For residents / PDs: making better impressions on applicants

[koolaidkid]

As we move up the academic ladder, we will likely strive to be the PD before reaching the coveted vice chair / chair positions. Looking at things from the other side, I'd want to make the best impression possible on my applicants. Similarly, I'm sure there will be applicants that I will really like as a resident, and I wouldn't want to turn them off.

I know that a few PDs/residents do actually read this, though most probably don't care. Certain things do make a difference on leaving a better impression on candidates (or leaving a bad impression and making them think whether they should even rank the program). Perhaps people can add to this.

At best, this will make the interview experiences better for applicants and let programs really shine. At worst, things won't change and it will be a nice little b*tch session. However, given that I am a jug with legs, crash through walls, and scream "oh yeah" you may not even want to bother reading further.

1) Interviewers who don't read your app or dont' care: Please have the interviewer at least vaguely know what the candidate is about. Having flown cross-country via red-eye to arrive and know 100% that the interviewer didn't even crack open your application is very disheartening. Yes, attendings are busy. But you wonder, if they're too busy to read your app, will they be too busy too teach? I loved Hopkins but was surprised when people flipped through my application in front of me and it was clear they hadn't looked at it. Also, the interviewer shouldn't be checking e-mail during the interview (not Hopkins). You dislike apathy and so do we.

2) Limiting the number of caustic interviewers (NYU, UCSF, etc). That can really turn off a prospective applicant.

3) not reimbursing parking. yes, we know that you provided lunch / dinner, but having us pay that extra $8 for parking from a department with a Gamma Knife and CyberKnife just smacks of stinginess.

4) quash the myths early. find out from your internal applicants what kind of "myths"/"urban legends" float around on the interview trail, such as the story about person dropping out of the program / suicide or residents frequently staying until 10pm at night. if it's true, you'll want to defend your program.

5) putting you up in a hotel is a true luxury. when a program does that, it really makes you feel warm inside. few can afford this, but....

6) even nicer is when the PD sends you a note. yes, I got the e-mail from Dr. Wilson, but it just made a huge difference and makes you feel a little less insignificant. When you frequently don't know where you stand and how to broach certain topics, having the PD e-mail you gives you the opportunity to communicate with the program. I don't think everyone gets the note from Stanford, btw. Additionally, it doesn't take that much more effort. A form one is fine, and yes, it does raise your hopes, but I think that it also gives you the chance to tell him/her what was great about the program and why you might rank it highly.

7) the city presentations: certain cities sell themselves (SF, Manhattan, Seattle) while others don't (Milwaukee, Detroit, Baltimore, Cleveland, St. Louis, Houston). When a happy resident tells you "I just bought a new boat and have a great time in the city. These are the places I like to hang out. I swing dance and volunteer at the art museum, etc" it really makes you think, "hmmm, maybe I can live in this city" and can really enjoy it. The presentation about St. Louis at Wash U, the residents at UW-Madison, and the presentation on Houston all helped. Additionally, for those with families, it's nice to have a similar resident share how "family friendly" a place like Manhattan or SF may actually be (which may help future applicants).

8) arrogance on the part of residents or attendings could be worse than apathy. met a few department superstars that did turn me off, and I thought to myself, could I really work with him/her?

9) having a resident or two make their e-mails available for questions. it's nice, and it allows us to sound them out. if we're really interested in a program, we'll likely be contacting several of them. Michigan residents handed out cards. very very nice.

10) name tags do help. prefer the pin / sticker. did not like thing around my neck; we spend effort to look professional and a handwritten note around my neck just ruined it

11) social event helps you gauge whether or not you can fit in with this crowd; a few drinks really livens things up; I personally enjoyed the dinner the evening of the interview more so than the evening before; applicants are more laid back and less guarded; this is especially nice when the attendings show up; having beers with Harari, Weichselbaum, or Cox after a stressful day of interviews (and realizing they're really down to earth people) makes a difference; you realize that these big names will likely support you and not leave you hanging; it doesn't even have to be dinner, a happy hour with finger foods (and of course total respect for non-drinkers) makes a nice impression

