I think I blew my interview (and other negative thoughts from a non-traditional student)

[Gradgirl2020]

Hi GFCers, 

I just had an interview with my top school (YAY!), but I thing I bombed (boooo!!!). Everything was going so well. I had answers for all their questions. My language was fluid and I even managed to make a connection to one of the interviewers via research interests. Then, I was asked to describe some research ideas. It was clear that my first idea DID NOT fit what the program does. The second idea, was EXACTLY the kind of thing the dept. does, but was so disparate from the first idea (and they told me as much). Then questions about HOW do I see myself fitting in despite the disparities. What exactly is the common thread in my research? Great questions that I should be truly asking myself, but, like before I applied. I am going to go drink myself into a coma. Did anyone think they bombed an interview, but actually prevailed? I need all the hope I can get. 

[FreakingOutFragonard]

In terms of internships and jobs, the applications and interviews I thought I had absolutely aced led to rejections. Two jobs where I thought I completely screwed up the interview I got the job. Facial expressions and tones of voice mean more than words and questions - did they sound annoyed at the disparity or was it more to open debate and challenge your thinking?

[Gradgirl2020]

10 hours ago, FreakingOutFragonard said:

In terms of internships and jobs, the applications and interviews I thought I had absolutely aced led to rejections. Two jobs where I thought I completely screwed up the interview I got the job. Facial expressions and tones of voice mean more than words and questions - did they sound annoyed at the disparity or was it more to open debate and challenge your thinking?

First off, thank you for responding. After talking to my husband about it, I think their feedback was, for the most part, to get me to think. Two of the three members were actually actively attempting to make connections between my research ideas and said that there are more similarities than one would think at first and that I'm trying to answer very complicated questions, but my methodologies are disparate. l am hoping they can see my potential. Grad school is supposed to mold you, right? I'm hoping that they see I just need molding. 

[TakeruK]

I wouldn't worry too much about this. In addition to what others said, the admissions process is holistic, so the interview is only one part of the decision factor. Just like someone might have a lower than average GPA and still get an offer, someone might not have done super great on an interview and still receive an offer. And in your case, this was one part in the interview, not the whole thing.

I have limited experience on the "selection"/"evaluation" side of things, but the way most people and I have made decisions is not to look for the perfect candidate that has zero issues. That person pretty much never exists. We encounter weaknesses in every candidate/proposal/etc. The question is whether the candidate's strengths and the program they are entering will be able to overcome their weaknesses. For example, when looking for an undergrad research student, one not-big-deal weakness might be the lack of background knowledge/courses in Astronomy because we can teach that to them. But zero training in mathematics will probably be a deal-breaker.

I think in your case, you would be fine. You may still not get the position since there are lots of other factors at play, so don't beat yourself up over this part of the interview, i.e. you could have aced that part and still not get the offer. It's still a good learning opportunity for other interviews though! Good luck

[Gradgirl2020]

46 minutes ago, TakeruK said:

I wouldn't worry too much about this. In addition to what others said, the admissions process is holistic, so the interview is only one part of the decision factor. Just like someone might have a lower than average GPA and still get an offer, someone might not have done super great on an interview and still receive an offer. And in your case, this was one part in the interview, not the whole thing.

I have limited experience on the "selection"/"evaluation" side of things, but the way most people and I have made decisions is not to look for the perfect candidate that has zero issues. That person pretty much never exists. We encounter weaknesses in every candidate/proposal/etc. The question is whether the candidate's strengths and the program they are entering will be able to overcome their weaknesses. For example, when looking for an undergrad research student, one not-big-deal weakness might be the lack of background knowledge/courses in Astronomy because we can teach that to them. But zero training in mathematics will probably be a deal-breaker.

I think in your case, you would be fine. You may still not get the position since there are lots of other factors at play, so don't beat yourself up over this part of the interview, i.e. you could have aced that part and still not get the offer. It's still a good learning opportunity for other interviews though! Good luck

Thank you. This makes all the sense in the world. I've read lots of your posts and I appreciate your feedback. 

[rising_star]

So, not me and not grad applications but, a friend of mine definitely thought ze bombed a job interview recently. Like ze was convinced ze was there just so they could justify hiring someone else. But, ze got the job! So, yea, it can happen. Don't be too down on yourself. As long as you learned something from it, you can view it as a good experience for you.

[Gradgirl2020]

You are absolutely right. A few days out I've processed it a bit and realize that if I'm lucky enough to score another interview, I'll be more prepared to articulate my research in a much more coherent way.  I am out of "likes" but thank you for the assurance that there is hope.