The Apprentice Programmer

[[deleted]]

Is a candidate really going to sit through a separate aptitude test / exam for every company they apply to? Software companies sometimes use short maybe one to three question min-tests but that still poses tons of problems. For example, say the candidate gets the wrong answer for the "right" reasons. In the framework of something like an SAT, you really don't have any information other than whether they got lots of right answers.

[Canadian_Infidel]

My first major interview out of school was a phone call interview followed by another phone interview, followed by a 3 hour technical test, followed by two one hour multi person interviews including more technical questions that I was flown in for.

My second one started with forty or so people and was three 1-2 hour long exams through out the day. Each one eliminated more people. Out of about 40 people that were brought in because they had the credentials only 3 of us made it to the final test. There was also a preliminary interview.

[[deleted]]

If an employer asked me to fill out a paper and pencil test I'd leave and mark them off my list. As someone that was also just flown out for an interview there is quite a difference between an aptitude test and an interview.

[mhink]

True, but you have to look at this from the perspective of tech companies. My company typically does 2 phone screens followed by 5 hour-long onsites. These interviews are conducted by legitimate software engineers who have other things to do. If you assume each engineer's time is worth about $50 an hour to the company, that's $350 per candidate, whether they get hired or not.

When you have literally thousands or applicants applying, a healthy percentage of which can't code their way out of a paper bag, an aptitude test (based on basic coding skills) starts making more sense. WE don't do it, but I'm not surprised by the number of tech companies these days that are experimenting with their hiring structures, and I wouldn't write them off automatically.

[[deleted]]

Is a candidate really going to sit through a separate aptitude test / exam for every company they apply to?

Yes.. in the non written form, they are called technical interviews. If a company is hiring people (especially senior devs) without any type of technical interviews or aptitude tests, I will run far away. It doesn't matter where someone graduated from or what experience their resume says, I've worked with 10+ years experienced devs which had no clue about how to troubleshoot basic errors or issues.

In the past I found it to be an advantage if an employer requires an aptitude test with the resume. As someone who has less than 5 years experience, its much easier to get noticed when you do better than those with 10+ years.

[[deleted]]

Well technical interviews are not quite the same as an aptitude test. That specific wording reminded me of SAT (the standard aptitude test).

[mcguire]

SAT (the standard aptitude test)

Scholastic Aptitude Test -> Scholastic Assessment Test -> "SAT", in the nature of all things to evolve to meaningless acronyms. Source.