Talent Meritocracy versus Exam Meritocracy

[Cowperson]

Interesting column by Fareed Zakharia in Newsweek on why it is American students test poorly but do well in real life while Singaporian students do the opposite.

Your own theories?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663340/site/newsweek/

Cowperson

[Bobblehead]

I think the one quote hit it on the head:

Work hard, memorize and test well.

They memorize well, but don't understand as well.

I know in the different jobs in my life, there are many times when I understand a problem, and recall from school or training there is a method for tackling the issue. I can then easily look up the solution and continue on my way. It would have done me no good to have the specific solution memorized but not understand how or where to apply it in the real world.

[troutman]

I know a business coach who teaches people about "emotional intelligence":

Emotional Intelligence is likely the single best indicator for success as an
executive, leader, and/or business owner. Environments of rapid change
require that you form strong teams quickly and efficiently, interact effectively with people, communicate goals and obtain buy-in from various groups.

These are skills that are not often taught in University.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by troutman

I know a business coach who teaches people about "emotional intelligence":

Emotional Intelligence is likely the single best indicator for success as an
executive, leader, and/or business owner. Environments of rapid change
require that you form strong teams quickly and efficiently, interact effectively with people, communicate goals and obtain buy-in from various groups.

These are skills that are not often taught in University.

Which is why I've never understood why for example, business and engineering schools don't have interview-based selection processes. Rather, your grades are apparently representable to the kind of person you are, but even top intellectuals and high performers can have problems communicating that keep them from acheiving (further) success.

[flamingchina]

because 18 year olds can't communicate by and large.
(hopefully these skills are learning in university, but then again who knows...)
A large part of a BComm education is now group work + presentations, to get you comfortable doing those things.

[troutman]

Didn't Donald Trump do a show about this? Book Smarts vs. Street Smarts. Who won?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by flamingchina

because 18 year olds can't communicate by and large.
(hopefully these skills are learning in university, but then again who knows...)
A large part of a BComm education is now group work + presentations, to get you comfortable doing those things.

18 year olds CAN communicate, just not always properly. It takes a few group projects and presentations to improve that.

This is why I strongly disagree with direct entry from high school into selective faculties. The kids just aren't ready, and end up taking spots that could have been given to transfer students who have a couple years of post-secondary under their belt and are familiar with the workings of the post-secondary experience. When a faculty can only take in so many applicants, and a certain percentage end up dropping out or switching faculties after their first or second year, couldn't those spots be given to students who have earned their right to be there and, more importantly, want to be there? As a BComm student, I have been disappointed seeing talented and motivated people get the shaft for a place in the business faculty to high school students who have no idea what it takes to be there, all because their GPA is a half point off from the high school student with an above-average grade.

I still see people come out of the school with zero 'emotional intelligence', and it's not any fault of the faculty. It's just that some people refuse to or ignore the teamwork part of their education that really counts.

[Bobblehead]

My company has put a bunch of people through Dale Carnegie, primarily to increase their value in the 'team' concept. Some people it definitely seems to have helped. It'll be interesting to see the long term results.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by fotze

Another aspect is that some organizations fully reward bull**** and misleading claptrap. There are certain special people who exude confidence and are born leaders but there are also the ones that everyone but their direct supervisor can tell they do not know what they are talking about. They speak in cliches and powerwords and parrot the ideas of those above them. You see a lot of politicians who excel at this.

If not the supervisor themselves too!

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by troutman

I know a business coach who teaches people about "emotional intelligence":

Emotional Intelligence is likely the single best indicator for success as an
executive, leader, and/or business owner. Environments of rapid change
require that you form strong teams quickly and efficiently, interact effectively with people, communicate goals and obtain buy-in from various groups.

These are skills that are not often taught in University.

That's hilarious! I was assigned "Emotional Intelligence" by one of my profs before we had a chance to sit down to discuss my thesis. After the "negotiation" which took place in regards to the content and potential edits, EM was withdrawn as an assignment. I still listened to the book on Audible though, and it was an interesting read. Not sure I agreed with much of it, but it did have an interesting insight on the subject. Sure beat the hell out of 7 Habits of Highly Defective People.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I think the one quote hit it on the head:



They memorize well, but don't understand as well.

I know in the different jobs in my life, there are many times when I understand a problem, and recall from school or training there is a method for tackling the issue. I can then easily look up the solution and continue on my way. It would have done me no good to have the specific solution memorized but not understand how or where to apply it in the real world.

This may apply to some subjects, but the tests I've taken so far this year are 95% applying knowledge. If you don't understand the material you will not do well.

[flamingchina]

Originally Posted by Jake

This may apply to some subjects, but the tests I've taken so far this year are 95% applying knowledge. If you don't understand the material you will not do well.

That's the key. I've lived over there (well parts of Asia)and the exams there are mostly not applying, they're memorization based.

I know for east asia, a lot of it is an ingrained culture thing, memorization and repeating what was done before by great masters was held higher than new creations.