31–40 of 79 posts
As someone who didn't major in CS, the technical interview is the reason I was able to get a job. I didn't have ton of professional experience, and I didn't have a degree in a directly relevant field. But in a technical interview, I could show that yes, I really did know how to code. I did have a "portfolio" of projects on Github, but it wasn't very large, and the most interesting project there were, well, too compli…
Accountants, Lawyers, and Surveyors have credentialling bodies that train, test and monitor performance. Accountants don't need to show they are qualified in interview because they have the letters ACA, ACCA, CEMA or whatever that they can clearly point to. Lawyers and Surveyors similarly have profession bodies that handle qualification. Software engineering is not uniquely broken but it is broken, but the author jum…
- the state of the art is both extremely diverse and rapidly moving, so any credential system would run the risk of being too specific and easily out of date. Very few are respected and most existing ones are tied to particular products. Possibly the only set of those that is respected is the Cisco ones.
- most of our work is (a) tightly intermingled with the work of others and (b) copyright belongs to our employers, so we can't build portfolios like artists. Many people have contracts that purport to own all code produced, even in your spare time.
It would be great if we could take all the basic tests once, upfront, under exam conditions, and then re-use that for years. I can't see how it can be coordinated. Maybe what we need is not a union but a professional body. In the UK we sort of have one (BCS, and more absurdly, the Worshipful Guild Of Informational Technologists) but their impact and benefit is also pretty tiny.
Several times in my career I have worked with people in software developer roles who could not write basic code. This was not a situation of mistaken title, they were in a position where they were expected to write code and could not. In several cases, they struggled to operate Visual Studio in spite of claiming to be a proficient .NET developer. Non-technical management could not tell the difference or nepotism was…
Once you submitted the exercise and went to on-site interview you sat with another engineer and they asked you to make some basic changes there and then.
I liked this approach: you could take your time working at home to be sure you understand the assignment and have a chance to think through your implementation, then when it came to the actual on-site interview you were already familiar with the code you'd already written so thwre was less of a deer-in-headlights effect. Bonus is you had to "work" with someone too so they can see if you are a good culture fit/not a jerk as well
This article is full of opinions, and brings no facts to the table. The author does not mention his experience interviewing or hiring people, and the whole piece reads more like a rant. > When an accountant is in an interview, they're not asked to multiply on-the-spot in their head what 485 x 761 equals because "you have to be good at math to be an accountant" This is an ignorant statement. Accountats don't have to m…
>I'd love to hear what OP suggests to replace the coding tests with. Making it easier to fire mishires would probably cover it.
This was a developer who can't code. You can't tell me this guy is a programmer who's just been off "not coding" for a few months.
Best technical interview I had (on the interviewee side) had me do a very simple coding exercise at home - it took maybe 4 to 6 hours max so could easily be done during lunch breaks at your current job. Once you submitted the exercise and went to on-site interview you sat with another engineer and they asked you to make some basic changes there and then. I liked this approach: you could take your time working at home…
Several times in my career I have worked with people in software developer roles who could not write basic code. This was not a situation of mistaken title, they were in a position where they were expected to write code and could not. In several cases, they struggled to operate Visual Studio in spite of claiming to be a proficient .NET developer. Non-technical management could not tell the difference or nepotism was…
And still could not produce in real world situation, because he cant do anything except self-contained examples and gets demotivated with pretty much any task quickly. He is good at remembering what blogs and forums said and repeating it to other people.
I'm not saying you have to be able to pass a FAANG technical screen or you are crap, I'm just saying there are a lot of pretenders that still apply for and manage to get jobs writing software.