We’ve all had them – for better or for worse. The nerves, the palpitations, the fear of a sweaty palm if there’s a welcoming handshake. The interviewer (the employer) rapidly withdraws from the clammy hand. ‘Come in, come in – thank you for coming.’
An interview can be one element of the entry process for schools, colleges or universities. No hiding behind ChatGPT here: it’s face to face. While on the subject of that chatbot, I’m aware of a young man who recently put together a presentation as part of a job application. He did his research, did the work and then thought he’d check it through the now ubiquitous app. It made a few changes which he adopted. The employer then did the same thing with his presentation. Job not offered.
For young people the interview can be a nerve-wracking experience. For the reticent, those lacking in confidence, ‘What will I say? I’m no good at anything!’ For the confident: beware of arrogance; advice not just for interviews – humility goes a long way. How, then, do you sell your talent? A tip. If you are genuinely top of the class for maths or a talented pianist it’s more politic to make the claim ‘because my teacher says so’ thereby using evidence rather than self-anointment.
The purpose of the interview is about the match – the fit. Inter-view: to look between. A good interviewer will draw out the victim. The poor interviewer will stifle. A fellow, former Head told me of his appraisal process where the appraiser talked mainly about himself. Such instances should be for listening, eliciting, finding out about the candidate. Is there common ground; a fit? Many of those tender Y6 pupils will have an interview for their senior schools. I would run a workshop with the year group. The fundamental purpose was to try and take the anxiety out of the process while illustrating the genres of questions. The reassurance came with the definition: looking between, was there a good match between candidate and school? If not, it was the wrong school. Disappointing, perhaps, but not failure.

After introducing a genre I would ask for volunteers to come to the front to test a question in front of the year group. A confident young man came up to the front and, as he sat down, broke wind, loudly, instantly turning puce. The others, of course, fell about. I advised against repetition.
Most questions should delve into the individual: character, strengths, areas for development – self-awareness. Then there are the random, lateral questions which can befuddle. Nothing wrong in saying, ‘I don’t know,’ or, ‘I don’t understand’ or asking for elaboration. It shows confidence. Young people will often be tempted to bluster and blunder through an answer just for the sake of saying something or fearful of hesitation. In the event of such a silence a proficient interviewer will fill in, elaborate or divert.
That was pretty well where the interview preparation stopped. There was no sustained coaching, with the exception perhaps a 1:1 session with the most reticent where I felt there was a good match between the individual and school and where the interview could be the deal breaker. The polished interviewee with the Pavlovian response is not necessarily the best candidate. Admissions staff and teachers can spot a robotic, scripted answer a mile off – there is a lack of authenticity.
One individual practice interview some years ago a pupil was registered for Bumbling College. I opened the session.
‘So, why do you want to come to Bumbling College?’
‘I don’t,’ he answered assertively and without hesitation. ‘I want to go to Drungleford.’

Mike’s book, Careering is available now with troubador.co.uk.
You can contact Mike at
mikepiercy@hotmail.com with your education-related queries.