Very interesting Interview...thoughts appreciated

[fki25]

Hi Everyone,

 

I had an interview today in New York, and this is a well established program with a great reputation and I was excited about interviewing. I have interviewed elsewhere, have read other comments about interviews online so I felt I was well prepared. Let me say- I was absolutely grilled. I've never heard of anyone getting more than one ethical dilemma question and I had 4. Other aspects of the interview were also a little bit too much, but overall I think I handled the questions well, it's just that now that I'm processing it, I'm wondering if I would want to go to a school like that.

 

So what I'm wondering from other people..is if you feel like the interview was kind of outrageous, is it worth rethinking whether you want to go to that particular school? I'm fortunate to have a choice at this point. How do you decide which school to choose? Thank you very much for your comments/thoughts.

[marilynpac]

You can't judge the school from the way you were interviewed. You're going to have to go with your gut feeling. It's good that you have a choice...You're best bet is to talk with other students from the school to see how happy they are with the program. You didn't say if it was just one interviewer or it was the whole package.

[rev ronin]

I'll beg to differ. The way a school interviews is in part how they communicate their ethos and values to the interviewees. I was really impressed by a couple of schools' interview process, and thought one was downright wasteful. The way I perceived my ordering on paper completely rearranged itself based on my interview experiences, and I ended up attending Pacific, who did a great job of conducting the interview day like a professional conversation between adults.

[Hemegroup]

I'll beg to differ. The way a school interviews is in part how they communicate their ethos and values to the interviewees. I was really impressed by a couple of schools' interview process, and thought one was downright wasteful. The way I perceived my ordering on paper completely rearranged itself based on my interview experiences, and I ended up attending Pacific, who did a great job of conducting the interview day like a professional conversation between adults.

 

I have to agree, for the most part. And this is an example of different strokes for different folks, because I was really disappointed in my interview at Pacific. I fell in love with the faculty and staff at my Drexel interview tho, which is where I accepted. Still, there was one or two lurkers that I'm glad I didn't interview with, so Marilyn does have a point, hehe ...

[swooshie1]

I've not gone through the interview process yet, but, I am wondering if this is something that you could follow up with if you are made an offer at this school ? Would it be acceptable (though potentially uncomfortable) to talk to the PD at that point and to discuss these kinds of concerns, and perhaps why the interview was conducted the way it was? If you felt there were aspects of your interview that were unreasonable, I would think it might be ok to have that discussion once an offer is made and you're trying to decide on schools, rather than dismissing it right off. My thinking comes from being an older student, with many years of diverse work experience in a variety of settings, and realizing that the most demanding (and sometimes outrageous/quirky) bosses and grad school professors were the ones who brought out the best in me. Then again, I could be way off base since I'm not yet a PA student or practicing PA-C. But just a thought.

[just_me]

meh do it if you wish but remember offers can be rescended also...I mean here you ahve a student questioning your program before they have even paid the deposit

 

another way to look at it is that they can take the time to let you know that your concerns are unwarranted but in all honesty some programs are simply more impersonable than others and really the interview is all you have to go off of

 

I've not gone through the interview process yet, but, I am wondering if this is something that you could follow up with if you are made an offer at this school ? Would it be acceptable (though potentially uncomfortable) to talk to the PD at that point and to discuss these kinds of concerns, and perhaps why the interview was conducted the way it was? If you felt there were aspects of your interview that were unreasonable, I would think it might be ok to have that discussion once an offer is made and you're trying to decide on schools, rather than dismissing it right off. My thinking comes from being an older student, with many years of diverse work experience in a variety of settings, and realizing that the most demanding (and sometimes outrageous/quirky) bosses and grad school professors were the ones who brought out the best in me. Then again, I could be way off base since I'm not yet a PA student or practicing PA-C. But just a thought.

[just_me]

honestly I feel that the was a person interviews is the same way that they are in the "workplace"...

