WEEK 6 DISCUSSION HRA
SEE ATTACHED
a year ago 10
GradDiscussionRubric.pdf
WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx
GradDiscussionRubric.pdf
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
Criteria No Submission
0 points
Novice (Criterion is missing or not
in evidence) 1-13 points
Basic (works towards meeting
expectations; performance needs
improvement) 14-16 points
Proficient (meets expectations;
performance is satisfactory) 17-18 points
Exemplary (exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding) 19-20 points
Support of Week's Reading
No Student Submission (0 points)
Does not refer to the readings to support postings
(1-13 points)
Alludes to the readings to support postings
(14-16 points)
Refers to examples from the readings to support postings
(17-18 points)
Provides concrete examples from the readings to support postings;
integrates prior readings in postings
(19-20 points)
Observations No Student Submission (0 points)
Does not integrate personal observations or knowledge;
does not present new observations (1-13 points)
Integrates personal observations and
knowledge in a cursory manner; does not
present new observations
(14-16 points)
Integrates personal observations and knowledge in an accurate way; presents
new observations (17-18 points)
Integrates personal observations and knowledge in an accurate and
highly insightful way; presents new observations
(19-20 points)
Response to Classmates
No Student Submission
(0 points)
Responds in a cursory manner to classmates’
postings (1-13 points)
Constructively responds to classmates’ postings
(14-16 points)
Constructively responds to classmates’ postings; offers
insight that encourages other students to think critically
about their own work. (17-18 points)
Constructively responds to classmates’ postings; masterfully connects the material presented in classmates’ postings to their
responses; encourages classmates to think critically about their own
work. (19-20 points)
Organization, Word Choice, and Sentence
Structure
No Student Submission
(0 points)
Posts are disorganized and information is not presented in a logical sequence; word
choice and sentence structure are not suitable
(1-13 points)
Posts are somewhat disorganized, and information is not
presented in a logical sequence; word choice and sentence structure
are not suitable (14-16 points)
Posts are organized, and information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and sentence
structure are suitable; there are a few errors; however,
errors do not affect readability.
(17-18 points)
Posts are organized and information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and sentence structure are suitable;
no errors in the response. (19-20 points)
References No Student Submission
(0 points)
Includes no sources to support conclusions
(1-13 points)
Includes 1 outside source to support and enrich the discussion;
Includes 2 or more outside sources to support and enrich the discussion;
sources are properly cited in
Includes 2 or more outside sources to support and enrich the discussion; sources are cited using
APA format; style guidelines are
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
sources are not properly cited in APA format
(14-16 points)
APA format and are properly integrated into the discussion
response (17-18 points)
masterfully integrated into the discussion response.
(19-20 points)
WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx
1
4
Please address each part of this assignment. APA format. Please cite scholarly authors.
1a.Your boss sent you the following email this morning: "Headquarters just told us we need to cut our HR department costs and our time to hire. I need you to look at our selection procedures and recommend what tools we can eliminate from our process to save time and money."
Choose TWO of the following selection procedures to eliminate. ( Note: when responding, assume none of these procedures are required by law):
· Resume Check
· Biographical Information Blank
· Job Knowledge Test
· Panel Interview
· Application
· Reference Check
· Integrity Test
· Drug Test
Which procedures would you recommend eliminating? Defend your recommendations: Why did you suggest these specific procedures? Where and how could you compensate for the eliminated procedures?
Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Start Here menu before posting.
**********************************************************************************************
1b.
Specifically, focus your responses to your peers' initial postings using the following prompts:
· Why do you think your peers should not have eliminated specific procedures?
· What issues did your peers miss when they recommended specific procedures?
· What additional support can you add to your peers' recommendations?
KW:To address the challenge of cutting HR department costs and reducing the time to hire, I recommend eliminating two selection procedures: integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing.
Regarding pre-employment drug testing, it's important to note that it's not universally required by law across all industries. While certain industries, like those in the U.S. government, may have specific regulations that mandate drug testing (Clockfly, n.d.), federal law doesn’t require it for all job positions. Many employers choose to implement drug testing voluntarily, primarily to minimize risks related to substance abuse and to ensure a safe work environment. However, this process can be both costly and time-consuming, as it adds steps to the hiring process. Drug tests require scheduling, and waiting for results can significantly delay hiring timelines. By eliminating this step, we could significantly expedite the hiring process and cut down on associated costs (Nagele-Piazza, 2020). Furthermore, state laws vary on drug testing, which adds unnecessary complexity. Removing drug testing from our selection procedure could help us standardize our hiring practices and reduce unnecessary expenses.
