4 ms·

We all know that interviews are terrible. Wouldn't that be the problem? Then students from top-tier universities achieving the same interview score as student f

We all know that interviews are terrible. Wouldn't that be the problem? Then students from top-tier universities achieving the same interview score as student from lower-tier universities is meaningless. The interviews fail to capture what matters. The best jobs I had and also jobs I performed the best I got through credentials and experience, not scribbling on a whiteboard. If you went to top 10 school in the world, you worked hard (at least it used to be this way). I don't need to look at specifics of what you did but I know you needed grit, good work-ethic, personal time sacrifice, etc to get through. Unless you're super smart. In either case it adds to your personal brand. I think that's what perpetuates the system. Given unlimited time I'd be happy to give everyone a shot. But time is precious so stick to what you know? I know how things are in the Uni I went to. If a CV landed on my desk form someone who did the same course, I'd put them on top of my list.

stmw 9y ago
This sounds reasonable enough, but on the other side, so is the observation that often people who get into and get through top 10 schools are actually ones that did not work hard. The point of using interviewing.io online technical interview as the first step of the process is that it makes your "I'd be happy to give everyone a shot" take far less time than alternatives. Still can't get unlimited time or perfect fairness, but it's better.
- opportune 9y ago
  I went to a "top 10 school." I'd say that only maybe 20% of the students (in CS) were people that I would want to hire if I were running a company. A lot of top school students get accepted because a) mom and dad are rich, sent kid to feeder high school, pushed kid to do ECs/do tutoring/get help with essays b) they fit into some admissions "bucket" like {has inspirational story} or {huge volunteering effort} or {also amazing artist}. The worst students were always the ones that went to feeder schools and had wealthy parents, which are incidentally the majority of students at top schools
  - stmw 9y ago
    Exactly. Those a great examples, and you could add the ones of students who are not interested in being engineers. Of course, technical interviews and really any other recruiting process, are not perfect, but it gets one closer.
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    I wonder if your experience taints your opinion here. I don't know because I barely went to a state college for a minute before I got the job I wanted and dropped out. It's possible if you spent the same time at an average university first you might find 50 or 80% of the "top 10" students to be worth hiring.
kbart 9y ago
Replacing tech interviews (even as quirky as they are) with credentials and school rating is even worse as it weeds out the wast majority potentially prospect candidates that had no opportunity to attend top universities. Of course, graduating top university shows that a person is capable, but it doesn't automatically means that (s)he's better everyone else who graduated lower ranking schools.

stmw 9y ago

This sounds reasonable enough, but on the other side, so is the observation that often people who get into and get through top 10 schools are actually ones that did not work hard. The point of using interviewing.io online technical interview as the first step of the process is that it makes your "I'd be happy to give everyone a shot" take far less time than alternatives. Still can't get unlimited time or perfect fairness, but it's better.

opportune 9y ago
I went to a "top 10 school." I'd say that only maybe 20% of the students (in CS) were people that I would want to hire if I were running a company. A lot of top school students get accepted because a) mom and dad are rich, sent kid to feeder high school, pushed kid to do ECs/do tutoring/get help with essays b) they fit into some admissions "bucket" like {has inspirational story} or {huge volunteering effort} or {also amazing artist}. The worst students were always the ones that went to feeder schools and had wealthy parents, which are incidentally the majority of students at top schools
- stmw 9y ago
  Exactly. Those a great examples, and you could add the ones of students who are not interested in being engineers. Of course, technical interviews and really any other recruiting process, are not perfect, but it gets one closer.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  I wonder if your experience taints your opinion here. I don't know because I barely went to a state college for a minute before I got the job I wanted and dropped out. It's possible if you spent the same time at an average university first you might find 50 or 80% of the "top 10" students to be worth hiring.

kbart 9y ago

Replacing tech interviews (even as quirky as they are) with credentials and school rating is even worse as it weeds out the wast majority potentially prospect candidates that had no opportunity to attend top universities. Of course, graduating top university shows that a person is capable, but it doesn't automatically means that (s)he's better everyone else who graduated lower ranking schools.