 

anotehr way to look at it is that the program uses the interview as a way to guage you so why should you NOT use it was a means to guage them. granted every faculty/staff member may not be that way but if youre interviewed by individuals that you will have to deal with on a day to day basis and they are not making your interview experience comfortable....I personaly feel they will not make my classroom experience comfortable either.

 

i had a "first choice" for 3 years and when I interviewed there it was ok. i was interviewed by a faculty member and loved the experience and interviewed by the clinical coordinator who rubbed me the wrong way. I interviewed other places and 2 of them I felt completely at home...they made me feel absolutely relaxed and THAT was very important to me.

 

then again I may be baised. I have never interviewed with someone who was cold and they turned out to be great to work with and vice versa.....comfortable interviewers turned out to be great employers

[Acebecker]

My take on this is to answer your question with another question - why would you not want to go to a school that had a rigorous interview process? In my opinion (and the opinion of many others), the interview process is about 1. getting to know the candidates 2. seeing if the candidates fit into the program's overall goals 3. for the candidates to get to know the program a little and 4. for the candidate to determine if he/she fits into the program. This just makes sense.

 

So, again, the question is not should I go, but rather why would I not go for this program? In my opinion a rigorous interview indicates high standards and, personally, I wanted to be amongst the best during my training. I selected a program and accepted because of a rigorous interview in which I got grilled. That is what my personality needed and it allowed me to succeed. I am now 5 months from graduation and doing very well.

 

That said - there are interviews in which whoever is performing the interview is simply being a jerk and riding a power trip. You have to try and spot the difference - is it repeated questions about ethical dilemmas or is it repeated questions trying to trip you up? If they're interviewing you and trying to trip you up, that's different. But if they're asking you questions trying to deepen their understanding of how you think or what makes you tick, then you have to roll with it.

 

Bottom line: you're asking to become part of their "family." You are a potential student and PA who will reflect on them. Are you the kind of person they want? There are people lining up around the corner for these seats. That said, you don't need to go to a program that is full of jerks. Be wary and discerning of the difference between high standards and power tripping.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Andrew

[Hemegroup]

Excellent advice, Acebecker, excellent. Some out there (I'm not pointing a finger at the OP, I'm just saying) simply don't yet understand what's coming up in PA school and after, which is but one reason why HCE is so vital beforehand. It certainly does sound as if they hold patient care ethics to be of significant attention in their program ... mine did as well, which was a wonderful thing (albeit wasted on a few of my know-it-all younger classmates who simply got miffed when anyone tried to teach them anything).

 

During my interview, I was asked what I liked about the program. I pulled out their handbook of rules and regulations (a lot of printing!), and said, 'THIS is what I like the most.' Their structure and oversight meant that there was an infrastructure in place that would ultimately guarantee me success and protection. We were asked 2 ethical questions in a group, that we had to write answers for individually.

 

All that being said, I had one interview which I found to be negative simply based on how the PD treated an interviewee in front of the group. Another interview I found to be negative when I really opened my heart up and saw the two people across the desk exchange looks like 'is this guy for real' ... yea, I don't do disrespect, thanks. You really do have to go with your gut feeling in the end. I wonder if the OP wouldn't mind sharing some of the other "too much" details, it might help us put it into better perspective.

[fki25]

Thank you everyone, for your responses. Acebecker, I think you said it very well and my thought process when I was sitting in the interview was "this is very thorough, that's good- why not go through a tougher interview to get into a good school?". However, to answer your question Hemegroup, the reason I began to feel slightly singled out is because I'm a Muslim gal who happens to wear a headscarf. So the question was "We do practice physical examinations where students practice on one another. Are you comfortable?" I said yes absolutely, I have no problem with that. They said "Well, you see sometimes we need to get to the head or the neck, and would you be ok with that?" I said, sure I can definitely accommodate that, and do what I have to in order to get the practice. At this point the other interviewer spoke up and said we have screens, so you really don't have to worry about it and I agreed that it's not a problem. I absolutely made sure that in no way, would my scarf interfere with my learning or otherwise. However, the main interviewer persisted in making it seem like she wasn't sure if I could do the job. I found this ironic coming from another female. Here I am, a Muslim woman clearly with the credentials (I went to an ivy league, have worked full time in a hospital, have above the average gpa) and yet, it was like they were trying to trip me up. Also, for one of the ethical questions, they wanted to know "what my guiding philosophy and principles were in making a certain decision". I think that's excessive. My dad says at some point, I should've turned the tables in a nice way and asked them to clarify what they were looking for. Overall, the more I think about it, the more I feel like I don't need to go to a school that's going to see me as a problem at the outset. I have two acceptances that are looking a lot more promising at this point. Thank you again...believe me, I'm incredibly committed to becoming a PA, and I'm willing to do the hard work and have no problem adjusting what I need to for the learning process. It's not a big deal for me, but apparently it was to them!