As for integrity testing, it’s commonly used by organizations to identify individuals who may pose a risk to the company due to dishonesty or a lack of strong moral principles. While these tests are appropriate in high-risk environments, they are neither required by law nor necessary for every role. Integrity tests are often costly, time-consuming, and can slow down the hiring process (Fedweek, 2019). In many cases, integrity tests identify candidates who are likely to fail at later stages, like background checks, but they are not essential for all positions (Fedweek, 2019). Eliminating integrity testing could save time, reduce costs, and allow us to make quicker decisions when evaluating candidates.
By eliminating both integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing, we would streamline the hiring process, reduce costs, and improve efficiency. Removing these steps would allow us to focus more on assessing candidates' core competencies while minimizing delays and expenses tied to unnecessary procedures.
References
Clockify. (n.d.). Pre-employment drug testing laws by state — Detailed guide. Clockify. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state
FEDweek Staff. (2019, May 29). MSPB weighs pros, cons of ‘integrity testing’. FEDweek. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/
Nagele-Piazza, L. (2020, January 21). Workplace drug testing: Weighing the pros and cons. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons
JA.
When implementing the best interview, the first step should be to create policies and procedures that abide by federal and state laws while supporting the company’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, regardless of the candidate's area (Burgess-Wilkerson, 2008). The two selection procedures I would recommend eliminating are reference check and biographical information blank.
Reference Checks
Our reading of the HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law (2013) article found that using discretion in hiring while still thoroughly investigating candidates' backgrounds will ensure that a “duty of care” was taken to protect workers, customers, and clients from injury caused by an unfit employee who showed signs during the hiring process of posing a risk. A resume check verifies that what a candidate submitted on their employment application is accurate. Since we already have this as part of the hiring process, reference checks seem to be an additional layer that does not provide a true picture of the candidate's skills, work style, or work ethic.
Reference checks, while seemingly a valuable tool, often fall short in providing a comprehensive view of a candidate's skills and work ethic. Candidates typically select references who will speak favorably of them, leading to a biased and subjective perspective on their performance and workplace behavior (Dewar, 2025).
Biographical Information Blank
The accurate measure of validity for an employment test should not just be based on the ability to master and take a test but also include ways to measure the performance of the developed abilities in areas such as diligence, persistence, energy, and drive (Sackett et al., 2008). Selection tests for potential employees have long been scrutinized for companies' fairness and true ability to “funnel” the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) they are searching for to pool the right candidates to interview. Biographical Information or BioData is a software or document providing comprehensive details about an individual’s personal and professional life (TemPostions, 2024). This information is collected based on a series of questions and other sources such as education, publications, awards, and other academic achievements. BioData shows a potential candidate's cultural and personal background, not just professional capabilities (Dewar, 2025). This information is nice to have, but the amount of time, resources, and money spent to find out this new hire’s cultural and personal background can be answered by specific questions during the panel interview. As a side note, be careful when including BioData because this could violate equal employment opportunity laws (EEO).
Hiring processes should be adaptive, tailored to the unique skills, hiring practices, and ethical norms of each job. No one-size-fits-all set of selection procedures exists. It's crucial to go beyond selection systems and personally interview candidates. This direct interaction allows for a more accurate assessment of their individual drive and level of work ethic.
References
Burgess-Wilkerson, B. (2008). Selection and Interview Procedures at a Multinational Company. Business Communication Quarterly, 71(1), 100–102. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379
Dewar, J. (2025, February 4). Reference Checks: Templates, Questions, and Best Practices for 2025. JobScore. https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/#the-benefits-of-reference-checks
Hidden liability: Understand the risks of negligent hiring. (2013). HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law, 8(7), 4.
Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly. (2008). High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness. American Psychologist, 63(4), 215–227.
