Sunday, November 18, 2007
Contemporary interviewing techniques
Big day on Friday: an interview for an ALT position covering various schools in the Playagawa area (props: VMM).
I arrived twenty minutes early, went for some convenience store coffee and made it back with the impression that the uniform Circle K employees are rocking may even be more horrible than that of their Daily Yamazaki counterparts.
First of all, I got chucked into a room with a few question sheets: one grammar/spelling quiz, a sheet of questions on Japanese culture and a self-evaluation psychology quiz (which came with a bibliography of which self-help books you can send off for once you've pigeon-holed yourself.)
This latter was a bit of a joke. By answering a series of closed questions, I was supposed to identify myself as either a Thinker or a Feeler. Sample question:
Do you prefer writers who:
a. Say what they think
b. Use symbolism and metaphor
WTF? I thought. How anyone can be expected to draw up a psychological profile based on this kind of non-data is entirely beyond me. How about changing the question to:
Do you prefer writers who:
a. Are mediocre to the last degree, but at least provide children with some decent, sterile morality, eg. Enid Blyton
b. Are absolute geniuses, but prefer sodomy to more biblically-acceptable forms of sexual intercourse, eg. Christopher Marlowe
It was once I got to the unexpectedly tricky marking scheme that the penny dropped: the whole purpose of the exercise was to test how thorough I was at marking test results. Suitably impressed with my insight, I double checked my marking and was rewarded when I found that I had recorded one of my answers incorrectly.
***
Non-threatening interviewer (hereafter NTI) finally comes in to see if I've finished my mountain of paperwork.
NTI: How did you go? The psychology test is pretty time-consuming isn't it?
DAN: Yes... was that by any chance to test how thorough I was at marking?
NTI: Oh no, we prefer our teachers to be the "Feeler" type: they're generally better with children.
DAN: Oh.
Silently laments the fact that his test score identifies him as a hard-nosed rationalist roundheaad. I knew that bloody test couldn't be trusted.
***
Fortunately, my demonstration lesson went off without a hitch and I did ok on the Japanese roleplay. If the worst comes to the worst, I've got another interview Wednesday morning. Fingers crossed!
I arrived twenty minutes early, went for some convenience store coffee and made it back with the impression that the uniform Circle K employees are rocking may even be more horrible than that of their Daily Yamazaki counterparts.
First of all, I got chucked into a room with a few question sheets: one grammar/spelling quiz, a sheet of questions on Japanese culture and a self-evaluation psychology quiz (which came with a bibliography of which self-help books you can send off for once you've pigeon-holed yourself.)
This latter was a bit of a joke. By answering a series of closed questions, I was supposed to identify myself as either a Thinker or a Feeler. Sample question:
Do you prefer writers who:
a. Say what they think
b. Use symbolism and metaphor
WTF? I thought. How anyone can be expected to draw up a psychological profile based on this kind of non-data is entirely beyond me. How about changing the question to:
Do you prefer writers who:
a. Are mediocre to the last degree, but at least provide children with some decent, sterile morality, eg. Enid Blyton
b. Are absolute geniuses, but prefer sodomy to more biblically-acceptable forms of sexual intercourse, eg. Christopher Marlowe
It was once I got to the unexpectedly tricky marking scheme that the penny dropped: the whole purpose of the exercise was to test how thorough I was at marking test results. Suitably impressed with my insight, I double checked my marking and was rewarded when I found that I had recorded one of my answers incorrectly.
***
Non-threatening interviewer (hereafter NTI) finally comes in to see if I've finished my mountain of paperwork.
NTI: How did you go? The psychology test is pretty time-consuming isn't it?
DAN: Yes... was that by any chance to test how thorough I was at marking?
NTI: Oh no, we prefer our teachers to be the "Feeler" type: they're generally better with children.
DAN: Oh.
Silently laments the fact that his test score identifies him as a hard-nosed rationalist roundheaad. I knew that bloody test couldn't be trusted.
***
Fortunately, my demonstration lesson went off without a hitch and I did ok on the Japanese roleplay. If the worst comes to the worst, I've got another interview Wednesday morning. Fingers crossed!
Labels: MAMMON
