SpanishFly Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Yea I realize that. I'm not unreasonable, I understand that this is there quick fix for a doctor shortage in underserviced areas. So until we can figure out a real solution, I guess they have to try and you can't fault them for trying. Unfortunately, using all of my logic to rationalize the situation doesn't make the process any less frustrating ya know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Yea I totally feel for you. I was feeling quite bitter about this last year around this time as well....after all, very few of us can choose where we decide to do high school. Hang in there and good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I train rural seeing eye dolphins... HAHAHA! Set me up with that gig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 HAHAHA! Set me up with that gig. I will, but you have to provide the dolphins..... and just to let you in on a secret... it's more impressive if you rescue them from commercial fishing nets in the pacific rather than stealing show dolphins from Marineland and other aquatic theme parks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I think you should take a briefcase to your Queens interview with live dolphins in the show and tell section. I think it would really impress them, regardless of their inherent biases. It's a total "wow factor". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 You know I am happy today. There was this 8 ball that said I wouldn't get into meds last year nomatter how many times I shook it. This year, that same 8 ball said yes every time I shook it. So I figure if things aren't going well, I would just pop out the 8 ball and tell the ad comm that it recommends me for admission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retsage Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 You guys have made some very good points, but I just thought I should point out that as someone who will be conducting the interviews at some point (though not for Queens), I would tend to be more impressed with someone who simply worked during their summers to help put themselves through school as opposed to volunteering overseas, etc. The reason is, someone who worked in the summer to pay their way through school I can pretty much know for certain that they didn't simply do so to put it on their resume, whereas with volunteering abroad, I wouldn't know. I think it shows maturity and dedication and an ability to be realistic if you use your summers to work as opposed to simply asking parents for a cheque when paying tuition. My 2 cents, take from it what you will. And here is an excellent example of the absurdity of the interview experience. Mick, here, worked during the summer. As such, he automatically has an impression that people who did are mature, upstanding students. They didn't have everything handed to them on a silver platter - they had to work hard to put themselves through school. Those who did not lack the maturity that is only gained from complete financial independence from one's parents. This is wonderful news if you are being interviewed by him and did work over the summer. Unfortunately, if you come from an upperclass (or middle upperclass) family and never had to do this to put yourself through school, you've automatically got a point knocked against you in his eyes (subconsciously, I imagine). Conversely, if you get the interviewer who was raised in an affluent environment, that person will probably not think much of those who worked over the summer, but be very impressed by large amounts of volunteering. See the problem? We all make snap judgments based on nothing more than our own intuitive, gut feelings, often based on how much we feel the person resembles us or who we want to be. And it's not just me saying this, when you look at the research, time and time again, it is shown that interviews are an absolutely horrendous mechanism for deciding between applicants. They simply don't work. Of course, every interviewer believes that he can discern the truth, that he can figure out what's needed, and that he can pick the right people, but it's almost never true. Good times. Good times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 So then, what would be a better mechanism? At least with interviews, you are able to determine a lot about a person's ability to communicate and still get a sense of their maturity level (depending on the questions you ask). No matter what we do, there is no absolute objective way to pick someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retsage Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 *shrug* Numbers game would be best, I suppose. Or numbers and an essay. Invite 150 people for the 140 acceptances. Drop the handful of people who can't keep a conversation going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 *shrug* Numbers game would be best, I suppose. Or numbers and an essay. Invite 150 people for the 140 acceptances. Drop the handful of people who can't keep a conversation going. Hahaha. How about, everyone who posted in this thread gets an auto-acceptance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 How about an MMI? Something like what mcmaster is doing with the online testing (the ones a few of us got to participate in) seemed so much better than a panel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcwxyz Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 And here is an excellent example of the absurdity of the interview experience. Mick, here, worked during the summer. As such, he automatically has an impression that people who did are mature, upstanding students. They didn't have everything handed to them on a silver platter - they had to work hard to put themselves through school. Those who did not lack the maturity that is only gained from complete financial independence from one's parents. This is wonderful news if you are being interviewed by him and did work over the summer. Unfortunately, if you come from an upperclass (or middle upperclass) family and never had to do this to put yourself through school, you've automatically got a point knocked against you in his eyes (subconsciously, I imagine). Conversely, if you get the interviewer who was raised in an affluent environment, that person will probably not think much of those who worked over the summer, but be very impressed by large amounts of volunteering. See the problem? We all make snap judgments based on nothing more than our own intuitive, gut feelings, often based on how much we feel the person resembles us or who we want to be. And it's not just me saying this, when you look at the research, time and time again, it is shown that interviews are an absolutely horrendous mechanism for deciding between applicants. They simply don't work. Of course, every interviewer believes that he can discern the truth, that he can figure out what's needed, and that he can pick the right people, but it's almost never true. Good times. Good times. Nomination for most intelligent post in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheena815 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Your interviewers have not lived their lives in a secluded box. They all have