I hate pre-employment personality tests, with good reason

I was just completing an online job application for a part-time job, an activity I have done countless times. On a totally related note- I just recently finished school, and I now have officially obtained my MSLS (Master of Science in Library Science).

However, a masters degree and the associated education do little to prepare one for the "evaluation" which accompanies the Hibbett Sports or Peebles online application process. Pre-employment personality tests are based on a psychological model developed in the 1930's and used to evaluate the abilities of between 60% and 70% of U.S. employees, according to information from from Lauren Weber and Elizabeth Dwoskin's 2014 Wall Street Journal article "Are Workplace Personality Tests Fair?"(Weber & Dwoskin 2014). 

According to Weber and Dwoskin, civil rights activists claim the algorithms used in developing the tests and evaluating results make getting a job harder for people who don't fit very specific formulas.  Personality tests are designed to gather information about individuals in order to evaluate them without bias, but Weber and Dwoskin raise concerns that they may actually introduce a new type of discrimination (Weber & Dwoskin 2014).

 A perfect example comes from the well known company, Xerox, which reassessed it's use of the personality tests after the realization that information regarding commute time was putting job applicants who live in minority areas at a significant disadvantage.  The test data originally showed the company that sales associates who had a shorter commute time were more likely to remain with the company longer (makes sense, right?).  But the executives at Xerox quickly realized that hiring people based on this information was discriminatory because individuals who lived farther away were likely to be minorities or lower income (Weber & Dwoskin 2014).   

The EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) is additionally researching the discriminatory effects of the tests on individuals with mental illnesses or disabilities like bipolar disorder, depression, or post traumatic stress disorder because of some of the questionable statements and questions used in the many different versions of the tests used by countless companies across the U.S. 

 In 2007 a woman from WV filed a lawsuit against the grocery chain Kroger, claiming it's pre-employment personality screening discriminates against individuals with mental illness, a claim with which I am inclined to agree on the basis of example questions like:

1. You are always cheerful
   Strongly Disagree // Disagree // Strongly Agree // Agree

1. You have no big worries
   Strongly Disagree // Disagree // Strongly Agree // Agree

Some other examples of absurd test questions from pre-employment tests which border on discriminating against those with personality or mental disabilities:

Mcdonald's asks applicants which statement out of two they agree with more

 1. I sometimes get confused by my own thoughts and feelings
OR
2. I do not really like when I have to do something I have not done before

RadioShack asks applicants to select how they feel about a particular statement out of: (strongly disagree//disagree//neutral//agree//strongly agree)  

1. Over the course of the day, I can experience many mood changes
 Strongly Disagree // Disagree // Strongly Agree // Agree

2. I am always happy
Strongly Disagree // Disagree // Strongly Agree // Agree

3. Sometimes there is so much stress I wonder how I am going to make it through the day
Strongly Disagree // Disagree // Strongly Agree // Agree


As someone who relates to Weber and Dwoskin's concerns of not fitting into specific formulas for which these tests are designed, I think companies who use them should reconsider their use and integrate some empathy into their hiring process. 



References
Weber, L. & Dwoskin, E. (September 29, 2014). Are workplace personality tests fair? Growing use of tests spark scrutiny amid questions of effectiveness and workplace discrimination. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved August 26, 2016 from http://www.wsj.com/articles/are-workplace-personality-tests-fair-1412044257

When your chosen path is affirmed

I ran into an old friend at the farmers market on Wednesday and we had a quick conversation during which she made a remark which I've been thinking about since. 

She commented on my chosen occupation, saying something to the effect of - 'you're a librarian now right', which I confirmed and informed her that I would have my MLIS at the end of August.  

This is when she made the comment which has stuck with me ... She said, as I remember it, 

"That makes sense" along with a smile and a half-laugh. 

To my mind it is as if she had said "what else would you be doing," which, coincidentally, is how I feel. 

I cannot describe how thrilling it is (and I am writing this because this is not the first time it's happened) to have an experience like this. For someone to confirm what I already know-that I have doscovered the perfect role for myself. That I am using my particular personality traits, talents, and interests to the most productive and gratifying end. 

I suppose what I'm really trying to say is that it feels wonderful to hear from someone else that the thing I am passionate about, the thing I have chosen to devote my education and career to, is perceived as so natural a role for me. Because it certainly feels natural. 