TemPositions (2024, January 3). What is BioData? An In-depth Understanding for Job Seekers and Employers. Recruitment Blog. https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/
GradDiscussionRubric.pdf
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
Criteria No Submission
0 points
Novice (Criterion is missing or not
in evidence) 1-13 points
Basic (works towards meeting
expectations; performance needs
improvement) 14-16 points
Proficient (meets expectations;
performance is satisfactory) 17-18 points
Exemplary (exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding) 19-20 points
Support of Week's Reading
No Student Submission (0 points)
Does not refer to the readings to support postings
(1-13 points)
Alludes to the readings to support postings
(14-16 points)
Refers to examples from the readings to support postings
(17-18 points)
Provides concrete examples from the readings to support postings;
integrates prior readings in postings
(19-20 points)
Observations No Student Submission (0 points)
Does not integrate personal observations or knowledge;
does not present new observations (1-13 points)
Integrates personal observations and
knowledge in a cursory manner; does not
present new observations
(14-16 points)
Integrates personal observations and knowledge in an accurate way; presents
new observations (17-18 points)
Integrates personal observations and knowledge in an accurate and
highly insightful way; presents new observations
(19-20 points)
Response to Classmates
No Student Submission
(0 points)
Responds in a cursory manner to classmates’
postings (1-13 points)
Constructively responds to classmates’ postings
(14-16 points)
Constructively responds to classmates’ postings; offers
insight that encourages other students to think critically
about their own work. (17-18 points)
Constructively responds to classmates’ postings; masterfully connects the material presented in classmates’ postings to their
responses; encourages classmates to think critically about their own
work. (19-20 points)
Organization, Word Choice, and Sentence
Structure
No Student Submission
(0 points)
Posts are disorganized and information is not presented in a logical sequence; word
choice and sentence structure are not suitable
(1-13 points)
Posts are somewhat disorganized, and information is not
presented in a logical sequence; word choice and sentence structure
are not suitable (14-16 points)
Posts are organized, and information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and sentence
structure are suitable; there are a few errors; however,
errors do not affect readability.
(17-18 points)
Posts are organized and information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and sentence structure are suitable;
no errors in the response. (19-20 points)
References No Student Submission
(0 points)
Includes no sources to support conclusions
(1-13 points)
Includes 1 outside source to support and enrich the discussion;
Includes 2 or more outside sources to support and enrich the discussion;
sources are properly cited in
Includes 2 or more outside sources to support and enrich the discussion; sources are cited using
APA format; style guidelines are
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
sources are not properly cited in APA format
(14-16 points)
APA format and are properly integrated into the discussion
response (17-18 points)
masterfully integrated into the discussion response.
(19-20 points)
WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx
1
4
Please address each part of this assignment. APA format. Please cite scholarly authors.
1a.Your boss sent you the following email this morning: "Headquarters just told us we need to cut our HR department costs and our time to hire. I need you to look at our selection procedures and recommend what tools we can eliminate from our process to save time and money."
Choose TWO of the following selection procedures to eliminate. ( Note: when responding, assume none of these procedures are required by law):
· Resume Check
· Biographical Information Blank
· Job Knowledge Test
· Panel Interview
· Application
· Reference Check
· Integrity Test
· Drug Test
Which procedures would you recommend eliminating? Defend your recommendations: Why did you suggest these specific procedures? Where and how could you compensate for the eliminated procedures?
Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Start Here menu before posting.
**********************************************************************************************
1b.
Specifically, focus your responses to your peers' initial postings using the following prompts:
· Why do you think your peers should not have eliminated specific procedures?
· What issues did your peers miss when they recommended specific procedures?
· What additional support can you add to your peers' recommendations?
KW:To address the challenge of cutting HR department costs and reducing the time to hire, I recommend eliminating two selection procedures: integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing.
Regarding pre-employment drug testing, it's important to note that it's not universally required by law across all industries. While certain industries, like those in the U.S. government, may have specific regulations that mandate drug testing (Clockfly, n.d.), federal law doesn’t require it for all job positions. Many employers choose to implement drug testing voluntarily, primarily to minimize risks related to substance abuse and to ensure a safe work environment. However, this process can be both costly and time-consuming, as it adds steps to the hiring process. Drug tests require scheduling, and waiting for results can significantly delay hiring timelines. By eliminating this step, we could significantly expedite the hiring process and cut down on associated costs (Nagele-Piazza, 2020). Furthermore, state laws vary on drug testing, which adds unnecessary complexity. Removing drug testing from our selection procedure could help us standardize our hiring practices and reduce unnecessary expenses.
