Re: Interview Questions

From: Gary Labowitz (glabowitz_at_comcast.net)
Date: 05/15/04

  • Next message: John Carson: "Re: << "\t";" 
    Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 21:25:33 -0400

    "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.nospamm.com> wrote in message
    news:8cdpc.50751$z06.7204895@attbi_s01...
    >
    > "Howard" <alicebt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:z_8pc.58344$Ut1.1528510@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
    > >
    > > Anyone else notice something strange about this post? I see it comes
    > > through San Diego State University's server (newshub.sdsu.edu). Also,
    the
    > > OP has not responded in any way, with their own opinions, follow-up, or
    > > whatever. And the OP claims to be a "professional", but asks some of
    the
    > > most basic questions. Isn't anyone at least suspicious that this is
    > really
    > > just a student taking a test or doing homework, and trying to get free
    > > answers to questions they're supposed to either know or research
    > themselves?
    > > This is at least the third time I've seen someone declare they were
    asking
    > > "job interview" questions, yet it seemed suspiciously like schoolwork to
    > me.
    > > Am I just being paranoid, or what?
    >
    > LOL! I recently saw a "Dateline" episode on college cheating, where
    students
    > would wirelessly access the internet during an exam to find answers to
    > questions.

    In addition to it probably being a student, there is an issue of legality
    and prudence with a potential employer using a test to qualify candidates.
    The general thinking goes like this:
    Are the questions on the test indicative of the type of work being done?
    Would being able to answer the question determine that the candidate could
    do the work that the opening is for? Can you prove that the questions are
    normative, non-descriminatory with respect to ethnic and cultural
    differences, sex, or race? How have you qulaified the test questions such
    that they are predictive of success or failure of the candidate in
    performance of the actual expected work?

    If there is no indication of having proof of the applicability of the test
    to the specific job, and proof that the questions are actually specific to
    the position being screened for, the use of the test is illegal. In
    addition, it must be shown (by actual job situations) that the information
    required to answer the questions is necessary to be known without reference
    to generally available materials expected to be in the workplace.

    It is legal, for example, to require a doctor to pass exams that require the
    candidate to know various medical terms, procedures, and techniques without
    reference to books, notes, or collegues in order to be certified as a
    surgeon. The elements of the exam must match what a surgeon must do in
    performance of general surgery. It is not expected that a surgeon will know
    everything (even if they all think they do!) and that reference may have to
    be made prior to a specific surgery, or even during a surgery in special
    cases.

    In programming, it is highly unlikely that all aspects of each language that
    might be encountered during any given project would be known without
    references to any given programmer. That eliminates from qualifying test
    such nonesence as "Which toolbar button do you use to change the display
    icon in a project?" What might be more appropriate (but still a little
    "dicey") would be to ask "Can the display icon for a project be changed?"
    and "What is involved in changing it?"
    It is one of the disgusting aspects of the Microsoft qualifying exams for
    certification that many of their questions are of the extremely specific
    type covering topics that most programmers would simply look up when needed.
    (And I have been certified, so I know whereof I speak; MCP, MCT, MDSD, CTT.)

    I tell my students "Never memorize what you can look up." What is important
    is that they understand the principles, techniques, and what's available in,
    say, a language so they know what can be done, various options, and reasons
    for selecting one over another. What distresses me is co-workers I have had
    who have no clear understanding of what a compiler does, how the language
    they're using is structured, the differences in data types, etc. This is the
    basic stuff I always wished we had a qualified test for before hiring them.

    IBM used to use a "Programmer Apptitude Test" in the '60s which I believe
    they dropped when they were faced with legal problems trying to justify it
    as predictive of success or failure. I took it in 1961, thought it was dumb,
    and got hired anyway. 

    -- 
Gary
  • Next message: John Carson: "Re: << "\t";"