Evaluating Student Performance

43% of hiring managers can't spot skills in resumes. I fixed that. Skills beat resumes every time. Traditional hiring methods miss talented people who can do the job but don't show up well on paper. Here's how to find hidden gems using a skills-based approach ↓ 1. Send tests before checking resumes: Why it works: 92% of employers say skills tests find better candidates than resumes do. Action: → Create an automated process to send assessments to all applicants before looking at their job history. 2. Focus on what they'll actually do: Why it works: Real job tasks show true abilities better than past titles. Action: Design practical tests based on daily responsibilities. → Give candidates real scenarios to solve. 3. Look at data, not degrees: Why it works: Measurable results cut through bias and show who can really perform. Action: Build clear scoring guides for all assessments. → Compare candidates using numbers, not gut feelings. 4. Think "add" not "fit": Why it works: Different viewpoints make teams stronger. Action: Look for people who share your values but bring fresh perspectives and new ways of working. Stop missing out on great talent. Test skills first, and read resumes later. — 📌 If you agree (and want to support my work): → Like → Repost Thank you!

How to Navigate AI-Optimized Resumes: Balancing Technology with Human Judgment in Hiring 🛠️ In the era of AI-generated resumes, hiring managers face several unique challenges that require them to adapt their evaluation processes. One of these challenges includes over-polished resumes which can make it harder for them to differentiate between genuinely qualified candidates and those whose resumes are simply optimized for algorithms. It is no surprise that candidates are turning to AI-powered resume tools: it increases their chances of catching the attention of employers. For example, if a job posting emphasizes "data analysis" and "team leadership," the AI might suggest adding these keywords to the resume if relevant to the candidate's experience. This optimization aims to improve the chances of a resume passing the initial automated screening and impressing human reviewers. 👉 While this technology helps candidates present themselves effectively, it also means employers must look beyond the polished surface to assess authenticity and find the best candidate for the role. So, how can companies effectively evaluate candidates with AI-optimized resumes? Here are a few strategies to consider: 1️⃣ Focus on Behavioral Interviews Behavioral interviews help reveal how candidates apply their skills and experience in real situations. To uncover their problem-solving abilities, for example, ask questions like, “Can you share a time when you faced a major challenge at work and how you resolved it?” 2️⃣ Skill-Based Assessments Practical assessments ensure candidates can indeed perform the tasks required for the role. For example, you might ask a developer to complete a coding exercise or a marketing professional to draft a quick campaign strategy. 3️⃣ Check for Authenticity in the Resume Use the interview to verify the claims on a candidate’s resume. Ask, ”You mentioned leading a successful project on your resume—can you walk us through your approach and the outcomes?” to ensure their achievements are authentic. 4️⃣Most Importantly! Remember that Human Judgement is Vital While AI may help you streamline resume screening, you must apply a human lens to evaluate nuances. For instance, after a screening tool identifies top candidates, ask them questions like, "What attracted you to this role and how do you see yourself contributing?" By implementing these strategies, your hiring process becomes thorough and equitable, allowing you to evaluate candidates beyond superficial qualifications and identify the most suitable individuals to enhance your team’s success. #FutureOfHiring #AIInRecruitment #HumanCenteredHiring #SkillBasedHiring #EquitableRecruitment __________________ 👋 Hi! I am Luiza Dreasher, DEI+ Strategist and Facilitator. I help leaders create workplaces where all individuals feel valued and want to stay. Would you like more DEI+ insights? 🔔 Ring the bell on my profile and follow me.

