On 12/17/10, Erin Knight <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey all - we are designing a set of assessments for various web
> development skill sets (for open education courses) and one that we
> are targeting is Advanced or Expert Javascript. Instead of tests or
> exams, we want to give people challenges or projects to encourage them
> to build something that demonstrates competency and quality.  Any
> ideas or examples that you have experienced and could share?
>
Test the candidate by asking him to review some of your code.

Tasks and quizzes are limited by the interviewer's ability assess the
quality of that which the candidate produces. Most often I find the
employer's "expert" who is giving the tests doesn't know jack shit
about javascript. One example is a local company "Salesforce.com",
which asked me to complete a task test and then suggested I use
MooTools to do that. OK, on the first part, but MooTools?! Relying on
host object prototypes' modifications and, where browser detection
determines that that is not supported, the host object itself is a big
failure. MooTools augments the failings of prototype. Lookig at their
outline test code, I saw a comment before the doctype, which gives
quirks mode in IE versions. Do they even know that?

Unlike with other trades (surgery, plumbing, auto mechanics), there
are not clear guidelines for what constitutes standard of quality.
I've interviewed at companies that have the wrong questions and, worse
yet, wrong answers. For an example:
http://www.uize.com/appendixes/javascript-interview-questions.html

Which to me, reads very haughty, e.g. " The candidate will spend a
good deal of futile time wondering if there is just a magical built-in
method that will do it for them. "

And so in response, I wrote the code guidelines document:
http://jibbering.com/faq/notes/code-guidelines/
And the accompanying document "code review guidelines"
http://jibbering.com/faq/notes/review/

Ask the candidate to perform a code review.. You'll also see how the
candidate deals with giving and receiving valid (hopefully) criticism.

Garrett

-- 
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]

Reply via email to