Part 2: Assessment of a virtual vs. onsite interview experience from the interviewer perspective

The University of Texas at Austin College of Pharmacy transitioned from onsite interviews to virtual interviews in fall 2020. There is limited literature on whether the virtual format impacts an interviewer's assessment of a candidate. This study examined interviewer ability to assess candidate...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Currents in pharmacy teaching and learning 2023-01, Vol.15 (1), p.26-33
Hauptverfasser: Litten, Kathryn, Dang, Elena, Lawson, Kenneth A., Latiolais, Claire A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The University of Texas at Austin College of Pharmacy transitioned from onsite interviews to virtual interviews in fall 2020. There is limited literature on whether the virtual format impacts an interviewer's assessment of a candidate. This study examined interviewer ability to assess candidates and barriers to participation. During the virtual interview process, interviewers utilized a modified multiple mini interview (mMMI) format to evaluate prospective college of pharmacy students. An 18-item survey was emailed to 62 interviewers from the 2020–2021 cycle. Virtual mMMI scores were compared to the previous year's onsite MMI scores. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to assess the data. The response rate to the survey was 53% (33/62), and 59% of interviewers preferred virtual interviews to in-person. Interviewers stated that there were fewer barriers to participation, increased comfort, and more time with applicants during virtual interviews. For six of the nine attributes evaluated, ≥ 90% of interviewers reported that they were able to assess applicants as well as they did in person. When comparing virtual and onsite MMI scores, seven of nine attributes were statistically significantly higher in the virtual cohort than onsite. From the perspective of interviewers, the virtual interview decreased barriers to participation and still allowed the ability to assess the candidates. While offering a choice of interview setting to interviewers could increase accessibility, the statistically significant difference in MMI scores between virtual and onsite formats suggests that additional standardization is required to offer both formats simultaneously.
ISSN:1877-1297
1877-1300
DOI:10.1016/j.cptl.2023.02.004