Weird Interview

[DocJuan]

So since my first interview is done, I'm inclined to just put it out of my head and focus on school because there's nothing I can do at this point, but I was thrown off by it. My interviewer probably did 80-85% of the talking. I didn't even have time at the end of the interview to ask questions although I was able to pepper some questions in throughout the interview. It was a 45 minute interview and she talked for maybe 5 minutes, would ask a question, then I gave what I believe were thoughtful answers, then she would talk again for 5 minutes then repeat until the end. She mostly talked about all the schools features and it kind of came off like a sales pitch. Any way I was wondering if this is a normal experience? It seems like everyone else interviewing had different experiences.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ismet]

It happens. Happens on the residency interview trail too.

 

[gyngyn]

Stuff like this drives schools to MMI's.

 

[#GetRekt]

Don't worry, in your next interview you'll get grilled about that A-, why you haven't cured cancer yet, and the healthcare landscape of Burkina Faso. The med school gods won't let this injustice go unchecked.

 

[DocJuan]

The long form interview was preceded by MMIs thank god (although I kind of bombed the first MMI). I just wonder how this is going to go over when the committee convenes. At least she can't say I wasn't a good listener.

 

[gyngyn]

The long form interview was preceded by MMIs thank god (although I kind of bombed the first MMI). I just wonder how this is going to go over when the committee convenes. At least she can't say I wasn't a good listener.

Most interviews in which the "interviewer" does all the talking are perceived to be very positive, from what I've seen.
Nevertheless, when we discover such an evaluator we do provide feedback in an attempt to rehabilitate them.

 

[Goro]

As per gyngyn, please tell the Admissions dean at this school, because it's the only way that this problem can be fixed.

Most interviews in which the "interviewer" does all the talking are perceived to be very positive, from what I've seen.
Nevertheless, when we discover such an evaluator we do provide feedback in an attempt to rehabilitate them.

 

[gyngyn]

You might want to wait until after you are accepted to provide your observations (in this sad but benign case).

 

[mw18]

You might want to wait until after you are accepted to provide your observations (in this sad but benign case).

I was about to type that and I saw that you had. But by then you may feel guilty, because all of my interviewers have special spots in my heart when leading to acceptances. You don't really want to trash someone who made your dream come true, but it is what's best for the school in the long run. I agree with what's been said though, people who talk that much during an applicant's interview love to hear themselves talk. So that will lead to them having a positive experience, and perhaps you getting recommended highly by them. Now, if they asked an applicant questions and the applicant's responses were super dry so they filled the void, then the applicant would be less likely to come out of it positively.

 

[Petrichor1]

I am actually waiting for my first school that does MMI, one day I'll get the call lol. I think it would be really interesting. Some of the questions are really thought provoking. I just don't want to be like "umm umm...can you hold off for a minute ma'am I have to think about the traps".

 

[DocJuan]

Thank you everybody for the feedback. If I'm accepted I'll try to bring it up.

The multiple mini "interview" wasn't at all what I was expecting either. I thought we would be interacting with people in the rooms but it was me reading a scenario and then explaining what I think to a human with an unreadable facial expression. Kind of like an in person Casper test. Actually I was lucky if their expression was unreadable. The lady in the first room immediately started frowning at my answer, which in retrospect may have come off as a tad insensitive because of the way I had worded it. I adapted and think the rest went well but they all just stared with blank expressions. They were super nice after the scenario was finished though.

But at least that was a shared experience for all the applicants.

 

[gyngyn]

Thank you everybody for the feedback. If I'm accepted I'll try to bring it up.

The multiple mini "interview" wasn't at all what I was expecting either. I thought we would be interacting with people in the rooms but it was me reading a scenario and then explaining what I think to a human with an unreadable facial expression. Kind of like an in person Casper test. Actually I was lucky if their expression was unreadable. The lady in the first room immediately started frowning at my answer, which in retrospect may have come off as a tad insensitive because of the way I had worded it. I adapted and think the rest went well but they all just stared with blank expressions. They were super nice after the scenario was finished though.

But at least that was a shared experience for all the applicants.

Oral board examiners are also instructed not to "cue" the candidate with facial expressions or body language. We warn the candidates to be prepared for this.
I know it's no comfort, but it's equally hard to maintain this facade.
We are told to appear "pleasantly neutral" and video monitors are used to make sure that we don't look "frowny." Maybe they should start doing this for the MMI.

 

[Petrichor1]

Oral board examiners are also instructed not to "cue" the candidate with facial expressions or body language. We warn the candidates to be prepared for this.
I know it's no comfort, but it's equally hard to maintain this facade.
We are told to appear "pleasantly neutral" and video monitors are used to make sure that we don't look "frowny." Maybe they should start doing this for the MMI.

lol talk about added stress.

 

[gyngyn]

lol talk about added stress.

The monitors are on the examiners, not the candidates!

 

[Petrichor1]

The monitors are on the examiners, not the candidates!

haha, seems like there is a 2 way test for both the examiner and the candidate.

 

[gyngyn]

haha, seems like there is a 2 way test for both the examiner and the candidate.

Believe it.

 

[Cara Delevingne]

I had an interview very similar to that where the interviewer spoke for the majority of the time, spoke highly of the school, and was saying how I would be a great fit etc towards the end of the interview. Got a rejection 2-3 weeks later. My stats were (significantly) above average for the school as well, and I got into every school that I interviewed at except that one, and it was the only one where the interview went that way.

My guess is that you don't get to say much in the interview, so the interviewer doesn't get a good idea of who you are and is unable to make a strong case for your acceptance. Bad luck IMO, but hopefully yours turns out differently than mine did.

 

[turtles43]

My first interview this cycle was similar. The interviewer spoke for what felt like 85% of the time about their career , where they went to school, the surrounding area, etc. Hopefully, this won't hurt my chances of acceptance.

 

[Germanicus89]

These are my favorite kind of interview.