Talk:Automated Resume Screening
The article is not yet 3000 words but it is clear that the author is going to elaborate more on some sections. From the time of review there are about 250-300 words. There are some blank sections where the author is going to talk about various ethical implications, so the draft is not quite finished.
The author does have an opening paragraph that summarizes the topic. However, I would advise the author to elaborate more on what the potential issue is. I feel as though this would help open the article to the ethical implications that will be touched on later. The body of the article is present, and explains the benefits of automated resume review for companies. However, I feel as though more could be done to explain what automated resume review is. Readers may not know how automated resume review works, and how it can vary from company to company. For instance, certain companies may use automated resume review that just does word matching between the job post and the resume, some may place weights on keywords. This could be a concept that could be more explored in the body section of the article. In terms of references, there is currently one reference and it appears to be a reliable source. However, I would expect there to be more references in the future. The source appears to be a reliable source of hiring information and statistics. The author also links to relevant Wikipedia pages four times for the terms that they stated. This is a good technique to create an understandable article.
The issue at stake is clear to me from the headings of the sections they intend to create. It appears as though the author will talk about how biases can exist in automated resume review. The author has listed three sections: gender bias, racial bias, and circumstantial bias. It is clear that the author will talk about how automated resume review may have gender bias. This issue could have multiple opinions, and hopefully the author will consider all opinions upon the issue. It is also clear that the author will talk about racial bias. There could be diverse opinions on the presence of racial bias in automated resume review. These sections are not yet written, but there is much opportunity to report on the diverging opinions in these topics. From the section headers, it is clear that the author will elaborate on these biases, but the sections are not yet written. This leads me to believe the author will touch upon how automated resume review may perpetuate biases in hiring practices. I am able to understand what ethical issues are going to be talked about, but I am unable to comment further as I am unable to see the author’s opinions. I am able to understand the importance of these issues, as automated resume review is used in almost all job applications. However, the author has not yet written about why these issues are so important.
There are not yet enough sentences written to determine if the author will use an objective point of view, but what is written so far is written from an objective point of view. Furthermore, the author talks about the benefits of automated resume review from a management standpoint. Thus, the author talks about how automated resume review can be a potential benefit, as well as talking about how automated resume review can be a potential negative for applicants. This demonstrates an objective point of view as the author is talking about how automated resume review can be both a positive and a negative. For statements that might be contestable, there is a reference to a reliable article. When there are multiple stakeholders in a controversy, the author defines all opinions in an objective manner. References are included for these statements.
--Brendan Chang
