The paragraph below, I assume, was written by an H/R “professional.” I am pasting this in, so the original remains intact.
Our new colleague will teach in our comprehensive music education program, which includes BME, MME, and Ph.D. students. They will provide leardership in curriculum and program development. They will provide leadership and oversight of the recruitment of undergraduate, master’s and Ph.D. music education students. The successful candidate will be a creative, flexible musician, scholar and pedagogue who is an experienced master teacher with substantial K-12 experience as well as college-level teaching experience. They will be responsible for teaching in our comprehensive music education program which includes BME, MME, and Ph.D. students. Our new colleague will provide leadership in curriculum and program development, and will be expected to have a well-developed, active research agenda. They will teach other courses in the music education curriculum as necessary.
Now my observations and reactions. (You knew there would be some, didn’t you?)
- My ambition is to be a learder. However, I don’t have other learders around to mentor me and showr me what a learder can be. I even lookerd online for a graduate leardership program. I can’t finrd a single one. Maybe if I use fuzzy logic, the search would be more successful? Can someone out there leard me to the info I neerd? I will follow if you leard.
- In seriousness now … I would like a role in which I could train the world to match plurals with plurals and singulars with singulars. (Creating a plural of the word “singular” makes me smile . . . and note that it does not have an apostrophe before the “s”! . . . it’s a plural, not a possessive or a contraction.”) The next-to-last sentence is just fine. Why not include the last sentence and remove the plural mismatch, like so: “Our new colleague will provide leadership in curriculum and program development; will be expected to have a well-developed, active research agenda; and will teach other courses in the music education curriculum as necessary.”
- I’ll leave the lack of the Oxford comma alone in this phrase: “will be a creative, flexible musician, scholar and pedagogue.” Wait. I didn’t.
- On a deeper level: I find this ad to be a bit ambitious at its core. Rare would be the person who (1) could legitimately be classed as a “master teacher,” (2) has “substantial” K-12 experience, and (3) also has college-level teaching experience.
- I would also think that some “H/R professional” would have read through the posting well enough to know that s/he had repeated almost one-quarter of the material. If the music department had simply written its own job description, it would have been better.
Layering H/R process on top of process may satisfy regulations and policy without serving the real need. On the other hand, if there is no process at all, someone or some department will likely need to oversee employment matters, given the litigiousness of our society. If there is a separate benefits department, there are benefits to be reaped there, although the health insurance benefit is more than it’s cracked up to be. As I wrote in this post,
Currently, [my wife and I] pay approximately 1/3 of the total cost of our own insurance, and my employer covers the rest of the group-rate premium. The rates for adding an additional family member [our son] increase dramatically, though—to the point that the deduction from my paycheck to insure three people would be equivalent to half of my take-home (net) pay.
A very perceptive man once remarked that the “Graduate School” in his institution didn’t add value to the process of getting a graduate degree. This post from 2016 mentions that right after complaining about the lack of benefit in three food additives, moving to question the value of additions in Christian churches.
And here is a post that briefly mentions three items that I find pretty much without benefit in churches.