12) concrete evidence of things on the horizon, everyone talks of protons etc; when I interviewed at Beaumont, they talked of protons and I thought "this probably won't happen for a while, look at X, Y, and Z that have all stalled" but it's true, wish I had known; similarly knowing Wisconsin's new cancer center and the construction at Yale were really nice...

https://www.beaumonthospitals.com/news-story-beaumont-cancer-procure-proton-beam-therapy-center

13) e-mailng applicants re. increases in number of spots: Wash U increasing its number of spots and telling us via e-mail made me change my rank list some; if you know for certain you'll have an extra spot, send us an e-mail

14) well-organized interview days: a huge plus; a negative thing is when you're told to go on tour to another site and no one takes you, at least walk us to the shuttle UCSF

15) seeing the city: no one has time to really see the city during the interview, but a huge thing for me was the dinner on the water in Seattle (UW); similarly, U Chicago's "club room" was nice, but a fun little dinner downtown would have really made people see how much of an exciting city Chicago is. Similarly true for Hopkins. Some of us have biological clocks ticking, and we think it's possible we may meet our future husband / mate in this town. Knowing there's a vibrant young urban professional crowd to mingle with is a plus.

16) plug for Wisconsin: I thought a longer period of time for the panel interview would have been better (or perhaps 2 panels and one/two one-on-ones); regardless, i had one of the best interview experiences here. Before I interviewed here, I didn't know much about the program/Madison besides Tomo. After interviewing, the program moved up ~5 spots on my rank list. A large part is the friendliness of the residents, the attendings, and the sense that yes, Madison is cold, but it really does seem like an enjoyable place to train.

I am sure programs want feedback too. I would suggest that the PD / an interested resident contact his/her internal candidates to find out about what could be improved.
The interview day is a true hassle to set up, requires serious time commitment on teh part of interviewers / applicants. A few small things can really improve the experience for everyone (and make a program look that much better).

please add... oh yeah, I hope those who celebrate Easter have a wonderful Holy Day. For those who don't, I hope they enjoy the rest of their weekend.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Impressions]

2) Limiting the number of caustic interviewers (NYU). That can really turn off a prospective applicant.

8) arrogance on the part of residents or attendings could be worse than apathy. met a few department superstars that did turn me off, and I thought to myself, could I really work with him/her?

I am laughing because what you say is so true. I dropped NYU to near bottom on my rank list because of a nasty interview experience and arrogance of one of the attendings--- in a small department, I just couldn't see myself working with such a person for four years. Yes, I know, it's a snap judgment, but sometimes one has to go with a gut feeling. (and ya know, I may just be an interviewee, but I do appreciate being treated with basic human manners) And ironically, I was expecting to place this program at the top of my list when I walked into the interview since I loved the location. So what can I say, you never know about a program until you interview (or better yet, rotate) there.

 

[mikedc813]

I have to agree that the little things really can add up to make either a good or bad impression of a program. Not validating parking really bugged me. And what's up with UTMB "refunding" you after you send back a W4 with your receipt?! I still haven't gotten my $10 back...

 

[Impressions]

I am laughing because what you say is so true. I dropped NYU to near bottom on my rank list because of a nasty interview experience and arrogance of one of the attendings--- in a small department, I just couldn't see myself working with such a person for four years. Yes, I know, it's a snap judgment, but sometimes one has to go with a gut feeling. (and ya know, I may just be an interviewee, but I do appreciate being treated with basic human manners) And ironically, I was expecting to place this program at the top of my list when I walked into the interview since I loved the location. So what can I say, you never know about a program until you interview (or better yet, rotate) there.

FYI- that "caustic" interviewer resigned and has departed from NYU.

 

[Impressions]

I have to agree that the most irritating thing is when the interviewer is reading your application during your interview. totally reflects badly on the program and is a frustrating experience. chandra (the caustic guy from NYU did that) as well as roberts (Yale).

 

[UrbanAmish]

.

