Practice Interview Question Thread

[forevafrensbear]

Are these medical student level interview questions?!! Wow.

Following a tragic accident, a 16-year-old boy is admitted to the Emergency Department. He has lost a lot of blood and is hemodynamically unstable. The boy is informed that a blood transfusion will have to be performed to save his life. Upon further questioning you find out that the patient is a Jehovah’s Witness follower. The boy resists any sort of help until the doctors promise to not give him a transfusion. The doctors eventually give in and make a promise to the patient. Some time later, the boy collapses due to the blood loss and is unconscious. The doctor then makes the decision to give a blood transfusion to the boy.
1. What are the conflict of issues in the passage above?
2. Did the doctor lie? Is it acceptable for the doctor to do so if the patient benefits?
3. Where may personal beliefs create an obstacle in the treatment of a patient, as a medical professional? Discuss.
4. Do you think that there is an inter-relation between a persons beliefs and health/wellbeing?
5. How would you have managed the situation?

1. The conflict is that:
A. The patient is identified as a Jehova's Witness and for religious reasons has refused consent for a blood transfusion. He requires a blood transfusion urgently for clinically life-saving reasons. Hence the treating practitioner has to decide whether to give blood knowing that is in conflict with the patient's wishes in order to provide life sustaining treatment.
B. Don't make promises you cannot keep. The statement of a mistruth places the practitioner in a difficult situation where he/she risks breaching the trust of the patient. The ideal situation would be to listen to the patient ; acknowledge his wishes. But not to make a promise. Is it acceptable? That can be argued either way and will be dependent on the reasoning behind the answer.
C/D. This is a 'personal' answer and relies upon reflection of one own's values and how it may affect their thought processes in this case.
E. The patient is a minor. Whilst I would endeavour to respect his wishes as best as able, in the circumstance where there is a time critical need to transfuse blood products emergently in order to save life, the legal precedent in this circumstance is that the practitioner is allowed to do so. An exceptional candidate would be aware of the legal policy/precedent. This situation would ideally require discussion with the executive on-call and/or most senior practitioner on duty in the ED. A patient who collapses would be an ED Resus code -> so I would also briefly mention the BLS/ALS pathway (e.g. DRABC etc...). I would give part of my answer to 'B' and then discuss how I would manage the emergent situation.

There is literature on blood refusal in minors and most institutions will have a well established escalation policy in place.

 

[TawnyOwl]

Hi guys,
I had a go at this question. I often have a lot of trouble with these "explain in simple terms" questions. Any feedback or tips oh how to approach these questions would be much appreciated! I'd love to hear possible explanations for the other words too.
Please select one of the following words and explain it in a way that could be understood by someone without a science background. Use an every day example as part of your explanation.

electricity, hormone, photosynthesis

Hormones

Hormones are a bit like the postal service. When you want to send a letter to a friend who lives far away, you put the letter in an envelope and write the address on the top before sending it off. The mailman then carries the letter and delivers it to the correct house, where your friend can read the letter and respond. In this case, hormones are a bit like the envelope and you are the brain sending messages to different body parts. The hormones are carried around the body until they get to the right “house” or rather body part. The body part can then ‘read’ and understand the hormone’s message, and respond by following the instructions in the message.

 

[JL538]

With regards to the question above - is that usually reserved for postgraduate interviews?

Since I'm quite worried as biology isnt a prerequisite and I didn't do it in high school (so that takes out 2 options) and I don't know electricity that well other than basic layman's knowledge

 

[Crow]

With regards to the question above - is that usually reserved for postgraduate interviews?

Since I'm quite worried as biology isnt a prerequisite and I didn't do it in high school (so that takes out 2 options) and I don't know electricity that well other than basic layman's knowledge

It’s a commonly asked question for UniMelb graduate entry, which has certain prerequisite subjects. If you get given this in an undergraduate entry interview, they will provide you with a blurb about whatever the term/topic is in reading time, and then you’ll be asked to summarise it in Layman’s terms. You won’t require prior knowledge.

 

[Sokka]

Hey all,
What would you guys say to this? I couldn't really think of good ideas.

