One thing I'm pretty sure; good academic results don't mean you can code, but poor results mean you can't code.
That's what happens here in Malaysia.
The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
21–30 of 38 posts
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#22“The tragedy of a team of perfect people is that they will all be so desperate to maintain their sense of perfection, their 4.0 in life, that when faced with the pressure of an important project their selfish drives will tear the team apart”
I've seen this happen in real life ... very relevant ...
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#23Tachikomas!
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, Ppl with good grades have hard time accepting someone without them to be as good or even better than they are. For them grades become like a company whose share they hold. And any one making an arument against their fallibility even in special situation makes them extremely self conscious!
They may be some people who are like this. But I know enough people with good grades, who are much more tolerant; and some even see their chase of high grades as a waste of time.
Honestly, I've seen more the former, not what you've described.
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#25One thing I'm pretty sure; good academic results don't mean you can code, but poor results mean you can't code. That's what happens here in Malaysia.
In Malaysia, good academic results don't mean anything because the education system is built on rout memorization, not creative thinking.
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#26One thing I'm pretty sure; good academic results don't mean you can code, but poor results mean you can't code. That's what happens here in Malaysia.
In Malaysia, good academic results don't mean anything because the education system is built on rout memorization, not creative thinking.
Well said
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#27The thing about "grades" is that the mindset that revolves around getting them can change instantly. They aren't necessarily a sign of intelligence, more of work ethic.
If a person is shown progress or potential in an area of motivation, they can express the same "care" that got the person a 4.0 great grades.
Of course, the person who got the 4.0 shows more historical evidence of continued motivation towards excellence, but I think there's something to be said for such a broad number that's more an implication of ability to solve thousands of fragmented problems than a person who is capable of solving one problem extremely fucking well.
Also, how many startups are really back-checking grades when recruiting? I can see big companies with HR departments and stuff doing so, but I imagine many just-ins don't have the resources/time/care to do so.
So, lie, programmers. Lie.
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#28One thing I'm pretty sure; good academic results don't mean you can code, but poor results mean you can't code. That's what happens here in Malaysia.
Not true. If you've been reading the rest of this thread, the argument has largely been that academic results aren't good indicators of programming ability.
In fact, the way the Malaysian education system is set up, I would argue that it's probably only possible to be a good programmer by getting poor results. (Unless you're a particularly good exam hacker). Becoming a good programmer takes practice, and practice takes time, and being a straight-A student in Malaysia involves going to school and going to tuition and memorizing garbage - all of which eats into possible programming time.
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#29[deleted]
Re: The Myth of the Underachieving Genius
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is true, but you wouldn't know it from the common rhetoric. We praise the comeback kid; the author points out that we need to remember that it's a far better bet never to fall behind in the first place.
> "we need to remember that it's a far better bet never to fall behind in the first place." True in principle, but since when did low/mediocre grades become associated with "falling behind"? I think that's the cognitive disconnect between the two camps - the pro-academic crowd sees poor grades as a general failure, the rest of us do not. Addressing the article directly: > "Those who get good grades are the ultimate s…
Out of my circle of friends, I undoubtedly left college with the lowest grades. Some of my friends were straight-A students (and we were at an academically challenging college). But 10+ years out it's arguable that I've achieved more in my career than any of them and there is a very weak correlation between career success and high grades in that group of friends.
And yes, while we were still close, I had to deal with a lot of resentment along the way. I heard all kinds of nasty things about how I 'magically' became successful after years of lackluster academic performance.
It's silly to say people who do well in school are flawed or are wasting their energy. I think there are many compelling reasons to do well in school. But in my experience there is a sense of entitlement that develops along the way that often leads to a lot of friction and disappointment down the road.
Also, after years of hiring and training people, I firmly believe that grades do not predict ability in any meaningful way.