YES:
Why do I believe interviews are a valid way of evaluating university applications? Two words: personal statements. That is why.
Some of you out there will be thinking, “What is she talking about? Personal statements are an essential part of an application, eradicating the need for time consuming, costly interviews. Mine gave me the chance to express my passion for my subject and gave the university a chance to see beyond my grades, to what I was really like as a person.” Others of you out there know exactly what it is I’m talking about and will be thinking to yourselves: “Say no more. There is no way of establishing an argument in favour of interviews better than the reminder of personal statements.” I would love to say no more and leave those two words do the talking. It would be like the girl at my school (or was it at yours?) who opened her Philosophy A-Level exam paper and saw the word “Why”, to which she replied “Because”.
However, I’m not just going to leave things there because there is something important to be said in favour of interviews and, more importantly, as an argument against the personal statement.
Cast your mind back to yours. No doubt you remember exactly how it started, I mean you did agonise over it for weeks. You probably couldn’t forget it even if you really wanted to (I’ve tried). An Oscar Wilde quote, a rhetorical question: “My experience of [insert subject] at A-Level has really opened my eyes?”
Starting to cringe a little at its pretentiousness/over-enthusiasm/boringness? If you’re anything like me, all three. Did it give a real sense of why you wanted to study at whichever university you were applying to? Did it actually sound anything like you at all? I mean, I can’t speak a word of French, but for some reason I opened mine with the words “Rien de Nouveau”.
I’m not being funny but if universities actually wanted a real impression of what their future students were like, why would they torment them by giving them only 4,000 characters and freak them out with all their advice on how to write a ‘good’ statement; do not, under any circumstances, use words such as “passionate” or sentences like “I have always wanted to be a…?” Thanks UCAS, UBITCH.
Sure, for students there would be many downsides to interviews, like having to take time off school, buy smart new clothes and meet other hopeful applicants… But for universities there’s no doubt it would be a better way of finding out a bit about students and gauging whether they were right for the course and the university.
Sadly though, I think the notion that universities actually care about our personalities and interests is just something we’re tricked into believing so we don’t feel so powerless in the whole rigmarole of university applications. As long as you get your five A*s they don’t give one solitary shit.
NO:
It’s a brutally expensive process, favours private-school students and ultimately widens the gap between the privileged and disadvantaged: interviewing to determine whether to make students an offer of a place at university is just fundamentally wrong.
The typical format of these interviews – where candidates are grilled by a panel of academics – undoubtedly gives an advantage to confident and eloquent pupils who have been coached in how to respond. The process just allows those who are educationally advantaged to excel: at my state school we had absolutely no interview practice throughout our entire two years of A-Levels; yet down the road Exeter public school students were at it for a whole week, with professional opportunities left right and centre to rehearse techniques and familiarise themselves with high level discussion.
Besides, research has consistently shown that the typical interview is pretty unreliable. They do not by any means ensure that the ‘best’ candidate is successful.
Under the traditional interview system, candidates answer questions about their exam results; work experience; hobbies and their reasons for wanting to study their chosen discipline. Really, though, all this has already been covered in students’ personal statements and some universities have even admitted these interviews are not what they seem. Rather, it looks like an interview, feels like an interview, but actually doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference to an application. The university has already decided to make an offer and the interview is merely a clever way of encouraging the student to accept it. If you, for instance, travel half way across the country, answer some challenging questions and then receive an offer, it makes you feel good. About yourself, yes, but also about the university. Hence, you are much more likely to accept that offer in favour of one which just popped up on UCAS.
Universities claim then, if anything, interviews give students a feel for the department and life at that particular institution. Yet, the chance is there during open days, which ultimately provide more in terms of opportunities to speak to academics and see what you like, at your own pace.
Right across the spectrum – be it jobs or university – interviews don’t allow great insight as to what candidates are really like: they’re on best behaviour from minute one and try to say all the right things instead of being absolutely honest. And there’s the commonly held belief that job interviewers have already made up their mind within a few seconds as first impressions are that important.
In truth, interviews are a waste of time and do more to hinder the application process rather than help it.