# Testing to enroll for employment



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I just thought of this idea today, I wanted to know what you guys think of it. What if when you applied for a job/career, instead of showing your various degrees from school, you just took a test that showed you were qualified for the job.

This would be helpful because, let's face it, no matter how smart you are, not everyone can pay for a college education to get a degree. But college isn't the only way to "get an education." If you have enough knowledge for a job through book reading and research, a test to apply for a job would let people with the smarts, but not the money to get a degree, to still get a job...

What do you guys think? It might be a stupid idea lol I don't know.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

It's a great idea. 

Of course one of the main points of college isn't actually to prepare anyone for a career, but to demonstrate membership in a certain social class.


----------



## Guest (Oct 9, 2011)

What even the RCM?? shock horror


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

What job are you thinking of applying? Taking an entry exam is not uncommon for many public service jobs, for example. Though other jobs will obviously require formal qualification.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

science said:


> It's a great idea.
> 
> Of course one of the main points of college isn't actually to prepare anyone for a career, but to demonstrate membership in a certain social class.


Interesting. I've never heard that in a graduation speech, never seen a motto to that affect, never heard anything of that nature from my professors, and have only heard from people not attending in it (especially those who never have), or not working in college who wish to disparage it, that would say that.

Of course college graduates may have had some other things in mind as well as career or personal betterment, such as how they benefited from the basic understanding that a lot of your success has to do with you pleasing your hierarchy superiors. I do remember more than one professor who I had to go out of my way to please, instead of focusing on the subject of the class, in order to get a good grade. This is an inevitable fact to be dealt with later in life: the ways of the hierarchy and it's "filial piety".

Does it produce a social class, and give the people in that social class a distinct idea of their class? Pretty often. However, colleges are not at all run or funded for that purpose, and most professors don't have that in mind. Adult education is mostly oriented towards academic and professional success. Unless you are supposing that there is some implicit agreement to this being a main principal, it would be illogical to suppose that a college would publicly endorse that idea or focus much on it with it's students. Even prestigious schools like King's College, Oxford, Yale, and the various Jesuit educational institutions, don't tend to express that as a main point, although Ivy League schools are popularly portrayed for their hauteur.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

*A Tale of Two States*

An opportunity to compare and contrast the Civil Service examination systems of (respectively) Illinois & New Jersey- at least at the time I took their respective exams.

In Illinois, upon taking a Civil Service exam, you were placed in one of three categories- A) (Well qualified), B) (Qualified) and X) (not qualified). The only stricture against filling the position is that one could not hire somebody from the 'X' list. In practice, this gave plenty of opportunity to hire folks who knew a good Precinct Captain, who had the 'correct' party affiliation in their voting history, and other such mischief.

Contrarily, New Jersey has an excellent Civil Service process, when they deign to apply it. Upon taking a test, one is given a _numerical_ score. When hiring, the hiring department is *obliged* to take one of the three highest-scoring candidates. In practice, this is mostly a 'fail-safe' for those times when a very high scorer reveals himself to be an utter social misfit in the interview process-- but generally, the highest scoring candidate is given the position unless there is an obvious reason for bypassing him.

I was in Illinois for nearly 20 years- was never a serious candidate for any Civil Service position, in spite of my (generally fine) test scores. In New Jersey, though, I was a candidate for virtually every position for which I tested, interviewed frequently, and in a brief while attained the sort of position that showed every evidence of being forever closed to me had I remained in Illinois.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Lukecash12 said:


> Interesting. I've never heard that in a graduation speech, never seen a motto to that affect, never heard anything of that nature from my professors, and have only heard from people not attending in it (especially those who never have), or not working in college who wish to disparage it, that would say that.
> 
> Of course college graduates may have had some other things in mind as well as career or personal betterment, such as how they benefited from the basic understanding that a lot of your success has to do with you pleasing your hierarchy superiors. I do remember more than one professor who I had to go out of my way to please, instead of focusing on the subject of the class, in order to get a good grade. This is an inevitable fact to be dealt with later in life: the ways of the hierarchy and it's "filial piety".
> 
> Does it produce a social class, and give the people in that social class a distinct idea of their class? Pretty often. However, colleges are not at all run or funded for that purpose, and most professors don't have that in mind. Adult education is mostly oriented towards academic and professional success. Unless you are supposing that there is some implicit agreement to this being a main principal, it would be illogical to suppose that a college would publicly endorse that idea or focus much on it with it's students. Even prestigious schools like King's College, Oxford, Yale, and the various Jesuit educational institutions, don't tend to express that as a main point, although Ivy League schools are popularly portrayed for their hauteur.


So do you believe that they only do what they say they do?


----------



## HerlockSholmes (Sep 4, 2011)

Methinks it's a brilliant idea.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

science said:


> So do you believe that they only do what they say they do?


