The whole point of the Interview

[pluripotent]

---

Members do not see this ad.

It helps to know that there is no right or wrong answer to ANY question you answer. With that said, focus on naturally answering any questions, such as what is your greatest weakness, head-on, concisely, and without hesitation. DO NOT GO INTO AN EXPLAINATION. Answer what they ask, then shut it. It helps to know why they are asking this question; the answer to the question is not as important as they are looking into your personality, character, and committment to see whether 1) You will get along with everyone-students, profs, staff, and 2) You will complete the program. I have heard of students saying, my biggest weakness are my "ethical obligations. There are lots of things I am ethically opposed to; abortion, stem cells, blah blah. However, I understand that I will have to study or perform surgery on blah blah in med school because if I don't, I will fail." It doesn't matter too much what you say, it matters, really how well you address the two questions above. The entire interview is the context in which these two questions are answered implicity.

This info came straight from a doctor. Hope it helps.

 

[Law2Doc]

It helps to know that there is no right or wrong answer to ANY question you answer. With that said, focus on naturally answering any questions, such as what is your greatest weakness, head-on, concisely, and without hesitation. DO NOT GO INTO AN EXPLAINATION. Answer what they ask, then shut it. It helps to know why they are asking this question; the answer to the question is not as important as they are looking into your personality, character, and committment to see whether 1) You will get along with everyone-students, profs, staff, and 2) You will complete the program. I have heard of students saying, my biggest weakness are my "ethical obligations. There are lots of things I am ethically opposed to; abortion, stem cells, blah blah. However, I understand that I will have to study or perform surgery on blah blah in med school because if I don't, I will fail." It doesn't matter too much what you say, it matters, really how well you address the two questions above. The entire interview is the context in which these two questions are answered implicity.

This info came straight from a doctor. Hope it helps.

I think it is not to your advantage to be close lipped and just shut it down when answering any question (as the bold above suggests). This is not a deposition. You want to get a bi-directional conversation going. The best interviews are conversations. There are a few wrong answers for sure, but far more ways to shut down an avenue of discussion that could make you shine.

It's not the case that you can address the above two questions and muddle your way into an acceptance (although I can see a doctor saying this off the cuff, without expecting/meaning you to take it to heart). Schools absolutely want you to be a good fit and complete the program, but it does you no good to tell them so - the objective words are not determinative.

Everyone can (and will) say they are good with people and look forward to being a physician. You have to come across as someone well thought out and who they find personable -- someone who they subectively feel would be a good addition to the school. Thus if you look at the interview as something where you have to convey X and Y to get in, you are already off the mark. If you look at an interview as an opportunity to sell yourself and have a good conversational discussion about both you and the school, you are far better off.

 

[da8s0859q]

I think it is not to your advantage to be close lipped and just shut it down when answering any question (as the bold above suggests). This is not a deposition. You want to get a bi-directional conversation going. The best interviews are conversations. There are a few wrong answers for sure, but far more ways to shut down an avenue of discussion that could make you shine.

Definitely.

Seems like a foolish policy to treat an interview with... stoicism, I guess you could say.

 

[nick_carraway]

I think what the OP was trying to warn people against is talking yourself into a bad place. A lot of nervous applicants will talk without thinking and begin to touch on areas or reveal attitudes that they probably shouldn't.

 

[Law2Doc]

I think what the OP was trying to warn people against is talking yourself into a bad place. A lot of nervous applicants will talk without thinking and begin to touch on areas or reveal attitudes that they probably shouldn't.

Sure, but you are usually better off having a good, flowing conversation than being guarded to avoid saying something stupid. The folks who are most personable and have the gift of gab do says stupid things now and then. But 9 out of 10 times people come away with a favorable impression of them, and enjoyed the conversation. It's the people who don't open up -- who just don't want to screw up -- who have the bulk of what you'd describe as bad, or uncomfortable interivews.

 

[pluripotent]

Sure, but you are usually better off having a good, flowing conversation than being guarded to avoid saying something stupid. The folks who are most personable and have the gift of gab do says stupid things now and then. But 9 out of 10 times people come away with a favorable impression of them, and enjoyed the conversation. It's the people who don't open up -- who just don't want to screw up -- who have the bulk of what you'd describe as bad, or uncomfortable interivews.

