It’s the thought that counts - Building good interview answers
I will cover three important aspects of good interview answers in this article, although it is important to state that this list is not exhaustive.
As I hate articles which try to hide their answers in their large blocks of text, in an attempt to make people read through them, I will provide the three aspects up front and explore them below using example questions.
Good answers are:
● Creative in controlled manner
● Relevant
● Built on structured arguments
Creativity
Creativity can very easily get out of hand; especially amongst students. I’ve had fantastically creative answers which miss the point of the question entirely. Furthermore, students who are too creative often provide long answers which can waste precious interview time; interviewers are looking for concise and clear answers.
However, it is still important to be creative. Bog standard answers highlight a students inability to think laterally or even engage with the question properly. It’s important to encourage students to take a moment to think through their answer.
Thinking about why the interviewer may have asked the question is a great way to encourage this creativity.
For example, take the following question I was asked during my 11+ interview; “Why do we wear uniforms?”
Many students answer this question with “because I am told to”. This answer will not impress interviewers. It entirely misses the point of the question and is so ill considered, it only serves to highlight the students inability to think laterally.
If the student took a moment to ask why they have been asked this question, it would become apparent quickly that the question was asked to get to grips with the principles behind wearing uniforms.
Good answers would involve the following concepts:
● Representation
● Identity
● Uniformity
Relevance
This is a favourite of interviewers; so often students provide an answer that does not answer the question. It either answers the question the student instead wants to hear or goes off track because the student can’t think of an answer, but wants to offer one.
If a student cannot form an answer, it would be better to confess this than try to concoct an answer that is not relevant. Saying “I don’t know” is better than an irrelevant answer. Even better still would be for the student to explain exactly why they are struggling with the question.
Interview questions are often complex and need explanation; sometimes interviewers will test students to see if they are willing to confess their lack of understanding. Knowing how to say “I don’t know” is an important part of learning.
Students should always keep in mind the question the interviewer asks and, if it helps, take a moment's pause to run the question through their heads.
If a student’s answer does not answer the question, it is worse than no answer at all.
A classic question runs along the lines of the following: “What is your favourite type of literature? Why?”
These types of questions are popular as they examine students’ personal academic interests. Often students are afraid to admit they don’t have relevant interests; in this case an interest in literature. Consequently, students create all manner of answers to appear intellectual, which often don’t answer the question at all.
I’ve had answers about specific books, fiction vs non-fiction and even about television programmes. These are not relevant and waste precious time. It would be better for students to state they don’t have a favourite type and explain why this is the case.
Good answers will not only carve out a specific type of literature, but also explain why this is a favourite. These reasons should be evidenced. Even better answers will explain why it is a favourite with direct comparison to other types of literature. The best answers will explain why it is a favourite, whilst highlighting issues with the genre, but justifying a conclusion, by highlighting its strengths over its weaknesses.
Structure
Students are often taught how to properly structure arguments late in their academic lives. Presenting good answers to interview questions requires good argument structure. Often students offer a jumble of sentences, hoping something within them addresses what the question is asking, without any thought to ordering their points. This makes it more difficult for interviewers to understand and grade answers.
Conversely, students who use good argument structure provide interviewers with an important sense of clarity; this is particularly important if an interviewer wishes to re-engage with the question, which is where higher marks often lie. Using these structures will allow students to communicate complex and compelling answers clearly.
Students should present conclusions, supported by premises, each supported with evidence and, if necessary, explanation.
Take for example the following questions: “What is the worst aspect of the school you’re applying to? Why will you still apply there despite this?”
These questions are actually relatively complex, even if they appear simple at first. The first doesn’t require much structure. However, the second needs structure to be answered clearly.
Often, I have faced students who answer the first part well, but cannot communicate their answer to the second. They start listing off random points about the school with no thought to their overall answer. The consequence is confusion, which harms their grade.
If students instead took a moment to order their answer in their minds before presenting it, they could easily form a well structured argument, which directly tackles the second question.
A good answer may look like the following:
● Conclusion: I will still apply despite the school's lack of football fields.
● Premise 1: The school has excellent academic facilities, which is more important than a lack of football fields.
● Evidence 1: On the open day I spoke to several teachers and visited several classrooms which highlighted the school’s academic excellence.
● Premise 2: PE classes here are well structured, providing an opportunity to engage with sport despite the lack of football fields.
● Evidence 2: I spoke to some of my friends already at the school and they informed me about the PE classes.
● Premise 3: I can still participate in football externally, despite the lack of football fields.
● Evidence 3: My parents have contacted other football clubs which will allow me to play there, making the loss of football fields at the school less important.
As previously stated, these three aspects are not exhaustive, but this article hopefully provides an overview of what the best interview answers contain. I address why interviewers ask these sorts of questions, and test thought processes rather than depth of knowledge, in the following article:
It’s not what you know...
Author: Kes - Oxford
BA Philosophy, Politics & Economics
In my mentoring, I like to focus on building critical thinking and communication skills, which are fundamental to both PPE. In my experience, the best way to build these skills is through understanding argument structure and then applying it to different scenarios.