 

[forevafrensbear]

It depends upon your own comfort levels and that of the hospital culture. However, being the on-call surgeon and given the colleague is in a critical condition,

At a specialist level, almost all specialists in that field in the same state would know 'of' each other. So that conflict isn't going to disappear by asking another surgeon to operate. Furthermore, the operating surgeon should be familiar with the hospital, credentialed etc... and unnecessary delays to find an appropriately willing surgeon may be counterproductive.

I would expect a candidate to reflect upon whether they could objectively operate on their colleague at their optimal ability. If yes discuss why. And if no, take steps to refer on in discussion with hospital executive. And perhaps what they would think/feel/do should things not work out well. It would be reasonable to consider to ask for help - ie. in a difficult case ascertain if a second surgeon could concurrently operate.

So in short, No, Yes, No (unless you or Dr Cheung's family decide otherwise).

4 is a personal answer.

 

[181205]

I've attempted the scenario below, would love some feedback if anyone is happy to give my response a read!

A little boy has come to your house, knocking on the door furiously. You open the door, and see the boy’s face extremely pale with tears flowing. You ask him what has happened and he replies that he has accidentally lit a fire in the national park, and that it has now gone out of control. You also hear a report on the radio that there is a fire at the national park and anyone that has information on the perpetrator will get a reward of $50,000 from the police. Upon hearing the radio announcement, the boy pleads to you that you keep him in your home temporarily and to not tell anyone that he was responsible for the fire to avoid any harsh consequences.

What would you do next?
Before I proceed, I would just like to preface that this scenario puts my in a very difficult position, because I naturally feel empathy for the child who is scared and frightened in this situation but I also must take into consideration my duties as a citizen. However, it is important that I act objectively in this scenario without letting my emotions take control of my actions.

Given that the child is very frantic in this scenario and is physically showing signs of distress, it is first important that I calm him down and comfort him. A hasty decision does not necessarily have to be mae here, as regardless of who started the fire, the fire department will already be treating the situation as an emergency to put out the fire and the police will only really question the perpetrator once the crisis has been averted. Perhaps, I could ask him to come sit inside and ask him what he thinks should be done in a sensitive and warm way so that he feels comfortable enough to tell me, in detail, the events leading up to fire. By gaining more information about the scenario I can be better equipped to deal with the situation at hand and decide what the best course of action is.

As the boy is only little, it is highly unlikely that the police will treat the situation as a crime, especially since he did it by accident and he is too young to have understood how to cause a fire. It is important that I explain this to the young boy, so that he understands that the police will not punish him severely for these actions, but that the police and his parents will have to be informed. Whether there is a reward or there is not, I have a moral duty as a citizen of the community to ring the police and let them know what has happened. This is to ensure that people in my neighbourhood are not in distress, thinking an arsonist is on the loose and to save the police their time and efforts. So in this scenario, I would ring the police and calmly let them know what has happened with the boy letting them know how distresses he is, performing this phone call in another room so that the child does not hear because he may become distressed again.

In summary, while I am sympathetic to the boy's circumstances and understand that he would be very frightened in this situation, it is in the community's best interest to inform the police. However, as I am simply fulfilling my role as a good citizen I would not accept the $50000 reward as this money can be better spent for other purposes in the community, such as to provide better education about fires in schools and early learning centers to ensure children in the community are better informed and such an event does not occur again.

 

[cocodreams]

Hey guys,
Had a go at practicing this scenario. It feels very short to me as it only took about 4:30 minutes so I was wondering how can I elaborate more on it?
You are an intern working at a rural hospital and are returning from a cocktail party with your friend. You decided to leave a little early as you have a morning shift at the hospital. It’s 1am and you are driving along the highway when the tires hit a pothole, causing the car to veer off the road and crash into a tree. You quickly get your bearings and assess the situation. Your friend is seems to be hurt and is slightly moaning. How do you proceed?

Firstly, in order to assess the situation in the right mind and properly, it is important for me to check myself whether I have sustained any injuries that could cause pain or further trouble. It may be that I have suffered from serious injuries so I would not exactly be in the right state of mind to assess my friend or provide medical support and rather dial 000. If it's clear that I am doing okay and it's minor injuries, I need to check on my friend. However, since it is on the highway and at night, I need to make sure we are not on the middle of the road and I have a tool such as a flash light or phone to assess properly. It is very important for me to see whether my friend is conscious or unconscious which can influence my further actions as if they are conscious, I can try interact/talk to them or if they are unconscious it may be very serious and I need to take urgent action. Considering I am an intern, I have experience and sufficient medical practice to a certain extent so it is important for me to apply those practices after seeing what the injuries may be. However, I may still have limitations so I need to dial 000 for the ambulance as well as police since it is a crash on the highway.