 

[yeasterbunny]

i believe this is a strategy that some programs use to get to know you better. one interviewer will meet you with knowledge of your file to focus on aptitude, another will meet you like a blind date to feel for chemistry.

Yeah, I remember one place they told us up front that no one but the PD had read our application for reasons like this. I suppose they say that the primary purpose of the interview is just to get to know you and see how you will fit into the program, that you're already good enough on paper or you wouldn't be interviewing. Still that doesn't make it any less annoying though when they simply haven't bothered to glance at it and they end up taking time out of the interview to read your file while you sit there and smile at the wall.

 

[Impressions]

FYI- that "caustic" interviewer resigned and has departed from NYU.

Er... any idea of which institution he departed to?

 

[Impressions]

Er... any idea of which institution he departed to?

Sorry, not sure, but where ever he went, those residents are screwed...he's a meany. I don't think NYU shed a tear on the news of his departure.

 

[Impressions]

"Penn
Steve Hahn will ask you wehre you are interviewing. be careful with this answer. he takes notes on this."

This is a challenging question to answer when asked of an applicant in rad onc, and I was wondering what you (the one who posted, or others) thought Steve Hahn or others would do with this information.

 

[CNphair]

Ok, I agree with all that has been said above. Plan to show them to my PD.

As a PGY-2 observing the interview process for the first time "on the other side," I would just like to add a few "Don't"s for applicants:

1) Arrogance - Yes, you have a PhD. Yes, you were AOA. Guess what? So were we. Please refrain from telling residents that their program is just a "backup" for you. We will tell the attendings you think so.

2) Boredom - The interview day is long and tedious no matter where you go. Goodness knows by the end of one 2 day (!) interview, I had broken a heel on the cobblestone street, gotten a sore back, and truly tired of explaining my committment to academics. However, I never rolled my eyes at an interviewers questions or told him just to check my CV. We also know that every linac looks alike, but we have to show you the work space. Don't act irritated. Yes, there are a few of you out there doing that - stop it.

3) Hangovers - We want you to have a good time at the preinterview dinner. Lord knows the residents at our program enjoyed a more than a few adult beverages. But its probably not the best idea to mention you plan to get "trashed" at the bar afterward and then show up the next day visibly hung over.

4) Back to arrogance - please don't feel the need to criticize your fellow applicants. Don't laugh at where they go to school. Don't ask why so-and-so didn't go to ASTRO. Its tacky...and again, we will spread the word.

 

[stephew]

Ah yes, putting down others is not a good idea. I've seen more than one dinged right off a rank list for this.

 

[BraggPeak]

Another thing that I thought was annoying, was when residents get all excited about their home school candidate at interview dinners and say things like "Dr. so and so really loved working with you, etc etc." This was especially true at the Loyola dinner where the residents were so excited about 1 of the current Loyola students. It's great that you love your home school candidate, but when you're sitting in front of 10 other people from other schools who came to look at your program, try not to be openly favoring someone. It makes other applicants think that the interview is a waste of time. I met at least 2 other students who interviewed at Loyola who said that they were ranking the program lower because it was pointless since they were probably taking a home school candidate, which ended up being true!

And since we're talking about Loyola, another thing-- also annoying to interview 30+ people for 1 spot. And then Loyola sent out an email to at least the top half of the candidates they interviewed (15 or so I hear) to say that "you have been favorably ranked." Most programs interview 10 candidates for every 1 spot. So in my opinion being ranked in the top 15 for 1 spot is not by any definition "favorable." Slightly unprofessional/deceiving on the part of the department.

 

[Leapfrog80]

I'm surprised to hear of such actions on the part of interviewees. Most everyone I met on the interview trail was friendly and not at all arrogant- people I would be happy to call colleagues. I would think the abovementioned behavior would only serve to shoot yourself in the foot and it is hard to believe it occurs. Why travel so many miles and pay so many dollars to interview at a program then display lack of interest is beyond me... but now that this process is over I wholeheartedly agree with stephew that the interview should not be discounted.

 

[BatemanDorsia]

Loyola has a medical school? really?

