All interviewers are required participate in training each year. We use a combination of training activities. I have a group training session where I go over the purpose, intent, and process/schedule of the interview, interview scoring rubric, approved interview questions, and WebAdMIT interview scoring input. For this I provide the scoring rubric and approved interview questions to the group by email prior to the training. They can then have access to the electronic version during training without the need to print anything unless it is their personal preference. I use both PowerPoint and WebAdMIT during the training. This annual training session is approximately an hour and a half. The session is also recorded for later review if necessary.
We have previously used a video of a staged interview interaction to allow discussion of individual opinions of where the specific responses would fall within the scoring rubric. This allowed the entire group to get a better understanding of applying the scoring rubric and the expected response range while still allowing individual judgement. This can be repeated (with a new video if needed) when a significant number of new interviewers are to be used in the upcoming interview cycle.
I hope this helps. If you have any other questions, please feel free to get back in touch with me.
Jonathan Parker, M.A., Ed.S.
Director of Pharmacy Admission
McWhorter School of Pharmacy
205-726-4242 | office
205-726-4141 | fax
800 Lakeshore Drive Birmingham, AL 35229
If you are willing to share your training agenda and/or materials that would be greatly appreciated. Maybe then we can combine the best of each of ours materials.
Toby Spiegel, PSY. D
Associate Dean of Student Affairs and Admissions, School of Pharmacy
P. 562.988.2278 e. 2022 I F. 562.988.1791 I www. auhs.edu
1600 E. Hill St., Signal Hill, CA 90755
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
"To Believe... To Learn... To Create... To Succeed."
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
CONFIDENTIAL: This communication, including attachments, is intended only for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error, and any use, review, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy any and all copies of this communication.
We do in person training as well. It is about a three hour session.
We do a review of the interview process (including the questions and scoring rubric), as well as the scoring rubric for our faculty review of applications to see if they get enough points to be invited to interview. For the application review process, I actually have 1 good and one not so good application for them to review during the session, and then we go over them to see where there was consistency and a lack thereof.
However, the number of faculty reviews is only about 20 or 25% of all applications, since we use a fast track to interview process for students who get enough points from their GPA's, and the bonus points we give for certain holistic applicant characteristics. Those Fast Track applicants get an automatic interview invitation, since in our fist couple of years we found that these students were extremely likely to get enough additional points to get an invitation after faculty review (which is a higher point requirement than the Fast Track requirement), so it didn't make since to have the faculty spend the time reviewing those applications. Especially since we still had the opportunity to have faculty review them on interview day, and pick up on any concerning issues.
We also have a separate training session for those faculty who take part in the group session part of our interview day. We put students through riddles, a math competition, a competitive group quiz show, and a group presentation, so that we can better assess their professionalism, communication, engagement, critical thinking, academic integrity, and their teamwork and general social skills. Because students are engaged in fun activities, we find that it is much harder for them to "fake it", and we have been able to identify red flags that we never could have using other methods like the MMI; including cheating, bullying, and other aggressive behaviors.
Lawrence "LB" Brown, PharmD, PhD, FAPhA Associate Dean of Student Affairs Professor of Pharmacoeconomics and Health Policy School of Pharmacy
Chapman University 9401 Jeronimo Rd, Ste 116 Irvine, CA 92618 Phone 714-516-5487 Fax 714-516-5481
CUSP Fundamental #2 – Assume positive intent
Pharmacists Help People Live Healthier, Better Lives!