Brainbench perl test?
uri at stemsystems.com
Tue Aug 28 20:28:50 BST 2012
On 08/28/2012 02:46 PM, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Uri Guttman <uri at stemsystems.com> wrote:
>> i also did it way back and didn't like it then. multiple choice tests in
>> general suck for actual testing of real world skills and programming ones
>> suck even more. no candidate i have reviewed in ages has ever mentioned
>> brainbench nor has any client. so in my world it is a non-entity. i know of
>> several take home tests from clients that i review or see the answers and
>> they tell me much more than any 'cert' could do. so does reviewing of
>> existing code samples. there is no reason to even consider a timed multiple
>> choice test.
> When I interviewed at the BBC they had me do Brainbench. It seemed
> like a fair, reasonably challenging test. The BBC is a pretty decent
> employer so I'd consider that a reason to do a timed multiple choice
> test ;-)
it can be used as a very basic filter to remove the idiots (there are
plenty of them). clients hate having to do that level of filtering
themselves so they may buy brainbench uses. i don't need them as my
idiot filter is on a hair trigger all the time. :)
>>From an employer's side - it's practically no cost to them on top of
> their existing recruitment efforts, and has a bunch of benefits
> associated with involving an unconnected third party.
considering the dozens of clients i have dealt with and none have ever
mentioned brainbench, i stand ny my view that it is a non-entity. if you
can't pass brainbench, you are a non-starter. if you can pass it you
would still need to be properly vetted by me or by coding tests. so it
doesn't gain much in my view.
More information about the london.pm