Multiple mini interview format

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

travelbunny

New Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hey all,

Sorry if this question has already been posted- I searched through the forums and I couldn't find anything. I'd be happy to read through old posts if anyone knows of any.

I was wondering if anyone on here has been through the 'multiple mini interview' format of vet school interviews? Were the questions fairly comprehensible, would you have preferred a more traditional interview? What types of questions did they ask? I've been looking on line for a questions bank, but I can't really find any ... I've mostly found journal articles about this type of interview.

Any feedback would be appreciated- :)

Thanks

Members don't see this ad.
 
Anyone who interviewed this year at VMRCVM this year has experienced the MMI interview format. I personally would have preferred a traditional interview, but I can see how MMI might work better for some people.

The most likely reason that you haven't found any specific questions online is that the schools who use this format make students sign a contract saying they'll keep all the specifics confidential. For the most part, the questions all put you into some type of situation, often a clinical situation. Essentially, the interviewers are looking to see how you would react, and what qualities you display.

In our case, it was set up so that there were eight rooms, each with an interviewer inside. You had two minutes outside the first door to read you question/situation, then a bell rings and we went inside and had six minutes to speak. At least in my case, I usually finished talking a bit early, so they had a few extra questions prepared to ask. Then the bell rings after the 6 minutes, and leave the room and run to the next station. Its a somewhat stressful situation, but once you get going, everything just sort of flies by.

Just some personal advice- Try not to read too much into what qualities the interviewers are looking for with a particular situation. If you BS, you'll probably end up putting your foot in your own mouth. Just react how you normall would, and you'll be fine.
 
Cool thanks for the reply!! Yeah its one of those things- its hard not to look into it so much. I think I'm more worried about the questions. At a seminar I watched a few years ago, the speaker briefly touched on the mini interviews and said the questions really have nothing to do with vet med. They're more to get to know how you would act in situations, some rooms might have an actor and you have to interact with them, for example. I'd just be afraid if they asked some question on politics or history... :p
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Some of the questions were pretty situational, some behavioral, and 1 or 2 traditional. It was pretty stressful in some ways--on the other hand, if you don't click with 1 of the interviewers, there are 7 more to make up for it. I felt pretty good after a few of them, and not very good after 1 or 2. I also have blocked out the first one I did. I remember thinking, "this isn't so bad, " but have no memory of the actual question :confused:. I think some of the qualities they were testing for include being able to focus clearly on the topic at hand and not dwell on the previous interview. One girl in my group seemed really upset about 1 of the interviews.


The worst of it was that I felt very unprepared. I felt like VM adcoms did not address applicant concerns and/or questions and in some cases gave us flat out contradictory information.

Are you interviewing in Canada?

Good luck! I think this format may become more mainstream--this predicts ethics/clinical/client skills ~40% more than traditional interviews, apparently. Dunno how they know that...
 
Wow. That actually sounds...pretty awful? :scared:

What is the supposed benefit of this type of interview over the more traditional type?
 
Last edited:
Wow. That actually sounds...pretty awful? :scared:

What is the supposed benefit of this type of interview over the more traditional type?

Supposedly they are able to learn about our "soft skills" like problem solving, communication, leadership, etc. However, after going through it, and after having a normal interview too, i think that you should be able to tell the persons soft skills in a regular setting instead of rushing through stations. Also, one thing that i really liked about the normal interview is that you get to know the interviewers yourself. With the MMI format you have NO CLUE who is who, what their job is, and some of them didn't even tell me their name.

Honestly, i didnt think it was that bad. I think i did well during it even though I am an alternate. (I think that it was the points for my gpa that dragged me down.) The good thing is you don't have to worry about not knowing a piece of information because they are all how you would respond to a situation so there are multiple ways to answer.
 
I actually really enjoyed the interview format, more than I think I would have a "traditional" interview. I felt a little nervous to start with, but I liked being able to discuss and talk to a person one on one. There were one or two people I didn't feel like I connected with, but at the end I still felt I conveyed myself clearly and appropriately. I never felt uncomfortable approaching a room, just felt a little off balance with one or two questions!