What B is Reading

C. S. Lewis

The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe

I began reading the Chronicles of Narnia out loud with my best friend and in what someone later informed me was the worst choice of order.  See, we began with The Silver Chair, simply because it was his favorite in the series when growing up.  I liked the experience of reading it so much that I decided to start from the beginning with The Magicians Nephew and read all of them (time permitting).  I have now progressed, as you can see, to what is probably the most well known from the series: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe.  I am enjoying all of what I have read very much, and would also like to share a quote which I found particularly significant from the first installment.  

As you can see in the photo, the quote says "For what you see and hear depends a good deal on where you are standing: it also depends on what sort of person you are."  

These are wise words, as expected from a work as prolific as the Narnia series. 

I believe wholeheartedly in the concept that one's perspective, along with the collective experiences of their past, will determine their actions regarding the present.  

 Finally, I would like to leave you with a poem which was shared with me by a dear friend. 

It is the work of the Sufi poet Rumi: 


Do you know what you are?
     You are a manuscript of a divine letter.
     You are a mirror reflecting a noble face.
This universe is not outside of you.
     Look inside yourself;
     everything that you want,
     you are already that.

 

 

Thoughts on Educational Reform from Sir Ken Robinson and Naval Ravikant

 Thoughts on Educational Reform from Sir Ken Robinson and Naval Ravikant

One of the very first TED talks that I ever watch was Sir Ken Robinson's "How do schools kill creativity," and I was instantly hooked by his ideas of educational reform and his chuckle inducing, conversational delivery of a topic that shouldn't be funny.

You can (and should) watch it for yourself here...

Robinson made numerous valuable points in his speech, and I'd like to discuss four of them here:

1. "Creativity is as important as literacy, and should be treated with the same status" 
2. All educational systems share a common ranking of subjects (in descending order of "value")
• Math and language
• The Humanities 
• The arts (and within the arts,)
• art (drawing, painting, sculpture, etc)
• music
• dance
3. The ranking is rooted in the facts that:
1. the subjects considered most useful for "work" are at the top
2. and academic ability is emphasized because public schools were designed "in the image" of universities, with the singular intention of preparing students for attending college.

      4. Three characteristics of intelligence are that it is:
               1. diverse in how we think about the world, experience it, and interpret it.
               2. dynamic- the brain isn't compartmentalized but interactive.
               3. distinct  - we all have individual values for intelligence and epiphanies as to what we                           should use our intelligence for (Robinson 2007).
 
I am inclined to agree with Robinson's statement that creativity is every bit as valuable as literacy - and I'm a librarian.  Stifling the creativity of children is a crime which creates stifled, repressed adults who don't know how to function socially.

As a student who is far from proficient at any math-related subject, I can attest to the value placed upon those courses in public school because I was looked down upon for not having any skill at them.  However, I do have skills in other areas, like writing, which is not an area that the school systems places in nearly as high a regard as it should. 

I see the disparity between values placed on subject matter all the time, being a librarian at a university, because  students are constantly in conflict over who's MAJOR is the best, or which group of students (in which major) are the most intelligent/or best at some particular skill etc.  Especially between communications majors, creative writing majors, and biology majors, seemingly. 

Robinson's characteristics of intelligence (diverse, dynamic, and distinct) help to support a point made by Naval Ravikant in a slightly unrelated podcast episode by Tim Ferris in which Ravikant explains how he would redesign the education system.  

Ravikant says that educators should focus on teaching children basic life skills as opposed to the memorization of facts, which is becoming obsolete due to the fact that we can now look anything up in about 10 seconds.  Ravikant would have children learn thinks like: how to be happy, details of a proper die, nutrition, and exercise, along with how to build good habits and break bad ones, how to find your spouse, and how to meditate (Ravikant 2016). 

Ravikant goes on to say that we shouldn't educate every child in every subject, but we should specialize, finding out what each individual child is good at.  This, to my mind, only reinforces the thematic importance of creativity from Robinson's TED talk.  Some children will like mathematics and some will like music, and there is no reason to make all of them agonize though the study of both subjects when only half will have the aptitude for half of the information (Ravikant 2016).    

 Children are our hope for the future and they should be given every opportunity to shape that future the way they want to.  It is their world, after all, and they will be the ones living in it.  We need to give them the tools to discover the world for themselves, as opposed to forcing them to memorize facts and random information which they will be able to find in a matter of seconds - if it is something of interest to them or that they need (Ravikant 2016).   
 

The landscapes of education, technology, ecology, and sociology are changing, and we need to redesign the systems in order to facilitate learning in the new environments and prepare our children for the very different world in which they will surely find themselves in the years to come. 


