everyone interviews well

[jdandturk]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I had an interview last week that i thought went really well. Problem is freinds who interveiwed there and people on sdn also thought their interviews went great. So how do i gauge my performance?

 

[ChubbyChaser]

You dont...I have yet to hear anyone say "OMG that went horrible"

 

[p30doc]

I had an interview that went horrible =P

 

[ChubbyChaser]

I had an interview that went horrible =P

So did I...lol but still.

90% of the time when ppl are asked "so how did it go"

they respond "it went well, I think"

and since schools cant admit 90% of there interviewees...well

 

[p30doc]

very true

this is pretty much how it went down:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww[/YOUTUBE]

 

[chemolupusMD]

My UM interview went horrible 🙁.

 

[nVictus]

i wish interviews were like first dates.... you find out at the end if you closed the deal or not

 

[thegreenlight]

Here's a similar clip with Sarah Palin. I actually kind of feel bad for her because that's what some of my interview responses have sounded like. 🙁

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMypXCUWMw

 

[Chocolate Bear]

i wish interviews were like first dates.... you find out at the end if you closed the deal or not

Or you could get strung along for months without knowing anything...wait, I don't see the difference anymore... 😕

 

[nVictus]

Or you could get strung along for months without knowing anything...wait, I don't see the difference anymore... 😕

i usually close the deal

 

[Chocolate Bear]

i usually close the deal

Nice 👍

 

[nVictus]

anywho.... this entire process is cryptic anyway.... you dont know how they screen for invites.... how your interviews went... etc. it's truely a crapshoot

 

[JamesBond15]

Some people are really not social, yet they think they can talk a good talk. I think there is a very good degree of separation among interviewees.

And I am surprised at how some people come unprepared, ie, don't why this school, don't know that you should have some questions prepared.

 

[nVictus]

Some people are really not social, yet they think they can talk a good talk. I think there is a very good degree of separation among interviewees.

And I am surprised at how some people come unprepared, ie, don't why this school, don't know that you should have some questions prepared.

really? weird. it seemed like everyone at all of my interviews was social.. walking up to random interviewees, starting conversations, etc. out of 25-30 interviewees.... i'd say maybe 2-3 were pretty quiet/withdrawn

 

[Quix]

It's entirely possible for most interviews to go well, especially since the interview is only one facet of the process. I've been told by *all* of my interviewers in the past that they would recommend admission, but here I am in academia instead. 😉

We suck at gauging the quality of interviews generally, and it usually takes a third party to judge how we did (if we don't have access to immediate feedback).

 

[213965]

Some people are really not social, yet they think they can talk a good talk. I think there is a very good degree of separation among interviewees.

And I am surprised at how some people come unprepared, ie, don't why this school, don't know that you should have some questions prepared.

Yes, that was pretty much me last year -

#1 - "How do you feel about the shift to our new curriculum?"

ME - (was not even aware of curricular change until orientation that morning) "Well, I think it's great that the school is keeping up with the changes in our society and adjusting the material being taught to better educate us as future doctors..." more lame vagueness with no reference to any specific curriculum "changes" whatsoever.

Did not get in.

#2 - (in reference to my 4 year long research project) "So how exactly does the inhibitor bind to the protein? What kind of biochemical interaction takes place here?"

ME - "That's a great question. Let me check." (frantically flips through published manuscript written months ago, panics and cannot find diagram with specific binding interactions). So then I spew some BS answer based off what I know in other models with ligand-protein binding interactions. I'm pretty sure he could tell I was BSing him.

Did not get in.

#3 - "Do you have any questions for me?"

ME - (blanks out, did not prepare for this question, just says the first stupid thing that comes to mind). "Um, what exactly is your affiliation with the school? How/when did you decide to become an interviewer for the admissions committee?"

(long pause) "Well, I've never actually been asked that before!" (15 min of rambling about himself, 15 min wasted of valuable interview time)

Did not get in.


Needless to say, I am much better prepared for this cycle. Good luck to everyone applying. Mistakes like these can easily be avoided with a few extra minutes prep. 😀

 

[fizzle]

It's entirely possible for most interviews to go well, especially since the interview is only one facet of the process. I've been told by *all* of my interviewers in the past that they would recommend admission, but here I am in academia instead. 😉

We suck at gauging the quality of interviews generally, and it usually takes a third party to judge how we did (if we don't have access to immediate feedback).

I think it's not so much that we're bad at judging our own interviews as that we just have very little idea of what they're looking for. Some of my most engaging conversations have been with people I haven't thought much of. My point is that establishing a great rapport with your interviewer may make it seem like an awesome interview, but it isn't necessarily a sign that the interview actually went great...maybe the topic was just interesting, or some other factor came into play.

It's easy to reduce a great interview into just being very sociable and conversational, but there's so much more to it than that. The quiet, withdrawn ones may have qualities that shine through despite their reticence.

 

[MsKrispyKreme]

really? weird. it seemed like everyone at all of my interviews was social.. walking up to random interviewees, starting conversations, etc. out of 25-30 interviewees.... i'd say maybe 2-3 were pretty quiet/withdrawn

Those people weren't social. They were being fake and sizing up the competition.

I'm extremely social, but I plan to be fairly quiet with fellow interviewees.

 

[nontrdgsbuiucmd]

I think it's not so much that we're bad at judging our own interviews as that we just have very little idea of what they're looking for. Some of my most engaging conversations have been with people I haven't thought much of. My point is that establishing a great rapport with your interviewer may make it seem like an awesome interview, but it isn't necessarily a sign that the interview actually went great...maybe the topic was just interesting, or some other factor came into play.

It's easy to reduce a great interview into just being very sociable and conversational, but there's so much more to it than that. The quiet, withdrawn ones may have qualities that shine through despite their reticence.

Yes most definitely. I'd conducted graduate admissions interviews for a few years (not med school). There is a difference between liking a candidate because they're interesting and recommending that the candidate be accepted to the program.

In a med school interview, I saw around 10 different components that my interviewer was "grading" me on. Not sure what these were (although hopefully I could guess on most of them), but being comfortable and interviewing "well" would not necessarily mean that I nailed each of those 10 areas.

Conversely, I think one could interview "badly" by, as mentioned above, not being familiar with the major areas/changes in a school, lacking basic knowledge of medicine & society, responding with shallow answers to questions on personal experiences, stammering/stuttering(due to nerves)/nervous body language, things that indicate a candidate is not ready for the big time & may need another year to .. mature ..