 

[Leapfrog80]

Sorry, not sure, but where ever he went, those residents are screwed...he's a meany. I don't think NYU shed a tear on the news of his departure.

I remember this attending. Very arrogant about his MDACC background and tried to make me feel like crap. I guess it wasn't anything personal. Hopefully the next institution will be able to look beyond his accomplished pedigree and see the whole person.

 

[RadOncRudy]

Okay seriously, what's with the Loyola bashing? While I agree that my home program interviewed a lot of people for few spots with two of us applying, I certainly had a similar experience described at 2-3 other schools where the residents were favoring their own students or people who had rotated there...it is easier to make conversation with them than me,a complete stranger, so I didn't take a offense to it. Also, they weren't the only ones with bad odds-- Mayo Jax was 40 for 1 and whether Case went through interviews or not I don't remember, but they listed 33 for 1. While I don't know whether the email was truly sent to almost half of the interviewees, I don't consider Loyola to be the only place where the above was happening. But I do understand the need to vent sometimes, so if that's all it is, carry on. I don't want to be too defensive, just felt I needed to point out this is not an isolated incident at a single program.

 

[BraggPeak]

Sorry, Rudy, didn't mean to single out Loyola....just using it as an example. interviewing 30 to 40 people for 1 spot for ANY program is crazy if you have your own students applying and have other who rotated there. The only exception would be a community program like Kaiser LA and CPMC maybe. And I agree that it's natural for residents to make small-talk with the candidates that they already know, but I think that they should try to not make it look like they are favoring one over the other at least on interview day! Most programs I went to had students that rotated there and residents obviously knew the candidates, but were not openly going on about how they were so great and that they hope they "stay here." Again, I'm not hating just sticking with thread title of giving advice for things programs can do to make a better impression.

 

[radonc09]

On the topic of how to give a better impression to the applicants, some programs did much better at giving the applicants undivided attention during the interview. I know, they are busy, but somehow many interviewers made other arrangements (residents to take care of things or talk to them between interviews, etc.). There were multiple programs that I experienced few to no interruptions and this gave a good impression.

At other places, the faculty took multiple phone calls and interruptions during the interviews. One program director came 15 min late for an interview, made a 5 min phone call, then started the interview and took 1-2 more phone calls during our conversation. What does this tell an applicant about the time you will spend talking with a resident in your program?

 

[digimon]

Another thing that I thought was annoying, was when residents get all excited about their home school candidate at interview dinners and say things like "Dr. so and so really loved working with you, etc etc." This was especially true at the Loyola dinner where the residents were so excited about 1 of the current Loyola students. It's great that you love your home school candidate, but when you're sitting in front of 10 other people from other schools who came to look at your program, try not to be openly favoring someone. It makes other applicants think that the interview is a waste of time. I met at least 2 other students who interviewed at Loyola who said that they were ranking the program lower because it was pointless since they were probably taking a home school candidate, which ended up being true!

And since we're talking about Loyola, another thing-- also annoying to interview 30+ people for 1 spot. And then Loyola sent out an email to at least the top half of the candidates they interviewed (15 or so I hear) to say that "you have been favorably ranked." Most programs interview 10 candidates for every 1 spot. So in my opinion being ranked in the top 15 for 1 spot is not by any definition "favorable." Slightly unprofessional/deceiving on the part of the department.

I'm sorry that you felt so threatened by compliments we made to individuals that rotated through the department. What can I say, we had a couple of exceptional internal candidates. FYI, we also had a few that were better off in Pathology. That being said, I was fortunate to participate in the rank process at Loyola and can assure you that the list was put together in a very objective way. As for the letters, I don't know who your sources are, but we did not send out that many letters. Maybe your letter got lost in the mail I think the statement that this is unprofessional is inflammatory. Don't believe everything you hear on the interview trail. And yes, I agree with you that we interviewed too many people. That was clear after meeting some of you

Anyway Bragg Peak, I understand your frustration, as I went through the same stressful process just a few years back. I assure you we've taken feedback from the interviewees and hope to make next year's process more streamlined. BTW, where you gonna be next year? if our paths cross, i'll buy you a beer and promise to be excited to see you again

 

[BraggPeak]

Not sure why programs have to be so sensitive about people pointing out things that they thought programs could do to improve how they are perceived by applicants-- it is not to criticize and make the program look bad-- if that were the goal, we would post this stuff before rank lists are done. As for the source of my information re the letters (I'm actually referring to an email, maybe there was a letter sent out as well), you can send me a private message if you want to know more. This information was not from someone else who interviewed...so it was not a rumor 'on the trail.'

