News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We compiled a library of realistic engineering take-home tests and ranked them. Parent comment

Re:We compiled a library of realistic engineering take-home ... by itsdrewmiller on Thursday August 25, 2022 @09:34PM (#32602309)
Re: 3 - if you read the full paper you'll see that on its own a work sample test has (barely) the highest predictive value (but a lower confidence in that than GMA which is more heavily studied). This quote I think does more to demonstrate that GMA and integrity are less correlated than GMA and work product testing or structured interviews, which is intuitive.

Re: 4 - I'm not sure why you would consider a take home test less valid as a work sample test and then prefer a whiteboard test. Certainly the latter is less representative of real working conditions. (I probably would not want to work in a place where whiteboarding is more representative, at least!)

Your other two points are reasonable threats to validity but I don't think especially strong ones. The research covers many different professions so I think the onus would be on you to explain why software engineering is so different.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We compiled a library of realistic engineering take-home ... by alexyang21 on Friday August 26, 2022 @02:09PM (#32610829)
Yeah I think #1 and #2 are valid criticisms. My issue with the parent comment's line of reasoning is that it doesn't apply the same level of rigor to evaluating whiteboarding as it does to work sample tests. Our goal should be to identify which evaluation approach is most predictive based on the evidence available.
[ Parent | on HN ]