opinions. Some will value hard work and putting yourself through school. Others may be philanthropists who will highly value someone who has done a lot of volunteer work. People see different things as having different values, and this is not something you can control. It also doesn't mean they're wildly biased- just that they have their own preferences, essentially, and this is not going to change so no point in fretting over it. What you can control, is what you make of your activities. Had a life-changing experience volunteering overseas? Tell me why. Don't say vague, generic comments like "helping the poor was extremely rewarding". Anyone would say that. Tell me a specific experience. If you worked to pay your tuition, tell me about your philosophy and how this matured you. Its WHY you did an activity and what you got out of it, not WHAT the activity was that matters. By and large, even though interviewers may personally value different experiences differently, its what you make of the experience, and how well you present it that determines how you will be marked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Your interviewers have not lived their lives in a secluded box. They all have opinions. Some will value hard work and putting yourself through school. Others may be philanthropists who will highly value someone who has done a lot of volunteer work. People see different things as having different values, and this is not something you can control. It also doesn't mean they're wildly biased- just that they have their own preferences, essentially, and this is not going to change so no point in fretting over it. What you can control, is what you make of your activities. Had a life-changing experience volunteering overseas? Tell me why. Don't say vague, generic comments like "helping the poor was extremely rewarding". Anyone would say that. Tell me a specific experience. If you worked to pay your tuition, tell me about your philosophy and how this matured you. Its WHY you did an activity and what you got out of it, not WHAT the activity was that matters. By and large, even though interviewers may personally value different experiences differently, its what you make of the experience, and how well you present it that determines how you will be marked. I totally agree with you Sheena. However I don't necessarily think that Retsage or I are disagreeing with you. We are merely stating that interviewers remain too subjective based on their experiences. Of course Mick would be moved more by an applicant who had to work to put himself through school than an applicant who didn't have to. It's just human nature - we are moved by notions that inspire specific emotions within us. And the level of subjectivity is something that you can never get rid of, but you CAN cut down on. So it remains that to interview 760 people using means that has more subjectivity than could be afforded remains questionable. Secondly, we have bashed volunteering a lot here. Sure, the tasks are stupid and mundane. But I mean, why would ad comms hate them? How the heck are we supposed to know what medicine is like and what the career entails if we don't get in there and see for ourselves? To me, it's very much different to read on the internet what doctors do than to be in the hospital seeing them in action/seeing them stressed out/ and catching them in their "natural state". Just something to consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Haha and if I wasn't anxious enough about my slim last chance hope of an interview.... I had an e-mail in my inbox from OMSAS.... I nervously open it to find... My professor reference gave me the wrong home address as she just moved.... and I needed to update OMSAS with the new one.... Geeeezzz... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I totally agree with you Sheena. However I don't necessarily think that Retsage or I are disagreeing with you. We are merely stating that interviewers remain too subjective based on their experiences. My main issue with the interview process is generally the training the interviewers have. I am not sure of course about all schools but the two I have looked in detail so far only give there interviewers about 1-2 hours training. That is no where near enough time to really learn how to interview someone and to really overcome some of the limitations of it. Interviewing is not these people many job function! Granted many interviewers are repeaters - the same staff is involved over and over again, but many of the panel we would face are new each year and there is not subsitute for actual training in effective techniques. One of my majors is psycology for Human Resources, I have done dozens of interviews at work as a project manager and I still feel like a novice at it. It must be worse for some of the interviewers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flasses Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 My main issue with the interview process is generally the training the interviewers have. I am not sure of course about all schools but the two I have looked in detail so far only give there interviewers about 1-2 hours training. That is no where near enough time to really learn how to interview someone and to really overcome some of the limitations of it. Interviewing is not these people many job function! Granted many interviewers are repeaters - the same staff is involved over and over again, but many of the panel we would face are new each year and there is not subsitute for actual training in effective techniques. One of my majors is psycology for Human Resources, I have done dozens of interviews at work as a project manager and I still feel like a novice at it. It must be worse for some of the interviewers At Queen's, you will probably be interviewed by doctors with thousands of hours of patient interview, resident interview, clinic experience, and small group educational experiences; furthermore, these people have spent many hours working closely with medical school students, residents, attendings, and other health professional staff in discussion, rounds, and debate settings. Even the students doing the interviews have hundreds of hours of clinical experience, interview patients, interact and debate with other students, have gone through interviews themselves, and interact with a plethora of attendings every week. I think that these people already have a pretty good idea of the characteristics that they want to see in a future medical school student at an interview. But, yes, I agree that there can be inherent limitations to interviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 QueensInterview2009 or Elaine..... Did you get any confirmation about that potential waiting list for interviews? Or was it nixed with the number of interviews being offered this year? Just wondering and thanks in advance of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 bump to supafield's post, and want to add if you guys know whether or not they will be wait-listing 660 people or will they send post interview rejections. wait..is queen's sending out invites this week???