How interviews are evaluated

[doctorbettyrock]

Does anyone know the "5 categories" most medical schools use to evaluate interviewees? ... It's something like knowledge of medicine, critical thinking, maturity.... Responses are always appreciated

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[kdburton]

Does anyone know the "5 categories" most medical schools use to evaluate interviewees? ... It's something like knowledge of medicine, critical thinking, maturity.... Responses are always appreciated

The two interviewers I had would have a hard time evaluating me on knowledge of medicine and probably some other dimesions because I don't think they asked me much about that. They just pretty much asked me questions about myself and some of my jobs and some standard questions they ask everyone. But there may be some schools that try to rate you on 5 different categories.

 

[Critical Mass]

They read your app just like they'd read a patient's lab results or other objective diagnostic criteria. Then they'll focus the interivew just like they'd do if you were a patient.

Short story--if they believe that you are the real deal, then they'll lead you with questions that affirm their belief. If they think that you don't have what it takes, then they will hammer you until they can rule out a diagnosis of good candidate.

When it comes to "scoring" you, they are going to go with their gut feeling about your potential and then slant the numbers one way or another. There is really no objective way to evaluate an interview even though they have to apply some kind of rating to it for purposes of sorting the applicant pool.

 

[jojo_1981]

When it comes to "scoring" you, they are going to go with their gut feeling about your potential and then slant the numbers one way or another. There is really no objective way to evaluate an interview even though they have to apply some kind of rating to it for purposes of sorting the applicant pool.

Isn't that the point of closed-file interviews? They've been ~30% of the interviews I've been on.

 

[braluk]

Does anyone know the "5 categories" most medical schools use to evaluate interviewees? ... It's something like knowledge of medicine, critical thinking, maturity.... Responses are always appreciated

I think these categories are pretty variable from school to school. There are some interviews that are extremely laid back that wouldn't be able to accurately gauge your knowledge of medicine, and there are those that grill you on everything from the chair to the kitchen sink. I think the major things that most schools will share in common when it comes to interviews, is probably looking for a mature, well thought out person who they could see themselves spending their time with as a colleague for the next four years. It will be the school that will define whatever the qualities of being a good colleague are and to ensure that its students are in line with the mission of their school.

 

[LizzyM]

Rather than knowledge of "medicine", I think what may be measured is knowledge of "medicine as a career". This is sometimes referred to as "why medicine". Other questions related to this may be "where do you see yourself in 10 years" and "what other careers have you considered" and "if the need for medicine were eliminated, what would you choose to do as a career?"

Other things I see interviewers comment on positively are: ability to think on one's feet, ability to describe one's research activities in a way that indicates that you know what is going on in the lab, humility, good manners, eye contact, smile, enthusiasm, questions that show that the applicant has some familiarity with the school (through publications, web etc).

 

[adcomm]

x2 for knowing what you actually did in your research, seeming interested in the school, having decent manners and communication ability, seeming motivated for medicine in general. at my school, it's the interviewers gut feeling on these topics.

 

[gmsquid]

Based on these criteria I don't think I had bad interviews...but my waitlist tendency shows otherwise :-(

 

[doctorbettyrock]

Based on these criteria I don't think I had bad interviews...but my waitlist tendency shows otherwise :-(

How would you describe your interviews?

 

[fizzle]

BOMP.

This is an interesting topic, but it hasn't been covered very thoroughly in typical pre-med style!

If there are two interviews, then what happens if one interviewer's impression of a candidate conflicts with the other interviewer's impression? e.g. One interviewer says, "This candidate shows great promise and motivation for medicine!" and the other says, "This candidate's motivation for medicine sounds a bit iffy."

 

[TooMuchResearch]

x2 for knowing what you actually did in your research, seeming interested in the school, having decent manners and communication ability, seeming motivated for medicine in general. at my school, it's the interviewers gut feeling on these topics.

How do people not know what they did in their own research?

Oh, and way to resurrect almost two year old threads. You've even got me asking questions in them. *emoticon missing*

 

[fizzle]

How do people not know what they did in their own research?

Oh, and way to resurrect almost two year old threads. You've even got me asking questions in them. *emoticon missing*

I was going to make my own topic on this, but then this topic popped up in the search, and I decided that I didn't want my own username gracing the front page of the forums under the topic title (I like to maintain a small bit of anonymity and hide in the shadows ) Besides, it's still a relevant question

 

[medhope31]

If you go to the stanford secondary thread they have a link to the online interview evaluation form that interviewers are supposed to use. There is a screen shot of the five categories.. I think greenlight posted it.

Here is another evaluation form that I found somewhere:
1.COMMUNICATION & INTERPERSONAL SKILLS - spontaneous vs rehearsed, able to keep conversation and be understood
2.MATURITY- confident, self-aware, knowns strengths and weaknesses
3. ENTHUSIASM FOR LEARNING - self motivated learner
4. COMMITMENT TO MEDICINE - knows what it is to be a doctor
5. AWARENESS OF ETHICAL ISSUES

all are ranked on a scale of 1 to 5, then there is an overall rank in the end with positive and negative feedback space.

I think that every school is variable based on what they are looking for.

 

[BrightHelix]

A glimpse into the admissions process:

http://med.stanford.edu/irt/development/mesa.html

 

[chad5871]

A glimpse into the admissions process:

http://med.stanford.edu/irt/development/mesa.html

Wow, that's really interesting! I hope I have the opportunity to be on an admissions committee someday!