Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really comparable... the overwhelming majority of flight tests involve flying an aircraft. There is no meaningful way someone can be excellent at flying an aircraft but can't pass a test which involves flying an aircraft. The same can't be said for many other tests. If the test involves the practical application of the very skill being tested, then that test has direct relevance to he competency of said skill. Bu…
They are never going to let you into a cockpit until you pass ground school, which involves a lot of math. > A teacher can be brilliant in the classroom yet stumble on a standardized certification exam full of pedagogical jargon. A teacher that cannot explain how calculus works cannot teach it to anybody. > a coding interview that relies on whiteboarding algorithms from memory can easily fail an excellent engineer wh…
The question is whether a given test measures anything relevant - did your friend become a better programmer for doing 6 weeks of leetcodes? E.g. what kind of experience did he gain about large code bases and how to handle those? Continuing your analogy, would you fly with a pilot who drilled on taking off a bunch of time, but never practised flying in a storm?
I'm not saying leetcodes or exams are useless, but Goodhart's Law apply.