Why pre-screen UX/UI interns before the portfolio review
Junior design portfolios have converged. The same course briefs, the same component library, the same case study structure with a persona, a journey map and three polished screens. What separates candidates is not visual quality, which is largely a function of the template they used, but whether they can say why anything in the file is the way it is. A short screen gets to that faster than a portfolio review, where the artefacts tend to do the talking.
What actually matters when screening UX/UI Intern candidates
- 01
Portfolio
Ask for two or three case studies: coursework, hackathon, or club redesigns. Look for wireframes, user flows, and Figma prototypes, not just polished dribbble-style screens.
- 02
Craft and rationale
Probe Figma fluency: auto layout, components, variants, constraints. Check they can justify type scale, contrast ratios against WCAG AA, and spacing decisions in their own screens.
- 03
Feedback and iteration
Test how they handled critique from a tutor, mentor, or usability test. Look for before and after screens and evidence of usability findings changing the design.
- 04
Working with the brief
Judge how they scope work under constraints: a brief with fixed deadline, existing design system, or developer handoff via Figma dev mode and annotated specs.
Pre-screening questions to ask UX/UI Intern candidates
12 questions grouped by what they test. Ask the same set in every screen and score answers on a consistent scale, or send them as an async video screen and compare answers side by side.
Their own work
3 questions01Can you describe a project where you made a significant contribution to the design?
Listen forTheir specific contribution separated from the team's, with the constraint they were working within and what they would change now.
Course briefs only, or a group project where their own part cannot be identified when asked.
02Can you describe your design process?
Listen forA sequence they have actually followed rather than a diagram, including where they skipped a stage and what it cost them.
Recites a standard double diamond with no example of applying it, or a process that never varies.
03Which design tools are you familiar with?
Listen forA primary tool with real fluency including components and prototyping, plus honesty about handoff and developer collaboration.
Lists every design tool as proficient, or has only used a tool for static screens with no prototyping.
Defending a decision
3 questions04How do you approach problem-solving in UX/UI design?
Listen forStarting from the user problem rather than the screen, with a case where they realised they were solving the wrong thing.
Starts from a solution or a visual reference, with no problem stated before design work began.
05How do you make sure your designs are accessible to all users?
Listen forSpecific practice rather than intention: contrast checked, focus states designed, labels on inputs, and something they changed for this reason.
Accessibility described as important with no example, or colour choices that were never checked for contrast.
06How comfortable are you with code?
Listen forAn honest level, plus enough understanding of what is expensive to build to have changed a design after talking to a developer.
Overstates coding ability, or has never considered whether a design is realistic to implement.
Taking critique
3 questions07How do you handle feedback and criticism of your designs?
Listen forBoth moves in one answer: feedback they acted on without arguing, and feedback they questioned with a reason.
Defends every decision, or changes the design on any comment with no view of their own.
08How do you handle design decisions when there is disagreement in the team?
Listen forA way of resolving it with evidence, such as testing the two options, rather than deferring to whoever is most senior.
Defers automatically to seniority, or holds their position with no evidence beyond preference.
09Can you describe a time you changed a design because of user feedback?
Listen forA specific change with what users actually did rather than said, and honesty about being surprised by the result.
Feedback described as praise, or a change made because one person expressed a preference.
Designing to a brief
3 questions10What steps do you take to understand a user's needs and motivations?
Listen forSome contact with real users, however informal, rather than personas assembled from assumptions about who the user might be.
Builds personas with no research behind them, or has never spoken to anyone who would use the thing.
11Do you have any experience with user research?
Listen forA method they ran themselves, even five informal interviews, with awareness that asking people what they want is unreliable.
Research described entirely as reading articles, or surveys asking users to specify features.
12How do you handle tight deadlines and working on several things at once?
Listen forA realistic account of what they cut when time runs short, and evidence they flagged it rather than delivering something unfinished quietly.
Claims to deliver everything at full quality regardless, or has missed a deadline with no warning given.
How to score responses
Score every candidate on the same four criteria immediately after the screen. At this stage you are shortlisting for panel interviews, not making the final call.
Portfolio
35%5Shows end to end cases with problem framing, flows, mid-fidelity wireframes, and a clickable prototype they can walk through unaided.
Craft and rationale
25%5Explains specific choices (8pt grid, 4.5:1 contrast, component variants) and names the user problem each decision solves.
Feedback and iteration
25%5Cites concrete feedback or test observations from five users, then shows the revised screens and what improved.
Working with the brief
15%5Asks clarifying questions about users and constraints, respects existing system components, and hands off with clear annotations and states.
Junior portfolios have converged on the same briefs and the same component library. A one-way video screen lets you hear the reasoning behind the screens before a portfolio review.
Try it on HirevireScreening FAQ
Process basics
How long should a pre-screening round for a design intern take?
Ten minutes across eight to ten questions, answered async. Async is what makes this workable at internship volumes, and hearing a candidate explain a design choice out loud tells you more than a written application ever does.
Should I expect real product experience from an intern?
No, but expect something with a constraint. A society app, a friend's small business site, a redesign they actually shipped. Course briefs have no client, no deadline and no disagreement, which removes the parts of design that are hard.
Evaluating answers
What is the strongest signal when screening a design intern?
Being able to criticise their own portfolio. An intern who can name what is weak in a piece they made six months ago is already improving on their own. One who defends everything will need every lesson delivered by someone else.
How much should tool proficiency count?
Very little. Figma is learnable in a fortnight and almost every applicant lists it. Reasoning, research instinct and how they take feedback are the things that are slow to teach, so weight the questions accordingly.
Go deeper on this role
Sanat has been hiring since 2012 and watching the recruitment industry change up close ever since, and turned that screening process into Hirevire's video screening platform. LinkedIn
