FH said:
I was in your shoes some 20 years ago. When you leave college, landing your first job is the next important step in your life. You're anxious, you don't know what to expect and, from your post, you clearly want to be prepared. I've been in the position to interview some people, so let me tell you a bit what that looks like from the other side. This will be quite a personal account and by absolutely no means implies that all interviewers will be like me, far from it. It'll merely give you one example.
I work as a software developer and, it being a small company, there's probably a deadline coming up, about 10 different problems to solve and a training seminar to go to. In the middle of that I have to interview someone and I really don't have the time. I will, at best, read the first page of your CV. I'll probably spend a minute on it before it goes into the reject, interview or maybe pile. Basically this means your CV must be short, to the point, clearly laid out and highlight your highest, e.g. likely your most recent achievements, not your entire history. I may or may not check your references. It's quite possible that I don't.
This means, once you come to the interview, it's like a blank slate. I've taken what little I read about you on faith, but everything that came before only served to get you the interview. Now I'm going to form my own impressions. In my case, I follow the general philosophy of Joel Spolski, over from the "Joel on Software" web-site, who wrote something called the "Guerilla Guide to Interviewing". Joel worked for Microsoft at one point and I think his opinions and interview technique may well have formed there. By all means try to find his older versions of the guide, detailing about 10 different interview techniques, which are quite harsh. He toned it down in a later edition I read.
While I don't follow Joel's guide exactly, I subscribe to his 2 main criteria for selecting employees, they must be smart and they must get things done. I might give you a test, which could be a written test. It will contain problems you must solve. That will also be the general character of my interviews. I'm not that interested in what you know or what you've done. I'm far more interested in how quickly you learn. While I might talk to you about your university work, I will also pose you at least one question about a scenario taken from my work, which means you'll have to learn about what I do and the products that my company sells. The best advice I can give you to prepare is: get a good nights sleep, have your wits about you and inform yourself about the company you're applying to. At the least visit their web-site, if any.
The other thing that will be in the back of my mind is: will you fit in with the company. Do you truly wish to be in the job we're offering? Is it your first choice? Do you see it as a stepping stone? What is your understanding of the current jobs market? Are your salary expectations realistic? Will you be happy in a job at all, or are you more of an academic? According to Joel, academics are the people who are smart, but don't get things done. Which is fine, if would rather do research than merely apply it.
I was dubious about one guy we hired. He'd had a great interview for a technical support job, but ultimately wished to be a programmer. As it turned out, he has been one of the best hires we've had. Part of that has been his great attitude. He went for the tech support job, because he thought that's what he could get in the jobs market at the time. He worked in that job for some years and is now working as a programmer. It worked out well, because his and the company's expectations were the same.
Finally, if you get rejected, don't let it drag you down. As an interviewer I fully expect to reject people. I simply don't have the time nor the ability to truly determine whether someone will be a good hire. The result is that I'd rather let good people slip through the net than risk hiring someone I don't feel sure about. If I reject you, it simply means we didn't hit it off on the day, under the circumstances, with the limited time that we had.
Hmm I see what you are saying. Now that I'm taking software engineering I know exactly what you are talking about. Agile method sounds like beast even more so since I might have to use it for the class project that's suppose to be like 50% of our grade.