Your point of being guarded is off topic and I disagree that you want to have a bi-lateral conversation. Interviewers have a list of REQUIRED questions that you are required to answer. Your doing yourself no harm by just answering the question, and volunteering no additional information. This is not a disposition approach, this is just prudent. When the interviewer engages your response further, then you can open further dialogue on the subject and delineate your opinions to address the interviewers follow up questions. I think you misunderstood the idea about being natural in converstion by overlooking the main point I made in my first post. I said in the context of the interview, your answers should come naturally, up until the point that the question has been answered. I would advise everyone to not add any outside information thereafter. With respect to stoicism, that is irrelevant, as I never even brought up the notion of emotional detachment, and would better address the question of "What attitude should I have in medical school to succeed?" I would also like to add to my original post another tip. In beginning of an interview, the interviewer/s will invite you in. Greet them amicably, shake hard but not too hard, make steady eye contact, and express your gratitude for the opportunity to interview. Sit down, and wait. Do not initiate. Often, the interviewers will ruffle papers, look busy or distracted, all designed to test your nerves. They will proceed with questions when their "test" is done.

 

[HumidBeing]

OP, I appreciate that you shared what you heard. It's not bad advice as it was stated, but it also leaves an uncomfortable impression of bordering on being formulaic, especially with the meet-and-greet post added on.

Now I have visions of thousands of med school hopefuls spending their undergrad years neurotically focused on fulfilling in what they believe is "The New Applicant Standard"

perfect______ # of EC's ____Check
perfect______ #hrs volunteering ____Check
perfect______#hrs research ____Check
perfect range GPA ____Check
perfect range MCAT score ____Check
perfect handshake ____Check
perfect robotic interview answers ____Check
(with practiced smile) ____Check
perfect pretend diversity ____Check

They leave the interview with a wonderful self-assured feeling of being the perfect applicant. After all, they know their checklists are unquestionably perfect.

Behind closed doors, I envision adcomms pulling out their remaining hair, sobbing in boredom that they have yet to meet a single interesting applicant that cycle.

I do hope they aren't yet building Stepford Medical School.

 

[nick_carraway]

Your point of being guarded is off topic and I disagree that you want to have a bi-lateral conversation. Interviewers have a list of REQUIRED questions that you are required to answer. Your doing yourself no harm by just answering the question, and volunteering no additional information. This is not a disposition approach, this is just prudent. When the interviewer engages your response further, then you can open further dialogue on the subject and delineate your opinions to address the interviewers follow up questions. I think you misunderstood the idea about being natural in converstion by overlooking the main point I made in my first post. I said in the context of the interview, your answers should come naturally, up until the point that the question has been answered. I would advise everyone to not add any outside information thereafter. With respect to stoicism, that is irrelevant, as I never even brought up the notion of emotional detachment, and would better address the question of "What attitude should I have in medical school to succeed?" I would also like to add to my original post another tip. In beginning of an interview, the interviewer/s will invite you in. Greet them amicably, shake hard but not too hard, make steady eye contact, and express your gratitude for the opportunity to interview. Sit down, and wait. Do not initiate. Often, the interviewers will ruffle papers, look busy or distracted, all designed to test your nerves. They will proceed with questions when their "test" is done.

Well for my committee interview, I used the conversational approach and it worked out well. He cracked jokes, I cracked jokes, and it was generally a good time. That being said, he DID run out of time at the end of the hour but asked all of the questions that he said he wanted to ask me.

I offered him my phone number and he called me up that weekend to chat for a bit to make sure that nothing else needed to go into the letter.

