link
28 June 2013
22 June 2013
20 June 2013
interviewing
That is, conducting interviews ...
This:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
is actually modestly interesting because of what it says produces useful information.
namely:
- structured behavioral interviews, where you have a consistent rubric for how you assess people, rather than having each interviewer just make stuff up.
- Behavioral interviewing also works — where you’re not giving someone a hypothetical, but you’re starting with a question like, “Give me an example of a time when you solved an analytically difficult problem.” The interesting thing about the behavioral interview is that when you ask somebody to speak to their own experience, and you drill into that, you get two kinds of information. One is you get to see how they actually interacted in a real-world situation, and the valuable “meta” information you get about the candidate is a sense of what they consider to be difficult.
- and this: one guy was highly predictive because he only interviewed people for a very specialized area, where he happened to be the world’s leading expert
This:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
is actually modestly interesting because of what it says produces useful information.
namely:
- structured behavioral interviews, where you have a consistent rubric for how you assess people, rather than having each interviewer just make stuff up.
- Behavioral interviewing also works — where you’re not giving someone a hypothetical, but you’re starting with a question like, “Give me an example of a time when you solved an analytically difficult problem.” The interesting thing about the behavioral interview is that when you ask somebody to speak to their own experience, and you drill into that, you get two kinds of information. One is you get to see how they actually interacted in a real-world situation, and the valuable “meta” information you get about the candidate is a sense of what they consider to be difficult.
- and this: one guy was highly predictive because he only interviewed people for a very specialized area, where he happened to be the world’s leading expert
stuff
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2013/06/17/192523112/name-ten-women-in-philosophy-bet-you-can-t
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/06/female_academics_pay_a_heavy_baby_penalty.html?fb_ref=sm_fb_share_toolbar
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/06/19/new-academy-arts-and-sciences-report-stresses-importance-humanities-and-social
17 June 2013
whatever
found this on Amazon:
He's been dead since 1991. I'm not even sure that's the most relevant counterclaim here.
13 June 2013
"A Crisis in the Humanities?"
http://chronicle.com/blognetwork/edgeofthewest/2013/06/10/the-humanities-crisis/
10 June 2013
"the new student excuse"
Corrupted-Files.com offers a service -- recently noted by several academic bloggers who have expressed concern -- that sells students (for only $3.95, soon to go up to $5.95) intentionally corrupted files. Why buy a corrupted file? Here's what the site says: "Step 1: After purchasing a file, rename the file e.g. Mike_Final-Paper. Step 2: E-mail the file to your professor along with your 'here's my assignment' e-mail. Step 3: It will take your professor several hours if not days to notice your file is 'unfortunately' corrupted. Use the time this website just bought you wisely and finish that paper!!!"
Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/05/corrupted#ixzz2VpFUG8wy
Inside Higher Ed
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)