How Competencies Play Out in Reality — From Applicants to Alumni

About? My talk will focus on what the data around the competencies that we evaluate during the selection process is telling us about the applicants and how do we see these play out once they enter the fellowship.

Core ideas? Relevant context? Rubric design and implementation to evaluate a subjective competency (will take one example to illustrate), why is that competency being evaluated, how do we expect that competency to play out in the fellowship and is the data collected at the selection stage correlating well with what is practically playing out on-ground. I will also provide context about the Teach For India fellowship and selection process for the audience to anchor in.

Why does this topic matter to me? I head the Selection team at Teach For India and we need to select ~700 fellows each year. This topic is one of immense (and central) professional importance to me and also a topic that I'm curious about (which is one of the reasons I'm in the role!)

Data connect? As we are evaluating a human being's fit for a fellowship, there is inherent subjectivity. At its core, how do we evaluate them both objectively and in a nuanced manner that acknowledges the human and subjective facets to them? What does the competency data tell us? Also, what does it NOT tell us? How do we evaluate the competencies and is there a scope to improve this from a qualitative and quantitative data lens i.e. are there better/more effective ways of evaluating these competencies?

Audience? Anyone interested in selecting/hiring/using rubric to evaluate performance and its far-reaching consequences would benefit from attending the talk.

Key takeaways? 1.) What can data practically and accurate inform? 2.) What can data not tell us as that would indicate where we need to avoid making assumptions 3.) Predictability of a selection model — up until what distance from the selection process is the data reliable (and hypotheses for the same)