Secret War Journal[?? April 2013]
Today, I went for the first round of interview for the National Infocomm Scholarship (NIS). While preparing for the interview, I noticed that there hardly any material on it for applicants to prepare on. Yes, I could find some information regarding the conduct of the interview but they are dated some five years ago. Furthermore, according to my senior, the procedures had since changed, rendering the information useless. Thus, it is my hope, in writing this post, future candidates have a greater idea on what to expect on the date of their IDA NIS interview.
(Disclaimer: Given the dynamics of the scholarship. I must emphasize that there is a high chance that there would be changes in the conduct of the interview. Above all, do not be unnerved if the interview is not as you expect and perform your best!)
Phase 1: Lobby
I am of the opinion that it is a taboo to be late for an interview. So for any readers interested in attending an interview, the first rule is "Do not be late." (I am curious, drop me a message if you, for whatever reasons, were late for an interview and successfully entered the next round. Thanks!)
However, depending on how you look at it, reaching the venue early may be to your advantage or disadvantage. As many would like to phrase it, the interview begins the moment you enter the lobby. The interviewers may not be there but the receptionist may actually be observing you, passing information to the interviewers at the end of the session for evaluation.
For myself, I did not talk much compared to the group at the other table. However, we made conversation which allowed me to know some of the candidates better. (Yes, one could also use this to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of your competitors. Of course, it would not hurt to make some friends. :)
Phase 2: Self-Advertisement
After all the candidates gathered, we are directed to the conference room. In there, we are given a set of paper with questions for us to answer. In the questionnaire, there are questions pertaining to one's character. For example, one could be asked to write down a past experience which demonstrated one's integrity. The queer thing was that we are advised to write around 500 words per question. What was unrealistic was the fact we were only given only 30 minutes to complete the essay-looking paper which had around 5 questions. That amounts to around 2500 words in 30 minutes. (I do not know about you but I definitely cannot write that fast!) Unless you have already prepared the answers, I am certainly sure that it is impossible to complete the given task. Thus, despite my best efforts, I was only able to attempt two questions. (Seriously, it is inhumane to write so fast). My strategy was to concentrate on completing what I started so that they will understand what I am trying to say rather than writing vaguely for all the questions. Of course, I am not sure if this approach works so I cannot endorse this approach. (It is all up to everyone's personal preference.)
Phase 3: Debate
If you thought the finger-bashing stage was bad, meet the highlight of this interview. Perhaps the phase which determines if you are shortlisted into the next round of selection, candidates would be grouped into 2 groups where they will be tasked to debate on an issue. This is difficult because your success depends not only on yourself but on the entire team. With team dynamics factored in, it is not hard to see why this group interview is so tough. Candidates not only have to balance between teamwork and standing out to be noticed, they had to make sure that their points flow.
Problems often occur when candidates are too anxious to stand out. Such was the case in one of the teams that day. It is very disconcerting to hear team mates contradicting each other's points. It does not demonstrate a convincing argument to the audience. The task is made even more difficult for the candidate who is tasked to summarize all the points that his team mates brought up as points when his team mates kept redefining the teams. At some point, it only serves to confuse both the audience and the team mates. Thus, is is not hard to see the team self-destructing during the debate. Notably, the fault lies in each and everyone in the team. The first mistake made by the team was the failure to allocate independent points to each team mate. Such problems surfaced when they realised that the points presented by each members were overlapping each other.
Like a scholar once told me, the debate section is one that will make or break the deal. In fact, it depends on who is on your team as well. The section eliminates candidates who cannot function in a team. It is a very useful technique to use in an interview albeit a tough one for candidates.
Fin
After the apparent massacre, it was the end of the interview and we were dismissed. I am not sure if the procedure will be the same next year round but I hope this helped. :)
"Always do your best. What you plant now, you will harvest later." - Og Mandino
Today, I went for the first round of interview for the National Infocomm Scholarship (NIS). While preparing for the interview, I noticed that there hardly any material on it for applicants to prepare on. Yes, I could find some information regarding the conduct of the interview but they are dated some five years ago. Furthermore, according to my senior, the procedures had since changed, rendering the information useless. Thus, it is my hope, in writing this post, future candidates have a greater idea on what to expect on the date of their IDA NIS interview.
(Disclaimer: Given the dynamics of the scholarship. I must emphasize that there is a high chance that there would be changes in the conduct of the interview. Above all, do not be unnerved if the interview is not as you expect and perform your best!)
Phase 1: Lobby
I am of the opinion that it is a taboo to be late for an interview. So for any readers interested in attending an interview, the first rule is "Do not be late." (I am curious, drop me a message if you, for whatever reasons, were late for an interview and successfully entered the next round. Thanks!)
However, depending on how you look at it, reaching the venue early may be to your advantage or disadvantage. As many would like to phrase it, the interview begins the moment you enter the lobby. The interviewers may not be there but the receptionist may actually be observing you, passing information to the interviewers at the end of the session for evaluation.
For myself, I did not talk much compared to the group at the other table. However, we made conversation which allowed me to know some of the candidates better. (Yes, one could also use this to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of your competitors. Of course, it would not hurt to make some friends. :)
Phase 2: Self-Advertisement
After all the candidates gathered, we are directed to the conference room. In there, we are given a set of paper with questions for us to answer. In the questionnaire, there are questions pertaining to one's character. For example, one could be asked to write down a past experience which demonstrated one's integrity. The queer thing was that we are advised to write around 500 words per question. What was unrealistic was the fact we were only given only 30 minutes to complete the essay-looking paper which had around 5 questions. That amounts to around 2500 words in 30 minutes. (I do not know about you but I definitely cannot write that fast!) Unless you have already prepared the answers, I am certainly sure that it is impossible to complete the given task. Thus, despite my best efforts, I was only able to attempt two questions. (Seriously, it is inhumane to write so fast). My strategy was to concentrate on completing what I started so that they will understand what I am trying to say rather than writing vaguely for all the questions. Of course, I am not sure if this approach works so I cannot endorse this approach. (It is all up to everyone's personal preference.)
Phase 3: Debate
If you thought the finger-bashing stage was bad, meet the highlight of this interview. Perhaps the phase which determines if you are shortlisted into the next round of selection, candidates would be grouped into 2 groups where they will be tasked to debate on an issue. This is difficult because your success depends not only on yourself but on the entire team. With team dynamics factored in, it is not hard to see why this group interview is so tough. Candidates not only have to balance between teamwork and standing out to be noticed, they had to make sure that their points flow.
Problems often occur when candidates are too anxious to stand out. Such was the case in one of the teams that day. It is very disconcerting to hear team mates contradicting each other's points. It does not demonstrate a convincing argument to the audience. The task is made even more difficult for the candidate who is tasked to summarize all the points that his team mates brought up as points when his team mates kept redefining the teams. At some point, it only serves to confuse both the audience and the team mates. Thus, is is not hard to see the team self-destructing during the debate. Notably, the fault lies in each and everyone in the team. The first mistake made by the team was the failure to allocate independent points to each team mate. Such problems surfaced when they realised that the points presented by each members were overlapping each other.
Like a scholar once told me, the debate section is one that will make or break the deal. In fact, it depends on who is on your team as well. The section eliminates candidates who cannot function in a team. It is a very useful technique to use in an interview albeit a tough one for candidates.
Fin
After the apparent massacre, it was the end of the interview and we were dismissed. I am not sure if the procedure will be the same next year round but I hope this helped. :)
"Always do your best. What you plant now, you will harvest later." - Og Mandino