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 QueensInterview2009 originally said you would get either an invite, a waitlist (very select few), or a rejection and then later said he wasn't absolutely sure on the waitlist option.. But as of last week when I spoke to Jen Saunders.... they said probably for sending them out this week.... but in any event that Feb 6th (next friday) was the absolute latest they would be sent out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 At Queen's, you will probably be interviewed by doctors with thousands of hours of patient interview, resident interview, clinic experience, and small group educational experiences; furthermore, these people have spent many hours working closely with medical school students, residents, attendings, and other health professional staff in discussion, rounds, and debate settings. Even the students doing the interviews have hundreds of hours of clinical experience, interview patients, interact and debate with other students, have gone through interviews themselves, and interact with a plethora of attendings every week. I think that these people already have a pretty good idea of the characteristics that they want to see in a future medical school student at an interview. But, yes, I agree that there can be inherent limitations to interviews. To be fair Queens was not one of the schools I had looked into, and that school may have a absolutely fantastic system! My main point is that this is another subjective aspect of the process. Systematic training is the only way to eliminate subjective impressions from overriding interviews. It isn't enough to know what want to see in an interview - we all know generally what an interviewing wants to see in the interview and high self moniters are very good at presenting an impression - particularly since many of the questions are quite predictable. Informal training or experience in other domains is VERY useful but it still isn't as good as learning proper technique formally. If it was we wouldn't need 4 year degrees in human resource management. Personally I would feel more secure in the process if one of the panel at least was specifically an HR type person. I wouldn't want them to override the process, that would be silly, but I think their input would be very valuable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 At Queen's, you will probably be interviewed by doctors with thousands of hours of patient interview, resident interview, clinic experience, and small group educational experiences; furthermore, these people have spent many hours working closely with medical school students, residents, attendings, and other health professional staff in discussion, rounds, and debate settings. Even the students doing the interviews have hundreds of hours of clinical experience, interview patients, interact and debate with other students, have gone through interviews themselves, and interact with a plethora of attendings every week. I think that these people already have a pretty good idea of the characteristics that they want to see in a future medical school student at an interview. But, yes, I agree that there can be inherent limitations to interviews. There was only 1 doctor at my interview and he was the only person who was actually respectful and appeared to have any sort of interest in me as an applicant and some of the things I've done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 bump to supafield's post, and want to add if you guys know whether or not they will be wait-listing 660 people or will they send post interview rejections. Yeah, I really hope they will either reject ppl post-interview or at least tell you what quartile you're in if they don't. While I'm not terribly worried about not knowing anything about the waitlist this year, thanks to having a steady job that I can quit without too much of a problem, I remember how much it sucked last year when I didn't have a ready backup plan. I'd feel bad for all the folks who just finished their 4th year and have to spend the entire summer in limbo on a 660-person waitlist with no idea where they are on that waitlist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_B Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Wow, so much harshness towards the interview process. Let me tell you about the Queens interview experience from someone who has interviewed there and has interviewed others. -there is a physician on the panel. They usually can get a feel for whether or not someone "gets" it in terms of their ability to think during an interview. - Hardest to impress -there is a community member with no training at this at all. Frankly, if you can't impress them, then I don't know what to say. If you can't speak well about yourself to a future patient, then you must not be that special In all seriousness, this member of the interview panel is there because they are going to be the future patients, and one should be able to demonstrate that they can talk to someone outside of the academic bubble we all end up living in. - easiest to impress -there is a 2nd year medical student. Frankly speaking, they usually have the biggest input. These are your future colleagues. If you can get along with them, you can't work with them. - most important to impress Now there has been a lot of talk about bias towards experience, and differences in what people will be able to contribute to the interview. Take it from someone who has done the interviews before, and will again in the future. WHAT YOU SAY IS A LOT LESS IMPORTANT THAN HOW YOU SAY IT!!! Seriously, who cares if you worked at the corner store or traveled to India to teach Ghandi. NSERC vs volunteered at an old folks home. Yada yada... we all have our stories. Heck. some of us have humble, and comparatively, boring beginnings (I know I do). But that doesn't matter in the interview. What the interviewers are paying attention to is you as a person. Earlier in the thread I posted the CANMED roles. During the interview, whether consciously, or subconsciously, the interviewers are trying to see you fulfilling those roles. The most basic question that we usually discussed after we conducted an interview was whether or not we could see this person as a physician. What they had done before rarely mattered much. Why often did, but not always. I mean, if you worked as a miner to pay the bills, well most people can respect that. If you volunteered, and can explain how that shaped you, we can get that. And so on. People always think that they need to impress, when really, they need to come across as normal, empathic human beings. You can't really prepare for that, and this is what bothers so many of you. Having said that, and I mean this as nicely as I can, but thats life. The panel isn't trying to do what is best for you, and doesn't care if you are smarter than Hawkings, they care about society. Thats why if you think your GPA makes you worthy, you fail to understand why they interview in the first place. Once they make their cutoffs, they know the people who reach them are smart. The interview is about (however imperfect) finding people with the temperament, insight, and integrity for medicine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Just to add, there was a post a little while ago that they've axed the community member this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.