I donât think CEA should share specific criteria. I think they should give rejects brief, tentative suggestions of how to develop as an EA in ways that will strengthen their application next time. Growth mindset over fixed mindset. Even a completely generic âmaybe you should get 80K advisingâ message for every reject would go a long way.
When we have a specific idea about what would improve someoneâs chances (like âyou didnât give much detail on your application, could you add more information?â) weâll often give it.
I guess you would rather they say âalwaysâ instead of âoften,â but otherwise it seems like what you want? And my recollection is that even the generic rejection emails do contain generic advice like linking to 80 K?
I guess this is kind of a tangent on the thread, but for what itâs worth Iâm not sure that EAG is actually doing something different than what you are suggesting.
(Note: I work for CEA, but not on the events team.)
The post you linked says:
I guess you would rather they say âalwaysâ instead of âoften,â but otherwise it seems like what you want? And my recollection is that even the generic rejection emails do contain generic advice like linking to 80 K?
I guess this is kind of a tangent on the thread, but for what itâs worth Iâm not sure that EAG is actually doing something different than what you are suggesting.
(Note: I work for CEA, but not on the events team.)