Do we need interviews?

You can recognise them a mile away. They sit in the waiting room wearing the pristine suits that are usually worn by the most senior consultants and professors, with shoes polished and hair neatly combed. In their hands there is usually a copy of the latest edition of a prominent scientific or medical journal, its pages turned over ritualistically, without seemingly a word being read. What gives them away, however, is the expression on their face, usually one of apprehension and nervousness, and above all the slight immaturity of an adolescent who is trying hard to act like a mature adult.

I am of course talking about the interview candidates for the MB BS course in medicine. They're an interesting lot, coming from different places and different backgrounds, and the only thing uniting them is the admission to medical school and eventually becoming doctors. I have interviewed about 50 or 60 applicants as a member of the interview panel at my medical school, and have often found myself intrigued by the whole process. Interestingly, I belong to a minority of students in my year to have been selected without being interviewed, which is probably why I often wonder whether interviews are needed at all. While interviewing applicants, I have often asked questions that even many doctors probably wouldn't be able to answer properly, let alone a 17 year old A level pupil. Funnily enough, I seriously doubt that it would stop them from being good doctors. So why are interviews used to select medical students? Are they successful in selecting the right candidates for the right reasons? Or is the whole process just a waste …