I agree with you actually, in most cases - but not this case.
This was about 5 years ago, so i'm short on details, but the test was more on general network admin knowledge and how they would handle given situations.
such as: What is X and how would you apply it to Y.
How would you perform routine Z and when would you perform said task? That sort of thing.
Candidate #3's answers were basically verbatim from web pages in his history. Now i appreciate those who have the sense to double-check themselves, but the blatant copying was a bit much for us. We later spoke to candidate #2, who was hired and he said he thought about double-checking his answers online, but realized that his traffic would surely be monitored and he didn't want to risk looking as if he'd cheated. As i said, he ended up being a great choice.
But again, i do agree that no one should be expected to memorize APIs or anything like that.. that's ridiculous. But knowing how to use the API, what an API is, when to apply certain methods or general procedures, etc.. that's is important.
Though i agree it's unfair that IT professionals should be targeted and test in this way, I can understand this point of view.
At a previous job, we interviewed for an assistant admin. We had three candidates, one slightly under qualified, one qualified and one who appeared a little over qualified. We gave them each the same test, on a computer with internet access mind you. The under qualified person and the qualified person did as expected. The, according-to-his-resume, over qualified candidate did outstanding.
We went back to look at the server logs at the time of the test and found that the 3rd person had Google'd all of his questions and basically copied answers from the web to paper.
In our eyes, if the candidate didn't realize that his internet usage could or was being tracked, then do we want that person? Apart from the fact that he basically plagiarized his answers.
So in this case, w/o the test, we would have ended up with an employee who basically lied to us. We ending up hiring the 2nd person and things worked out perfectly.
Agreed. Entry level QA can be a great place to start looking.
One of my best friends is a very successful QA Engineer, he knows very little about software development and enough about scripting to help him in his everyday work. Also, if you have any friends who do enjoy programming / scripting, they can always help you out with scripting until you learn a little more about it.
I did QA as my first Engineering job (after some helpdesk / sys admin work) and found that it's a great job for someone who doesn't wish to program, but wants to work in the SW industry.. the job wasn't for me, but thankfully i got promoted to development pretty quickly.
But again, QA is probably a great area to start looking.
I cannot imagine how anyone who broadcasts an unencrypted radio signal can complain if someone else picks up that signal. It would be like a TV station claiming that you are stealing their content because you tuned into their channel.
An interesting argument. This is slightly off topic, but in Virginia Radar Detectors are illegal. Yet their sole job is to pick up on openly broadcasts signals sent from radar guns. The radar gun is sending out a broadcast radio wave into the open air... and yet, when a radar detector picks that signal up and reacts to it, that is considered a crime.
To me it's the equivalent of this tee-shirt. The shirt picks up a signal.. doesn't read it per se, just picks up on its existence... much like a radar detector mounted in a car.
The only difference I see is that someone with a radar detector is more likely to use that signal to break the law. But to me, until the driver actually breaks the law (speeding that is), then where's the crime?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you actually, in most cases - but not this case.
This was about 5 years ago, so i'm short on details, but the test was more on general network admin knowledge and how they would handle given situations.
such as: What is X and how would you apply it to Y.
How would you perform routine Z and when would you perform said task? That sort of thing.
Candidate #3's answers were basically verbatim from web pages in his history. Now i appreciate those who have the sense to double-check themselves, but the blatant copying was a bit much for us. We later spoke to candidate #2, who was hired and he said he thought about double-checking his answers online, but realized that his traffic would surely be monitored and he didn't want to risk looking as if he'd cheated. As i said, he ended up being a great choice.
But again, i do agree that no one should be expected to memorize APIs or anything like that.. that's ridiculous. But knowing how to use the API, what an API is, when to apply certain methods or general procedures, etc.. that's is important.
Though i agree it's unfair that IT professionals should be targeted and test in this way, I can understand this point of view.
At a previous job, we interviewed for an assistant admin. We had three candidates, one slightly under qualified, one qualified and one who appeared a little over qualified. We gave them each the same test, on a computer with internet access mind you. The under qualified person and the qualified person did as expected. The, according-to-his-resume, over qualified candidate did outstanding.
We went back to look at the server logs at the time of the test and found that the 3rd person had Google'd all of his questions and basically copied answers from the web to paper.
In our eyes, if the candidate didn't realize that his internet usage could or was being tracked, then do we want that person? Apart from the fact that he basically plagiarized his answers.
So in this case, w/o the test, we would have ended up with an employee who basically lied to us. We ending up hiring the 2nd person and things worked out perfectly.
Agreed. Entry level QA can be a great place to start looking.
One of my best friends is a very successful QA Engineer, he knows very little about software development and enough about scripting to help him in his everyday work. Also, if you have any friends who do enjoy programming / scripting, they can always help you out with scripting until you learn a little more about it.
I did QA as my first Engineering job (after some helpdesk / sys admin work) and found that it's a great job for someone who doesn't wish to program, but wants to work in the SW industry.. the job wasn't for me, but thankfully i got promoted to development pretty quickly.
But again, QA is probably a great area to start looking.
An interesting argument. This is slightly off topic, but in Virginia Radar Detectors are illegal. Yet their sole job is to pick up on openly broadcasts signals sent from radar guns. The radar gun is sending out a broadcast radio wave into the open air... and yet, when a radar detector picks that signal up and reacts to it, that is considered a crime.
To me it's the equivalent of this tee-shirt. The shirt picks up a signal.. doesn't read it per se, just picks up on its existence... much like a radar detector mounted in a car.
The only difference I see is that someone with a radar detector is more likely to use that signal to break the law. But to me, until the driver actually breaks the law (speeding that is), then where's the crime?