Interview is the last decisive step for the candidates who stand out from many written tests, and it is also an eternal topic for the shortlisted candidates. After dealing with these candidates for eight years, I have become more and more aware that participating in interview training can not only win through theoretical knowledge, simulation exercises and other aspects of training.
Since I graduated from graduate school, I have the honor to join a well-known organization. After half a year's training, I successfully became an interview trainer. Up to now, I still clearly remember standing in the classroom for the first time, really more nervous than the candidates at the interview site. The first class I took, 1 1 students, only three people finally landed. When I learned the result, I was really depressed and felt really good. Later, when I held a regular meeting on Monday, I learned that the pass rate of each shift was not high, and the highest was only about 70%. Only then did I realize that the original propaganda and reality could not be consistent. The ratio of 1: 3 is 33%, and it is quite good to get more than 50% in each course, except for some giving up and some getting big scores. Even if individual classes all rank first, it is not easy to reach more than 70%. So I often see advertisements for some training courses, and I don't know the pass rate of more than 90%. If there is such a class, I think it is worthwhile to spend a high price.
In the following days, I toured classes in different training institutions and all over the country, and I was constantly exploring and summarizing. What I hear most are the terms of regularization and anti-regularization. Some people say that routinization is not good, and it is necessary to reverse routinization. Personally, I think that both routine and anti-routine are individuals who need training. For example, is it suitable for a fresh graduate and a person with certain work experience to attend classes in the same class and under the same curriculum system? Therefore, looking at the current training institutions, all courses are recommended according to rankings, and almost no institution is tailor-made according to the needs of candidates. I think this is mainly caused by the market economy!
Having said that, let's give some hints to the students who entered the interview, hoping to help everyone.
Every candidate who enters the interview has different advantages and disadvantages. What we need to do is to foster strengths and avoid weaknesses. For example, a trained teacher often tells you to speak loudly when answering questions. But it has been maintained for more than 20 years, and it is difficult to change it permanently during the short training of 10 days. Even if you deliberately increase your volume during the interview, the result is often that it is very loud in the first few minutes and finally becomes your original volume. This kind of anticlimactic thing often happens, leaving a bad impression on the examiner. I remember an accidental opportunity to have dinner with an examiner. He played a joke on me at dinner. When I was an examiner, I was very tired all morning, and I was still sleepy after 2 o'clock in the afternoon. A candidate came in with a particularly loud voice and woke him up at once. When he pays attention to his answer, the candidate may be.
In more than 8 years' experience, I met a student with poor family economic conditions who respected me very much. I asked him to share a room with me while teaching. And I broke the original curriculum system and communicated with him after class alone. In the end, his interview score reached 94. 1, which is also the peak of my interview score in more than 8 years. Of course, this achievement is not my own. In the following days, during each class, I tried to communicate with individual differences, and my grades got better and better (there is no need to use the pass rate here). This example shows that interview training should not blindly listen to other people's recommendations in order to find psychological comfort, and which training course is good or not! But it is most important to know your own shortcomings and find a suitable curriculum system. Just like Estee Lauder's cosmetics for oily skin, is it suitable for a person with dry skin?
Writing here, I feel more and more. As a teacher who is still struggling in the public examination training, I think I am a teacher with conscience. Although it is inevitable that there is suspicion of propaganda, I hope it will help candidates who are about to enter the interview and those who are still struggling on the way to the bowl test. Of course, if I am lucky enough to attend the training class of national education, we may become good friends.