IT is often said that teachers are born and not made. The remark would be equaIly true of interviewers. But whereas most teachers know their weaknesses the same cannot be said of interviewers. AIl
the world claims to be a good judge of character and some there are who are definitely dogmatic about it. But it is one thing to judge the character of a daily acquaintance and quite another to assess the personal qualities and even academic possibilities of a complete stranger. The carpenter takes up his wood and chisel, and the result of his craftsmanship grows visibly before his eyes; if the finished work is not good he sees his mistakes and learns to improve his technique. The interviewer is not only judging much more complicated material, he frequently remains in ignorance of the results of many of his decisions. Even where his mistakes catch up with him he may refuse to recognise them as his own, projecting them instead on to the student who has perhaps been admitted to the wrong course or institution. Which does not mean that all student failures are due to bad selection. There is many a slip twixt cup and lip, and the student has to run the gauntlet of many perils before he reaches the finishing post.