After the ambulance arrives, it is important for me to stay by my friends' side and take them to the hospital as well as contact any of their family members or an known individual who can stay by their side and retrieve them. As I also have an early morning shift, it is essential for me to get a checkup done and rest well so I can treat my patients effectively. If there are serious injuries for which I need rest, it is important I inform my colleagues of the emergency situation and try get someone else to cover since my own health issues can have impact on the care I deliver to my patients.

Thank you!!

 

[cocodreams]

I've attempted the scenario below, would love some feedback if anyone is happy to give my response a read!

A little boy has come to your house, knocking on the door furiously. You open the door, and see the boy’s face extremely pale with tears flowing. You ask him what has happened and he replies that he has accidentally lit a fire in the national park, and that it has now gone out of control. You also hear a report on the radio that there is a fire at the national park and anyone that has information on the perpetrator will get a reward of $50,000 from the police. Upon hearing the radio announcement, the boy pleads to you that you keep him in your home temporarily and to not tell anyone that he was responsible for the fire to avoid any harsh consequences.

What would you do next?
Before I proceed, I would just like to preface that this scenario puts my in a very difficult position, because I naturally feel empathy for the child who is scared and frightened in this situation but I also must take into consideration my duties as a citizen. However, it is important that I act objectively in this scenario without letting my emotions take control of my actions.

Given that the child is very frantic in this scenario and is physically showing signs of distress, it is first important that I calm him down and comfort him. A hasty decision does not necessarily have to be mae here, as regardless of who started the fire, the fire department will already be treating the situation as an emergency to put out the fire and the police will only really question the perpetrator once the crisis has been averted. Perhaps, I could ask him to come sit inside and ask him what he thinks should be done in a sensitive and warm way so that he feels comfortable enough to tell me, in detail, the events leading up to fire. By gaining more information about the scenario I can be better equipped to deal with the situation at hand and decide what the best course of action is.

As the boy is only little, it is highly unlikely that the police will treat the situation as a crime, especially since he did it by accident and he is too young to have understood how to cause a fire. It is important that I explain this to the young boy, so that he understands that the police will not punish him severely for these actions, but that the police and his parents will have to be informed. Whether there is a reward or there is not, I have a moral duty as a citizen of the community to ring the police and let them know what has happened. This is to ensure that people in my neighbourhood are not in distress, thinking an arsonist is on the loose and to save the police their time and efforts. So in this scenario, I would ring the police and calmly let them know what has happened with the boy letting them know how distresses he is, performing this phone call in another room so that the child does not hear because he may become distressed again.

In summary, while I am sympathetic to the boy's circumstances and understand that he would be very frightened in this situation, it is in the community's best interest to inform the police. However, as I am simply fulfilling my role as a good citizen I would not accept the $50000 reward as this money can be better spent for other purposes in the community, such as to provide better education about fires in schools and early learning centers to ensure children in the community are better informed and such an event does not occur again.

Hey,
I also had a go at this one and these points you came up are excellent! Especially the start as you acknowledge the difficult situation and provide both sides of the situation and also in the conclusion about the $50 000 reward. I really like the structure of the response and how you are attempting to comfort him and treat the situation as calmly as possible.

One thing I thought of was that perhaps you should also try ask him about the details of an adult/parents that were with him. Maybe he knows the phone number and you can contact them and let them know about his whereabouts since the boy may have gotten lost while being so panicked and his parents may also be looking for him. But I guess this could be a minor action since you are already contacting the police so they can let the parents know, however, this also possibly comforts the boy as he knows his parents/known adult is with him.

Overall, great job!

 

[fadingxreminisce]

Hey guys,
Had a go at practicing this scenario. It feels very short to me as it only took about 4:30 minutes so I was wondering how can I elaborate more on it?
You are an intern working at a rural hospital and are returning from a cocktail party with your friend. You decided to leave a little early as you have a morning shift at the hospital. It’s 1am and you are driving along the highway when the tires hit a pothole, causing the car to veer off the road and crash into a tree. You quickly get your bearings and assess the situation. Your friend is seems to be hurt and is slightly moaning. How do you proceed?