I can see law's point and your point. Have a fun conversation but be mindful of the time to save time for the ones that you really want to talk about without having too much fun for relatively simple questions.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Your point of being guarded is off topic and I disagree that you want to have a bi-lateral conversation. Interviewers have a list of REQUIRED questions that you are required to answer. Your doing yourself no harm by just answering the question, and volunteering no additional information. This is not a disposition approach, this is just prudent. When the interviewer engages your response further, then you can open further dialogue on the subject and delineate your opinions to address the interviewers follow up questions. I think you misunderstood the idea about being natural in converstion by overlooking the main point I made in my first post. I said in the context of the interview, your answers should come naturally, up until the point that the question has been answered. I would advise everyone to not add any outside information thereafter. With respect to stoicism, that is irrelevant, as I never even brought up the notion of emotional detachment, and would better address the question of "What attitude should I have in medical school to succeed?" I would also like to add to my original post another tip. In beginning of an interview, the interviewer/s will invite you in. Greet them amicably, shake hard but not too hard, make steady eye contact, and express your gratitude for the opportunity to interview. Sit down, and wait. Do not initiate. Often, the interviewers will ruffle papers, look busy or distracted, all designed to test your nerves. They will proceed with questions when their "test" is done.

Wow. I completely disagree with just about everything you're saying.

Yes, at minimum they want you to answer the question so they know you will fit in well and finish the program.

But to answer the question and the just stop talking will create awkward moments and make it seem like you aren't very personable (and whether whatever doctor who gave you this advise thinks so or not - its pretty much a fact that the interview is partly to see how you deal with conversing with another human being).

I think people should do whatever is natural for them but I would strongly encourage people to keep talking - flow wherever the conversation naturally takes you. Yes some schools have this "required" list but I'd say the vast majority don't. They have certain questions they want to cover but a lot of them are meant to be far more conversational than what you're making it out to be.

Granted I only went to a 4 interviews but EVERY ONE I went to was VERY conversational. Not a single interviewer had this alleged list of required questions in front of them. They sat down with my primary and talked to me. And when one activity naturally led into another or when I really took off on their first question "Tell me about yourself" then I just kept talking. They would interject to ask a question about what I was talking about - or comment about their own experiences. But at every interview I went to I led the conversation, we talked about what I wanted pretty much.

This is an awesome way to go about an interview if you're able to (can easily converse comfortably with someone you don't know well). First of all it usually saves you from those uncomfortable ethical questions that adcoms come up with when interviewees don't seem to have anything else to say, and secondly it allows you to talk about what you're most passionate about and really show the type of person you are. You're there to talk about yourself and if you have even a little bit of vanity - it should be pretty easy for you 🙂

I would encourage everyone to do it. I never once got an ethical question and loved chatting with all my interviewers. It was a fun enjoyable conversation where I learned about them and they learned about me.

I can't imagine anything worse than sitting there mechanically answering the interviewers question and then sitting there in silence while you wait for them to ask another. And its got to be miserable for them to, yes there are certain things they would like to cover but they'd rather flow into it in a fun conversation than ask you each question in order, with no flow or enjoyment.

Interviewing should be fun people...if its not - something is wrong.

 

[Jaded03]

Granted I only went to a 4 interviews but EVERY ONE I went to was VERY conversational. Not a single interviewer had this alleged list of required questions in front of them. They sat down with my primary and talked to me. And when one activity naturally led into another or when I really took off on their first question "Tell me about yourself" then I just kept talking. They would interject to ask a question about what I was talking about - or comment about their own experiences. But at every interview I went to I led the conversation, we talked about what I wanted pretty much.

Hmm. How did you start that tell me about yourself? 😛 Did you ever post for that thread? 😛

 

[alwaysaangel]

Hmm. How did you start that tell me about yourself? 😛 Did you ever post for that thread? 😛

I did indeed.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5426358&postcount=4

That was geared more toward the interview than writing tell me about yourself. I think I was answering the OP in regards to a secondary question - but since I never wrote a secondary with that on it that was simply my interview answer.

 

[nick_carraway]

I did indeed.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5426358&postcount=4

That was geared more toward the interview than writing tell me about yourself. I think I was answering the OP in regards to a secondary question - but since I never wrote a secondary with that on it that was simply my interview answer.

Ooo thanks for asking, jaded, and thanks for the link always.

I knew that I was just supposed to start talking with those types of questions but there are so many ways to do it. Any reason why you went from most recent activities to the start of college? I was thinking the other way around since it seems like I'd have less of a chance to talk about the beginning later on in the interview.

