Balanced Question Time panel tonight - of course not!
Discussion
RYH64E said:
crankedup said:
How old are your applicants?
Parents should be behind their kids when they are seeking their first employment opportunity. I say this for the simple reason that their is always businesses out there that would love to take advantage of young 'greenhorns'. How would these young people know what are the right questions to ask and interpret some of the T&C on offer? Sometimes intervention is required. And its a perfectly natural mechanism for a caring parent to be involved, level of involvement could be an issue I suspect.I am not suggesting for a moment that you or your Company fall into this lower grade of employer.
Many a top entrepreneur has evolved from the no qualification barrow boy into a glittering head of Company. That is another reason I do not hold full weighting to paper qualification. But I do agree that candidates with papers AND practical skills will outshine those without one or either at an interview.
Apprentices get a lot of support from the College, workplace rights and employer duties are part of what they're taught, and there's no shortage of counsellors available to help if needed. The last thing an employer wants is interference from a 'caring parent', it's a workplace not a school and apprentices are young adults not children. Think Pike's mum in Dad's Army, it's really not appropriate and doesn't reflect well on the apprentice.Parents should be behind their kids when they are seeking their first employment opportunity. I say this for the simple reason that their is always businesses out there that would love to take advantage of young 'greenhorns'. How would these young people know what are the right questions to ask and interpret some of the T&C on offer? Sometimes intervention is required. And its a perfectly natural mechanism for a caring parent to be involved, level of involvement could be an issue I suspect.I am not suggesting for a moment that you or your Company fall into this lower grade of employer.
Many a top entrepreneur has evolved from the no qualification barrow boy into a glittering head of Company. That is another reason I do not hold full weighting to paper qualification. But I do agree that candidates with papers AND practical skills will outshine those without one or either at an interview.
As for paper qualifications, they're not hard to get. If an applicant doesn't have any there will be a reason why not, most likely they don't have the ability to study to the required level, or they've ignored everything they've been taught. Neither quality is valued in the workplace, and an assurance from their dad (hardly unbiassed) that they can rebuild engines isn't likely to be particularly reassuring.
When you say 'many a top entrepeneur', you probably mean 'a few entrepeneurs', most successful people are highly intelligent and usually well qualified, though there will of course be the odd exception. It's very rare for an intelligent person not to pick up a few paper qualifications along the way, even if they leave school at the first opportunity, it's not at all rare for an unintelligent person to leave school with nothing. If you're an employer it's not unreasonable to conclude that a candidate with no qualifications is either thick or lazy, most often both.
Edited by RYH64E on Saturday 7th November 17:48
Paper qualifications are all to easy to obtain, witness the year on year and percentages increases in top grades being achieved. Year after year we would hear the usual mutterings of exams being so easy.
As an employer looking at a candidate who has no qualification may indicate a person with outstanding practical skills. If the apprentice I seek will be required to demonstrate such skills within the work place I will always favour that candidate over the person who only holds papers. Of course if the candidate demonstrates both qualities that candidate has a nose in front. In the end it's horses for courses.
mikees said:
I've just taken on 16 apprentices in my business unit and 200 overall in the uk company. We see it as the future (it services)
Yup, good to hear. When the announcement came that Government was no longer supporting the 'apprenticeship model' us oldies were belly aching over it being a huge mistake.crankedup said:
Paper qualifications are all to easy to obtain, witness the year on year and percentages increases in top grades being achieved. Year after year we would hear the usual mutterings of exams being so easy.
As you say, paper qualifications are easy to obtain, so if a candidate presents with no qualifications you have to ask why. The obvious reasons are that they lack the ability to absorb information, or they haven't applied themselves throughout their school career, or that they don't put any effort into a task that they're not interested in. Can you think of any positive reasons why anyone would leave school without a handful of decent GCSEs?RYH64E said:
crankedup said:
Paper qualifications are all to easy to obtain, witness the year on year and percentages increases in top grades being achieved. Year after year we would hear the usual mutterings of exams being so easy.
As you say, paper qualifications are easy to obtain, so if a candidate presents with no qualifications you have to ask why. The obvious reasons are that they lack the ability to absorb information, or they haven't applied themselves throughout their school career, or that they don't put any effort into a task that they're not interested in. Can you think of any positive reasons why anyone would leave school without a handful of decent GCSEs?Student focusing on practical aspects of life, eg the arts/music.
Student incapacity to learn. (as your example)autistic for example.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'positive reasons' but the reasons that I cite are real life, it happens. That is not to say that these people are lazy and / or morons and are thus dismissed, although I do agree that on first impression it is not the most positive aspect. But then it depends very much on the chosen path of the student regards job career.
crankedup said:
RYH64E said:
crankedup said:
Paper qualifications are all to easy to obtain, witness the year on year and percentages increases in top grades being achieved. Year after year we would hear the usual mutterings of exams being so easy.
As you say, paper qualifications are easy to obtain, so if a candidate presents with no qualifications you have to ask why. The obvious reasons are that they lack the ability to absorb information, or they haven't applied themselves throughout their school career, or that they don't put any effort into a task that they're not interested in. Can you think of any positive reasons why anyone would leave school without a handful of decent GCSEs?Student focusing on practical aspects of life, eg the arts/music.
Student incapacity to learn. (as your example)autistic for example.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'positive reasons' but the reasons that I cite are real life, it happens. That is not to say that these people are lazy and / or morons and are thus dismissed, although I do agree that on first impression it is not the most positive aspect. But then it depends very much on the chosen path of the student regards job career.
If a candidate presents with even a C grade GCSE in Geography I'm not interested in their knowledge of rainfall levels in Guatemala, but I am interested in the demonstrated fact that they've shown sufficient ability and application to pass a basic exam, which suggests that they might do a decent job for me.
In my (considerable, coming from a family of teachers) experience of our schooling system, even the most basic of schools offer the opportunity for a good education, and hardworking immigrant children are most likely to take advantage of what's on offer. White, working class boys are most likely to significantly underperform.
It's long been the cry of the Grammar school opponents that 11 years old was completely the wrong age to assess someone for the pathway to the rest of their life. That bleat is just as valid at 16. Depending on the industry concerned, all kinds of skills could be an advantage, some learned and some inherent or latent. Academia does not impart skills in anything other than passing exams after studying someone else's work! And as for the validity of some of the degrees obtained....
Thorodin said:
It's long been the cry of the Grammar school opponents that 11 years old was completely the wrong age to assess someone for the pathway to the rest of their life.
It's a weak argument IMO. No interview/test process is fair, but given a fixed number of places for a school you need a process to determine suitability of applicants - some people will miss out. Also they used to have 13+ and 15+ in my catchment area for extra spaces.fido said:
Thorodin said:
It's long been the cry of the Grammar school opponents that 11 years old was completely the wrong age to assess someone for the pathway to the rest of their life.
It's a weak argument IMO. No interview/test process is fair, but given a fixed number of places for a school you need a process to determine suitability of applicants - some people will miss out. Also they used to have 13+ and 15+ in my catchment area for extra spaces.fido said:
It's a weak argument IMO. No interview/test process is fair, but given a fixed number of places for a school you need a process to determine suitability of applicants - some people will miss out. Also they used to have 13+ and 15+ in my catchment area for extra spaces.
I agree, it's a weak argument against them. I was arguing for them! Unfortunately, The bit about the argument being just as valid at 16 was missed. I can only speak from my own experience, at being 16 that is. In my case although reasonably bright I was much more interested in girls, Eddie Cochran/The Everlys and the various bands ('groups' then) I was in. That lifestyle gave me far more than 'education' and suited me much better than anything more formal. 
king lemons. UKiPs guy acts like he's in the playground for most of the time, horrible front man.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff