Hi, does anyone know the typical format of history interviews at Worcester colledge?
My brother did one 2 years ago. I guess it depends which people interview you so this may not apply to your interviewers.
His two were pretty unfriendly (no hellos or nice to meet you) and they also cut him off without a goodbye. In terms of format, it was a bit of stuff about personal statement (but not much), talk about economics because he was studying this too, a medieval 6th century piece to read (even though he said his key interest was 20th century history) and then discussion about it, then a further discussion related to the them of the writing at a bit of tangent. So it was essentially quite a hostile tutorial.
He told me that he didn't feel they were interested in him as a person. He didn't get in, although he got 4A* and is super bright, well read and absolutely committed to history. BUT when he reflected on the interview, he felt he went wrong mainly by not accepting their alternative proposals in the discussion. He is v well read as I said and he knew the suggestions they were making were wrong (I guess they were playing devils advocate) so he just rejected their arguments. In retrospect he wonders if he should have debated more and hypothesised about their arguments as if they were correct. Maybe they thought he was too self assured. Nevertheless, they spent a good portion talking about economics in medieval Europe which he neither knows about nor cares about.
I can't say that's a typical format but that was his experience.