Firstly, in order to assess the situation in the right mind and properly, it is important for me to check myself whether I have sustained any injuries that could cause pain or further trouble. It may be that I have suffered from serious injuries so I would not exactly be in the right state of mind to assess my friend or provide medical support and rather dial 000. If it's clear that I am doing okay and it's minor injuries, I need to check on my friend. However, since it is on the highway and at night, I need to make sure we are not on the middle of the road and I have a tool such as a flash light or phone to assess properly. It is very important for me to see whether my friend is conscious or unconscious which can influence my further actions as if they are conscious, I can try interact/talk to them or if they are unconscious it may be very serious and I need to take urgent action. Considering I am an intern, I have experience and sufficient medical practice to a certain extent so it is important for me to apply those practices after seeing what the injuries may be. However, I may still have limitations so I need to dial 000 for the ambulance as well as police since it is a crash on the highway.

After the ambulance arrives, it is important for me to stay by my friends' side and take them to the hospital as well as contact any of their family members or an known individual who can stay by their side and retrieve them. As I also have an early morning shift, it is essential for me to get a checkup done and rest well so I can treat my patients effectively. If there are serious injuries for which I need rest, it is important I inform my colleagues of the emergency situation and try get someone else to cover since my own health issues can have impact on the care I deliver to my patients.

Thank you!!

Hi cocodreams,
I think your response is pretty good, 4:30 is already plenty of time as you will get a few follow ups in the interview. However, personally, I would talk about the reasons/issues leading to the accident and also have these in mind when considering courses of action. I think one of the important points you did not explore is whether you are drink driving and whether your friend has had any alcohol since the prompt says you a returning from a cocktail party. If you are drink driving, perhaps this would be an underlying factor that has led to the accident. This may also impact on your ability to react to the situation at hand as your cognitive ability would be impaired so perhaps you are would not be capable of making the best decision (although I note that you have already talked about the fact that you could also be seriously injured and wouldn't be in the right state of mind to assess the friend or provide medical support and would call 000 so in effect you have covered this).

However, it could also be the case that this was a pure accident and/or the fact that the roads are quite dark given it is in a rural setting at 1am and perhaps this could be the underlying factor leading to the accident.

Calling the ambulance is obviously a good course of action but you would also need to explore the fact that you are in a rural area. Depending on rurality and also considering the fact that it is 1am, the ambulance might be take a long time. You also did say if it is urgent you would take action so I suppose this can be tied in to this point as well if the ambulance is delayed. You also did say that you could contact your friend's family - perhaps you could do this earlier on as well (especially if the ambulance will take a longer time) because they might be able to get there faster and there could be a possibility that they could help in some way if they have any experience/knowledge/qualification medically speaking. And obviously they would want to know out of concern for their family member even if they can't really do much.

Also, if you have been drinking and/or have gotten into an accident, it might not be appropriate for you to attend your shift as you could be under the influence of alcohol or you could also be negatively impacted emotionally due to the accident (especially if your friend is seriously injured) so another course of action might be to take some leave by calling the relevant contacts and explaining the situation.

Disclaimer: postgrad + undergrad applicant (postgrad MD offer accepted) but still take my advice with a grain of salt

 

[cocodreams]

Hi cocodreams,
I think your response is pretty good, 4:30 is already plenty of time as you will get a few follow ups in the interview. However, personally, I would talk about the reasons/issues leading to the accident and also have these in mind when considering courses of action. I think one of the important points you did not explore is whether you are drink driving and whether your friend has had any alcohol since the prompt says you a returning from a cocktail party. If you are drink driving, perhaps this would be an underlying factor that has led to the accident. This may also impact on your ability to react to the situation at hand as your cognitive ability would be impaired so perhaps you are would not be capable of making the best decision (although I note that you have already talked about the fact that you could also be seriously injured and wouldn't be in the right state of mind to assess the friend or provide medical support and would call 000 so in effect you have covered this).

However, it could also be the case that this was a pure accident and/or the fact that the roads are quite dark given it is in a rural setting at 1am and perhaps this could be the underlying factor leading to the accident.