As for integrity testing, it’s commonly used by organizations to identify individuals who may pose a risk to the company due to dishonesty or a lack of strong moral principles. While these tests are appropriate in high-risk environments, they are neither required by law nor necessary for every role. Integrity tests are often costly, time-consuming, and can slow down the hiring process (Fedweek, 2019). In many cases, integrity tests identify candidates who are likely to fail at later stages, like background checks, but they are not essential for all positions (Fedweek, 2019). Eliminating integrity testing could save time, reduce costs, and allow us to make quicker decisions when evaluating candidates.
By eliminating both integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing, we would streamline the hiring process, reduce costs, and improve efficiency. Removing these steps would allow us to focus more on assessing candidates' core competencies while minimizing delays and expenses tied to unnecessary procedures.
References
Clockify. (n.d.). Pre-employment drug testing laws by state — Detailed guide. Clockify. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state
FEDweek Staff. (2019, May 29). MSPB weighs pros, cons of ‘integrity testing’. FEDweek. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/
Nagele-Piazza, L. (2020, January 21). Workplace drug testing: Weighing the pros and cons. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons
JA.
When implementing the best interview, the first step should be to create policies and procedures that abide by federal and state laws while supporting the company’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, regardless of the candidate's area (Burgess-Wilkerson, 2008). The two selection procedures I would recommend eliminating are reference check and biographical information blank.
Reference Checks
Our reading of the HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law (2013) article found that using discretion in hiring while still thoroughly investigating candidates' backgrounds will ensure that a “duty of care” was taken to protect workers, customers, and clients from injury caused by an unfit employee who showed signs during the hiring process of posing a risk. A resume check verifies that what a candidate submitted on their employment application is accurate. Since we already have this as part of the hiring process, reference checks seem to be an additional layer that does not provide a true picture of the candidate's skills, work style, or work ethic.
Reference checks, while seemingly a valuable tool, often fall short in providing a comprehensive view of a candidate's skills and work ethic. Candidates typically select references who will speak favorably of them, leading to a biased and subjective perspective on their performance and workplace behavior (Dewar, 2025).
Biographical Information Blank
The accurate measure of validity for an employment test should not just be based on the ability to master and take a test but also include ways to measure the performance of the developed abilities in areas such as diligence, persistence, energy, and drive (Sackett et al., 2008). Selection tests for potential employees have long been scrutinized for companies' fairness and true ability to “funnel” the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) they are searching for to pool the right candidates to interview. Biographical Information or BioData is a software or document providing comprehensive details about an individual’s personal and professional life (TemPostions, 2024). This information is collected based on a series of questions and other sources such as education, publications, awards, and other academic achievements. BioData shows a potential candidate's cultural and personal background, not just professional capabilities (Dewar, 2025). This information is nice to have, but the amount of time, resources, and money spent to find out this new hire’s cultural and personal background can be answered by specific questions during the panel interview. As a side note, be careful when including BioData because this could violate equal employment opportunity laws (EEO).
Hiring processes should be adaptive, tailored to the unique skills, hiring practices, and ethical norms of each job. No one-size-fits-all set of selection procedures exists. It's crucial to go beyond selection systems and personally interview candidates. This direct interaction allows for a more accurate assessment of their individual drive and level of work ethic.
References
Burgess-Wilkerson, B. (2008). Selection and Interview Procedures at a Multinational Company. Business Communication Quarterly, 71(1), 100–102. https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379
Dewar, J. (2025, February 4). Reference Checks: Templates, Questions, and Best Practices for 2025. JobScore. https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/#the-benefits-of-reference-checks
Hidden liability: Understand the risks of negligent hiring. (2013). HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law, 8(7), 4.
Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly. (2008). High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness. American Psychologist, 63(4), 215–227.
TemPositions (2024, January 3). What is BioData? An In-depth Understanding for Job Seekers and Employers. Recruitment Blog. https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/
- Criminal Justice essy
- my math lab homework
- SEE ATTACHMENTS
- Deliverable Length: 1,250–1,500 words Details: Weekly tasks or assignments (Individual or Group Projects) will be due by Monday and late submissions will be assigned a late penalty in accordance with the late penalty policy found in the syllabus. NOTE: A
- Unit Assessment
- Business Questions
- English
- week 5 acc 564 dq 1& 2 >>>>xoon only
- An endothermic reaction _____. does not require activation energygives off heat to the environmentreleases less energy than it usesreleases more energy...
- BUS 600 Week 2 Assignment ( International and Intercultural Communication ) ~ 3 Different Papers To Help You Score Better ~ ( Latest Syllabus - Perfect Tutorial - Scored 100% )