- Joined
- Feb 18, 2016
- Messages
- 663
- Reaction score
- 223
Out of curiosity, when did it become common practice for professional schools to interview applicants? When did it become mandatory across the board?
Couldn't find an answerCould googling stuff like this not provide you with an adequate answer ?
They've always interviewed applicants. The standardized exams are the newer advent, and were meant to augment the interview and give adcoms a more objective way of viewing candidates, because grades and the way someone came across in person often didn't reflect their actual propensity for success in med or dental school, so there were a ton of washouts prior to the MCAT/DAT.Out of curiosity, when did it become common practice for professional schools to interview applicants? When did it become mandatory across the board?
I never would've thought that the exams were newer. So interviews were always the norm since the last 100 years? I don't understand why law-schools, for example, rarely interview applicants to this day yet pharmacist schools do.They've always interviewed applicants. The standardized exams are the newer advent, and were meant to augment the interview and give adcoms a more objective way of viewing candidates, because grades and the way someone came across in person often didn't reflect their actual propensity for success in med or dental school, so there were a ton of washouts prior to the MCAT/DAT.
Because law is a profession got the soulless- you can have no personality and be a cutthroat sociopath and still be great at the job. The service professions of health care have always sought to protect their professional image and to fulfill their school's missions by selecting people with certain humanistic qualities that can be felt out in the interview.I never would've thought that the exams were newer. So interviews were always the norm since the last 100 years? I don't understand why law-schools, for example, rarely interview applicants to this day yet pharmacist schools do.
Never thought I would say this, but I agree.I never would've thought that the exams were newer. So interviews were always the norm since the last 100 years? I don't understand why law-schools, for example, rarely interview applicants to this day yet pharmacist schools do.
Talk about prejudice—even if that were true, it's not like pharmacists interact with patients on any meaningful level to where interviews are called for.Because law is a profession got the soulless- you can have no personality and be a cutthroat sociopath and still be great at the job. The service professions of health care have always sought to protect their professional image and to fulfill their school's missions by selecting people with certain humanistic qualities that can be felt out in the interview.
Lol, go say that in the pharmacist forums, I'd love to see their reaction.Talk about prejudice—even if that were true, it's not like pharmacists interact with patients on any meaningful level to where interviews are called for.
It's a retail position at the end of the day.Lol, go say that in the pharmacist forums, I'd love to see their reaction.
Interesting. Medicine might have had interviews long before dentistry then, it seems.A dentist told me in the mid 1970's that he had the option of interviewing, but didn't because that was more for the kids who had a lower GPA. He just mailed in his app and received acceptance like 4 months later.
Not all pharmacists are retail pharmacists. Pharmacists actually pop up in some of the most random facets of healthcare and some pharmacist positions never even see the inside of a typical Walgreens or CVS and are actually heavily involved in patient care.It's a retail position at the end of the day.
A dentist told me in the mid 1970's that he had the option of interviewing, but didn't because that was more for the kids who had a lower GPA. He just mailed in his app and received acceptance like 4 months later.