There’s a lot of buzz about hiring for skills these days. With more technical roles popping up across industries and a talent shortage, skills-based hiring might be the game-changer organizations need. Unlike traditional hiring, which focuses on degrees, skills-based hiring zeroes in on the abilities and expertise needed for the job. This approach can help companies find the right talent. By focusing on skills, companies can uncover talented individuals who may not have a traditional educational background but possess the practical skills needed for the role. As more technical roles emerge, the gap between job openings and qualified candidates grows. Skills-based hiring bridges this gap by identifying people who can do the job, regardless of their formal education. A Simple Example from a McKinsey report stated: Imagine a job posting for a customer service representative at a large company. Many job descriptions are outdated and require a four-year degree. Instead, what if the company says, “We are no longer going to require a four-year bachelor’s degree for this role.” They focus on the skills needed to succeed, like communication, problem-solving, and empathy. This simple change exemplifies skills-based hiring. This approach also promotes a more diverse workforce by valuing different experiences and backgrounds. Hiring based on skills ensures employees have the necessary abilities to perform well, leading to better overall performance. Employees hired for their skills are often more engaged and likely to stay with the company, as their abilities are recognized and valued. So, focus on the skills and competencies needed for the role rather than degrees or years of experience. Use practical assessments to evaluate a candidate’s relevant abilities. Offer training and development opportunities to help employees build the skills they need. This shift not only helps organizations grow but also creates opportunities for individuals who have the skills but not the traditional credentials. #skills #hiring #talent #people #hr #mckinsey

94% of top performers don't have the 'required' years of experience Steve Jobs. Mark Zuckerberg. Elon Musk had that in common -  they did not have the "years of experience" I have seen so many recruiters and staffing teams use this metric  and its all wrong "Years of Experience" as a hiring metric is: ➡️ A poor predictor of "PERFORMANCE" Fact: A 2019 study found only a 3% correlation between experience and job performance Reality: I've seen 2-year "rookies" outperform 10-year "veterans" countless times ➡️ Stifles INNOVATION • 78% of HR leaders agree: Fresh perspectives drive innovation • Example: Would Netflix have disrupted Blockbuster if they only hired "experienced" video rental experts? ➡️ Particularly flawed in tech • Tech skills have a half-life of about 5 years • A developer with 2 years in cutting-edge AI often trumps one with  10 years in legacy systems ➡️ It discriminates against career changers • 49% of employees will change careers in their lifetime • You're missing out on diverse problem-solving approaches by ignoring transferable skills ➡️ It ignores the QUALITY of the experience • 3 years of high-impact projects > 7 years of routine tasks • I once hired a 3-year product manager who increased ROI by 200% over a 10-year counterpart The Solution: Focus on these instead ✅ Demonstrated skills: Use practical assessments ✅ Learning agility: Look for continuous self-improvement ✅ Adaptability: Ask for examples of quick learning and pivots ✅ Problem-solving ability: Present real scenarios in interviews ✅ Cultural add (not just fit): How will they enhance your culture? Actionable Steps: 1. Rewrite job descriptions: Replace "X years required" with specific competencies 2. Implement blind resume reviews: Test actual abilities, not years accumulated 3. Use skill-based assessments: Focus on achievements, not timelines 4. Conduct project-based interviews: See candidates in action 5. Create diverse interview panels: Reduce bias and get multiple perspectives The result?  You'll build more innovative, adaptable, and high-performing teams. What's been your experience?  Have you seen "inexperienced" hires shine? #Recruitment #Hiring #HiringandPromotion #Startups #Founders RecruitingSniper and Joshua Talreja

