Your search found 3158 results.

Descriptors:
Job Applicants; College Graduates; Communication Skills; Employees; Career Centers; Education Work Relationship; Surveys; Adjustment (to Environment); Problem Solving; Personnel Selection; Employment Qualifications

Abstract:
Employers value a four-year college degree, many of them more than ever. Yet half of those surveyed recently by "The Chronicle" and American Public Media's "Marketplace" said they had trouble finding recent graduates qualified to fill positions at their company or organization. Nearly a third gave colleges just fair to poor marks for producing successful employees. And they dinged bachelor's-degree holders for lacking basic workplace proficiencies, like adaptability, communication skills, and the ability to solve complex problems. What gives? These days a bachelor's degree is practically a prerequisite for getting one's resume read--two-thirds of employers said they never waive degree requirements, or do so only for particularly outstanding candidates. But clearly the credential leaves employers wanting. While they use college as a sorting mechanism, to signal job candidates' discipline and drive, they think it is falling short in adequately preparing new hires. The tension may lie partly in changes in the world of work: technological transformation and evolving expectations that employees be ready to handle everything straightaway. And perhaps managers are right to expect an easier time finding employees up to the task--after all, three times the proportion of Americans have bachelor's degrees now as did a generation or two ago. While some institutions tout their career centers, internship offerings, and academic programs designed with industry input, others argue that workplace skills ought to be taught on the job. Higher education is meant to educate broadly, not train narrowly, they say: It is business that is asking too much. And if college graduates are not up to scratch, some campus leaders ask, why do employers keep hiring them? The unemployment rate for Americans with bachelor's degrees, after all, is less than 5 percent; for those with only high-school diplomas, it is nearly double. Well, because even though employers may kvetch about college graduates, they generally make better employees than those who finished only high school. If nothing else, having gone through four--or five or six--years of schooling proves that they can stick with a task. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Cognitive Ability; Adaptive Testing; Feedback (Response); Predictive Validity; Computer Assisted Testing; Cognitive Measurement; Evaluation Methods; Evaluation Problems; Organizations (Groups); Testing Problems; Personnel Selection; Selection Criteria; Item Response Theory; Human Resources; Cognitive Tests; Simulation; Adults; Correlation; Comparative Analysis

Abstract:
Cognitive ability tests are widely used in organizations around the world because they have high predictive validity in selection contexts. Although these tests typically measure several subdomains, testing is usually carried out for a single subdomain at a time. This can be ineffective when the subdomains assessed are highly correlated. This article illustrates the applicability of using multidimensional computerized adaptive testing (MCAT) for a cognitive ability test used in organizational contexts. MCAT can increase the validity of subdomain ability scores by effectively administering and scoring items based on the relations between the subdomains. This can be particularly useful in settings where there is a need to provide detailed feedback regarding subdomain scores, but there is limited time for assessment. Results indicate that MCAT leads to improved test precision, shorter tests, and increased selection utility compared to more traditional testing methods. (Contains 3 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Personnel Selection; Graduate Students; Labor Market; Job Applicants; Tenure; College Faculty; Job Application

Abstract:
The academic job market is overcrowded, but departments are hiring, and each year thousands of graduate students and other candidates will get phone calls offering them tenure-track positions. It is typically a moment of mutual giddiness. The department heads are excited at the prospect of a terrific new colleague; the job applicants now know that their immediate future is assured. Then, well, complications may ensue. Unless a hiring contract has been worked out ahead of time (a rarity), a new round of potentially awkward interplay begins. The chair's concerns include: Will she accept? Will I be competing with other offers? Will the dean (or other senior administrators) approve of the package I want to offer? The chosen candidate may be wondering: Should I see if I get other offers? What can I ask for that doesn't make them angry? Will I get the best deal possible? For both parties, those are good worries--much better than the stress of a failed search for the chair or of no offers for the applicant. But both should proceed carefully, because what they say and do now can have consequences in the years ahead. In this article, the author discusses how to get to "yes" efficiently and amicably for those who want a job. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Undergraduate Students; Data Analysis; Persuasive Discourse; Instructional Design; Case Method (Teaching Technique); Decision Making; Failure; Business Administration Education; Personnel Selection; Problem Solving; Logical Thinking; Success

