Rasmussen College Mock Interview Critique

Rasmussen College Mock Interview Critique

Rasmussen College Mock Interview Critique Interview Information Student’s Name: Program Area: Interviewer’s Name: Title: Interviewer’s Company: Date of Interview: Interview Evaluation Place a check in the box to indicate the rating given to each skill area. Comments are very useful to students. Rating Scale: 5-EXCELLENT 4-Very Good 3-Good 2-Average 1-Poor Skill Area Comments First Impression Professional Appearance Eye Contact and Facial Expressions Resume Use of Relevant Examples in Answers Use of Educational Background in Answers Enthusiasm and Attitude Vocal Quality Correct Grammar Usage Portfolio Questions for the Interviewer and Closing Strengths, Weaknesses, and Optional hiring Decision Please list areas of strength exhibited during this interview. Please make any necessary recommendations to the student for future interviews.

Paper For Above instruction

The mock interview critique template provided by Rasmussen College serves as a comprehensive tool designed to evaluate a student’s interview performance systematically. Such evaluation encompasses multiple dimensions, ranging from initial impressions to specific skills demonstrated during the interview process. This critique facilitates both self-assessment and targeted feedback, essential for improving students' professional presentation and communication skills, which are vital in competitive job markets.

The first impression of a candidate is often the initial judgment of professionalism and preparedness. The critique emphasizes the importance of professional appearance, which includes appropriate attire, grooming, and overall presentation. A polished appearance contributes positively to first impressions, projecting confidence and respect for the interviewing process. Complementing appearance, eye contact and facial expressions are critical non-verbal cues that convey engagement, enthusiasm, and sincerity. Effective eye contact demonstrates confidence and attentiveness, while facial expressions can reinforce interest and cordiality.

The evaluation also highlights the importance of the resume, which serves as a fundamental document presenting a candidate's qualifications, skills, and experience. Interviewers often look for clarity, relevance, and accuracy in a resume, which should complement the verbal responses during the interview. Use of relevant examples in answers is another key area, showcasing a candidate’s practical application of skills and knowledge. This often involves framing responses with specific instances that demonstrate competencies, problem-solving abilities, and accomplishments.

Educational background is also emphasized, encouraging students to link their academic experiences with job-related skills and qualities. Demonstrating how educational achievements have prepared them for professional roles can reinforce credibility and suitability for the position. Additionally, enthusiasm and attitude are assessed, as they significantly influence the interviewer's perception of a candidate's motivation and cultural fit within an organization.

Vocal quality and correct grammar usage are fundamental to clear communication. A confident, articulate voice combined with proper grammar helps ensure ideas are conveyed effectively, avoiding misunderstandings. The critique also suggests preparing a professional portfolio, which can include work samples, certifications, or other relevant documents that substantiate claims made during the interview.

Furthermore, the template recommends preparing questions for the interviewer and practicing strategic closing statements. These elements demonstrate genuine interest in the role and allow candidates to gather additional information about the organization. Identifying strengths and weaknesses through the critique supports continuous improvement and self-awareness, while optional hiring decisions reflect the overall impression and suitability for the role.

Overall, the Rasmussen College mock interview critique is a valuable instrument to guide students in honing their interview skills. By systematically evaluating areas such as appearance, communication, preparation, and attitude, students can identify strengths to leverage and weaknesses to improve, thereby increasing their chances of success in future employment opportunities.

References

• Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10(2), 99-117.
• Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2004). Placing perceptions of organizational justice in the context of performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 159–172.
• Levashina, J., & Campion, M. A. (2007). Measuring professionalism: The development and validation of the Professionalism Competence Inventory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 950–963.
• Schawbel, D. (2013). Promote Yourself: The new rules for career success. St. Martin’s Press.
• Silvestro, R., & Silvestro, R. (2011). The importance of nonverbal communication in a job interview. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(4), 471-478.
• Spitzberg, B. H., & Chagnon, G. (2009). The development of intercultural communication competence. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural competence (pp. 97-122).
• Tickle, T., & Kahl, K. (2011). Managing interview anxiety: Techniques and strategies. Career Development Quarterly, 59(4), 370-377.
• Walker, T., & Shaffer, S. (2005). The effectiveness of mock interviews for college students. Journal of Career Development, 32(3), 199-210.
• Weber, J. (2018). Interpersonal communication skills for job interviews. Business Communication Quarterly, 81(3), 283-286.
• Yates, S. D. (2010). The role of formal visual cues in job interview success. Psychology & Marketing, 27(12), 1227-1243.