7 ms·

I've noticed there are SO many of these "coding interview prep" courses lately. Like, obviously it's a hot job market, but there's just so many and of a certain

I've noticed there are SO many of these "coding interview prep" courses lately. Like, obviously it's a hot job market, but there's just so many and of a certain vibe that it seems like some are selling a dream. There's a common narrative too, that it's all about algorithm question prep and it's a "game" you can win. One youtuber who recently landed a ~$275K TC gig said it's not about being "intelligent" it's about practice and rapid pattern recognition (he also was pitching his own coding interview prep course). Said he forgot half of it after getting the job. This could all be true but this narrative is coming from sources that have a financial interest in making you believe that. What do you think HN? I mean I know algorithm prep is an important part of the interview but.. there's just something sketch about all these outfits I can't quite put my finger on. (I also wonder if the people who get hired based on prep vs. aptitude then have a kind of survivor bias and hire others who are strong on this limited range of pattern recognition... could it be a problem for the industry?)

dgzl 7y ago
I love your insight, but I don't know much about these courses. Even though I am myself prepping for an interview, I'm just reading CtCi and building the structures and algorithms myself.
save_ferris 7y ago
A major force driving this is the employers who choose to conduct interviews in this way. I'm a developer with about 6 years experience in full stack web app development (Rails & Django mostly), and I recently got my ass absolutely kicked during a couple of live coding challenges that were very heavy on theory (also worth mentioning that I'm a self-taught dev without a CS degree). I started talking to some former coworkers about my experience, and I got 2 main responses: A) it's imperative to have a CS foundation regardless of your degree if you want to advance in your career, and B) employers only consider prior experience to certain degree. The two interviews that I bombed involved heavily contrived coding challenges that tested CS fundamentals in ways that I've never encountered in a professional environment, so it doesn't surprise me at all to see services like this popping up.
- xenihn 7y ago
  I don't have a CS degree either, and I have yet to pass so much as a FAANG phonescreen (I'm 0 for 3), but I'm both glad and grateful that the employers that pay the most also care the least about your education or past experience when it comes to the interview process. Compare it to equivalent high-paying fields like finance or law, where you can hit a career ceiling based simply on what school you went to. I hate studying for tech interviews. It feels like a sisyphean task, since I'll get really into prepping for a few days, then taper off until I've forgotten everything. At least it's easier to start up again the next time. This is now my third time attempting to prep. I wish I was brave enough to just quit my job and spend 2 months studying. I'm in SF now, and all of my friends here make at least $300k when counting stocks and bonuses. I'm just barely short of half that (with no stocks or bonuses), and getting there is my next big career goal.
- abalone 7y ago
  To be clear I think it’s good to test CS fundamentals even if you don’t use them every day. It’s a good screen for aptitude. I’m just concerned that taken to the extreme it mistakes excessive pattern recognition prep for true comprehension and aptitude. Especially if it’s “whoever puts the optimal solution on the board fastest wins.” I do think it would do you some good to read up on core CS and algorithms though. I also did not get a CS degree and learned in the field, but now having studied up on it I feel much more in command of my craft. They do come into play now and then, it’s not just brain teasers. It does take weeks to months to really learn it though so I understand the resistance.
  - dntrkv 7y ago
    A strong CS foundation is hugely valuable and I don't think anyone will argue that but the fact that someone with over a decade of experience can go from a "no hire" to "hire" after a couple months of practice tells me that we aren't testing for the right skills.
    - abalone 7y ago
      Being exactly of those people (experienced but would have failed algo screen and had to brush up), I can confirm it would have false negatived me despite years of competent productivity... and yet I also feel I have filled in some significant gaps that I was lucky to avoid previously. I think if you have a really strong “portfolio” of individual work that can be validated as being yours, like side projects, that can be a valid pathway into at least non senior roles. Maybe you’re weak on algos and other team members can help out at key points. But I don’t know a better objective and direct measure of coding aptitude inside of 60 minutes. My issue is not with it in principle, at least for senior roles. It’s taking it to an extreme and misinterpreting the results. It gives this false sense of certainty about aptitude.
dntrkv 7y ago
It depends on the company, but most of the FAANG company (and others that try to imitate them) interviews come down to how quickly you can get the optimal solution on the board. It has very little to do with how well you can code day to day. Most interviews have 4 sessions broken up in the following manner: 1 hour: coding 1 hour: coding 1 hour: lunch 1 hour: system design 1 hour: cross-functional In my experience though, the first two are the ones that really make or break candidates, if you don't pass both, you're not getting hired. And yes, most of those interviews just test your knowledge of how quickly you can figure out the right data structure and algo for the question at hand. And even if you know all of the data structures and the applications of each, it can be incredibly difficult to solve the problems in the allotted time. The other funny thing is that your previous experience doesn't do anything for you other than maybe getting to skip the technical phone screen. Everyone goes through the same process. e.g. https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en On the bright side, it does look like many companies are now realizing this isn't a great way to evaluate someone's ability and are beginning to incorporate more practical exercises.
- mevile 7y ago
  Where I work we give people real problems to solve during interviews. We have a great team that gets a lot of work done. In hiring we put emphasis on practical expertise with the tech we use and the problems we face and not academic puzzles. There's immense value in having a strong computer science background and I feel we've had success being able to get a sense in our candidates where they stand without the standard whiteboard hell other companies put their candidates through.
  - abalone 7y ago
    Can you give an example problem? I wonder how rigorous non-algo challenges can be inside of an hour. Or how you would “get a sense” of CS fundamentals without algo tests.
    - IanCal 7y ago
xenihn 7y ago
I'm pretty sure that Interview Cake is at least five years old at this point.
hello_moto 7y ago
> I've noticed there are SO many of these "coding interview prep" courses lately. Like, obviously it's a hot job market, but there's just so many and of a certain vibe that it seems like some are selling a dream. It's akin to the Fitness world. There are tons of people selling proteins whey, their fitness apps, fitness set "reps", etc. Can't blame them, they're selling what people want.
- growtofill 7y ago
  What’s wrong with either of those?
ma2rten 7y ago
I work at Google. I think it's half true. I would not have passed the Google interview if I had not prepared. After 3 years, I have completely forgotten most of the prep. I couldn't even implement a binary search right now. That said, I do have an innate ability for problem solving. I know another person, who has prepared significantly more than me (multiple months full-time) but still wasn't able to get an on-site interview. In my opinion, it requires at least a minimum level of intelligence, luck and preparation.
- Sirenos 7y ago
  I get the sentiment but come on. I seriously doubt you cannot even implement a binary search right now.
  - ma2rten 7y ago
    It's true. Obviously I could do it if I could look it up or if I could look it up, but not on command.
weq 7y ago
I have found pair-programming with a dev on a current problem you have in your codebase to be the best litmus test. If u want to give "quiz" interviews, u will get employee's good doing them. Like those CS grads in my class who copied eachothers take-home assignments yet still passed because they were good at memoizing. Furthermore, this is the first training session for your future employee - you are inducting them into your companies culture. If "answering meaningless questions for the sake of it, is what you want to portray to them. So be it." They have been warned! Selecting for a certain subset of people, is a business decision. Be aware of what interview practices mean in the context of how that company operates. If the job add has a sticker list of tech-hype, a promise of re-dev'ing a monolith into k8 microservices, with a leetcode interview, you already know alot about that company!
- abalone 7y ago
  > I have found pair-programming with a dev on a current problem you have in your codebase to be the best litmus test. This has its drawbacks too. You're biasing towards familiarity with your code base's specific tech stack. Good engineers can learn new tech stacks in days/weeks, so that's not that important to screen for. Plus "everyday" code is a lot of plumbing and busywork, so it's not as good a screen for intelligence. Algos at least cut to the "hard stuff". > Like those CS grads in my class who... passed because they were good at memoizing. Getting good at memoizing would be a perfectly fine reason to pass a dynamic programming class. :-)