Nah. And I don't mean to sound so harsh either. That's just not been my experience with every college I've become familiar with. Writing and editing for Philosophia Christi (I think I'm their only Preterist, by the way, which is quirky and I was wondering if you were familiar with "soft" Preterism), I've several associates and friends who've told me the same about colleges in the U.S. and Europe, as well as a few Canadians. As far as I can tell, ego petters easily produce ego petters, but adult education isn't really funded with that in mind.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Depends if some personality types really don't do well with tests (they get all anxious and don't perform well). True, sometimes a college education isn't everything. But actually from my experience, certain job positions _do _have tests done to make sure you knew certain skills. I had to do some, but unfortunately didn't get those jobs.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I have a lot of familiarity with Brazil, because my wife is Brazilian, my sister lives there, and I've visited the country multiple times.
After the fall of the military dictatorship, Brazilians got very weary of the game of political influence. They kind of had an over-reaction to the opposite method.

In Brazil, to get a number of jobs (especially those in the public sector, but also many in the private sector) you have to sit for an exam. 90% of the decision comes from your score. 10% comes from you CV, interview, other subjective factors.

I think it's a wonderful system.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> [...]
> In Brazil, to get a number of jobs (especially those in the public sector, but also many in the private sector) you have to sit for an exam. 90% of the decision comes from your score. 10% comes from you CV, interview, other subjective factors.
> 
> I think it's a wonderful system.


90% of the decision - how 'hard' is that? Is there a hard result, a number from the exam and a number for the rest, with the former multiplied by 9 and the latter not multiplied, with the result determining one's eligibility?

(I'm not even going to get into the makeup of the test).


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

In the musician's world, the "test" is an 'audition' ... it doesn't matter how many pieces of paper with fancy letters you have, if one can't pass the audition, you are generally out of luck.

I do not have a degree in music, yet I have been able to garner superb church positions (by audition and oral interview only) for the past 50+ years and am considered and respected as one of the top twenty organists in my region. 

I am not against higher education, and I laud those who have pursued the necessary degrees. Sometimes, there is far too much emphasis on a person's degrees instead of their skills, at least, imho. 

Kh


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2011)

It can take 12 months to select a new member for our National Orchestra and I am with you 110% on this KH


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> 90% of the decision - how 'hard' is that? Is there a hard result, a number from the exam and a number for the rest, with the former multiplied by 9 and the latter not multiplied, with the result determining one's eligibility?
> 
> (I'm not even going to get into the makeup of the test).


In the typical case, the test is a multiple choice test. You sit for it, and get a score. It weighs 9 times. Then everything else - CV, interview - has a weight of 1.

Let's consider two candidates, A and B, applying for the same job. They sit for a test, and have an interview during which they present their CV and talk about themselves, their experiences, their goals.

Say there are 200 multiple choice questions, and candidate A replies correctly to 160 of them. He/she gets a score of 80. Then in his/her interview and analysis of CV he/she gets a score of 90 out of 100.

This candidate has a final score of 72 (80% of 90) + 9 (90% of 10) = 81

Candidate B replies correctly to 180 questions, with a score of 90. His/her interview gets him/her a score of 50 out of 100. Candidate B will have a final score of 81 (90% of 90) + 5 (50% of 10) = 86 and will get the job.

This means that in spite of the fact that the employer liked better candidate A's interview and CV, candidate B got the job for demonstrating more knowledge of the material relevant to the job. Therefore, the subjective factors (connections, looks, performance during the interview, etc.) end up being much less important.

It means that knowledge relevant to the position is valued a lot more than subjective factors, minimizing the ability of employers/employees to rig the system. It means that if you're competent you get hired, rather than being hired for being outspoken, looking good, having connections, etc. After a period when what mattered was having good connections with the military rulers and politicians, Brazilians went for a system that values knowledge and preparedness, while still granting to the employer some say in terms of subjectively liking the applicant, all things being equal (e.g., the employer will be able to pick between two candidates with the same score in the written test by valuing them differently in the interview).

About the test - typically, it is written by experts, and is supposed to reflect the skills and knowledge needed for the job.

Of course, you still need to have the qualifications. Let's say that it's a job for engineers - you'll have to have a valid engineering degree before you can even sit for the test.

And of course, private businesses aren't *required* to use this system (it is more typical of the public sector). But many private employers spontaneously do use this system, because it came to be valued by the local culture as a good method for selecting competent employees. So it's not uncommon to see in Brazil a large business posting an ad saying - "We're hiring information technology specialists with experience in Linux. Our business uses the 90/10 system. Candidates must hold a degree on .... or .... . All qualified candidates must sit for a multiple choice test. All candidates scoring within 10 points of the top scoring candidate will be invited to submit to an interview and CV analysis. Log into our web site www........com.br for the list of topics relevant to the multiple choice test. Working knowledge of English preferred. Multiple choice test will include questions that intend to assess proficiency in the English language. Application deadline is on ....., multiple choice test will take place on ...., followed by interviews. Final results to be posted on ...... ."


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

I work in the public accounting industry, and it is interesting to see how much of an emphasis the industry puts on degree requirements and test scores. To be a CPA you have to get the undergraduate degree, graduate with at least 150 credits, and pass the 4-part CPA exam.

Which all seems a bit ridiculous on the surface. In my brief time in the actual working world, I have learned far more about accounting than I ever did from sitting in all those classes and learning theory. All the knowledge I had gained from classes was nearly irrelevant once I actually started.. However, having a good GPA _does_ provide proof that you are smart, hard-working, and interested in the work. And that is why having a degree is a good thing.


----------

