I agree that prohibiting the question does sound impossible, and that a different direction should be tried. However, I still think that making every applicant take a test made specifically for the job is better than using grades. As for long term conscientiousness, past jobs work, or maybe just firing people if they don’t fit.
An ad hoc test for certain jobs is certainly better in many cases, but they’re not mutually exclusive.
The same applies to measuring conscientiousness. Past work is preferable, but then again we do look at past work today. Grades will not matter much to many employers if you’ve been in the workforce for a decade. They may look at them, but they’re only another data point—I don’t see how more data would be bad in this scenario.
I agree that prohibiting the question does sound impossible, and that a different direction should be tried. However, I still think that making every applicant take a test made specifically for the job is better than using grades. As for long term conscientiousness, past jobs work, or maybe just firing people if they don’t fit.
An ad hoc test for certain jobs is certainly better in many cases, but they’re not mutually exclusive.
The same applies to measuring conscientiousness. Past work is preferable, but then again we do look at past work today. Grades will not matter much to many employers if you’ve been in the workforce for a decade. They may look at them, but they’re only another data point—I don’t see how more data would be bad in this scenario.