dgzl 7y ago

I love your insight, but I don't know much about these courses. Even though I am myself prepping for an interview, I'm just reading CtCi and building the structures and algorithms myself.

save_ferris 7y ago

A major force driving this is the employers who choose to conduct interviews in this way. I'm a developer with about 6 years experience in full stack web app development (Rails & Django mostly), and I recently got my ass absolutely kicked during a couple of live coding challenges that were very heavy on theory (also worth mentioning that I'm a self-taught dev without a CS degree). I started talking to some former coworkers about my experience, and I got 2 main responses: A) it's imperative to have a CS foundation regardless of your degree if you want to advance in your career, and B) employers only consider prior experience to certain degree. The two interviews that I bombed involved heavily contrived coding challenges that tested CS fundamentals in ways that I've never encountered in a professional environment, so it doesn't surprise me at all to see services like this popping up.

xenihn 7y ago
I don't have a CS degree either, and I have yet to pass so much as a FAANG phonescreen (I'm 0 for 3), but I'm both glad and grateful that the employers that pay the most also care the least about your education or past experience when it comes to the interview process. Compare it to equivalent high-paying fields like finance or law, where you can hit a career ceiling based simply on what school you went to. I hate studying for tech interviews. It feels like a sisyphean task, since I'll get really into prepping for a few days, then taper off until I've forgotten everything. At least it's easier to start up again the next time. This is now my third time attempting to prep. I wish I was brave enough to just quit my job and spend 2 months studying. I'm in SF now, and all of my friends here make at least $300k when counting stocks and bonuses. I'm just barely short of half that (with no stocks or bonuses), and getting there is my next big career goal.
abalone 7y ago
To be clear I think it’s good to test CS fundamentals even if you don’t use them every day. It’s a good screen for aptitude. I’m just concerned that taken to the extreme it mistakes excessive pattern recognition prep for true comprehension and aptitude. Especially if it’s “whoever puts the optimal solution on the board fastest wins.” I do think it would do you some good to read up on core CS and algorithms though. I also did not get a CS degree and learned in the field, but now having studied up on it I feel much more in command of my craft. They do come into play now and then, it’s not just brain teasers. It does take weeks to months to really learn it though so I understand the resistance.
- dntrkv 7y ago
  A strong CS foundation is hugely valuable and I don't think anyone will argue that but the fact that someone with over a decade of experience can go from a "no hire" to "hire" after a couple months of practice tells me that we aren't testing for the right skills.
  - abalone 7y ago
    Being exactly of those people (experienced but would have failed algo screen and had to brush up), I can confirm it would have false negatived me despite years of competent productivity... and yet I also feel I have filled in some significant gaps that I was lucky to avoid previously. I think if you have a really strong “portfolio” of individual work that can be validated as being yours, like side projects, that can be a valid pathway into at least non senior roles. Maybe you’re weak on algos and other team members can help out at key points. But I don’t know a better objective and direct measure of coding aptitude inside of 60 minutes. My issue is not with it in principle, at least for senior roles. It’s taking it to an extreme and misinterpreting the results. It gives this false sense of certainty about aptitude.

