Test taken: History Admissions Assessment (HAA)
Number of interviews: 2
Time between interviews: 30 minutes
Length of interviews: 30-40 minutes
Online interview: No

My first interview was split up into three sections: the first and longest was discussing the source that I had been given before my interview, exploring what I initially thought of it before my interviewers revealed something that changed the nature of the source, and asked me different questions to gauge my reaction and see whether the historical significance of it had changed. The second part of the interview involved discussing one of my two submitted essays for about 10 minutes, questioning me and challenging certain claims I'd made in it (important note: submitting high mark essays is important to show your best work, but don't be afraid to submit a slightly lower mark essay if it is on a topic you're invested in/enjoy - genuine enthusiasm goes a long way). It is important to listen to what the interviewers say and incorporate it in your answers, but if you disagree or think they are wrong you should push back (as long as you can substantiate it with evidence!). The final part of my first interview involved discussing a book I had mentioned in my personal statement.

I slowly eased into the interview, and although I was always 'on edge' it quickly became quite enjoyable. There were a few awkward moments of silence where I didn't know how to respond to a question, but that is normal. I actually went into my second interview more confident than I had been going into the first.

My second interview was similar, but we spent much more time on one of my submitted essays and personal statement. It began differently too, with a more relaxed/casual introduction and general questions about myself ( i.e. where I lived, the school I was at, why I'd applied). Although it started off more relaxed, the second interviewe was actually more rigorous in historical discussion surrounding my submitted work and the A-level topic, which thankfully I had done a lot of preparation for. Without divulging the question, during discussion of how my English A-level connected to History and talking about a book I'd done for coursework, one of my interviewers shot me an unusual question I wasn't prepared for, and posed an answer I disagreed with - I said as much and explained why. Debate is obviously central to historical inquiry, and at least from my experience I think interviewers like it when you stick to your guns/disagree with them as long as you have evidence to back up your claims and are not just being contrarian. Again, this is not to say you have to disagree at all. Both interviews had two interviewers that alternated between each other in asking questions/leading discussion.

The cliche is that you can never 'prepare' for your interviews - you can rarely anticipate the questions that will be asked - but in spite of this, I still think that closely rereading your personal statement and continuously thinking about any books you mention or discuss is very valuable, and coming up with your own questions about things you've read will likely lead you down other avenues to explore. Crucially, being comfortable and confident in discussing the topics you're studying at A-level is a big one - it's unlikely that the interview will drift beyond what you cover in your submitted essays, but having a good grasp allows you to draw beyond the immediate content - it is stressed you shouldn't revise topics for the sake of your interview as you would for actual exams, but you should definitely be knowledgeable about the topics covered in your submitted essays.

A practice interview, if it's at all possible, is useful (but by no means essential) - my school didn't provide them, so I just did a 'mock' with my dad - if this isn't possible, simply articulating different concepts or ideas and explaining them to interested friends/family helps you solidify how you might express x or y in an interview situation - in lieu of these, talking to yourself in the mirror is always a possibility! If there are any mock interviews on YouTube I'd definitely recommend watching them (Oxford or Cambridge) - familiarising myself with what an interview situation would feel like definitely helped me be less overwhelmed when I was there. As mentioned for the HAA test, source analysis preparation is key, since at least half of one interview will likely be on an unseen source you've had 30 minutes to read over - try not to 'overthink' things, always begin with the basis - provenance, purpose, author etc - interviewers might try to throw a spanner in the works by revealing something you had no idea about the source, so expect the unexpected!

I prepared almost exclusively through practice papers - going over the demands of the question very, very closely was key, especially for sections that were to do with inference/reading comprehension (deceptively difficult) - practice makes perfect, do every past paper you can get your hands on - try to do them under timed conditions to emulate the real thing. Doing one or two Thinking Skills Assessment (Oxford PPE) was handy in this instance, as was the Law National Admissions Test (LNAT). Websites that allow you to practice quick source analysis are also particularly useful - this is a good starting point: https://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/primary-source-exercises, but you can also use sources in A-level textbooks.

Take the whole experience as what it is, particularly with interviews - speaking to experts in their field can often be as rewarding as it is intimidating. Try not to worry, especially after interviews when the admissions process is finished - focus on what is ahead of you, and once it's finished put it behind you - especially at interviews when you're on the spot, you will say things you might look back on and think you should've or could've said differently; what's done is done. For history, interviewers will look for people who can hold their own - interview settings can be intimidating, especially if you're unfamiliar with the setting (as I was) - do your best to push through this and engage with the interviewers - genuine enthusiasm as well as alertness is indicative you're both a serious candidate and actually interested.

Don't be afraid to properly *think* about responses during interviews, and don't let silence intimidate you - I know from experience it can be easy to freeze up if you don't immediately come up with an answer to a question, but always try and hazard a guess, even if you're totally unsure. Preparation is key for the entire process - do as many past papers as you can for admissions tests, read books relating to your subject, revise school topics and practice interview materials - nothing is guaranteed, but effective and efficient preparation will put you in good stead. It's difficult to be totally 'unique', but through the application process try and explore historical areas that perhaps aren't touched as much, or maybe are linked in some interesting way to another area (an example I used; the Crusades from the Arab perspective) - go beyond your syllabus and engage in things that interest you - a very good way to explore this is podcasts! History Extra in particular on Spotify has a plethora of materials that can start you on a topic.