Subj : Re: Software Job Market Myths
To   : comp.programming,comp.software-eng
From : Richard Heathfield
Date : Tue Aug 16 2005 11:32 am

Robert Maas, see http://tinyurl.com/uh3t wrote:

> The only time an actual company gave me any kind of programming
> aptitude test was in 1974, Four Phase Systems.

Well, that's a clue that you're probably in your fifties, at least, and 
quite possibly your sixties.

> I would be glad to take your test,

If I have inadvertently suggested that I'm hiring, I apologise. I didn't 
think I'd done that. But anyway, just to be 100% clear, I'm not hiring.

My contributions to this thread have been hypothetical in that sense. That 
is, they indicate what I consider to be an intelligent strategy for those 
who /are/ hiring.

> providing that it emphasizes stuff I
> already know for the closed-book part,

The purpose of such a test would be to check that a candidate has at least a 
basic understanding of the languages (or skills, or whatever) that are 
needed for the task for which an employee is sought by the company setting 
the test. The material would be chosen for its appropriateness in 
identifying suitable candidates, rather than to emphasise material with 
which a particular candidate is comfortable.


>> Anyone who makes no more than, say, two mistakes on the test would be
>> invited for interview.
> 
> What topics would you want people to know for the tele-commuting
> programming job you are offering currenntly?

I am not offering a telecommuting programming job currently.

> 
> In any case, I'd like a job writing the CGI program that administers
> your test over the Web.

I'm sure you would - but if I were hiring, which I am not, I would ask 
candidates to answer the test in their own handwriting.

>> At the interview, one thing I'd do is present the applicant with
>> several code fragments (probably entire self-contained routines)
>> written or modified /that day/ - real code intended for production -
>> and ask the applicant to make detailed comments on those code
>> fragments.
> 
> Do I have to guess what the basic purpose of the code is, or is that
> given?

It seems to me that the best strategy is to give candidates sufficient 
contextual information to enable them to provide intelligent answers if 
they have the skills that are sought.

>> For each [code fragment], I'd ask:
>> o  What does it do?
>> o  What is good about it?
>> o  What is bad about it?
>> o  How could it be fixed?
> 
> Hey, I'd like to tackle something like that. Please post a couple such
> examples for me to try. (Um, wait, what language is this in? I don't
> know x86 assembler, sorry, and I don't have an APL font. Hopefully it's
> in some language I can both view and understand?)

That's kind of the point, isn't it? But those who didn't know the language 
in question would probably be rooted out at the application form stage.

If you want to try this exercise on some code fragments, there's plenty of 
code on the Web. Undoubtedly you will be able to find some written in a 
language with which you are familiar.


>> I suspect that this would be a far more effective strategy than
>> relying on the experience people claim on their CVs.
> 
> Here in America we use resumes not CVs. You must be in Europe.

That depends on your definition of "Europe", I guess. :-)  I live in 
England.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

.