Monday, July 4, 2011
Buffetting : Monash University Medicine Interview
Another day another interview, I'm getting numb...
Or that was what I thought.
Apparently the administration revamped their conventional/traditional interviews for med-students in 2011, just when I*yes mighty me* is about to enter their program.
The traditional interview, according various sources was a 2 stationed interview,
Station 1, the interviewer CHATS with you about anything yada yada... The same old stuffs.
Station 2, the student is given a scenario on a medical case, and he is required to describe and explain them to the interviewers as if they know cocks about medical terms.
In the newly modified interview, according to my experience today was also a 2 stationed interview.
Station 1 and 2 both have a scenario in which students are required to look through and brainstorm on the possible questions and answers to be brought up by the interviewers*talk about speculation* within 2 minutes.
After that, a bell goes off, students will enter the room and 2 interviewers will ask 5 questions in total regarding the scenario given, and students are to answer those questions.
I was totally caught off guard by this.
Yet, my speculation these days are getting better, especially for interviews.
Scenario 1 was also Grey's Anatomy identical.
You overheard a conversation between 2 person over the room.A houseman was proposing a reasonable and proper medical treatment for a patient. Yet, the senior consultant brushed it away, and was somehow posting sarcastic comments towards the houseman. The consultant then posted a new approach and the houseman immediately agreed to it. As the senior consultant moves away, the houseman turns around and wiped tears away her eyes.
What will you suggest, What will you do, How do you approach.
I hit 3 questions, but the last 2 questions was weird, and I kinda forgot about them. The last one was something like: Plenty of medical researches and practicals are based on trial and error, to what extend do you agree to this so that the areas wouldn't be costly.
I had to make interviewer to repeat this question TWICE. Gosh, wonder if that was appropriate.
I'll spare you my answers. What's most important is those answers can make me pass this interview. Then I will post my answers.
DNA has been know for its accuracy in the justice conviction system. The juries were well known for their trust towards the experts, especially scientific ones.
And the rest was kinda vague.
The questions were things like do you agree, how would you see things, and a few more again which I do not recall. Probably because I was having a headache trying yo answer those questions.
Bottom line, the new systems kinda rocked. It tickles the student's critical thinking, though I think I kinda screwed up a lil. Hopefully I can actually gain an admission, if better the Monash in Clayton.
PS: The Australian adults actually talk just like US. I mean the words they used, not their accent.
Owh well, lets hope for the best for now.
Geez, why am I always the first to be in more interviews? Just like today.
PPS: Random pictures. I have no idea why this exist in the internet.