Calling the ambulance is obviously a good course of action but you would also need to explore the fact that you are in a rural area. Depending on rurality and also considering the fact that it is 1am, the ambulance might be take a long time. You also did say if it is urgent you would take action so I suppose this can be tied in to this point as well if the ambulance is delayed. You also did say that you could contact your friend's family - perhaps you could do this earlier on as well (especially if the ambulance will take a longer time) because they might be able to get there faster and there could be a possibility that they could help in some way if they have any experience/knowledge/qualification medically speaking. And obviously they would want to know out of concern for their family member even if they can't really do much.

Also, if you have been drinking and/or have gotten into an accident, it might not be appropriate for you to attend your shift as you could be under the influence of alcohol or you could also be negatively impacted emotionally due to the accident (especially if your friend is seriously injured) so another course of action might be to take some leave by calling the relevant contacts and explaining the situation.

Disclaimer: postgrad + undergrad applicant (postgrad MD offer accepted) but still take my advice with a grain of salt

Thank you so much for the detailed feedback! Definitely got some few more points

 

[181205]

Hey guys, bit of a older scenario but would love to hear some feedback if possible

There is an outbreak of an incredibly contagious life-threatening disease. The disease is spreading across the country at a rapid rate and the survival rate is less than 50%. You are a senior health care administrator, and when the vaccine is developed, you have priority to receive the drug. Do you take the vaccine yourself or give it to another person? Why or why not?

In such a situation, the perspectives of both me, as a representative of the healthcare profession, and people in the public should be taken into consideration and a range of health professionals and advisors should be involved in the decision making process of prioritising who receives the vaccine. Since the spread is rapid and the survival rate is low, a fairly rapid decision does need to be made, however.

As healthcare professionals are known as front-line workers, the main advantage of having vaccinated doctors and nurses is that it ensures that the people that can help the people that are sick are protected. For instance, because the doctors and nurses come into contact with more infected people, they are more likely to become infected themselves as it is a contagious disease. As the illness is life-threatening, the likelihood of death is high which would lead to fewer available doctors and nurses to help the sick patients. Therefore, me being vaccinated or someone else in the healthcare profession is advantageous is good as it ensures that the healthcare system is intact and ready to help the sick patients.

However, as a doctor one of my key roles is beneficence, or to do good for the community and keeping the vaccine for myself would not directly achieve this. Therefore, giving the vaccine to another person would be good as this individual would then be more likely to survive and this potential line of transmission is cut off. Some may argue that prioritising some people over this is unethical as all life should be equal, however, if we are thinking logically, the entire population cannot be vaccinated overnight so some people will unintentionally be prioritised anyway so it makes sense for this prioritisation to occur in such a way that benefits the community the most. Arguably however, having healthcare professionals vaccinated arguably helps more people indirectly because having a strong healthcare system working ensures that anyone that does get infected can get the help they need and their survival rate increases. Such a situation should be addressed in a case-by-case manner, for example, if I was a foot doctor, it would probably be not important for me to get vaccinated so it would be more appropriate for a doctor working with infectious diseases to be vaccinated instead. Overall, in order to benefit the population in general and do as much good as possible, healthcare workers directly involved should be vaccinated, whether that be me or someone else.

 

[chinaski]

You've answered the question assuming you are a frontline doctor, not a "senior healthcare administrator" as per the question stem.

 

[fadingxreminisce]

Hey guys, bit of a older scenario but would love to hear some feedback if possible

There is an outbreak of an incredibly contagious life-threatening disease. The disease is spreading across the country at a rapid rate and the survival rate is less than 50%. You are a senior health care administrator, and when the vaccine is developed, you have priority to receive the drug. Do you take the vaccine yourself or give it to another person? Why or why not?

In such a situation, the perspectives of both me, as a representative of the healthcare profession, and people in the public should be taken into consideration and a range of health professionals and advisors should be involved in the decision making process of prioritising who receives the vaccine. Since the spread is rapid and the survival rate is low, a fairly rapid decision does need to be made, however.

As healthcare professionals are known as front-line workers, the main advantage of having vaccinated doctors and nurses is that it ensures that the people that can help the people that are sick are protected. For instance, because the doctors and nurses come into contact with more infected people, they are more likely to become infected themselves as it is a contagious disease. As the illness is life-threatening, the likelihood of death is high which would lead to fewer available doctors and nurses to help the sick patients. Therefore, me being vaccinated or someone else in the healthcare profession is advantageous is good as it ensures that the healthcare system is intact and ready to help the sick patients.