After diagnosing over 1,000 dementia cases, I've developed a system that primary care doctors can use. You don't need a neuropsychologist. You don't need a 6-month wait for specialty referral. You don't need advanced imaging. Here's my clinical approach: The 15-minute assessment that catches what traditional tests miss: 1/ History from an observer is more valuable than history from the patient ↳ Spouse or adult child notices changes first ↳ Patient often minimizes or doesn't recognize deficits ↳ Ask: "What activities have they stopped doing?" 2/ Digital cognitive testing reveals patterns traditional tests miss ↳ Standardized digital tests eliminate administrator bias ↳ Normative data adjusted for age and education ↳ Qualifies for CPT 96132 reimbursement 3/ The questions that reveal more than any test ↳ "Do you still handle finances independently?" ↳ "Have you gotten lost in familiar places?" ↳ "Are you repeating questions or stories?" ↳ "Have family members expressed concern?" The diagnostic framework I use: Rule out dementia imitators first ↳ Sleep apnea ↳ B12 deficiency ↳ Depression ↳ Medication side effects ↳ Thyroid dysfunction ↳ Hearing loss Establish pattern of decline ↳ Slow and steady suggests neurodegenerative process ↳ Stepwise progression points to vascular dementia ↳ Fluctuating symptoms may indicate Lewy body dementia Assess functional impact ↳ Mild: Independent with complex tasks becoming difficult ↳ Moderate: Needs help with some daily activities ↳ Severe: Requires supervision for safety The diagnosis conversation I have: "Based on everything we've reviewed together, I believe you have early-stage dementia. This means your brain has changes affecting memory and thinking that are beyond normal aging. Here's what we can do about it." Then I create an immediate care plan: Start medications that work better early ↳ Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors add quality years ↳ Side effects minimal if started properly ↳ Benefits appear over years, not days ↳ Earlier start means better outcomes Address modifiable risk factors ↳ Treat cardiovascular disease aggressively ↳ Optimize diabetes control ↳ Manage sleep disorders ↳ Address hearing loss ↳ Encourage physical activity Connect to resources ↳ Alzheimer's Association for education and support ↳ Adult day programs for socialization ↳ Caregiver support groups Specialists are overwhelmed with complex cases ↳ 6-12 month wait times when most cases are straightforward PCPs have longitudinal relationships and know patients best The tools now exist to make this practical ↳ Digital testing is standardized and billable ↳ Care planning has CPT code 99483 The barrier isn't knowledge or skill. It's believing that dementia diagnosis belongs in primary care. It does. with the right support. ⁉️ Primary care providers: what stops you from diagnosing dementia in your practice? 👉 Follow me (Reza Hosseini Ghomi, MD, MSE) for practical dementia care strategies

A few days ago, I wrote here about formative assessment and why it matters more than we sometimes admit. In this visual, I’m covering one of the key tools of formative assessment: portfolio assessment. Unlike one-shot tests, portfolios offer a richer, more nuanced picture of student learning. They track progress over time, highlight individual growth, and, most importantly, give students a voice in the assessment process. I drew on key ideas from Valeri-Gold et al. and Gillespie et al. to put this together. Here are just a few things portfolios do well: 1. Document growth 2. Encourage reflection 3. Integrate assessment into learning 4. Help students and teachers make sense of progress I believe portfolio assessment deserves a place in any serious conversation about meaningful evaluation in education. Feel free to download or share the visual. #education #assessment #formativeassessment #edtech #teaching #learning #portfolioassessment #medkharbach #educatorstechnology

One sample- 15+ techniques. But which one gives the RIGHT answer? In industries like coatings, pharma, and materials science- 👉 Choosing the right characterization technique is everything. 🔬 Major Characterization Techniques (Simplified) 🧪 Structural & Surface Analysis • XRD → Identifies crystal structure & phases • SEM → Surface morphology & defects • AFM → Nanoscale roughness & surface profile 🧬 Chemical Identification • FTIR → Functional groups, binders, degradation • Raman → Pigments, carbon structures • XPS → Surface chemistry & contamination 🎨 Optical & Surface Properties • Spectrophotometer → Color measurement & ΔE • Gloss Meter → Surface reflectance & finish ⚛ Elemental Analysis • AAS → Heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg) • ICP-OES → Multi-element detection • XRF → Rapid elemental screening 🔥 Thermal Analysis • TGA → Weight loss, filler content, stability • DSC → Glass transition, curing behavior 🧩 Molecular & Separation Techniques • GPC/SEC → Polymer molecular weight • HPLC → Non-volatile compound separation • GC / GC-MS → Volatile compounds & residual solvents 🧠 Practical Insight 👉 No single technique gives the full picture 👉 Real understanding comes from combining techniques Example: A coating defect investigation may need: ✔ SEM (surface issue) ✔ FTIR (chemical change) ✔ TGA (composition variation) 🎯 Key Takeaway In analytical science: 👉 Right technique = Right decision 👉 Multiple techniques = Complete understanding.

