Response# 1
As I read Robert Austin and Gary Pisano’s article, Neurodiversity as a Competitive Advantage, I was immediately reminded of HBO Max’s documentary “Persona: The Dark Truth Behind Personality Tests”. While viewing the film, I was utterly appalled when I learned how personality tests are used as a screening tool for employment, which unfairly discriminates against neurodivergent and other disabled people. I think this is a topic in need of further exploration in the D&I arena. I have googled several articles and posts and discovered there is a field of study called Psychometrics meant to measure skills, attitudes and personality traits. I think it will be helpful if I can find an article by a person in that field who disagrees with using personality tests as an employment screen. So far, I have a report on algorithms and disability discrimination. Next, I will check out the SU library where I’ll look for any journals related to disability and Human Resources, as well as any on Psychometry.
Response #2
Although “Understanding D&I Concepts” from The Inclusion Dividend: Why Investing in Diversity & Inclusion Pays Off by Mark Kaplan and Mason Donovan offers us an incredibly insightful and detailed dissection of the meaning and implementation of crucial D&I concepts, the authors fail to mention real world examples of best practices for handling bias. Whereas Robert Austin and Gary Pisano’s Neurodiversity as a Competitive Advantage gives us a robust report on how to recognize discriminatory practices against the neurodivergent, as well as detailed plans from existing businesses on D&I implementation. As exhibited in Austin and Pisano’s piece, they have convincingly demonstrated to us that the reported strategies work, based on listed companies’ willingness to implement them.
As you can see above, I have utilized 2 theys and have tried to remain somewhat neutral in what my beliefs are. With that said, I still employed the use of descriptive and emphatic verbs to help get the point across that real world examples are important when recommending strategies for workplace improvement.
Sherri,
I think your idea for the “Expanding the Canon” project is great! Using a documentary as a resource or at least referring to it will be such a great tool that will isolate your work into its own category- it will make it very effective and intriguing. Finding people or organizations that differ from personality tests will be very interesting, and I am eager to see these people’s beliefs and what they stand for. I am also now eager to see what their alternative system and/or process would be. I am excited to see what you do!
Hi Sherri, I think it’S great that you were able to form a connection between the documentary and the Austin and Pissano article. I also like that you mentioned looking for accounts from people in the psychometrics field who disagree with the practice because this will provide and entirely new perspective. I really enjoyed reading your they say/ i say. I like how you formatted it so that it would be clear that the they says that you used were in opposition of each other by comparing what one does that the other fails to do.
Hi Sherri,
I really enjoyed reading your responses! I really like your topic idea for expanding the canon. I think understanding the bias of personality tests can be easily disregarded but it is very important to learn about. To create a fair, inclusive, and equal society, we need to identify the roots of discrimination to eliminate them. I also have read about bias on other tests such as SATs and state administered standardized exams. I think will be a fascinating topic to research and I am so excited to learn more!
You note something important in your 2nd response, Sherri–anytime we are presenting source material, we are shaping the conversation in some way, based on what we choose to focus on, the words we select, the way that we put them into discussion with one another. We’re building an argument in that way.
One other quick note, as I’ve seen a couple of people do this–recognize that “whereas” sets up a dependent clause, which then necessitates an independent clause. (Whereas X does/says this, Y says/does this other thing.) We need both parts in a single sentence in order for the thought to be complete.