 

[psipsina]

I agree with L2D, a natural two sided flowing conversation is optimal in any interview situation. In the context of medschool admissions they want to see how you fit in with their school (and thus with them) and make sure you're not crazy/unpersonable etc. They might have a question or two about your app that they want clarification on but this isn't the main purpose of the interview. What better way can you show how well you will fit in than to have a great conversation? Also, people love talking about themselves . . . if you can get an interviewer to talk about themselves a little it often makes the experience more enjoyable for them, they feel like you are interested in them which always feels nice.

Every interview I had that had a positive outcome was a conversational comfortable interview, not a stilted question and answer session. I messed up one interview and got waitlisted, I was nervous because the school was a top 10 (which I hadn't really expected to invite me) and I didn't manage to get a conversation going . . . there was nothing wrong with my answers and I did everything the OP recommends but it was awkward and forced and I'm sure thats what hurt me.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Ooo thanks for asking, jaded, and thanks for the link always.

I knew that I was just supposed to start talking with those types of questions but there are so many ways to do it. Any reason why you went from most recent activities to the start of college? I was thinking the other way around since it seems like I'd have less of a chance to talk about the beginning later on in the interview.

You know, for me it just flowed better. I was having a hard time making a way to flow from the beginning of college to the end, where just talking about it backwards worked better.

Ultimately I always got the end of that little speech. We always went on lots of tangents on the way but I got there eventually.

Do whatever you're most comfortable with as that will work best for you.

EDIT: And upon looking at that again, I think one of the main reasons for it was that every one of my activities that I was doing during my year off was just a bigger version of something I had started earlier on. So it was easier for me to say: I took a quartertime Americorps position at the free clinic that I worked at throughout college, than it was for me to talk about working at the free clinics and my experiences there and then say oh yeah and now I'm doing a quartertime americorps position. Again - for me it just flowed better to mention what was kind of the apex of my activities (during my year off) all of which came from a base of earlier activities.

 

[Jaded03]

Well I have an interview story. This one guy I knew interviewed everywhere so he was a pretty strong applicant, but he really didn't think he stood a chance at UMich. So he kinda just went in with a carefree attitude. His interview was so random, they talked about UCLA basketball for the whole interview. He ended up getting accepted and matriculating to his reach dream school. 😛 This kinda bridges the two ideas on here: have a conversation, demonstrate that you fit with the staff and students.

 

[nick_carraway]

You know, for me it just flowed better. I was having a hard time making a way to flow from the beginning of college to the end, where just talking about it backwards worked better.

Ultimately I always got the end of that little speech. We always went on lots of tangents on the way but I got there eventually.

Do whatever you're most comfortable with as that will work best for you.

EDIT: And upon looking at that again, I think one of the main reasons for it was that every one of my activities that I was doing during my year off was just a bigger version of something I had started earlier on. So it was easier for me to say: I took a quartertime Americorps position at the free clinic that I worked at throughout college, than it was for me to talk about working at the free clinics and my experiences there and then say oh yeah and now I'm doing a quartertime americorps position. Again - for me it just flowed better to mention what was kind of the apex of my activities (during my year off) all of which came from a base of earlier activities.

I guess I'll skim past the intro of college to get to the meaty activities that were closer to the end. <shrug>

I'm actually looking forward to my interviews. Chance to travel, eat out, learn about the schools. I really enjoyed my committee interview, I guess. Hopefully I get at least one since I already bought my suit and gee I'd like to wear it too 🙁

 

[nick_carraway]

Well I have an interview story. This one guy I knew interviewed everywhere so he was a pretty strong applicant, but he really didn't think he stood a chance at UMich. So he kinda just went in with a carefree attitude. His interview was so random, they talked about UCLA basketball for the whole interview. He ended up getting accepted and matriculating to his reach dream school. 😛 This kinda bridges the two ideas on here: have a conversation, demonstrate that you fit with the staff and students.

I sometimes wish that I knew more about sports. Especially for these big name schools like UMich.

