Back to the Future or why we forgot what teaching means

Thanks to the ilks of Jeb Bush and Bill Gates the United States has pushed our educational system and governmental entities have pushed the country to evaluate both our students and teachers on the basis of the results of standardized tests. They claim that the testing results are a clear picture of the success of our educational system.

I spent six years of my life in the classroom and having graduated under a system which did not put as much emphasis on testing I can tell you while the intent is well intended it misses a major outcome that we need in today's global workplace.

Consider two views of teaching. The first is the current system where the process of students and therefore the impact of the teaching effort is based on the content of the state standards and accompanying tests. The indirect result is that because there is so much emphasis on meeting the standards teachers are forced to establish their lesson plans around that content. I am not suggesting that there is a problem with setting standards for what should be taught in the classroom. I have a problem when the concentration is the test rather then the content.

Take the second view of teaching. This the view that was the norm up until the push for the standardized tests. My grandfather worked his way up through the business world to the level of CEO without basing that education on the test results. When I was attending school we had the opportunity to take the NYS Regents exam to judge our progress.

Here is my problem with the new world. I hear and read almost every day that companies are having a hard time finding employees who can function at a satisfactory level within the workplace. Why not? Because the direct result of the new system is the lack of critical thinking. The success of our organizations is not dependent on whether you passed some standardized test but rather your ability to think through problems. The ability to think through why the organization is undergoing issues is critical for the success of the economy and the organization.  It is very disturbing when an educator tells me that if he taught Math the way he did when he started teaching 25 years ago he would be forced to fail all his students. This is what happens when we do not take the time to challenge the students to find solutions on their own using easily taught skills. This is what happens when the aim of the system is to meet the content of the test rther then life skills.

In order to ensure that we have a workforce that can meet the challenges of the future, we need to return to the time when the programs were designed to challenge the students to think through problems not by rote response to the issues. Our organizations, our economy, our survival and our innovation demands it. The future demands it if we are to be the powerhouse we claim to be.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Corporate America and the GPS Mentality

As I write this I am on a family vacation to visit friends in Colorado Springs. As I do on most trips I called AAA for a Triptik and loaded the address in the GPS. When last Sunday came around we pulled out of the driveway and told the Magellan to take us there by the shortest route. Well come to find out that both the Triptik and the Magellan took us on the long way to get to our destination and in the process added about 200 miles to the trip by taking the long way to get there.

As I look back at the drive (yes we did drive it from Florida to Colorado) I looked at some of our organizational processes and I wondered how many times have we tried to resolve an HR issue using a GPS mentality?

In this electronic world we live in we try and find a solution to our needs by finding a tool or device that can make out lives easier. So we go out and purchase a GPS to make our lives easier.

When we look at our organizational processes we tend to strive for the same goal. We want to make our business lives easier with all the stress levels that we currently undergo. But like the GPS our route to an easier life is not as easy as we may think. Like my trip routes it is easy to take a route which on the face of it makes our life easier but in reality makes our lives within the organization more complex. We take the easy way out with out regards for the consequences of our actions.

When you look at how you organization operates do you do so with a GPS view or do you look for ways to be innovative in the way you implement your processes?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

We are on a Journey but seem to have lost our way

Within the past week I have had several conversations with HR professional peers with a rather disturbing thread to the conversation. I had one individual tell me that if we treated HR as an individual, they would fail an Emotional Intelligence analysis ( and you think you can use it to judge candidates) I have others tell me that many of our colleagues want to return the era when we were called personnel. Still others suggest that if we continue in the track we are in, the profession will cease to exist.

At the same time other of our peers argue for a seat at the "partner table." I challenge you to define what we have done to earn that seat. Many managers see us not as a partner but an obstacle to the organization. We are not aligned with the business strategy but rather we object to changes in the way the organization operates because that is not the way we do things. We remain stuck in a world that has changed, we are just on a journey which isn't the journey we thought we were on.

If you open your focus and your mind it may not be too late to change your focus. We may not have reached the point of no return and we can still demonstrate to our organizations that we are a vital part of the organization and its future.

So I challenge each and every one of you to become a vital cog in your organization by learning the language of your business. Change your path so that you are no longer a  drain on the organization.

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed

Engagement or Engagement!!!

http://www.linkedin.com/miniprofile?vieweeID=30670&context=anet&view">

There is a story in the news here in Florida today about a lifeguard who left his assigned station to save the life of a man in distress.It reportedly was off his assigned watch area.

In return his employer fired him for leaving his assigned section of the beach. He was followed by several other lifeguards who either were likewise fired or quit in protest. The lifeguard company finally offered to reinstate all of them, but they refused because of the nature of the event.

From a corporate perspective we continually hear about organizations complaining that they can't get their employees engaged within the organization. Could this be why? Does your message encourage employees to get involved or encourage them to stay within their tiny little part of the universe called your organization. Is engagement of importance to your organization?

Posted via email from hrstrategist@Net-Speed