References

Robinson, K. (2007, January 6). How Do Schools Kill Creativity? Retrieved February 7, 2016, from http://www.npr.org/2014/10/03/351552772/how-do-schools-kill-creativity

Ferris, T. (2016, January 30). Naval Ravikant on Happiness Hacks and the 5 Chimps Theory. Retrieved February 7, 2016, from http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/01/30/naval-ravikant-on-happiness-hacks/

The value of solitude

While reading recently I came across Maria Popova's Brainpickings article on Sara Maitland's book: How to be Alone in which she discusses the book and provides several excerpts.

Based on the bits and pieces made available by Popova, I think Maitland's book is one possibly worth checking out, however right now I am reading two books for pleasure in addition to the coursework required for the masters program that I am working on; so it will have to go on the bookshelf.

I would like to discuss several of the quotes/excerpts provided by Popova though.

First:   

"We are supposed now to seek our own fulfillment, to act on our feelings, to achieve authenticity and personal happiness — but mysteriously not do it on our own."
Sara Maitland, How to be Alone

          I particularly enjoyed this section because I identified with it personally.  The advice is frequently given to "be yourself" and many variations of that, but when an individual steps outside society's norms, even slightly, it makes those advice givers uncomfortable and they tend to recoil from differences.  It is as though we are supposed to do those things, seek fulilment and express our feelings authenticly in order to achieve happiness, but only if our happiness fits within the constraints of what society deems apropriate.  

          We are expected to work a full time job, mow our lawns, and wash our cars.  These examples come to me because I have neighbors who literally wash their cars by hand twice a week at least, more when the weather is nice.  

          I prefer working enough to afford what I need, because I don't believe our lives should be consumed by work but instead by leisure or by learning.  

          I don't wish to be mistaken, I love my job and the line of work I'm in.  But I don't think that's common among most adult job holders.  Many people hate their jobs and work them only to provide a means by which to live.  In my opinion that's no way to live life, and it's a lifestyle I could never accept for myself.  But it is what society expects of us.  Get a job, make money, pay taxes, live and don't cause trouble.  How is this a fulfilling life?  Especially if the time away from the un-fulfilling work life is spent on menial tasks like car washing?

Second:

"...even those who know that they are best and most fully themselves in relationships (of whatever kind) need a capacity to be alone, and probably at least some occasions to use that ability. If you know who you are and know that you are relating to others because you want to, rather than because you are trapped (unfree), in desperate need and greed, because you fear you will not exist without someone to affirm that fact, then you are free. Some solitude can in fact create better relationships, because they will be freer ones."
Sara Maitland, How to be Alone

          This particular excerpt struck me as exceptionally profound because I feel very much like I am someone who would have said at many points in their life that they "...are best and most fully themselves in relationships..." however I do function very well in a state of solitude.  I find myself craving the experience of solitude frequently in fact. 

However:

          That is not to say that I have always been that way, because I also have felt, in my younger days and during my very first, most heart-wrenching breakups; ones which threaten to tear the soul in two (as all young lovers experience when they are parted from their first love), that I had indeed been "... trapped (unfree), in desperate need and greed, because you fear you will not exist without someone to affirm that fact..."

           I think it is part of growing up and part of becoming who you are to develop the skill to enjoy solitude, which does - of course - not mean that you are lonely.  One can be alone, certainly, and have a wonderful experience totally devoid of any feelings of loneliness if they are totally secure and know who and what they are. 

           Maitland gives five benefits which will come to those who invest their energy in learning to operate in solitude successfully which are:

• A deeper consciousness of oneself
• A deeper attunement to nature
• A deeper relationship with the transcendent (the numinous, the divine, the spiritual)
• Increased creativity
• An increased sense of freedom

          All five of these benefits mentioned by Maitland in How to be Alone remind me of benefits mentioned by various podcast hosts or in various articles I've read over the last several months on the general topic of Mindfulness Meditation, which I believe very probably goes hand in hand with the topic of solitude.  In order to be comfortable being alone with oneself, one should begin practicing being alone with ones mind via formal meditation practice. 

References

Popova, Maria. "How to Be Alone: An Antidote to One of the Central Anxieties and Greatest Paradoxes of Our Time." Brain Pickings. Brainpickings.org, 03 Sept. 2014. Web. 5 Jan. 2016. .

