Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#31

Post by allThumbs » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:19 PM UTC

cema wrote: post #25

allThumbs wrote: post #21

I feel like things are operating according to the following pattern: 1. Go to college: a. spend many semesters in lectures all of which tangentially brush upon the final exam based on the whims of the lecturer. b. cram for final exam last minute panic to crunch memory according to advice on content which was brushed upon during lectures. 2. Interview for job: a. cram for interview by going to coursera to crunch memor…

Is 3a "good interviewees..."? Perhaps you are right. This is a usual argument against canned exams.

You are correct, sir. Updated accordingly.

EDIT: Wow, this is downvoted? Really?

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#32

Post by jmagoon » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:20 PM UTC

allThumbs wrote: post #21

I feel like things are operating according to the following pattern: 1. Go to college: a. spend many semesters in lectures all of which tangentially brush upon the final exam based on the whims of the lecturer. b. cram for final exam last minute panic to crunch memory according to advice on content which was brushed upon during lectures. 2. Interview for job: a. cram for interview by going to coursera to crunch memor…

completely agreed, which is why it seems like years of experience has no correlation to technical interview performance, despite the likelihood that there would be some correlation between years of experience and actual job performance--because memetic technical interviews and what the job actually entails are generally miles and miles apart.

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#33

Post by vdnkh » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:21 PM UTC

allThumbs wrote: post #21

I feel like things are operating according to the following pattern: 1. Go to college: a. spend many semesters in lectures all of which tangentially brush upon the final exam based on the whims of the lecturer. b. cram for final exam last minute panic to crunch memory according to advice on content which was brushed upon during lectures. 2. Interview for job: a. cram for interview by going to coursera to crunch memor…

> the majority of actual tasks are often googled and stack-overflowed

The more I've grown as a developer the less I've had to do this.

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#34

Post by dexwiz » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:22 PM UTC

allThumbs wrote: post #21

I feel like things are operating according to the following pattern: 1. Go to college: a. spend many semesters in lectures all of which tangentially brush upon the final exam based on the whims of the lecturer. b. cram for final exam last minute panic to crunch memory according to advice on content which was brushed upon during lectures. 2. Interview for job: a. cram for interview by going to coursera to crunch memor…

Don't underestimate the knowledge gained from tangential brushes. Being able to Google and Stack-Overflow a question is dependent on knowing the vocabulary and keywords related to the problem. While tangential brushes don't give you full mastery of the domain, it gives you a bookmark on what is possible and how to find it again in the future. If you talk to newer programmers (new anything really), you will find they lack to knowledge to even properly express their problem, let alone search for answers. While more experience people may not know everything in detail, they have a better handle on various knowledge domains and where to look.

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#35

Post by boha » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:22 PM UTC

Sad to see so much detail paid to the data, and so little to the setup of the experiment itself.

It shouldn't be surprising that an online technical screen favors candidates who've participated in a MOOC, but is blind, say, to years of experience. A screen like this is timed-performance-at-a-distance, which resembles MOOC participation. The full spectrum of qualities that comprise a Good Hire might incorporate the other signals from the post, but this type of interview won't test them.

(I'll be the first to admit I'm biased against performative coding in engineering interviews. Tech screens like this are often necessary, though, so they have their place.)

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#36

Post by bhntr3 » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:24 PM UTC

I wonder if "took courses" could be a stand in for "prepared heavily". It seems like people with all the other attributes might think they didn't need to study. People without them might think they did and took courses to "catch up". In my experience, preparation is the key driver of performance in these types of interviews.

It seems reasonable that a person who took a MOOC might have prepared in other ways as well while people who didn't probably didn't prepare much at all (since watching a few Algo lectures seems the most accessible refresher.)

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#37

Post by sporkenfang » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:25 PM UTC

geebee wrote: post #14

Interesting bit on the MS degree. I followed the link, and I'm not quite as surprised that the correlation is poor, or even negative, given the way the data was collected and analyzed. Absolutely agree that some MS degrees are pretty much less rigorous cash cows by now, that allow students to skip the fundamentals such as data structures, operating systems, and compilers. However, many CS MS degrees actually do requi…

I'm curious what would happen if they looked at, as separate categories, people who mastered out of a doctoral program, people who did the 5-year BS/MS, and people who obtained a doctoral degree as well as a master's.

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#38

Post by mattkrause » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:26 PM UTC

jmagoon wrote: post #32

allThumbs wrote: post #21

I feel like things are operating according to the following pattern: 1. Go to college: a. spend many semesters in lectures all of which tangentially brush upon the final exam based on the whims of the lecturer. b. cram for final exam last minute panic to crunch memory according to advice on content which was brushed upon during lectures. 2. Interview for job: a. cram for interview by going to coursera to crunch memor…

completely agreed, which is why it seems like years of experience has no correlation to technical interview performance, despite the likelihood that there would be some correlation between years of experience and actual job performance--because memetic technical interviews and what the job actually entails are generally miles and miles apart.

On top of that, I would assume that the bar is much higher for candidates with years of experience, either because the more experienced candidates self-select for more senior jobs or because it sets up some expectations from the the interviewer ("he's been a tech lead for 12 years and didn't know about quick sort!").

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#39

Post by lintiness » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:26 PM UTC

"I’m excited to see that what mattered way more than pedigree was the actions people took to better themselves."

so a degree from a top school is not earned (nor are admissions i guess), but rather conferred at birth? i beg to differ.

the commentary on the "disutility" masters degrees is even worse.

Re: Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews

#40

Post by nickbauman » Wed, Dec 28, 2016, 8:28 PM UTC

chewyshine wrote: post #23

Top school is probably serving as a proxy for intelligence in this analysis...a well known predictor of both interview and actual job performance.

Top school is also serving as a proxy for wealth and privilege. Good grades are also a proxy for wealth. Kids who have rich parents get private tutoring.