Live data from Hacker News

Making software engineering interviews predictive of job performance

qualified.io

111–113 of 113 posts

Re: Making software engineering interviews predictive of job performance

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you think knowledge of CS fundamentals is what is separating the hired from the rejected... I've never stated that. I am aware of the other behavioral tests if that's what you're referring to. But the fact remains that they give you algorithms questions that we dont use in most of our daily work and if you can't meet the rather high basics you are rejected. > And there are IQ tests/proxies that are entirely “ver…

> I am aware of the other behavioral tests if that's what you're referring to. No I’m not. I’m saying FAANG are hiring based on fast pace general problem solving skills that are difficult to game and have very little to do with computer science. That is why “our” interview processes are being compared to IQ tests. “We” have rejected people who teach computer science fundamentals at prestigious schools and hired teena…

> No I’m not. I’m saying FAANG are hiring based on fast pace general problem solving skills that are difficult to game and have very little to do with computer science.

These are very vague words. What are these tests then? Can you give a sample? You're telling me that you get engineers to interview these candidates and they don't give questions that involve computer science? What are they supposed to ask then?

Or are you telling me you have tests that weakly correlate to an IQ test thanks to a number you computed? And therefore that makes it an IQ test?

> How is it detached from reality?

IQ tests are inherently just a number for one's potential, and they don't tell how someone will perform on the job - there are so many other factors involved.

Re: Making software engineering interviews predictive of job performance

#112
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post makes absolutely no sense given that you can practice for IQ tests and improve your score on them. This isn't up for debate. You can improve things measured by IQ tests (i.e. spatial reasoning and pattern recognition) without rote. You can also improve them with rote. You can improve them with or without another person helping you as a mentor/tutor. It doesn't matter which one you do, the end result is the…

And you've lost the point. If these FAANG tests are meant to be IQ tests and you can rote learn them they are NOT a good measure of intelligence unlike some people claim them to be. Edit: Also, good IQ testing involves a 2-3year break in between IQ tests. The thing is, you can leetcode continuously to game these tests.

You're arguing that real IQ tests don't exist, then. Any test is gameable.

Re: Making software engineering interviews predictive of job performance

#113
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you've lost the point. If these FAANG tests are meant to be IQ tests and you can rote learn them they are NOT a good measure of intelligence unlike some people claim them to be. Edit: Also, good IQ testing involves a 2-3year break in between IQ tests. The thing is, you can leetcode continuously to game these tests.

You're arguing that real IQ tests don't exist, then. Any test is gameable.

They exist if you dont game them too much. And there isnt that much incentive to do so given the wide variety of tests.
Post reply on HN