Perceptions and Pieces of Glass

 Admire with me, the beauty and insight of the poetry found in Inge and Sten Hegeler's An ABZ of Love:

"If we look through a piece of glass, irregularities and impurities may distort and discolor the impression of what we see. If we regard something through a convex lens, it appears to be upside down. But if we place a concave lens in front of the convex lens, we correct the distortion in the convex lens and things no longer appear topsy-turvy. Each one of us regards the world through his own lens, his own glasses. The effect of those glasses is that, even though we may be looking at the same thing, not all of us actually see the same thing. The lenses are ground by each individual’s upbringing, disposition and other factors." 

This quote puts me in mind of the radical acts of violence to which our people have been subjected  as of late, and the various political and religious responses which have been evoked by them.

 I am speaking, when I say "our people" of the general population of Earth, not of a particular National affiliation because I do not hold one in higher regard than any other, necessarily.  And by political and religious responses I mean just that, any and every comment or post, verbal or written which has been spewed into the universe and to which we are all now subject.

Apparently, for instance, there has been some argument over the topic of whether Islam as a religion/doctrine is to blame for the violence.  

For example: 

 Sam Harris (2015) "Islam and Violence" [Video file]. Retrieved December 8, 2015, from https://youtu.be/_uPXf-nyG6Q 

Noted author, philosopher, neuroscientist, and atheist Sam Harris makes clear in this video that he believes the violence inflicted upon the world by Muslim extremists is a direct result of the religious doctrines taught by that specific religion, with which I am inclined to agree. 

People committing these atrocious, vicious acts of violence are, as Harris puts it, "motivated" by their religious beliefs because the Quran teaches that they will be rewarded in paradise (Sam Harris 2015).

"...not all of us actually see the same thing.  The lenses are ground by each individual's upbringing, disposition, and other factors (Popova)."  The two items from which I am deriving information to comment upon are vastly different, and upon a preliminary examination would seem unrelated.  After having read this far they may still seem unrelated to you, even. 

Harris goes on to say that "religion is losing the tug of war with science" and predicts that the extremism will eventually lose its footholds and a scientific understanding will gain promenance in our society.

We can only hope that he is correct because religious beliefs encourage behaviors like beheading and science is only helping us to improve our overall quality of life. 


Regardless of what our religious affiliation is, or our educational background, or national origin, skin color, gender, sexual orientation, or any of millions of possible other factors are, we can all appreciate the gravity and tragedy of lost life.  We can relate to pain felt when a nation experiences a tragedy, or we can relate at least on a personal level to loss of some kind, because loss and grief are emotions that we all experience despite any quality or impurity in the glass through which we are viewing the world.

-B


P.S.: I'd love to hear from you in the comments!


References

Popova, M. (2012, December 05). An ABZ of Love: Kurt Vonnegut’s Favorite Vintage Danish Illustrated Guide to Sexuality. Retrieved December 8, 2015, from https://www.brainpickings.org/2012/12/05/an-abz-of-love/ 

Sam Harris (2015) "Islam and Violence" [Video file]. Retrieved December 8, 2015, from https://youtu.be/_uPXf-nyG6Q

 

A beautiful illustrated exploration of intercultural definitions of love

While curating content for my professional social media pages
at work today I came across this article 
on the emotions related to love which are not easily expressed with words.

Because I relate to this so vividly in my personal life, I thought it would be nice to share my favorites from the collection of twelve wonderful illustrations which depict a non-English word and its closest possible English translation.  

Anticipation, Iktsuarpok in the Inuit dialect.  The feeling that someone is coming to visit, and the act of constantly going outside to check if they have arrived. 
This is a feeling so common among the beginning stages
of  falling in love.  But it is so common among other phases of life as well.  Friendships and family ties are wrought with anticipation for reunion-even when the time spent apart has not been so long. Which brings us to our next word...


Viraha is the Hindi word for what happens when we realize that we are in love with someone only through being separated from them.  Absence, as the saying goes, makes the heart grow fonder.  When we nurture unsure feelings for another person and they are suddenly no longer available to us, the ache caused by the absence or the absence of ache can be the telling factor as to how strong the feelings really are. 


And finally, Geborgenheit the German word for the feeling of safety associated with the close proximity of loved ones.  From a romantic partner to friends or relatives, those we care deeply about not only make us feel more safe and secure, but make us want to create a safer world in which they can exist.  


 Love, like happiness, sadness, grief, and joy is one of the culturally universal concepts which all humans can understand and relate to.  We have all loved someone or something.  We will all experience loss of whatever we love, and we have those collective experiences - both of loving and losing, to bind us together as the emotional, spiritual beings which we are meant to exist as.