As for me, I matched at my #2! #1 was UPENN, but that was a lot of people's #1.

Having said all this, thought Loyola was an overall solid program. I ended up ranking it in the bottom half of my list because they didn't have a radiobiology program set up yet...But, emami did say that was one of his goals for the upcoming year. Also, the new physics director from U o C straight up told me to also consider U chicago since they have more serious research going on. Pluses of the program that I felt (and also heard others mention) were the two really cool PGY 2's!

 

[Bruce Banner]

I'm sorry that you felt so threatened by compliments we made to individuals that rotated through the department. What can I say, we had a couple of exceptional internal candidates. FYI, we also had a few that were better off in Pathology. That being said, I was fortunate to participate in the rank process at Loyola and can assure you that the list was put together in a very objective way. As for the letters, I don't know who your sources are, but we did not send out that many letters. Maybe your letter got lost in the mail I think the statement that this is unprofessional is inflammatory. Don't believe everything you hear on the interview trail. And yes, I agree with you that we interviewed too many people. That was clear after meeting some of you

Anyway Bragg Peak, I understand your frustration, as I went through the same stressful process just a few years back. I assure you we've taken feedback from the interviewees and hope to make next year's process more streamlined. BTW, where you gonna be next year? if our paths cross, i'll buy you a beer and promise to be excited to see you again

Digimon, I don't think his comments were personal. No reason to flame him. And from what I remember about Loyola, there is a virtually guaranteed spot(s) each year for any Loyola graduates. So I think some of his frustration is valid and probably something your department needs to address with next year's candidates.

 

[BraggPeak]

Digimon, I don't think his comments were personal. No reason to flame him. And from what I remember about Loyola, there is a virtually guaranteed spot(s) each year for any Loyola graduates. So I think some of his frustration is valid and probably something your department needs to address with next year's candidates.

Thank you

 

[3dtp]

I remember this attending. Very arrogant about his MDACC background and tried to make me feel like crap. I guess it wasn't anything personal. Hopefully the next institution will be able to look beyond his accomplished pedigree and see the whole person.

You mean MDACC didn't invent radiation therapy?

 

[BraggPeak]

You mean MDACC didn't invent radiation therapy?

BTW-- the attending in question--- anurag chandra--- will be going into private practice. so no one worry-- we won't be working with him regardless of where you matched!

 

[CNphair]

Digimon, I don't think his comments were personal. No reason to flame him. And from what I remember about Loyola, there is a virtually guaranteed spot(s) each year for any Loyola graduates. So I think some of his frustration is valid and probably something your department needs to address with next year's candidates.

Noone was flaming him.

We definitely should address this perception...considering only 1 of 6 residents is from Loyola medical school. Only 2 candidates matched in the last 6 years are from Loyola. So, I hardly think it is a guaranteed thing.

 

[stephew]

"Penn
Steve Hahn will ask you wehre you are interviewing. be careful with this answer. he takes notes on this."

This is a challenging question to answer when asked of an applicant in rad onc, and I was wondering what you (the one who posted, or others) thought Steve Hahn or others would do with this information.

For perspective, while this question may not feel very nice (and someone I think suggested it was a violation of NRMP), most intentions behind it are pretty benign. I don't think anything is generally going to be "done" with the information. I think most of the time its a soft bit of info that doesnt factor in in any "hard" way (lets say things like publications, USMLE scores and evals etc are "hard" data). Its just more of a snapshot of You As Candidate.