[just_me]

I think grilling sometimes can be overrated--there are ways to make find the deeper side of an applicant without making it seem like an interrogation.

 

I guess what Im saying is that I dont feel that the grilling of an applicant means the program is any better than the next. The program Im attending was more concerned with getting to know me as a person and making me feel comfortable during the interview and to me that speaks volumes. While my program didnt grill me or anyone else there, they are considered a great program and has the PANCE scores to prove it.

 

I guess my thing is perhaps you should be able to ask yourself both questions...and if you can only answer one question then thats your answer. If I can say why I wouldnt attend that program based on their inetrview techniques but cant answer why I would....then maybe I shouldnt.

[Hemegroup]

Interesting. Certainly a valid question for them to ask, but I agree that it was odd for the main interviewer to continue with her questioning the situation. At least you know that it's not a complete majority who have an issue.

 

On the matter of the "guiding philosophy and principles are in making a certain decision" question, I don't think that's excessive in the slightest. I was actually asked that in one of my recent interviews for employment, by a Surgeon of many years. It was a tough one (I think my first words were, "Oh boy, okay ..." and then I thought for a few seconds), but my answer was that I believe that the purpose of life is the enjoyment of consciousness, and that our job as medical providers is to do our utmost to ensure that our patients have every opportunity to live their lives in the most optimum conditions of health. I find your issue with that question to be puzzling.

 

In the end, I agree with just_me ... it was the PANCE first-time pass rates combined with my gut feeling that made my decision for me. That being said, my gut feeling involved knowing that I felt compatible.

[fki25]

Let me emphasize, I'm not expecting special treatment, just fair treatment.

[fki25]

I agree, looking at the PANCE first time pass rates was one of my reasons for considering this program over the other two. Hemegroup, my issue with the question was because it was asked after I explained why I would react in a certain way (the question was regarding cheating and whether I would speak up, I said I would, I believe everyone deserves a fair chance at the exam). It seemed like they were testing to see whether I would talk about religion in the interview or not. It bothered me about the lengths they took to get an answer out of me, after I answered the question. So that's why I had an issue with it. It seemed like a veiled attempt (ha ha) to get me to talk about my religion, as if I would do that in an interview!

[just_me]

I think it seems like that question is a roundabout way of asking the OP about her religion and trying to determine if said religion will cause teh program problems which I dont think can be asked in an interview even if it is for grad school.

 

I mean if its a standard question with no hidden meaning then thats fine, BUT if its not and simply a way to find out if the OPs religion is going to cause any problems and/or objections then it is inappropriate. I mean do they ask all candidates what their stance is when it comes to abortions or birth control I mean afterall, anyone of their students could end up with a OB/GYN who performs abortions or perscribes birth control.

 

I guess its hard to know what was meant without asking for clarification--I mean if the OP were not wearing the scarf, would they have even bothered to ask? Thats what Im wondering.

[rev ronin]

I think grilling sometimes can be overrated--there are ways to make find the deeper side of an applicant without making it seem like an interrogation.

 

Exactly. It's called behavioral interviewing: "Tell me about a time when..." It forces the candidate to find an appropriate example, explain the situation, and explain the resolution. I've done probably 30 employment or internal transfer interviews using this method, and it's plenty effective at teasing out whether a person is as good in person as they are on paper.

