even really read my application at all so idk what he was doing.

They have a survey where I could provide anonymous comments, which I was planning to do. Do you think that would suffice, or would it be worth it for me to email or phone call the admissions office to talk to someone? Is there such a thing as a replacement interview or is this probably it for me? I know he interviewed someone else right before me and I wish I could talk to them to see what their experience was.

 

[jm192]

To echo what Goro said, there are definitely wrong answers.

There is no good/right answer to what is your biggest weakness.
But, "I have a temper." "I hate working in groups." is probably not going to help you.

 

[Goro]

I kind of wondered that (the research thing) at first; we have a very broad field of interest in common but I don't think he even really read my application at all so idk what he was doing.

They have a survey where I could provide anonymous comments, which I was planning to do. Do you think that would suffice, or would it be worth it for me to email or phone call the admissions office to talk to someone? Is there such a thing as a replacement interview or is this probably it for me? I know he interviewed someone else right before me and I wish I could talk to them to see what their experience was.

I think that your comments will suffice. Be sure to name the interviewer.

 

[Goro]

To echo what Goro said, there are definitely wrong answers.

There is no good/right answer to what is your biggest weakness.
But, "I have a temper." "I hate working in groups." is probably not going to help you.

Also trying to paint a positive as a negative doesn't help either

"I work too hard!"

 

[Rhabdoviridae]

To echo what Goro said, there are definitely wrong answers.

There is no good/right answer to what is your biggest weakness.
But, "I have a temper." "I hate working in groups." is probably not going to help you.

Some things to add to that list would be admitting that you are one of the following
-racist/prejudiced
-sexist
-a compulsive gambler
-an alcoholic
- a chain smoker
-into hard drugs

I myself said at my interview that I have an envious personality and tend to hold grudges against others. Not sure if this was the best answer, but I probably would have said it again if given the opportunity. They are looking for an honest answer so tell them the truth. The worst thing you can do is say something like "I have no weaknesses," fumble the question, or recite one of the other cliches already mentioned. Saying that is honestly comparable to saying one of the things I bulleted above in the eyes of whoever is interviewing you.

 

[DBC03]

One of my biggest weaknesses is that I have a difficult time saying no to people when they ask me to help out. So I use that as an example - it's honest, I know it's a weakness, I've been actively working on it since graduating from college (I'm a work in progress, what can I say), and I can discuss how I am working on it. I also realize how it could be a possible issue as a physician, so I know to be careful about setting boundaries from the get go.

 

[Rhabdoviridae]

One of my biggest weaknesses is that I have a difficult time saying no to people when they ask me to help out. So I use that as an example - it's honest, I know it's a weakness, I've been actively working on it since graduating from college (I'm a work in progress, what can I say), and I can discuss how I am working on it. I also realize how it could be a possible issue as a physician, so I know to be careful about setting boundaries from the get go.

You are basically saying in a nutshell that you are too nice to people, which is almost like dodging the question. Saying this is in the same ballpark as saying your biggest weakness is spending too much time at the homeless shelter or giving to much money to the poor. Can't really blame you though, our presidential candidates all did the same thing last year during the debates too when asked this same question.

 

[DBC03]

You are basically saying in a nutshell that you are too nice to people, which is almost like dodging the question. Saying this is in the same ballpark as saying your biggest weakness is spending too much time at the homeless shelter or giving to much money to the poor. Can't really blame you though, our presidential candidates all did the same thing last year during the debates too when asked this same question.

You can say that until you've had bosses tell you it's a real issue. If you think it's just being too nice, then you don't actually understand it.

 

[Boogy'sChick15]

You can say that until you've had bosses tell you it's a real issue. If you think it's just being too nice, then you don't actually understand it.

It also becomes an issue when you start to be seen as a "push over". I can definitely see how that can be a persons weakness.
It really depends on how you phrase it too. Saying you can't say no and that everyone comes to you for help isn't explaining how it is a weakness, that is more like trying to spin a strength or positive trait into a negative.
But saying how people have maybe used you for their advantage, or you had to help out with things you weren't comfortable with because you feared letting people down could definitely be seen as a weakness.

 

[DBC03]

It also becomes an issue when you start to be seen as a "push over". I can definitely see how that can be a persons weakness.
It really depends on how you phrase it too. Saying you can't say no and that everyone comes to you for help isn't explaining how it is a weakness, that is more like trying to spin a strength or positive trait into a negative.
But saying how people have maybe used you for their advantage, or you had to help out with things you weren't comfortable with because you feared letting people down could definitely be seen as a weakness.

Also admitting you do things out of guilt or can be guilt tripped into things. That's not a good trait. Doing things out of genuine kindness is great. Being afraid to offend or say no - not so much. It's in the explanation. It's certainly not an, "I'm too nice - I hate to let people down." I have to set boundaries and learn to prioritize what's important and what's not." And sometimes it's important to say no even if I'll cause offense - which can hard, but it is essential in specific situations. Not knowing how to say no is not a positive trait, but I suppose some people may see it as such.

 

[ReapPremed]

As someone who can't say no, takes on a ton of work, and then things get out of hand I can relate.

I would imagine its more important to demonstrate that you're self-aware enough to acknowledge a problem you have, and show you've worked on fixing it? Seems like a better way to address it than worrying about whether or not you'll stumble into the whole cliche of "my weakness is my strength!"

 

[Boogy'sChick15]

As someone who can't say no, takes on a ton of work, and then things get out of hand I can relate.

I would imagine its more important to demonstrate that you're self-aware enough to acknowledge a problem you have, and show you've worked on fixing it? Seems like a better way to address it than worrying about whether or not you'll stumble into the whole cliche of "my weakness is my strength!"

It is very important that you acknowledge it and explain how you have learned from it or fixed it. You definitely don't want to just say what your weakness is, and leave them thinking that you haven't worked on it. That would just bring up questions on whether or not your weakness could hinder your ability to do well in med school lol

 

[MCATISEZ]

Want to jump on this thread really quickly after my interview today... I was asked two questions: where am I from (I got to name the town, brief follow up sentence about where I work) and what do I do at work (maybe about 1 minute answer). The rest of the 45 minutes was almost exclusively him talking about his work/research and me listening (I got to ask maybe 3 questions during his ever-so-brief pauses about what he was saying but he still ended up interrupting my questions a couple of times because he would just continue talking again) and at the end I got to throw in a thing about liking some of the stuff he had said about the school. Is this normal??? How could he properly evaluate me by asking barely anything and only talking at me? It was bizarre and I can't see how this would work out positively for me unless he only cared about me being a good listener... Very disappointed because this was a top 10 school and I've generally enjoyed traditional interviews, though I probably wasn't going to get in here anyway. Any thoughts about the situation would be appreciated because I do not want this to happen again.

People like to talk about themselves (especially their research). I would ask questions about their research and really try to understand it so I can have an intellectual conversation about his research interests, while throwing some facets in about my own research experience.

Sometimes I feel like interviews are largely a test of your social skills and how you react under pressure. People with good social skills can effectively hold conversations with many different kinds of people, including those that seemingly dominate conversations.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile