College admissions will get personal.
I am for it.
In my opinion, it’s smart for college admissions to look at the whole person and the area in which they are from, rather than just what they accomplished as a student. I think this adds a sociological perspective to the application process that is beneficial to the applicant and the college.
A holistic view of the realistic barriers a student may face could provide insight into their potential. I think it would help to level the playing field for college applicants and shine more light on the abilities of students in depressed, inner-city, or rural areas that may lack in opportunities to thrive in or out of the classroom.
According to this article, 57% of senior leaders on the platform today say soft skills are more critical to their businesses than hard skills. Shouldn’t this transfer to a collaborative, working, and learning environment of a school, too? According to this article it’s supported that admissions is trending toward looking at the environment that the student is in. College students aren’t studying in a vacuum. Students are living, working, and otherwise coexisting. Why not encourage the admission of more well-rounded individuals to be a part of that learning community?
College students aren’t studying in a vacuum. Students are living, working, and otherwise coexisting.
This personal method allows for the demonstration of maturity and work-ethic and resourcefulness of a college applicant that otherwise may go unnoticed if using traditional methods of judging a student by grades and test scores. A student can demonstrate their creativity, an important skill to employers, by submitting a video. These extra avenues allow for the full individual, not just the student, to shine through.
Companies will shift to an ecosystem mindset — and hire for it.
I'm for it.
Our class reading mentions the importance of soft skills in an employee. This article supports the idea that companies care not just about what a prospective employee is certified or trained to do, but what they can offer to the organization as a whole. LinkedIn Learning editor Paul Petrone wrote that “57% of senior leaders on the platform today say soft skills are more critical to their businesses than hard skills.” Even a “hard skill” mentioned here is “people management”, rather than just “management experience”. It details the importance of being able to coach, and empower people, which supports Sanyin Siang’s idea that roles an employee can offer are just as- if not more- important to an organization.
Corporate generosity will grow — and help the bottom line.
I agree that corporate giving is trending upwards, and think that resource-dependent nonprofits can greatly benefit from corporate money. I think corporations taking a stand can bring a wider audience to important causes. I do, however, have moral reservations about corporations opportunistically buying into causes simply because it will make them more money.
So, I'm for it, albeit begrudgingly and skeptically.
This article from class encourages posting videos about corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives to show a good cause that an organization is involved in. This mention of CSR in a best-practices article alludes to the increasing ubiquity of this trend. According to Tempel (2016) promotions and cause-marketing is the fastest growing area of philanthropic giving by corporations. This is supported by the trend that consumers want businesses to take a stand, and corporations that do, benefit financially. More supporting evidence for this trend is data from Giving USA, which states that philanthropic giving by corporations increased by 8% from 2016 to 2017.
Linked In
LinkedIn endorsements need to be taken with a grain of salt as they don’t carry much weight. However, for what it’s worth, an endorsement is usually genuinely attributed (Rapanta, 2017). The research found that an endorser seems to value a person’s skills before they endorse that person. (Rapanta, 2017, p.456). But the level of authority that the endorser has doesn’t exceed that of a general understanding of what the endorsee does at work (Rapanta, 2017, p.454). Echoing this lack of authority from the endorsers, people between age 40 and 49 who are understood to be the most productive people in the workforce (Rapanta, 2017) rarely give LinkedIn endorsements. So, the people with the most experience, skills, and clout aren’t the ones awarding endorsements. Thus, endorsements aren’t a valid example of someone’s skills.
The article compares LinkedIn endorsements to Facebook’s “like” feature. People are more likely to endorse someone that endorsed them, or if LinkedIn prompts them to endorse someone. LinkedIn says it’s helpful because it keeps you in touch with your endorser/endorsee. This recent connection maintains a more recent connection, which makes it easier when reaching out for other purposes. (Rapanta, 2017, p.44). So, it becomes a networking action rather than an influential tool that leads to concrete results regarding somebody’s professional profile and authority. (Rapanta, 2017, p.455).
Resources
Rapanta, C., Cantoni, L. (2017). The LinkedIn endorsement game: Why and how professionals attribute skills to others. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, Volume 80. 443-459.
Seavers, D. (2018). Social Media Trends That Will Impact 2019 Talkwalker.com https://www.talkwalker.com/blog/social-media-trendsutm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=EN&utm_content=blog&utm_campaign=social-media-trends-2019&fbclid=IwAR2M-STWpdUiD0TrCc6jUeT9aJU2nZmO3ofcjOsKFR_Zfrb3SAAlbUNeZdw#12
See the numbers – Giving USA 2018 Infographic. (2018). Retrieved from
https://givingusa.org/see-the-numbers-giving-usa-2018-infographic/
Seiler, T. L. (2016). Achieving excellence in fundraising. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Tempel, E.R. & Benjamin, L. (2016). Achieving excellence in fundraising. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Comentarios