Abstract:
Solving complex, ill-structured problems may be effectively supported by case-based reasoning through case libraries that provide just-in-time domain-specific principles in the form of stories. The cases not only articulate previous experiences of practitioners, but also serve as problem-solving narratives from which learners can acquire meaning. The current study investigated the effects of different case-types (success, failures) on analogical transfer to similar problems. In the first week, undergraduate sales management students (N = 36) were assigned to different case library treatments (success, failure) and asked to construct a multifaceted argument (initial argument, counterargument, rebuttal) to resolve an ill-structured, decision-making hiring problem. In the following week, students constructed an argument to solve a novel case without the support of the case library. Data analysis revealed the failure-based case library condition produced significantly higher scores on measurements of counterarguments and holistic argumentation scores on both tasks. A discussion of the implications for pedagogy and instructional design are also presented. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; White Collar Occupations; Social Support Groups; Interviews; Labor Market; Unemployment; Job Applicants; Cross Cultural Studies; Personnel Selection; Cultural Context; Responses; Job Search Methods; Participant Observation

Abstract:
This article provides a new account of American job seekers' individualized understandings of their labor-market difficulties, and more broadly, of how structural conditions shape subjective responses. Unemployed white-collar workers in the U.S. tend to interpret their labor market difficulties as reflecting flaws in themselves, while Israelis tend to perceive flaws in the hiring system. These different responses have profound individual and societal implications. Drawing on in-depth interviews with unemployed job seekers and participant observations at support groups in the U.S. and Israel, this article shows how different labor market institutions give rise to distinct job search games, which I call the chemistry game in the U.S. and the specs game in Israel. Challenging the broad cultural explanations of the unemployment experience in the existing literature, this article shows how subjective responses to unemployment are generated by the search experiences associated with institutionally rooted job search games. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Personnel Selection; Search Committees (Personnel); Clothing; Job Applicants; Employment Interviews; Interpersonal Competence; Leadership; Personality; College Faculty

Abstract:
Spring is interview season for aspiring presidents, provosts, and deans. It's when search consultants spend a lot of time sitting in meeting rooms at airport hotels watching candidates engage with hiring committees in the ritual dance of the preliminary interview. Even after 15 years of that, the author is constantly surprised by the approaches and tactics that candidates think will provide them with a winning edge--but that inevitably produce the opposite result. Presented here are the top 10 interview techniques that backfire on administrative candidates when they meet with search committees. These include: (10) Eschewing graciousness; (9) Not dressing the part; (8) Overzealousness in showing one's stuff; (7) Handing out material during the interview; (6) Excessive seriousness...or excessive levity; (5) Ignoring the obvious; (4) Telling the search-committee members what the candidate thinks they want to hear; (3) Not signaling a desire for the job; (2) Talking, talking, and then more talking; and finally at No. (1) Not acting like a leader. Search committees are equally apt to do things that, while seeming sensible and advisable, are actually counterproductive. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Educational Environment; Personnel Selection; Diversity (Faculty); Intergroup Relations; Social Integration; Selection Criteria; Personnel Policy; Teacher Recruitment; Leadership Qualities; Employment Opportunities; Change Strategies; Teacher Attitudes

Abstract:
Ongoing globalization and immigration bring diversity and rich cultural elements to American organizations at all levels. An educational environment with faculty and leaders from people of colors will set a good example for all students, especially for students of color who are eager to explore ideas and arguments at a thoughtful level to rethink their own education and to reconsider their life promises. Higher education needs to reaffirm diversity though faculty hiring. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (256K)

Descriptors:
College Administration; Public Colleges; Leadership; Leadership Effectiveness; Vertical Organization; Administrative Organization; Educational Legislation; Personnel Selection; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
This paper examines the nature of the leadership crisis in Malaysia's public universities. Our main concern is about the leadership at the top levels of university management, and the administrative hierarchy as perceived by both outsiders and insiders. Critics have lamented that Malaysia lacks people with international stature to lead its public universities to greater heights; however, they stop short of outlining good, feasible leadership plans for public universities. This paper contends that the primary reason for the malaise underlying the Malaysian university leadership crisis is that there is no proper system in place to appoint the most able, talented, authoritative and respected scholars to lead Malaysia's public universities. This paper also argues that the current provision in the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971, regarding the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor, is obsolete and not aligned with the aspiration of treating universities as independent, trustworthy and autonomous entities. It is contrary to international best practices of selecting university leaders through an extremely competitive and rigorous search. Arguably, Malaysian universities need leaders--academics (in the first instance) cum administrators--who are inspirational, visionary, respected for their scholarship, and progressive in their approach. The leadership crisis in Malaysia's public universities is approaching such a critical stage that nothing less than a total reform has to be instituted, not only of the law in relation to appointments, but also of the practices and cultures, which currently do not promote meritocracy. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
College Athletics; Student Needs; Change Strategies; Organizational Change; Organizational Objectives; Organizational Theories; Athletes; Opportunities; Student Empowerment; Personnel Selection; Selection Criteria; Athletic Coaches; Institutional Characteristics; Governance; Barriers; Economic Impact

Abstract:
College sports is a billion-dollar enterprise whose leaders pride themselves on taking care of athletes. But lately many institutions have lost that focus. Broad proposals to change the game have historically fallen short. But what if the focus is narrowed, reorganizing around the needs of students? This article presents five ideas for doing that: (1) Hire educator-coaches; (2) Expand opportunities; (3) Give players more voice; (4) Consider due process; and (5) Help with hiring. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
College Faculty; Tenure; Governance; Personnel Selection; Costs; Researchers; Research Universities; Administrators; Budgets; Educational Finance

Abstract:
In the long-running debate over how many administrators are too many, two economic researchers believe they have identified an ideal ratio. For colleges to operate most effectively, they say, each institution should employ three tenured or tenure-track faculty for every one full-time administrator. What the ratio is now is difficult to say, though most colleges probably would have to hire significantly more faculty or pare back on administrators if they wanted to meet a three-to-one goal. The numbers are fuzzy and inconsistent because universities report their own data. Different institutions categorize jobs differently, and the ways they choose to count positions that blend teaching and administrative duties further complicate the data. When researchers talk about "administrators," they can never be sure exactly which employees they are including. Sometimes colleges count librarians, for example, as administrators, and sometimes they do not. In their recent study, Robert E. Martin, a professor emeritus of economics at Centre College, and R. Carter Hill, a professor of economics at Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge, attempted to quantify the factors that drive costs at 137 public research institutions. They describe their findings in a working paper titled "Measuring Baumol and Bowen Effects in Public Research Universities," released in October. The study's findings demonstrate the importance of shared governance in universities' budget decisions. Sharing decisions about hiring and other spending across different types of people, including faculty, administrators, and governing-board members, acts as a natural check and balance, ensuring that no individual side's interests rise to the top. But the study highlights a staffing trend, seen over two decades, of colleges' hiring more administrators than faculty. Universities reduced costs by hiring part-time instructors instead of tenure-track faculty, while hiring relatively more full-time administrators, the study shows. In 1987, the ratio of tenure-track faculty to full-time administrators at public research universities was 0.96, a balance of about one-to-one, with a slight tilt toward administrators. By 2008, however, the ratio of faculty to administrators had fallen to 0.56, reflecting a strong shift toward administrators. Regardless of what exact ratio might make sense, some scholars see value in trying to do a better job of quantifying colleges' costs and in taking a deeper look at higher education's structure. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website