Interviewing in vain?

[Sephiroth]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

So I was just reflecting a bit on this past interview season and what became of my interviews. Like most people, I can think of some that seemed to go really well, and others that were a little more nerve-racking. But now with some outcomes to look at as well, I find it strange to see that the interviews that stuck out in my mind as going the best were (2 of the 3) places I was outright rejected from [post-interview]. Now I know that you often can't quite tell how well an interview is going, but let's assume I'm not completely incapable of picking up on these things and do have at least some sense of how well it went. This makes me wonder, were my interviews there completely in vain? Was I just good enough to meet their interview cutoff to fill interview spots, but never really meeting their standards to get in (unless of course a large chunk of their other interviewees showed up and turned out to be crazy)? Are there places that will interview a decent number of candidates they have no intention of accepting unless that person walks in with the nobel prize they just picked up, or they just have very bad yield for their interviews?

 

[Charles Darwin]

The school isn't the problem; somebody thinks too highly of their interview skills.

 

[Sephiroth]

The school isn't the problem; somebody thinks too highly of their interview skills.

I assure you I don't. In fact, I fully admit my interviewing skills are below average. I was referring specifically to the ones that seemed to go very well, yet had worse outcomes than those that didn't seem to go as well.

 

[Finches]

So I was just reflecting a bit on this past interview season and what became of my interviews. Like most people, I can think of some that seemed to go really well, and others that were a little more nerve-racking. But now with some outcomes to look at as well, I find it strange to see that the interviews that stuck out in my mind as going the best were (2 of the 3) places I was outright rejected from [post-interview]. Now I know that you often can't quite tell how well an interview is going, but let's assume I'm not completely incapable of picking up on these things and do have at least some sense of how well it went. This makes me wonder, were my interviews there completely in vain? Was I just good enough to meet their interview cutoff to fill interview spots, but never really meeting their standards to get in (unless of course a large chunk of their other interviewees showed up and turned out to be crazy)? Are there places that will interview a decent number of candidates they have no intention of accepting unless that person walks in with the nobel prize they just picked up, or they just have very bad yield for their interviews?

I doubt that most schools do this, although there is some speculation of schools that interview late in the game for waitlist spots. Why waste their own time, and also the time and money of the applicant? I think schools have an intention of accepting the interviewees; it's just that the reason behind that intention varies greatly. The final acceptance depends on whether the applicant satifies that reason in person.

Also FYI, some schools specifically instruct the interviewers to make their applicants "feel good about themselves", and to make sure that the applicants leave the interview with an uplifted, positive feeling. This could have been one of the reasons why you felt your interviews were amazing, when in reality, every interviewee walked out feeling the same.

 

[theseeker4]

So I was just reflecting a bit on this past interview season and what became of my interviews. Like most people, I can think of some that seemed to go really well, and others that were a little more nerve-racking. But now with some outcomes to look at as well, I find it strange to see that the interviews that stuck out in my mind as going the best were (2 of the 3) places I was outright rejected from [post-interview]. Now I know that you often can't quite tell how well an interview is going, but let's assume I'm not completely incapable of picking up on these things and do have at least some sense of how well it went. This makes me wonder, were my interviews there completely in vain? Was I just good enough to meet their interview cutoff to fill interview spots, but never really good enough to get in (unless of course a large chunk of their other interviewees showed up and turned out to be crazy)? Are there places that will interview a decent number of candidates they have no intention of accepting unless that person walks in with the nobel prize they just picked up, or they just have very bad yield for their interviews?

Most likely, you didn't seem to do as well to the interviewers as you did to yourself. You aren't exactly an impartial and objective observer, so there really is no way you can rely on how you thought you did.

I doubt med schools bother to interview anyone they flat out wouldn't accept. They may give interviews to unlikely candidates based on something that makes them stand out, and based on a not horrible but not exceptional interview choose to reject them, but why would they waste their time interviewing someone they have absolutely no desire to accept? I am sure it varies from school to school how high their standards are for interview performance, meaning at some schools you need to stand out at the interview to gain an acceptance while at others you simply need to not show yourself to be socially inept, but interviewing someone they have no desire to accept no matter how the interview goes makes no sense.

There is the confounding variable, of course, of whether the willingness of the reviewer to accept you matches the committee as a whole. If an individual makes the "invite this applicant" decision, their view may not match enough of the committee to give you any chance at an acceptance. In this case, even if you do amazing at the interview, if there are other aspects of your application the adcom members don't like, they could reject you despite the interviewer's recommendation to admit. I imagine this isn't that common, but I would bet it does happen at least occasionally.