Weight of interview

[LAman10]

anyone know how much weight the interview holds? actually, this is kinda a general question for all schools. I mean, if we assume that everyone who makes it to the interview stage is "worthy" in regards to stats/ECs/experiences, then the interview should be the deciding factor, right? It seems like people who just "click" with their interviewer or are just naturally good sweet talkers would be the ones who get in.... which also means that you could easily get rejected if you are unlucky enough to have an interviewer who doesn't share the same mindset/interests as you. what kinds of checks and balances are in this process? just curious, not critical

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[bannie22]

extreme

 

[CoolWhipp]

It obviously holds a lot of weight. You can be perfect all the way until the interview and still F it up.

 

[FutureScaresMe]

I think the checks and balances you described come from the fact that the interviewer doesn't have sole decision making authority. Often times your interviewers are essentially your advocates in the admissions committee who must paint a picture of who you are to a group of AdComs who have not met you, but still are given the responsibility to accept/waitlist/reject you. A bad and good interview could turn the tables for applicants, but a normal, nothing special interview I guess is perfectly ok as long as the paper portion of your app clears the committee members who haven't met you in person.

This I'm sure would allow for a well rounded individual who had a poor interview to slide by and a sweet talker with lackluster stats to come up empty handed.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

http://www.aamc.org/meetings/gsa/2009/admisspresentations/dunleavyoppler.pdf

According to the aamc, it's the most important criterion on average (see slide 34).

This will vary by school though. For example, I remember that at OHSU, 80% of your admissions score is based upon the interviewer evals as interpreted by the average score given by members of the committee based upon that, while the other 20% is based upon MCAT/GPA, which happens to also be what your interviewer is blinded to (semi-open file).

However, except in truly closed-file interviews, the interviewer may be predisposed towards or against you based upon your app. And the final decision is usually made by a group of people known as the committee, though most of them did not meet you.

 

[scattun]

It is definitely a very important important part of your application, but I personally have a hard time believing that everyone is equal once they hit that stage. I'm sure there is some crazy school out there, that does this, but I think it is definitely the exception rather than the rule. As far as checks and balances, I obviously don't know all the ins and outs of admissions committees, but at the very least at most places you have at least two interviews. That should serve to partially normalize outlier experiences like having everything in common with your interviewer or finding out that your estranged uncle killed your interviewer's father in a duel.

 

[slowbutsteady]

GREATES SDN MYTH OF ALL TIME:

"If I make it to the interview I am on an equal playing field with all other applicants, and my stats don't matter very much anymore."

 

[BlueElmo]

Interviews are no doubt important but I think your entire application counts post-interview.

 

[PinkIvy08]

Eh, I think it depends on each individual candidate at each particular school. For instance, at one of my interviews it was clear that this was just a formality and that I was basically in (provided I was normal/not insane). At another interview, I'm pretty sure the interview held all the weight in the world for when I was told of my acceptance, the Dean specifically said that it was my interview that flew my application quickly through committee

But, you never really know the weight of the interview at each school, so take them all like it's the only thing you have to get you in!

 

[BBender716]

Depends on the school, for sure.

 

[InanelyHighNut]

At the interview, just make them like you so much that they'd rather reject other good candidates than reject you.

I say the interview counts for a lot. All it takes is someone on the inside to stand up in your favor.

Why worry about the weight anyway? You're going to do the best you can.

 

[BBender716]

At the interview, just make them like you so much that they'd rather reject other good candidates than reject you.

I say the interview counts for a lot. All it takes is someone on the inside to stand up in your favor.

Why worry about the weight anyway? You're going to do the best you can.

Word. It's just the pre/post interview neuroticism that we need to know the weight for

 

[InanelyHighNut]

Anyways, I just ROFLed @ OP's MDApps.

OP, by the time you get halfway through your interviews, you're going to have all those questions down so casual. You'll probably be thinking you're just reliving a good dream at each one after that.

 

[GTV]

Who knows. This whole process is hopelessly convoluted and shrouded in mystery. I, personally, have had three interviews thus far. My first (Georgetown) went extremely well. The interviewer even told me that I was "very insightful" that "I hit on everything he was looking for in an applicant and more" and that "I had a solid understanding of medicine." REJECTED. My second interview (Vermont) wasn't really as much of an interview as it was a lecture. "We" talked for an hour, meaning that he spoke for 95% of the time and told me stories about his med school days. I had virtually no opportunity to make any sort of impression, good or bad. ACCEPTED. My third interview was with a joint program with Tufts/MaineMed and consisted of 2 1 hour interviews. At the first, the woman told me that my answers to her questions were insincere and canned, and that the field of medicine required that I be genuine, and pointed out that I had issues with speaking about myself. The second interviewer reacted similarly to my answers as did the interviewer at Georgetown and praised me for my eloquence in writing and speech. What will happen? Who knows. Frankly, now that I'm accepted somewhere, I don't really care.

Just do your best and don't try to analyze your performance.

 

[learnmdabc]

lol, man. My dad was giving me a lecture on how to interview. He told me he interviewed over 1000 people in his lifetime (job interviews, not medical school interviews). He kept on insisting, "It's never what you say or don't say. Not at all. Just leave me with a good impression; I don't care if you're knowledgeable, really. Just make me like you. And even better, give me the impression that you like me!"

For your Vermont interview, I'm sure he pegged you as a brilliant listener

I'm also curious about how much interview weigh. And what's the best approach.