 

[alwaysaangel]

I guess I'll skim past the intro of college to get to the meaty activities that were closer to the end. <shrug>

Totally! Seriously I remember when I was jotting down the basic flow of that for myself I kept trying to go beginning to end of college and it wasn't working for me. So I swapped it. If you can make it work - then you're a better narrator than I 🙂

I'm actually looking forward to my interviews. Chance to travel, eat out, learn about the schools. I really enjoyed my committee interview, I guess. Hopefully I get at least one since I already bought my suit and gee I'd like to wear it too 🙁

I'm sure you'll get plenty of interviews. And yeah they are fun. I liked the interview itself better than the trip. I despise traveling alone. My first interview my parents went with me and made a vacation of going to DC, that was a blast. After that I went to NY which sucked, then to Kentucky (where I stayed in a hotel room alone and slept HORRIBLY), and that was the end of that.

Thank God I got an early acceptance or I seriously would have probably gone crazy if I'd had to travel alone more...if I NEVER see Midway again, it will be too soon.

 

[nick_carraway]

I despise traveling alone. My first interview my parents went with me and made a vacation of going to DC, that was a blast. After that I went to NY which sucked, then to Kentucky (where I stayed in a hotel room alone and slept HORRIBLY), and that was the end of that.

Thank God I got an early acceptance or I seriously would have probably gone crazy if I'd had to travel alone more...if I NEVER see Midway again, it will be too soon.

Aw. That's kinda depressing. I'm hoping to bring my GF with me to an interesting place if I can rack up enough mileage points between now and then.

So you withdrew from your non-CA schools after your 4 interviews and then focused your campaign for UCI?

 

[TheRealMD]

There are a few questions that can have "bad" answers in the sense that you haven't prepared for them yet.

1) Why medicine?
2) Questions about information on your primary.

Only those 2 questions have "wrong" answers. Everything else is a slippery-slope where some answers are certainly better than others but not potentially disasterous.

The real problem comes with a person who has been invited for an interview but hasn't spent any time preparing for it. I'd say take a look at the interview questions in the SDN Interview Feedback section and then get comfortable with those questions you find "icky". Begin to reason out some answers. Focus not on answering the question but improving on reaction time so you don't have a blank face while thinking. That's what makes the difference between a crappy interview and a good one.

 

[Law2Doc]

I think you misunderstood the idea about being natural in converstion by overlooking the main point I made in my first post. I said in the context of the interview, your answers should come naturally, up until the point that the question has been answered. I would advise everyone to not add any outside information thereafter.

I understood you perfectly -- I just totally disagreed with it.
The goal is not to just answer the questions. The goal is to have the interviewer enjoy talking to you, and think you would be a good fit for the school. In the process, you generally end up answering all the questions but in a far less stop and start nonconversational manner. My best interview involved absolutely no questions, just a back and forth discussion about something in my background that interested the particular interviewer. Different interviewers will ask different questions, but they are generally more of a crutch to get the conversation going -- ie ice breakers to start a dialogue -- rather than things the interviewer needs to know for purposes of the interview. While interviewers do often have a checklist of things they are evaluating you on, they tend to be far more generic things like personality than your having answers to specific questions. Far more important is whether they like you enough to advocate for your admission at the adcom meeting. So absolutely add outside info. It may start a line of discussion that can jump start an uncomfortable interview. Nothing makes a worse interview than an interviewer feeling like he is pulling teeth trying to get you to talk beyond the concise answers to his questions.

 

[Law2Doc]

Well I have an interview story. This one guy I knew interviewed everywhere so he was a pretty strong applicant, but he really didn't think he stood a chance at UMich. So he kinda just went in with a carefree attitude. His interview was so random, they talked about UCLA basketball for the whole interview. He ended up getting accepted and matriculating to his reach dream school. 😛 This kinda bridges the two ideas on here: have a conversation, demonstrate that you fit with the staff and students.

Exactly the right approach IMHO. But it needn't be about sports. You just need to find an area of interest to segue into and jumpstart a conversation and you have hit a home run. Which is why relying on the interviewer to direct the interview with questions and never giving outside info often misses these topics.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Aw. That's kinda depressing. I'm hoping to bring my GF with me to an interesting place if I can rack up enough mileage points between now and then.

So you withdrew from your non-CA schools after your 4 interviews and then focused your campaign for UCI?

No, I actually only had 3 interviews in fall then nothing for a long time. In Feb my UCI status changed to denied for interview (my last UC), and I thought I was done and started planning to go to DC. In April I suddenly got the Irvine interview and in June they let me in.