Re: Test for potential programmer

On Dec 3, 2:11 pm, Ranty McRanterson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Carlo Sogono <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 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!!
>
> Congratulations on offending around two-thirds of the list by implying
> that their chosen speciality is so trivial any lawyer could pick it up
> in just a few months. You can count on getting unhelpful, inflammatory
> responses (such as this one) from the people you've offended.
>
> The other third won't notice, because their social skills are worse
> than yours. Try hard not to be offended by their responses - they mean
> as little offense as you did.
>

I think it really is impossible to understand our situation without
giving the complete picture.

I belong to a team of 4. 2 have IT backgrounds including myself and 2
are aviation specialists. Our roles are essentially the same but given
our backgrounds, of course the IT people would be stronger in IT while
the aviation people will be stronger in aviation. I am one of those
people you speak of that had to learn the busines side of the company.
And you are also correct when you said it takes years to be a good
software developer (not just as a programmer/coder), in the same way
that it will take me years to fully understand the legalities related
to aviation at the same level of my aviation colleagues.

My teammate leaving has an aviation background and we are looking to
replace him. Turning our team into a 100% IT department is not what we
want. When the 2 aviation guys are stumped hit IT roadblocks, thats
when me and the other IT specialist come in; and they would do the
same when we encounter aviation/law roadblocks.

I am not going to budge with our decision to only hire aviation
specialists because that is exactly what we need. Everything can be
learned but would you really blame a law firm for hiring only law
graduates? Would it be really right to tell them to hire IT graduates
and train them in law in-house? This is really just the same thing.

And law+IT grads isn't exactly what we're looking for. We're after
people very speicific to aviation, that is why the role requires
DIRECT experience with the aviation industry. The position is not a
low level position. My only intention by sending SLUG chat an email
was to find out how to check for aptitude for programming. Im baffled
as to how you people have turned it into a flaming session.

Carlo


>
>
> > So all my candidates will have ZERO programming experience and will
> > not have a clue on who Knuth would be.
>
> You're hiring the wrong kind of people. Programming isn't something
> you can just pick up by reading a few books (or even going on a few
> courses) - at least, it's not something you can become fluent in that
> quickly. if your candidate isn't a total idiot (and none of the people
> I've known who completed a law degree were *total* idiots) they'll
> probably pick up the basics within a few weeks - but it takes years of
> study, and years more on-the-job learning, to become fluent - in the
> meantime, their goofs will be making us all laugh onhttp://thedailywtf.com, for which I thank you in advance.
>
> If you really want a single person to do this, you'd be better off looking for:
>  - someone who has already studied both Law and IT - they do exist!
>  -  If you can't afford that person, at least someone who has studied
> Law and toyed with IT in their spare time.
>
> Either way, someone who doesn't "have a clue on who Knuth would be" is
> going to be a poor third choice - you really want someone who at least
> knows who Knuth is, even if they're not intimately familiar with his
> books.
>
>
>
>
>
> > 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
>
> --
> 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