Catalina S. told me something that completely reframes how we should think about skills validation. After 10+ years leading workforce transformation at Vodafone, T-Mobile, and DataCamp, she dropped this truth bomb during our latest Business AI Playbook episode: "Companies don't just want employees to know things, they want employees who can do things." Most L&D teams are still stuck measuring completion rates and quiz scores. But Catalina's seeing something different work: Evidence-based skill validation that proves real-world capability. Here's what she's implementing right now: → AI-powered surgical feedback — Johns Hopkins is using AI to analyze actual surgical videos, providing objective feedback on technique and precision, not just theoretical knowledge → Peer-led GenAI Scouts — A global engineering org turned employees into instructional designers, achieving 90% engagement and 20-40% time savings on repetitive tasks in just 6 months → Real-world retail simulations — AI roleplay environments where new hires practice customer interactions, earning badges only after demonstrating 3 successful and 3 unsuccessful scenarios with lessons learned → Skills data as strategic inventory — Finally giving companies visibility into their actual internal capabilities while supporting employee growth aspirations Catalina's challenge to every L&D leader: "We need to shift from knowledge retention to evidence-based skill validation." The companies getting this right aren't just improving training metrics. They're fundamentally changing how their workforce approaches capability development. 🎥 Watch the full conversation below 🔄 Share this if you think proving skills matters more than passing tests What's the most creative approach you've seen to validate real-world skills? #BusinessAIPlaybook #LearningInnovation #SkillsValidation #AITransformation #FutureOfWork

In 1973, David McClelland, Professor of Psychology at Harvard, published a paper that opened with a direct indictment of one of the most trusted mechanisms in professional life: the credential. His argument was not that education was irrelevant, but that the degree had been allowed to function as a proxy for capability without ever being validated against the actual capability it was supposed to represent. Twenty-five years later, Frank Schmidt and John Hunter published a meta-analysis in Psychological Bulletin that synthesized 85 years of research on what actually predicts job performance. Their findings: Education: .10. Years of experience: .18. Work sample tests: .54. Structured interviews: .51. General mental ability combined with a work sample test: .63. The things organizations use most to screen candidates sit at the bottom of the validity hierarchy. The things that actually predict who will perform sit at the top. The gap between them represents the difference between a selection process that has a 10% chance of being right and one that has a 63% chance of being right. I call that the Validity Gap. And 85 years of evidence pointing in one direction has not been enough to close it, because the credential proxy continues to be an incentive problem. Credential-based screening is fast, defensible, and easy to report. Competency-based assessment is rigorous, expensive upfront, and holds the hiring process accountable for outcomes it has historically been allowed to avoid. Whenever I see someone discussing skills-based hiring I see that they frame the conversation entirely as a corporate policy question: should organizations remove degree requirements from job postings? That question is a good one and the answer, in many contexts, is yes. But removing a degree requirement from a job posting while leaving the job architecture itself unchanged will not produce the expected results. The harder question is what replaces the degree as a signal of capability, how that signal is validated, how it connects to the actual demands of the work, and how it is updated as those demands change. That, friends, is a real job architecture question. Check out my new article on what that architecture actually looks like and what the science says about building it.

Recruiters! If you’re serious about skills-based hiring, you need a stage in your process that actually validates the skills.👇 - Not a vibe. - Not a great anecdote. - Not a 15-minute chat where they say all the right things. Real skills. In context. Here’s how to build that into your hiring flow: 1️⃣ Create a Skills Stage for Every Role - Devs? Give them a code problem that reflects your stack. - CS? Have them reply to a tricky customer scenario. - Marketers? Ask for a teardown or content plan. Doesn’t matter if it’s engineering, marketing, or ops. Give them something that mirrors the actual work. 2️⃣ Use a Rubric - If you’re scoring off gut feel, you’re not running a skills-based process. - Set clear criteria for what “good” looks like. - Align with the team before the first interview, not after the sixth. - Same inputs, same standard = less bias, better decisions. 3️⃣ Score First, Talk Second - Get feedback submitted before the debrief. - No discussion, no “what did you think?” - Just: score it based on the rubric, submit, then meet. This keeps decisions focused on evidence, not opinion. The goal of a skills-based stage is to give the right candidates a chance to shine, even if they didn’t go to the right uni or haven’t done your exact job before. You don’t need more top-of-funnel noise, you need better signal in the middle of your process. Skills-based hiring is how you get there. What’s working for you when it comes to testing skills fairly and efficiently? Tell me below 👇 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi 👋 I’m Luke. I empower recruiters with data. Want to get data-driven for free? Link in my profile for my free weekly newsletter. #recruitment #recruiting #recruiters #talentacquisition