Hey guys,
Would really appreciate if you could rate my essays. I frankly do not know if I am doing a good job. Please help me out!
Topic:
Some employers who recruit recent college graduates for entry-level jobs evaluate applicants only on their performance in business courses such as accounting, marketing and economics. However, other employers also expect applicants to have a broad backgrounf in such courses as history, literature and philosophy.
Do you think that, in the application process, employers should emphasize one type of background-either specialization in business courses or a more varied academic preparation over the other? Why or why not? Develop your position by using reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.
Essay:
Some people think that employers who recruit recent college graduates for entry level jobs must evaluate applicants on basis of one type of background while others feel that candidates must be evaluated on a more varied academic background. This issue is a controversial one, however, a closer examination reveals that employers must evaluate applicants on one type of background for several reasons.
First, this is a very competitive age. As a result, there are not many college graduates in the job market, with such varied backgrounds. So, if an employer resorts to targeting such candidates with varied backgrounds, he would have an extremely tough time zeroing in on the right candidate as his target audience is very small.
Second, the time when a simple engineering degree or a business degree was enough to get a job is long gone. Everyone is asked to specialize. For example, rather than taking up a degree in history or philosophy, a business graduate would look to pursue MBA specializing in marketing. Therefore, the college graduates that employers get to choose from have become increasingly specialized in their field of expertise and lack a varied background.
Finally, perhaps the best reason is that someone with such a varied background would be significantly older than the average "one type" background candidate. Surely, an employer looks for a college graduate for an entry level job, so that he can mould him to make him a better fit at the company. It is common knowledge that as a person grows older and more experienced; it is harder to mould him to work for you towards a common goal.
In summary, while there are arguments to be made for both sides, it is clear that there are greater advantages to hiring college graduates with one type of background as the target pool from which employers recruit college graduates contains very few candidates with varied backgrounds, college graduates are becoming increasingly specialized in their field of expertise and because candidates with varied backgrounds would be older and thus, harder to mould to conform to the culture at the organization. Hence, employers who recruit college graduates for entry-level jobs must evaluate applicants only on their performance in specific courses like business, finance, etc.
Would really appreciate if you could rate my essays. I frankly do not know if I am doing a good job. Please help me out!
Topic:
Some employers who recruit recent college graduates for entry-level jobs evaluate applicants only on their performance in business courses such as accounting, marketing and economics. However, other employers also expect applicants to have a broad backgrounf in such courses as history, literature and philosophy.
Do you think that, in the application process, employers should emphasize one type of background-either specialization in business courses or a more varied academic preparation over the other? Why or why not? Develop your position by using reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.
Essay:
Some people think that employers who recruit recent college graduates for entry level jobs must evaluate applicants on basis of one type of background while others feel that candidates must be evaluated on a more varied academic background. This issue is a controversial one, however, a closer examination reveals that employers must evaluate applicants on one type of background for several reasons.
First, this is a very competitive age. As a result, there are not many college graduates in the job market, with such varied backgrounds. So, if an employer resorts to targeting such candidates with varied backgrounds, he would have an extremely tough time zeroing in on the right candidate as his target audience is very small.
Second, the time when a simple engineering degree or a business degree was enough to get a job is long gone. Everyone is asked to specialize. For example, rather than taking up a degree in history or philosophy, a business graduate would look to pursue MBA specializing in marketing. Therefore, the college graduates that employers get to choose from have become increasingly specialized in their field of expertise and lack a varied background.
Finally, perhaps the best reason is that someone with such a varied background would be significantly older than the average "one type" background candidate. Surely, an employer looks for a college graduate for an entry level job, so that he can mould him to make him a better fit at the company. It is common knowledge that as a person grows older and more experienced; it is harder to mould him to work for you towards a common goal.
In summary, while there are arguments to be made for both sides, it is clear that there are greater advantages to hiring college graduates with one type of background as the target pool from which employers recruit college graduates contains very few candidates with varied backgrounds, college graduates are becoming increasingly specialized in their field of expertise and because candidates with varied backgrounds would be older and thus, harder to mould to conform to the culture at the organization. Hence, employers who recruit college graduates for entry-level jobs must evaluate applicants only on their performance in specific courses like business, finance, etc.
