To determine the people "cut out" or "not cut out" for something, based on a single class or two ignores a host of problems which have nothing to do with aptitu

To determine the people "cut out" or "not cut out" for something, based on a single class or two ignores a host of problems which have nothing to do with aptitude nor interest in the material. The way it is taught, the teacher, the fellow students, all contribute to success in an academic endeavor. Further, some people struggle with subjects for a long time, then one day "get it" and surpass those who were obviously in the good group all through studies. Some people thrive under one teaching methodology and curriculum and others thrive under different conditions. Basically the thing you describe only selects the subset of people who represent the intersection of the sets (people with an aptitude for proramming) (people who thrive under this curriculum) (people who get it quicly/incrementally). There could be plenty of other people in the (people with and aptitude for programming) set. Another vaguely related bit of thinking: A lot of the best programmers I know come out of non-cs curriculums like math, music, geography, philosophy and so on.