[Hemegroup]

I agree, looking at the PANCE first time pass rates was one of my reasons for considering this program over the other two. Hemegroup, my issue with the question was because it was asked after I explained why I would react in a certain way (the question was regarding cheating and whether I would speak up, I said I would, I believe everyone deserves a fair chance at the exam). It seemed like they were testing to see whether I would talk about religion in the interview or not. It bothered me about the lengths they took to get an answer out of me, after I answered the question. So that's why I had an issue with it. It seemed like a veiled attempt (ha ha) to get me to talk about my religion, as if I would do that in an interview!

 

Even if that were the case, that was your time to answer the question honestly and objectively. I don't see how the two questions were necessarily related. I understand that it's not always easy to remain objective, especially if you're feeling on the defensive. But that's life, and this is all training in how to remain clear-headed and focused when those types of situations arise.

[fki25]

" But that's life, and this is all training in how to remain clear-headed and focused when those types of situations arise."

 

I like your advice and at the end of the day, I'm here to become a PA one way or another. I may as well start practicing being as objective as I can. Thanks for your thoughts.

[Acebecker]

I think that recognition of your religious beliefs changes the context of the grilling somewhat. As before, I am all for an honorable grilling during an interview if it is for the purpose of determining the depths of an applicant or ability to handle a little bit of pressure. Sometimes that takes the form of singling out a particular candidate based upon an answer he or she has given.

 

That said, it sounds as if your answers were on par with other candidates and that it is feasible that you were singled out because of the outward manifestations of your religious convictions (read: the wearing of a scarf). You appear to have handled the questions well and answered the way I would expect of a good and professional candidate. But the persistent digging on the subject seems a bit shady and out of line. Without knowing the interviewers actual motives, I won't hazard a judgment, but I think you are right to steer clear of it. Quality program or not, an interview like that gives one a gut feeling about potential problems to come.

 

Hope all works out well - sounds like you've got options and are ready to go.

 

Andrew

[crystaltide]

I agree with what Acebecker said, but at the same time, you might not want to let one person's issues speak for the entire program. That person could have certain trepidations that no one else in the program does (of course, that then begs the question of why they were chosen as an interviewer for the program in the first place, which is a valid point). Still, I think the best advice given so far is speaking with other students. And if they let you in despite the grilling, I guess that shows that whatever trepidations that person had, the school as a whole still wants you and thinks you would make a good PA.

[Acebecker]

Crystaltide - I'm glad you brought that up. I certainly don't believe that a single interviewers prejudices or impure motives speak for that entire program. In fact, it seems as if the program is well known and as a whole has a solid reputation. I didn't mean to convey that because one person had an "issue" that it makes everyone bad.

 

Rather, what I meant to say is that even a single "problem" faculty can cause many headaches later on down the line and that it might be prudent to best avoid the situation rather than set yourself up for headaches. I didn't mean to overgeneralize on this point.

 

Andrew

[jenecollins]

My interviewer for PA school was a faculty member who left the program before I even started. I don't think that you should put too much emphasis on ONE of the faculty members who conducted your interviews. Of course, I am biased, but so is everyone. . .

[alsboston]

If you're thinking about the fairness of the questions then you're probably already thinking about the wrong things. You should just focus on providing the best answers to the questions. That the interview asked a follow up question means that they weren't convinced after your first answer, so provide a more detailed and convincing answer the second time round. At least they asked a second question, allowing you to address thier concerns. Would you rather they just assume the worst and not ask for further clarification?

[fki25]

Just to follow up....I got accepted to this program a few days later. Looks like they had a decision and were just waiting on my interview to send out the letter. Still not sure if I'm going to go...but it's more because the location isn't my top choice!

[fki25]

PAMAC- to clarify, of course my interview was an important part of the process but I believe every other aspect of my application had at that point been approved in order for them to have accepted me so quickly after the interview.