Now you can debate the pertinance of the info until the cows come home (i.e. it should be irrelevant, you should be evaluated on your fitness, not how viable you are perceived by other programs etc) and I would probably agree. And I think most PDs and committees would too. What I'm trying to communicate is that I don't think that most of the time they intend this info that way. (at a subconscious level, could it be factored in? Sure.)


Sometimes the question is probably asked as a conversation piece. Interviews can be difficult. Applicants often think its would be great to talk about their research. sometimes that is true- but often we dont understand your bench research or we get what we need from the CV. We're more interested in hearing you talk, hearing who you are and your thoughts about things. We can reach for oblique things to get you to chat. If we can get into a real "conversation" that's better for most of us.

So im not defending the "where else are you interviewing" question. Just trying to give you a perscpective as to where it might be coming from and that often, the interviewer means little by it and has no idea how much it makes your stomach churn.

 

[BraggPeak]

I agree with Steph that it's not that they are going to "do" anything with that information. A lot of people ended up giving advice about each program, which was actually helpful when I made my rank list.

The times that this question concerned me was when they would take notes on each program I mentioned. I think at 1 interview I went at, I tried to answer the question by saying "well yesterday I was at Stanford and tomorrow I will be going to UCLA." But there were times when they would push more....and even after I would list off some names and stop (hoping I gave enough info), they would stop writing and say, "Ok, where else." The one thing I would say to applicants for next year is, just don't lie and add in Harvard, MSK, etc just to make yourself look better. I have no evidence to support this, but I have no doubt PDs talk about applicants after interviews, just as we talk about programs after interviews. You don't want to be caught lying on something that is so so minor in the end.

I would add this though: if you go to some programs that are considered "middle" or "lower" tier (whatever that really means) you may want to not list some of the top programs that you're interviewing at (don't lie if they probe further). At one program I mentioned Stanford, Penn, etc and the PD said, "oh ok, well i'm not going to lie, we can't compete with those programs." So I felt like they might end up ranking me lower thinking that I would not seriously consider them.

 

[digimon]

Not sure why programs have to be so sensitive about people pointing out things that they thought programs could do to improve how they are perceived by applicants-- it is not to criticize and make the program look bad-- if that were the goal, we would post this stuff before rank lists are done. As for the source of my information re the letters (I'm actually referring to an email, maybe there was a letter sent out as well), you can send me a private message if you want to know more. This information was not from someone else who interviewed...so it was not a rumor 'on the trail.'

As for me, I matched at my #2! #1 was UPENN, but that was a lot of people's #1.

Having said all this, thought Loyola was an overall solid program. I ended up ranking it in the bottom half of my list because they didn't have a radiobiology program set up yet...But, emami did say that was one of his goals for the upcoming year. Also, the new physics director from U o C straight up told me to also consider U chicago since they have more serious research going on. Pluses of the program that I felt (and also heard others mention) were the two really cool PGY 2's!

congrats on the match Braggs Peak. My response wasn't intended to flame anyone. I just think that it's silly that a criticism of the interview process was that we were complimentary to people that were known entities. The other stuff I agree with and hope that they'll fix in the future. Good luck with Intern year!

 

[Adawaal]

For perspective, while this question may not feel very nice (and someone I think suggested it was a violation of NRMP), most intentions behind it are pretty benign. I don't think anything is generally going to be "done" with the information. I think most of the time its a soft bit of info that doesnt factor in in any "hard" way (lets say things like publications, USMLE scores and evals etc are "hard" data). Its just more of a snapshot of You As Candidate.

Agree with Steph here. You'd have to look long and hard to find a department chair nicer, more laid-back, and more interested in his residents than Steve Hahn at Penn. Many of us inquire about where all a candidate is looking. For most of us, it's a completely benign question. I don't care what your answer is. But I think you can glean a bit from the answer. Does the answer make the candidate look too much like a gunner for a "name" program, does it point to a serious academic bent, does it point to a commitment to a geographic region, etc.?

And for the record, the question, discomfiting as it may be, is not a Match violation. Asking you where you plan to put our program on your ROL would be.

 

[stephew]

that was my understanding A. but i admit i havent looked it up since the question was raised.