Having never been on a traditional interview, I can't say whether or not it would have covered the same material. Considering some of what I've seen at my job, I can understand why they want to try and evaluate and tap into more of those soft skills. Veterinary medicine is only partly about the book knowledge - when you get into practice its 90% communication and interaction with clients.

To prepare, I went over some traditional and behavioral vet questions just to get my brain thinking. Really, none of them came up, but at least I had some experiences I could and WANTED to share in mind when I went through different stations and could relate to the interviewer!

In terms of names, etc...I only got a chance to really meet one or two people. But, I DO know they pulled some vets from the surrounding area as well as faculty and staff from the school to help with the interview. A few of my coworkers were actually interviewers and they sent out a list with everyone's name ahead of time to make sure they weren't assigned to people they knew. The idea was to see how you interacted with people you had just met as opposed to people you already know!
 
thanks alot!!

Gilch, yeah I am interviewing in Canada- this is the first time they're implementing the MMI at OVC, but I'm not applying for this cycle. So here's to hoping it stays like this? I guess??... seems like either one is beneficial, but seems like MMI is more structural in a sense- sort of gives one an even playing field.
 
Are you divided into groups for these, or are you going through individually? I'm just interested because it sounds really similar to RA selection at my school.
 
Are you divided into groups for these, or are you going through individually? I'm just interested because it sounds really similar to RA selection at my school.

you are divided into groups of 8 people but when you interview you go through individually. there are 8 stations so one person at each station and then you rotate around by the timed bells.
 
you are divided into groups of 8 people but when you interview you go through individually. there are 8 stations so one person at each station and then you rotate around by the timed bells.

Ahh okay, thanks for clarifying.

I think it's an interesting way of handling interviews, and I like the fact that they involve vets from the surrounding community in the process, which Tobysgirl mentioned.

This thread will definitely be helpful if I decide to apply to schools that use the MMI format. Thanks for bringing it up, travelbunny!
 
I liked the MMI format... I liked how I didn't have to have a little speech planned for the whole time because they asked follow up questions. Some of the questions were pretty much the same as a regular interview and some were really different and neat. I think I was more comfortable talking to one interviewer than I would be if there was a big panel.

I guess I'm used to things like this because I did extemporaneous public speaking in 4-H many times... I think it helped a lot.
 
I did both a MMI and a trad interview. In all honesty, I think the MMI was a lot more stressful, but also a better test of personality/character.

With the traditional interview, it's a lot easier to prepare. Most of the questions are to be expected: Tell me about yourself, what are your strengths/weaknesses, why do you want to be a vet, tell us an important news story, etc. It's a lot easier to script a response. It's also a lot more based on your chemistry with the interviewer(s).

With MMI, there's not a TON of preparation you can do except to be yourself. None of the questions I received required specific knowledge of vaccines, diseases, political situations, etc. But it does require strong communication, explanation of thought process, and the ability to think on your feet. As it has been mentioned, there are also multiple interviewers so if you don't perform well on one question or you have poor interaction with a set of interviewers, you always have the chance to redeem yourself. I think it's a lot more practical to a real life test; in real life scenarios you won't have a scripted response, and you may or may not always get along with the person you're interacting with.

That being said, there are pros and cons to both styles. Just my 2c on it!
 
I did one MMI interview (VMRCVM) and four other traditional interviews, and I have to say, the MMI was by far the worst. The entire process felt cold and impersonal, to the point of being uncomfortable. Of the eight rooms I was in, only two people were even remotely friendly. I personally have a serious problem with interviewing with someone if I am not even supposed to shake their hands and introduce myself, which we were told not to do. Every person I spoke to after the interview thought it was horrendous, and my mother said when we got back, every one of us looked shell-shocked. Also, it was impossible to judge how the interview went.
 
Top