Joy English · Nivel C1 · Ética y tecnologíajoy-english.com

Un seminario sobre la selección automatizada de candidatos

Nombre:Fecha:

Una profesora y dos estudiantes debaten si las herramientas automatizadas pueden clasificar con justicia las solicitudes de empleo y qué garantías necesitaría una organización.

Audio y corrección de respuestas: https://joy-english.com/es/listening/hiring-software-seminar

Actitud, opinión e inferencia

Escucha y elige la mejor respuesta. Algunas respuestas no se dicen de forma directa.

What is Marco's main criticism of the company?
- a) It used a program that was too slow
- b) It refused to hire any new staff
- c) It ignored its own past decisions completely
- d) It treated the software as objective without questioning how it learned
What point is Lin making about human recruiters?
- a) They are always faster than software
- b) They are also far from neutral, and a program can at least be checked
- c) They should never review applications
- d) They have no influence on the final decision
What does the figure of seven seconds suggest to Lin?
- a) That people judge applications very quickly
- b) That programs read applications more slowly
- c) That most applications are rejected unread
- d) That recruiters are overworked
What prevented the company from auditing the tool?
- a) The company did not employ enough staff
- b) The tool was too new to be tested
- c) The supplier would not reveal how it worked
- d) Applicants refused to give their data
Why does Marco call the lack of explanation "the real scandal"?
- a) It made the company lose money
- b) Rejected applicants had no way to challenge the decisions
- c) It broke the supplier's contract
- d) It meant too many people were hired
What does Lin mean by saying efficiency is "mistaken for fairness"?
- a) Fair tools are always the most efficient
- b) Efficient firms treat applicants better
- c) Fairness is easier to measure than speed
- d) A tool that saves effort is wrongly assumed to be just
What reservation does Marco express about testing?
- a) Firms only look for biases they already know about
- b) Testing is too expensive for most firms
- c) Tools cannot be tested before they are used
- d) Testing always proves that a tool is fair
What does the professor imply about a human decision at the end of the process?
- a) It is unnecessary if the program is accurate
- b) It should be carried out by the supplier
- c) It is valuable only if the person genuinely judges the result
- d) It always prevents unfairness

Escucha los detalles

Escucha otra vez y escribe la palabra o el número que falta. Puedes escribir los números con palabras o con cifras.

The software had learned from ___ years of past hiring decisions.
Reviewers spent an average of ___ seconds on each application.
The supplier described its method as a trade ___.
Lin describes ___ applications in a week as a cost problem.
Each student must draft a ___-page policy.

Respuestas

Actitud, opinión e inferencia

d) It treated the software as objective without questioning how it learnedDice que el programa aprendió de decisiones pasadas y simplemente reprodujo cualquier patrón que había en ellas, así que llamarlo objetivo fue un descuido.
b) They are also far from neutral, and a program can at least be checkedDice que los humanos distan mucho de ser neutrales, como muestran los juicios precipitados, y que un programa se puede auditar.
a) That people judge applications very quicklyDice que sugiere muchos juicios precipitados por parte de los revisores humanos.
c) The supplier would not reveal how it workedEl proveedor dijo que su método era un secreto comercial, así que la empresa no podía explicar sus rechazos.
b) Rejected applicants had no way to challenge the decisionsDice que, sin una explicación, un candidato rechazado no podría impugnar la decisión.
d) A tool that saves effort is wrongly assumed to be justDice que la herramienta resuelve el problema del costo, pero nadie tuvo que demostrar que es justa.
a) Firms only look for biases they already know aboutDice que algunas empresas hacen pruebas con cuidado, pero solo para los sesgos que ya conocen.
c) It is valuable only if the person genuinely judges the resultDice que quien se limita a hacer clic en aprobar no es una gran garantía, así que importa cuál es realmente la función de esa persona.

Escucha los detalles

ten / 10Marco dice que aprendió de diez años de decisiones pasadas.
seven / 7Lin cita un promedio de siete segundos.
secretEl proveedor dijo que el método era un secreto comercial.
ten thousand / 10000 / 10,000Lin dice que diez mil solicitudes en una semana es un problema de costo, que la herramienta resuelve.
one / 1 / singleLa profesora pide a cada uno que redacte una política de una página.

Transcripción

Professor Siddiqui: Last week we looked at how automated tools sort job applications. This week I'd like your reactions to the case study. Marco, you've read it. Was the company wrong to use the system?

Marco: Not necessarily wrong, though I'd say careless. The company claimed the software was objective because it had no opinions. But it had learned from ten years of past hiring decisions, and if those decisions favoured a certain kind of candidate, the system simply reproduced the pattern, only faster.

Lin: I'd push back a little. Human recruiters are hardly neutral. One study in the reading found that people reviewing applications spent an average of seven seconds on each one, which suggests plenty of snap judgements. At least a program can be audited.

Professor Siddiqui: An important distinction. Can it be audited in practice?

Lin: That depends on whether anyone is allowed to look inside. In this case the supplier refused, saying the method was a trade secret, so the company couldn't explain its own rejections.

Marco: Which seems to me the real scandal. Had the company been able to explain a decision, a rejected applicant could have challenged it. As it was, people were turned away by a process nobody could describe.

Professor Siddiqui: So the objection is not to the technology as such, but to its opacity.

Lin: Mostly, yes, though I'd add that efficiency is being mistaken for fairness. Ten thousand applications in a week is a cost problem, and the tool solves the cost problem. Whether it's fair is a separate matter that nobody was obliged to answer.

Marco: I'm not sure I'd go quite that far. Some firms do test their tools carefully. The difficulty is that they test for the biases they already know about.

Professor Siddiqui: Which brings us to your assignment. I'd like each of you to draft a one-page policy for a small organisation that wants to use such a tool. I don't want a ban, and I don't want blind enthusiasm. What safeguards would you require? Think about who should be able to see the results, how often the system should be reviewed, and what an applicant is entitled to ask.

Lin: Can the policy include a human decision at the end?

Professor Siddiqui: Certainly, but be specific about what that person actually does. A human who merely clicks approve on a machine's recommendation is not much of a safeguard.