Re: Test for potential programmer

Thanks for all your replies.

I mentioned earlier that I would like to hire someone with no IT
background and measure their aptitude for becoming good programmers. I
suppose I need to explain what the role is exactly.

I work for Qantas and I'm looking to fill a systems analyst position
with an aviation with an edge in law/legal stuff to learn a very high
level programming language to work with aviation rules and regulations
(both international and local). As you might assume, it is probably
easier to hire someone with something like a law degree to learn
programming....than train a computer science graduate in law!!

So all my candidates will have ZERO programming experience and will
not have a clue on who Knuth would be.

Piers is correct. Our priority is for the candidate to have the
correct attitude towards technology in general. He/she has to be
interested in learning more about IT and programming. The second most
important would be his aptitude for it. I'm trying to look for a way
to measure whether this person has enough aptitude to solve
programming problems.

Carlo


On Dec 3, 12:44 pm, Daniel Pittman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Carlo Sogono <[email protected]> writes:
> > What kinds of tests should I be giving people to measure their
> > aptitude to become good programmers/problem solvers?
>
> There isn't one.  Given many years of experience interviewing and hiring
> programmings and systems admin staff, I assure you that there is no single,
> widely applicable, useful test that you can use for this.
>
> What you /can/ do is apply *specific* tests to people:
>
> Ask them detailed, technical questions appropriate to the level of knowledge
> they claim for languages, tools or techniques.  This will weed out people who
> transform "I saw a C++ book once" and claim to be experts on C++.
>
> Ask them to write some code in the language they will be working with in front
> of you, so they can't cheat.  Use a whiteboard, or pen-and-paper, for this.
> Make sure that it isn't complete junk.
>
> This weeds out the people who claim to be programmers, but can't actually
> manage correct syntax, or recall anything about the language at all.
>
> > I work in a really specialised field and it is actually better to hire
> > someone who has experience in this field then train them to do a
> > programming than hire a programmer to learn the business.
>
> I assume you are speaking form past experience, where you have done both of
> these things, and judged the results over *multiple* people in both cases.[1]
>
> Otherwise, this sounds like a dangerous assumption to me; generally, my
> experience is that you are better off hiring the best people regardless of
> background, provided they can do the job.
>
> > Are IQ tests enough?
>
> Absolutely, under no circumstances, let yourself be fooled into thinking these
> show you anything except the most basic anything, and keep in mind that they
> are almost all heavily culturally biased.
>
> Certainly, they are useless for the traits you are looking for.
>
> > Or should I be looking for something else?
>
> Yes: look for personal recommendations, and people who maintain a good public
> presence on the Internet.  Both of those give you insight into the character
> and abilities of the people you are looking to hire.
>
> Review code that people have written previously[2], or other works they have
> created.  Ensure these show actual skill and talent before you bring them in.
>
> Look for claims like "I contributed significant code to GNU Grep", which you
> can actually check for factual accuracy[3], and then check them.  Which is
> educational. :)
>
> Mostly, though, personal recommendation is the way you want to hire.  You get
> a much, much harder judge between you and the candidate[4], from someone with
> extensive personal knowledge of the candidate, and from someone with extensive
> knowledge of the business.
>
>         Daniel
>
> Footnotes:
> [1]  To reduce the chances that, for example, you just got two dud
>      programmers, but one or two really sharp non-programmers, for example.
>
> [2]  I doubt that non-programmers can be trained to write code better than
>      *good* programmers can be trained in a new language / business, although
>      a good non-programmer is going to be better than a bad programmer.
>
> [3]  ...and, as a hint to those people who have sent me resumés with claims
>      like this before: yes, I /do/ actually check that.  GNU keep good
>      records, so either your contribution was so insignificant they didn't
>      need to record it, or predates records kept back to the '80s.[5]
>
> [4]  ...well, unless you have employed someone who is rather an idiot, and is
>      willing to make themselves look awful by recommending someone who can't
>      do the job.
>
> [5]  ...and one day I hope to actually get a resumé that claims this, and
>      where the name of the person /does/ show up in the changelogs.
>
> --
> ✣ Daniel Pittman            ✉ [email protected]            ☎ +61 401 155 707
>                ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons
> --
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List -http://slug.org.au/
> Subscription info and FAQs:http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html