This seems like a really significant issue. First, because "5 as median" isn't a universal grading scheme, and 50% is often failing. Second, because this poll d

This seems like a really significant issue. First, because "5 as median" isn't a universal grading scheme, and 50% is often failing. Second, because this poll didn't specify what the numbers mean. The bounds of "programming ability" are basically undefined. Does 1, being the lowest, mean "cannot program"? Does 10, pain-scale style, mean "best programmer imaginable"? Or do the numbers represent deciles of skill? If so, do they include everyone who has written code? Only people who have completed a substantive project? Only people who have been "programmers" in a non-hobby setting? Only in a non-hobby, non-academic setting? Only people taking this quiz? And worse, it's a meta question. We aren't guessing what the survey meant here, we're guessing what the respondents thought it meant - which means that the skew may be totally accurate under their chosen boundaries! Keynesian beauty contest and all that. So this is an interesting result, but I can't really use it as data about self-reported skill, only about interpretation of surveys.