Which response would be better?

[Guest glo106]

I was talking to a physician I have volunteered for, and when he was giving me advice for interviews, this was one piece of advice he gave me. He said that when you're asked the all-important question "Why do you want to be a doctor?" it's best to have a very specific example (e.g. an experience you had with a patient and how it motivated you etc, etc). Before he told me this, I had thought that my answer for this question would be suffice (e.g. I like the challenge of being a doctor and having the opportunity to interact with patients, patients' family, etc, etc), but now I'm thinking that my answer is too general and I should have this really outstanding and specific experience that has made me want to be a doctor. What do you all think? Is it absolutely critical to have a more specific example?

 

Thanks!

[Guest strider2004]

He's right. A generic response means that the interview panel will have a generic picture of you. Is that what you want? You need to show them who you are, and that's by showing them what you've done.

[Guest mying]

Exactly. You can kind of think of it as a double-question. When they ask you why you want to be a doctor, they're looking for the answers to two unspoken questions. Do you really know what it is to be a doctor? and, What sets you apart from other applicants in your motivations to become a doctor?

[Guest Ian Wong]

Any time you can answer an interview question by providing an example, you should. Here's an example:

 

Interview question: What is your biggest strength?

 

Answer 1:

Well, I'm really good with working with people. I'm a pleasant person to be around, and I think that this is important in a doctor.

 

Answer 2:

Well, I'm really good with working with people. In my position as a math tutor, I quickly learned that each person learns differently, and that I needed to work closely with each student to find out what his/her learning style was, and then incorporate that into my teaching. I'm a pleasant person to be around, and last year received a Tutor of the Year award from my students for being attentive and patient, and I think that this is important in a doctor.

 

Answer 2 is much more specific, and uses examples to back up each statement. It's also much more likely to be remembered, because it makes you more unique, and makes your application that much more personalized.

 

Ian

[Guest glo106]

Thanks, everyone, for the input! I do have some specific examples to back up my answer, and I'll definitely work them in whenever I'm asked this question.

 

Thanks again!

[Guest medschoolboy]

don't u ever think that if everyone is specific, there;s not much one can do to really stand out?!?! unless u do something outrageouswhich would prob be bad?

[Guest Lactic Folly]

You want to stand out in the quality of your response, not by striving for sensationalism. By being specific, you'll help flesh out your interviewers' concept of you as a person, which will help them remember you better (and hopefully favourably!).

[Guest aneliz]

Always remember to ANSWER THE QUESTION that is asked...nothing gets you a low mark faster than rambling on about something that is not even remotely connected to the question asked...use examples, but keep them relevant and don't tell us your life story since birth...("well, I was born at X hospital in....and since that time I've wanted to be a Dr...")

 

I do agree with the previous posts. Providing examples not only demonstrates your understanding of the question asked, it helps to make you stand out from other applicants. This does not mean that you need to be sensational in your examples to stand out....but having something to remember about the applicant (ie they taught math, or they volunteered with boy scouts, or they are into swimming or guitar playing, or something) is much better for the applicant. When you leave the room, the interviewer should be able to remember something specific about you (ie "Nice guy from Halifax that likes to coach kids soccer and play guitar") If you give your interviewers nothing but generalities (ie I am good at communication, I like teamwork, I feel that I am a patient and kind person...blah, blah...) what they will remember is "nice person, but nothing special". You will blend into the crowd. And worse than blending in is being below average...nothing is more annoying than people that speak in generalities that are so vague that their statements are meaningless. Meaning, they never refer to anything specific...they speak in cliches and use 'catch-phrases' and words that they think that you want to hear...

 

It is not so much WHAT you say at your interview (ie you don't need to talk about your publication in Nature or your Nobel prize to stand out) but HOW you say it. A well spoken, thoughtful person that provides specific examples that demonstrate insight and intelligence will get high marks regardless of what specific examples they talk about. Meanwhile, a person that has great 'things' to talk about but doesn't answer the question well, consistently misinterprets the point of the question, is not logical, etc will get poor marks. It is much more about HOW you say things and HOW you respond to things than WHAT it is (specifically) that you say.