However, as a doctor one of my key roles is beneficence, or to do good for the community and keeping the vaccine for myself would not directly achieve this. Therefore, giving the vaccine to another person would be good as this individual would then be more likely to survive and this potential line of transmission is cut off. Some may argue that prioritising some people over this is unethical as all life should be equal, however, if we are thinking logically, the entire population cannot be vaccinated overnight so some people will unintentionally be prioritised anyway so it makes sense for this prioritisation to occur in such a way that benefits the community the most. Arguably however, having healthcare professionals vaccinated arguably helps more people indirectly because having a strong healthcare system working ensures that anyone that does get infected can get the help they need and their survival rate increases. Such a situation should be addressed in a case-by-case manner, for example, if I was a foot doctor, it would probably be not important for me to get vaccinated so it would be more appropriate for a doctor working with infectious diseases to be vaccinated instead. Overall, in order to benefit the population in general and do as much good as possible, healthcare workers directly involved should be vaccinated, whether that be me or someone else.

Agree with chinaski's feedback. However, I think you do have some good points but I also think you could structure it a bit better so you get to the point quicker and have clearer points.

To me this question is very similar to the 'do you choose organ recipient A or B?' question except the twist that you are in the equation so the approach is fairly similar. The underlying issue is one of justice i.e. distributing resources fairly so I like how you touched on 'Some may argue that prioritising some people over this is unethical as all life should be equal'. I would personally try to argue for why I should receive the vaccine and the good that would come from that ('recipient A'). And then argue for why I shouldn't receive the vaccine and the good that would come from that (various hypothetical 'recipient B's). Then give my opinion based on which would result in the greater good, so in essence a very consequentialist/utilitarian argument (a bit reductionist but does the job for these questions). I think you may have tried to do this but it isn't particularly clear in your response - my understanding is that you would take the vaccine (but I'm not confident that I have come to the right conclusion).

Reason why I should receive the vaccine: primarily just the fact that I am a senior healthcare administrator (not much to go off from the prompt). I wouldn't say that healthcare administrators are frontline workers in the same sense that doctors, nurses and other clinical staff are since I would understand them to be more behind the scenes. But no doubt they would still have an integral role to play, especially in an outbreak. Senior healthcare administrator is a bit generic and could still mean a variety of things, whether it be on big scale or smaller scale. Could mean admin that helps keep a medical institution (hospital, clinic, etc.) running. But could also mean someone who has influence over healthcare policy. If I were to receive the vaccine which successfully prevents me from contracting the disease then I could continue to support the operation of the medical institution where I work and if I happened to working in an area of policy that was related to the outbreak then perhaps I could also help drive public health intervention/s that benefit the wider population.

Reasons why I shouldn't receive the vaccine: this really depends on who the hypothetical 'another person' is. If they could benefit society more than I could (e.g. if they are the PM or something) then there is a logical argument there. Similarly they could also be a frontline health worker who is also benefitting society but at greater risk than me so another argument could be made here for that. On the contrary, the other person could be someone who doesn't have the same capacity to benefit society but in this case it could be argued that all life is equal on the basis of a shared humanity so I could also opt to sacrifice myself on another's behalf.

Personal opinion: I believe that all life is equal no matter what contribution a person can make to society and how much they benefit society. However, based on the information at hand (or lack thereof), it would be quite hard for me to justify giving the vaccine to another (faceless individual no less). If I were sacrifice myself for another, as noble as that is, I would at least need to need to be convinced by my emotions and be moved to make that decision out of sympathy for their situation. I would find it very far fetched to think that I would have the capacity to give up the vaccine without any sort of personal connection at all. Couple that with the fact that I am also in a position where I can really benefit others in the midst of an outbreak, I would choose to be vaccinated.

Disclaimer: postgrad + undergrad applicant but still take my advice with a grain of salt

 

[Endgame.]

