My interview was in early December. A student greeted me at the porter’s lodge and took me to wait in the JCR (Junior Common Room).

My first activity was an interview with my prospective director of studies. The interview was scheduled to last 20 minutes, but went on for 40 minutes causing me to be unable to have a break and be late to my second interview with two fellows of the college. The second interview lasted 20 minutes.

Later in the day, a student rep took me to take the law test which was in essay format and 60 minutes long.

In the first interview, we I was asked difficult questions about balancing interests within society using law, and the intersections between medicine and law (something I had written about in my personal statement). It seemed as if the interviewer was playing devils advocate and pushing me to see how far I would go in different scenarios to stand by my argument. Voicing my whole thought process and outlining steps was something that I picked up my interviewer liked so I tried to do, even though half the time I was making things up on the spot to fit my argument. I also picked up that the interviewer appreciated candidates ability to reason and taking time to think and give a thoughtful response (for examaple, where counter-arguments would be considered), rather than blurting out an answer instinctually - so don't worry silence/pausing to think is not a bad thing! I was pushed to my limits in this interview and wanted to cry but stuck through it and felt that I would never get in after walking out of that room. I think the interview format (barring the making me want to cry) is an accurate representation of supervisions and the teaching style at Cambridge.

In my second interview I was given a piece of legislation and given 15 minutes to prepare for a question and answer style interview on it. The two fellows took turns asking me questions on whether something would be considered legal/illegal based on the legislation that I previously annotated and made notes on. I could tell if they weren't satisfied with my answer by their facial expressions and as they would often ask a follow up question poking holes in my response or ask "Is that your final answer?". If you speak out your reasoning I find it helps them see where you are coming from and guide you in the right direction. It is okay to change your answer, just make sure to say you noticed a mistake in your reasoning previously and would like to change your answer because of X reason. This subject specific interview was pleasant and did not make me want to cry (unlike the general one lol).

A sample of the written test can be found online so would recommend practicing this before going in for the interview/examination. The test has 3 potential formats (a quote or piece of legislation you analyse, an open ended essay question, or a problem question where you advise a party), and gives you options for which question to answer. I was given a choice between three open ended essay questions, that had to do with a type of law that I will be studying until my final year here, so dont worry if you dont know the exact legislation because nobody expects you to. I tried to use reason to make an argument and wrote in a typical 5 paragraph essay structure (intro, paragraph 2 giving reasons for argument, paragraph 3 giving further reasons for argument, Paragraph 4 potential counter arguments and why they fail, paragraph 5 conclusion).

Re-read my personal statement multiple times and have reasons/evidence to back up everything I claimed. Be ready to answer questions about your interest in the subject. Watch YouTube videos on the Cambridge university page of interview examples and the subject introductions.

Do mock interviews with friends/teachers/family/anyone you can get a hold of, so you can practice voicing your thought process. Practice the exemplar law written test with the material provided online on the Cambridge Law Faculty website.

It’s really hard to tell how your interview went so don’t overthink it during the interview or afterwards (I made this mistake and before going into my second interview had convinced myself I wasn't going to make it in). Lots of people I know thought they had a bad interview because they didn’t know the exact answers to questions or were pushed out of their comfort zone. In reality I think it was because their interviewers thought they promising so wanted to stretch them with hard questions.