Who knows. This whole process is hopelessly convoluted and shrouded in mystery. I, personally, have had three interviews thus far. My first (Georgetown) went extremely well. The interviewer even told me that I was "very insightful" that "I hit on everything he was looking for in an applicant and more" and that "I had a solid understanding of medicine." REJECTED. My second interview (Vermont) wasn't really as much of an interview as it was a lecture. "We" talked for an hour, meaning that he spoke for 95% of the time and told me stories about his med school days. I had virtually no opportunity to make any sort of impression, good or bad. ACCEPTED. My third interview was with a joint program with Tufts/MaineMed and consisted of 2 1 hour interviews. At the first, the woman told me that my answers to her questions were insincere and canned, and that the field of medicine required that I be genuine, and pointed out that I had issues with speaking about myself. The second interviewer reacted similarly to my answers as did the interviewer at Georgetown and praised me for my eloquence in writing and speech. What will happen? Who knows. Frankly, now that I'm accepted somewhere, I don't really care.

Just do your best and don't try to analyze your performance.

 

[ziggydoc]

I don't know what is the best approach, for me I don't want to be so formal and dull, so I try to think about all the awesome things each school has, and just be very friendly, and engaging, so far it seems to work well, I haven't heard from any of my interviews yet, but at pretty much all of them we laughed a lot, I got across what I wanted to say, and we had a good time. One of my interviewer told me he hopes to see me at their school, and another said he wished he had more time to chat with me about my research and travels. So I think I made good connections with them. Again, I'll update once I find out if my way of interviewing worked or not

And I hope they weigh a lot lol, altho my stats are fine. I just think I am a better applicant in person and I enjoy interviews

 

[MilkmanAl]

they're always very important, but as with everything else, the importance varies by school. I know the interview is incredibly important here at UAMS, but I also know there are other schools that weight it similarly to GPA and MCAT.

 

[LizzyM]

Everyone who interrviews is "good enough" but some are better on paper than others. What happens in the interview is that if you are neither stellar nor horrible you'll keep your place in the pecking order. If you impress the interviewer(s) you may move up a notch, if you do very badly you may plunge to the bottom of the list.

 

[flip26]

GREATES SDN MYTH OF ALL TIME:

"If I make it to the interview I am on an equal playing field with all other applicants, and my stats don't matter very much anymore."

 

[BlueElmo]

Who knows. This whole process is hopelessly convoluted and shrouded in mystery. I, personally, have had three interviews thus far. My first (Georgetown) went extremely well. The interviewer even told me that I was "very insightful" that "I hit on everything he was looking for in an applicant and more" and that "I had a solid understanding of medicine." REJECTED. My second interview (Vermont) wasn't really as much of an interview as it was a lecture. "We" talked for an hour, meaning that he spoke for 95% of the time and told me stories about his med school days. I had virtually no opportunity to make any sort of impression, good or bad. ACCEPTED. My third interview was with a joint program with Tufts/MaineMed and consisted of 2 1 hour interviews. At the first, the woman told me that my answers to her questions were insincere and canned, and that the field of medicine required that I be genuine, and pointed out that I had issues with speaking about myself. The second interviewer reacted similarly to my answers as did the interviewer at Georgetown and praised me for my eloquence in writing and speech. What will happen? Who knows. Frankly, now that I'm accepted somewhere, I don't really care.

Just do your best and don't try to analyze your performance.

This is a great post here.

 

[GTV]

This is a great post here.

Blue, I see that you are a fellow post-interview Georgetown reject. Did you have a similar experience to mine when you interviewed there?

 

[bannie22]

yes. i just noticed that OPs interviews are... DAMN YOU

 

[BlueElmo]

Blue, I see that you are a fellow post-interview Georgetown reject. Did you have a similar experience to mine when you interviewed there?

Yeah, dude I thought my interview went well, and rejection.

 

[J ROD]

Interviews count 33% at my school......

Glad I interview well!!

 

[Homoochan]

Who knows. This whole process is hopelessly convoluted and shrouded in mystery. I, personally, have had three interviews thus far. My first (Georgetown) went extremely well. The interviewer even told me that I was "very insightful" that "I hit on everything he was looking for in an applicant and more" and that "I had a solid understanding of medicine." REJECTED. My second interview (Vermont) wasn't really as much of an interview as it was a lecture. "We" talked for an hour, meaning that he spoke for 95% of the time and told me stories about his med school days. I had virtually no opportunity to make any sort of impression, good or bad. ACCEPTED. My third interview was with a joint program with Tufts/MaineMed and consisted of 2 1 hour interviews. At the first, the woman told me that my answers to her questions were insincere and canned, and that the field of medicine required that I be genuine, and pointed out that I had issues with speaking about myself. The second interviewer reacted similarly to my answers as did the interviewer at Georgetown and praised me for my eloquence in writing and speech. What will happen? Who knows. Frankly, now that I'm accepted somewhere, I don't really care.

Just do your best and don't try to analyze your performance.

Well, there could be times when people get accepted after less-than-stellar interview but isn't this really really rare?

Well, I guess as interviewee, we don't exactly know how we did. Our perception of how we did can be largely deceptive..

 

[Homoochan]

Everyone who interrviews is "good enough" but some are better on paper than others. What happens in the interview is that if you are neither stellar nor horrible you'll keep your place in the pecking order. If you impress the interviewer(s) you may move up a notch, if you do very badly you may plunge to the bottom of the list.

Hello Lizzy,

In the perspective of school admissions, what is considered a "good" interview?

It seems like the "good" interivew from interviewee's perspective and from interviewer's perspective can be different.

 

[MilkmanAl]

It seems like the "good" interivew from interviewee's perspective and from interviewer's perspective can be different.

Interviewers see hundreds of students and thus have exceptionally good basis for applicant comparison, but pre-meds are generally pretty socially stunted and can't be relied upon for an accurate appraisal of an interview.

A good interview would be one where you maintain eye contact, answer questions directly and thoughtfully, and establish a rapport with your interviewers. There's not much more to be said on the subject than the general stuff since every school looks for different nuances in applicants.