dntrkv 7y ago

It depends on the company, but most of the FAANG company (and others that try to imitate them) interviews come down to how quickly you can get the optimal solution on the board. It has very little to do with how well you can code day to day. Most interviews have 4 sessions broken up in the following manner: 1 hour: coding 1 hour: coding 1 hour: lunch 1 hour: system design 1 hour: cross-functional In my experience though, the first two are the ones that really make or break candidates, if you don't pass both, you're not getting hired. And yes, most of those interviews just test your knowledge of how quickly you can figure out the right data structure and algo for the question at hand. And even if you know all of the data structures and the applications of each, it can be incredibly difficult to solve the problems in the allotted time. The other funny thing is that your previous experience doesn't do anything for you other than maybe getting to skip the technical phone screen. Everyone goes through the same process. e.g. https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en On the bright side, it does look like many companies are now realizing this isn't a great way to evaluate someone's ability and are beginning to incorporate more practical exercises.

mevile 7y ago
Where I work we give people real problems to solve during interviews. We have a great team that gets a lot of work done. In hiring we put emphasis on practical expertise with the tech we use and the problems we face and not academic puzzles. There's immense value in having a strong computer science background and I feel we've had success being able to get a sense in our candidates where they stand without the standard whiteboard hell other companies put their candidates through.
- abalone 7y ago
  Can you give an example problem? I wonder how rigorous non-algo challenges can be inside of an hour. Or how you would “get a sense” of CS fundamentals without algo tests.
  - IanCal 7y ago

xenihn 7y ago

I'm pretty sure that Interview Cake is at least five years old at this point.

hello_moto 7y ago

> I've noticed there are SO many of these "coding interview prep" courses lately. Like, obviously it's a hot job market, but there's just so many and of a certain vibe that it seems like some are selling a dream. It's akin to the Fitness world. There are tons of people selling proteins whey, their fitness apps, fitness set "reps", etc. Can't blame them, they're selling what people want.

growtofill 7y ago
What’s wrong with either of those?

ma2rten 7y ago

I work at Google. I think it's half true. I would not have passed the Google interview if I had not prepared. After 3 years, I have completely forgotten most of the prep. I couldn't even implement a binary search right now. That said, I do have an innate ability for problem solving. I know another person, who has prepared significantly more than me (multiple months full-time) but still wasn't able to get an on-site interview. In my opinion, it requires at least a minimum level of intelligence, luck and preparation.

Sirenos 7y ago
I get the sentiment but come on. I seriously doubt you cannot even implement a binary search right now.
- ma2rten 7y ago
  It's true. Obviously I could do it if I could look it up or if I could look it up, but not on command.

weq 7y ago

I have found pair-programming with a dev on a current problem you have in your codebase to be the best litmus test. If u want to give "quiz" interviews, u will get employee's good doing them. Like those CS grads in my class who copied eachothers take-home assignments yet still passed because they were good at memoizing. Furthermore, this is the first training session for your future employee - you are inducting them into your companies culture. If "answering meaningless questions for the sake of it, is what you want to portray to them. So be it." They have been warned! Selecting for a certain subset of people, is a business decision. Be aware of what interview practices mean in the context of how that company operates. If the job add has a sticker list of tech-hype, a promise of re-dev'ing a monolith into k8 microservices, with a leetcode interview, you already know alot about that company!

abalone 7y ago
> I have found pair-programming with a dev on a current problem you have in your codebase to be the best litmus test. This has its drawbacks too. You're biasing towards familiarity with your code base's specific tech stack. Good engineers can learn new tech stacks in days/weeks, so that's not that important to screen for. Plus "everyday" code is a lot of plumbing and busywork, so it's not as good a screen for intelligence. Algos at least cut to the "hard stuff". > Like those CS grads in my class who... passed because they were good at memoizing. Getting good at memoizing would be a perfectly fine reason to pass a dynamic programming class. :-)