I cannot emphasize enough not to read off a screen if it's virtual.
I bring it up because last year (I did interviews for two schools, and one of those schools I did several days of their MMIs) someone would take a deliberate pause after I read the question, and then I can all but guarantee they were reading a paragraph that AI spit out. You could see their eyes moving, and they paused a few more times and it seemed they were waiting for the paragraph generation to catch up before continuing. Several others later in the interview day/weeks of interviews, for both schools, likely got a hold of the questions through peers and had drafted their answers ahead of time and were reading from those because the content was more sincere.
With the number of applicants that are using AI to complete VMCAS/supplementals, this doesn't surprise me at all, but if we have suspicions we are absolutely reporting those instances to the adcoms. What they do with it, idk, because we can't definitively prove anything of course, but it's not a good look to be so
obviously reading something off during an interview. If you really can't get through the interview without help, you're not ready for vet school.
ETA: And I guess another tidbit...if you have experience in something that could be seen as controversial, I'd avoid bringing it up during the interview unless directly asked about it. I still remember the applicant that repeatedly brought up their experience involving what very much sounded like a roadside zoo/pay to play type facility, and they did not know that they were being interviewed by myself (zoo) and a very prominent zoo faculty member at that school. And that was not even an open file interview, so they volunteered that info repeatedly and in very certain contexts that did not do them any favors. Like bringing up situations that as a zoo person, were so clearly sketchy and dangerous (free contact with certain species, for example). Interviews are as objective as possible, but that does not mean interviewers don't use their own backgrounds/experiences/opinions to decide on your rating. The hard part is knowing whether or not you've got something controversial, I guess, but that would take some self-reflection and awareness I suppose. Also if it's not open file or you aren't being asked to share about a specific experience/'time where you did....' it's because we don't need that info.
ETA x2: And I mean they were using these situations they described to back up certain things they were saying, or to flaunt their experience (which you should do, when appropriate!) but it just took a lot for us not to cringe the whole time. I wouldn't necessarily ding a person just because of the experience they have, it was moreso how they were utilizing it to answer the questions being asked. It makes less sense when I try to keep it vague lol.
I was absolutely
grilled on my zoo experience during my UF interview (an open file interview) back in the day, and they grilled me about Blackfish (very hot at the time), my thoughts on it, and why I was still interested in zoo after that came out. In hindsight, they probably went too far, but I had enough practice dealing with off the wall questions thanks to my job at the time that I did well enough to get accepted. I knew the zoo faculty at UF at the time and it wasn't them, so I've always assumed it was someone who held specific opinions about zoos/aquariums.