How do you answer the question type where it asks 'why do you want to study at OUR university?'. I know you can talk about the programme (CBL etc, and why you like that), and maybe the student atmosphere you've read or heard about being great, but what else is there. It kinda feels shallow, because most universities share the former point, and the second is very easily fallible. Only other thing is maybe the course duration, but that seems even more shallow and vain to say (ie saying a course being 5 years means you can get to helping people faster as a doctor, or a 7 year journey means you feel more mature, knowledge etc)

 

[N182]

How do you answer the question type where it asks 'why do you want to study at OUR university?'. I know you can talk about the programme (CBL etc, and why you like that), and maybe the student atmosphere you've read or heard about being great, but what else is there. It kinda feels shallow, because most universities share the former point, and the second is very easily fallible. Only other thing is maybe the course duration, but that seems even more shallow and vain to say (ie saying a course being 5 years means you can get to helping people faster as a doctor, or a 7 year journey means you feel more mature, knowledge etc)

I think another one on top of those reasons is location, for example if the university is close to your house and you don't have to move, that is genuinely a reason in which you preference that uni (ofc try to make this an actual reason like wanting to keep connections, stay with family, you know your community). If the uni is interstate try researching whether its near the city centre, or near more quiet environments and use that.

 

[panda_6940]

How do you answer the question type where it asks 'why do you want to study at OUR university?'. I know you can talk about the programme (CBL etc, and why you like that), and maybe the student atmosphere you've read or heard about being great, but what else is there. It kinda feels shallow, because most universities share the former point, and the second is very easily fallible. Only other thing is maybe the course duration, but that seems even more shallow and vain to say (ie saying a course being 5 years means you can get to helping people faster as a doctor, or a 7 year journey means you feel more mature, knowledge etc)

Those are good things to bring up, but you could also talk about aspects that are unique to each university (you'll have to do some research on this). For example, cohort sizes (e.g. smaller cohort being closer), UNSW research year, Adelaide's new facilities, etc.

 

[ThunderDragon]

How do you answer the question type where it asks 'why do you want to study at OUR university?'. I know you can talk about the programme (CBL etc, and why you like that), and maybe the student atmosphere you've read or heard about being great, but what else is there. It kinda feels shallow, because most universities share the former point, and the second is very easily fallible. Only other thing is maybe the course duration, but that seems even more shallow and vain to say (ie saying a course being 5 years means you can get to helping people faster as a doctor, or a 7 year journey means you feel more mature, knowledge etc)

I guess adding onto what other people have here, it would be really good to talk about how the program is different to other universities programs such as how JCU has a heavy Tropical Health Presence or how UNSW has a research year and then go into detail about why you think that uniqueness is good and how it draws you into their program such as potentially you are passionate about rural and Indigenous health which is why you are attracted to the JCU program as opposed to other universities programs as an example. If the university is within your home state, you could also talk about how you lived in the state for a long period of time or all your life and would like to give back to your community and people as you feel like you're a part of the community.

 

[umm]

Could someone please offer their insight into this question?

You are treasurer of a university Club controlling club money and you are one of 3 members of the Executive. There is going to be a meeting in another city with similar clubs from other universities. The club has enough money to cover the costs of only 3 members. There are 8 club members, and everybody wants to go and for the club to pay their expenses.
What do you do?

 

[chezpopcorn]

Could someone please offer their insight into this question?

You are treasurer of a university Club controlling club money and you are one of 3 members of the Executive. There is going to be a meeting in another city with similar clubs from other universities. The club has enough money to cover the costs of only 3 members. There are 8 club members, and everybody wants to go and for the club to pay their expenses.
What do you do?

This is what I would say: [only a fellow interviewee, bear in mind]

1) Explain the situation to the club members - communicate
2) Explore alternatives - e.g. could you distribute the club money amongst the 8 members and get each individual to make up the rest of the fee
3) In the scenario where 2) is not possible, look into the nature of the meeting; is there a particular topic/thing that it is focused on and who would have the best expertise in that area to make a useful contribution. But also chose a people who isn't as well versed in XYZ topic of the meeting, its a chance for them to broaden their knowledge and skillset/grow as a team member. [I'd probably chose one 'expert', one 'executive' and someone else who could learn a lot from the experience but ofc would have to be open for negotiations depending on what the other execs think]
Also important to be transparent about your decision-making process to the rest of the team and ideal to reach an overall agreement; in the case where there is conflict around your decision, be open to engaging in a discussion. (But afterwards, if everyone still wants to go, as an executive you would have to put your foot down) (respectfully ofc)
4) Next time an opportunity like this arises again, be looking to chose different people to give everyone an equal opportunity - reassure the club of this as well.