Explaining poor academic performance during interview

[fayevalentine]

Hello all!

I had a few less than stellar grades in my undergrad, as well as a handful of withdrawals. I read on SDN that the school I currently have an interview offer for is one that likes to question any instances of poor performance. How do I properly address such questions? In my early years I was immature and had no direction, but I did get a few B-/C type grades because... well, the classes were just plain hard, and I was too focused on my job and not focused enough on school. I don't want to sound negative at all during the interview, or offer excuses! Help, please!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Alpha Centauri]

I know from your previous postings you have been a strong student Stats wise. Just be open and up front. My first 2 semesters of undergrad I had like a 3.2 just because I was lazy and not serious about school, and that is exactly what I plan on saying if they bring it up. My performance after that showed I learned from my mistakes and changed my perspective

 

[deleted740991]

There's an honest fine line that you must use in addressing poor performance many years ago with admissions people. Some committees will be open to hearing from you, others are overly bitter or pretentious of you and will use question after question to say "why did x, y, z happen? Tell us again."

The reality is you have 15-20 minutes in most interviews for dental school for 2 sessions - don't let certain people with certain agendas dictate your time and your energy on redundant parts of you that you feel aren't being discuss; but you must also properly address your shortcomings and move on efficiently.

The proper sequence is to (1) acknowledge / take ownership of your past, (2) discuss solutions you did to improve, (3) discuss how you've changed since, and (4) talk with conviction that who you were x amount of years ago doesn't represent who you are today. And this all must be discussed in 90 seconds - 2 minutes. In a 20 minute session, there is absolutely no need to discuss more than 2 minutes of grades or poor performance. This is what politicians masterly do all the time in framing issues or qualities in defense of them, and people who are absolutely sound at arguing and talking in general are most effective.

If you feel during the interview that you're being hammered for longer than that period of time, then you have nothing to lose at this point psychologically. Committees have perceptions and agendas of you before you ever walk in the door, and if you feel like you're already down and out on a negative perception potentially wasting half of your interview on grades, then you must steer the conversation in a way that's positive to you to make the interview meaningful to yourself.

Just remember that your grades and DAT were good enough for an interview, and how you react quickly to describing yourself beyond these shortcomings without ignoring it is what will get you accepted.

 

[DMDDDSHopeful]

There's an honest fine line that you must use in addressing poor performance many years ago with admissions people. Some committees will be open to hearing from you, others are overly bitter or pretentious of you and will use question after question to say "why did x, y, z happen? Tell us again."

The reality is you have 15-20 minutes in most interviews for dental school for 2 sessions - don't let certain people with certain agendas dictate your time and your energy on redundant parts of you that you feel aren't being discuss; but you must also properly address your shortcomings and move on efficiently.

The proper sequence is to (1) acknowledge / take ownership of your past, (2) discuss solutions you did to improve, (3) discuss how you've changed since, and (4) talk with conviction that who you were x amount of years ago doesn't represent who you are today. And this all must be discussed in 90 seconds - 2 minutes. In a 20 minute session, there is absolutely no need to discuss more than 2 minutes of grades or poor performance. This is what politicians masterly do all the time in framing issues or qualities in defense of them, and people who are absolutely sound at arguing and talking in general are most effective.

If you feel during the interview that you're being hammered for longer than that period of time, then you have nothing to lose at this point psychologically. Committees have perceptions and agendas of you before you ever walk in the door, and if you feel like you're already down and out on a negative perception potentially wasting half of your interview on grades, then you must steer the conversation in a way that's positive to you to make the interview meaningful to yourself.

Just remember that your grades and DAT were good enough for an interview, and how you react quickly to describing yourself beyond these shortcomings without ignoring it is what will get you accepted.

Great advice here! Someone give this man or woman a coaching position.

 

[fayevalentine]

I know from your previous postings you have been a strong student Stats wise. Just be open and up front. My first 2 semesters of undergrad I had like a 3.2 just because I was lazy and not serious about school, and that is exactly what I plan on saying if they bring it up. My performance after that showed I learned from my mistakes and changed my perspective

Thanks I plan to be honest, I just don't want to come off like I'm making excuses for what was just my own laziness or lack of motivation.

 

[fayevalentine]

There's an honest fine line that you must use in addressing poor performance many years ago with admissions people. Some committees will be open to hearing from you, others are overly bitter or pretentious of you and will use question after question to say "why did x, y, z happen? Tell us again."

The reality is you have 15-20 minutes in most interviews for dental school for 2 sessions - don't let certain people with certain agendas dictate your time and your energy on redundant parts of you that you feel aren't being discuss; but you must also properly address your shortcomings and move on efficiently.

The proper sequence is to (1) acknowledge / take ownership of your past, (2) discuss solutions you did to improve, (3) discuss how you've changed since, and (4) talk with conviction that who you were x amount of years ago doesn't represent who you are today. And this all must be discussed in 90 seconds - 2 minutes. In a 20 minute session, there is absolutely no need to discuss more than 2 minutes of grades or poor performance. This is what politicians masterly do all the time in framing issues or qualities in defense of them, and people who are absolutely sound at arguing and talking in general are most effective.

If you feel during the interview that you're being hammered for longer than that period of time, then you have nothing to lose at this point psychologically. Committees have perceptions and agendas of you before you ever walk in the door, and if you feel like you're already down and out on a negative perception potentially wasting half of your interview on grades, then you must steer the conversation in a way that's positive to you to make the interview meaningful to yourself.

Just remember that your grades and DAT were good enough for an interview, and how you react quickly to describing yourself beyond these shortcomings without ignoring it is what will get you accepted.

Wow... this is really fantastic advice. Thank you thank you THANK you! Why have I not read anything else of yours on these forums ? I especially love this part: "If you feel during the interview that you're being hammered for longer than that period of time, then you have nothing to lose at this point psychologically. Committees have perceptions and agendas of you before you ever walk in the door, and if you feel like you're already down and out on a negative perception potentially wasting half of your interview on grades, then you must steer the conversation in a way that's positive to you to make the interview meaningful to yourself" because it is so true, yet I could see myself normally just playing defense here instead of offense. I'm going to practice having people interrogate me about my bad grades so I can learn to do this.

Good luck to you - are you applying anywhere this cycle?

 

[Alpha Centauri]

Thanks I plan to be honest, I just don't want to come off like I'm making excuses for what was just my own laziness or lack of motivation.

They aren't excuses, it's just being honest!

 

[doc toothache]

If ds were concerned about some warts on the application, it is unlikely they would extend an interview invitation. It's not like an applicant will come up with an excuse/explanation for their poor academic performance that they have not heard before. Such line of questioning is usually done to rattle cages and see how an applicant handles him/herself.