3 ms·

> I don't get it. University tests are brutal too and have the expectation the student will devote large amounts of time and energy. It seems like a job intervi

> I don't get it. University tests are brutal too and have the expectation the student will devote large amounts of time and energy. It seems like a job interview is fair game for the same, no? No. That logic is just superficial pattern matching. The point of university is to spend the time and energy to master the subject, test or no, and the knowledge gained is usually valuable in and of itself. The kind of interview prep in question is basically learning how to jump through some arrogant company's hoops, which likely has little to do with anything, including their actual job.

rchaud 5y ago
What is the SAT/ACT if not jumping through hoops? Why do I have to be in the top 10% of my HS class, AND in the 95th percentile of SAT scores? People are accustomed to jumping through hoops to pay an already rich institution several thousand more dollars. In contrast, you study for Google's exams, and if you pass, Google ends up paying you.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > What is the SAT/ACT if not jumping through hoops? I wouldn't call those "university tests." Also, you can do quite well by just mastering your High School subjects without extra test prep, and the stuff tested (e.g. Algebra) is stuff you'll actually build on in university. They're also standardized, so even if you decide to do test prep, it's not like you have to prep for different exams for each school you apply for.
johnwheeler 5y ago
> The point of university is to spend the time and energy to master the subject Really? I think most people go to college to get a good job before all else. With that line of thinking, an interview is just another of these “tests”. But you make a good point about these arrogant companies administering tests. College faculty are never arrogant, but always humble like this guy in the article who just can’t chalk his failure up to being a human being.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > Really? I think most people go to college to get a good job before all else. With that line of thinking, an interview is just another of these “tests”. That's called credentialism, and it's a perversion of what universities are supposed to be. > But you make a good point about these arrogant companies administering tests. College faculty are never arrogant, but always humble What a red herring. > College faculty are never arrogant, but always humble like this guy in the article who just can’t chalk his failure up to being a human being. Let's review that professor's story: > Jacobson has no trouble admitting he totally blew a basic test at the beginning of an interview for a fairly elite job at Google. He has no expectation that had he passed the test, he would have earned a place at the company down the line. He has a problem with the fact that a company with the power, prestige and wealth of Google has developed a recruiting process that is so large and systematic that it can both ask for large amounts of time and energy from prospective candidates and then easily or accidentally hurt or dismiss those same qualified candidates because of a difference, like Jacobson's cognitive disorder. Does that sound like arrogance to you? Ignoring the sarcasm for a moment, there's a difference between being humble and being a pushover, and it's more of a pushover thing to overlook glaring problems in a process in order to blame oneself. His story also brings to mind another salient difference that undermines your attempt to compare a Google's interview process to the ACT/SAT: if you flub a standardized test, you can easily retake it. That's not so much the case with an interview.

rchaud 5y ago

What is the SAT/ACT if not jumping through hoops? Why do I have to be in the top 10% of my HS class, AND in the 95th percentile of SAT scores? People are accustomed to jumping through hoops to pay an already rich institution several thousand more dollars. In contrast, you study for Google's exams, and if you pass, Google ends up paying you.

tablespoon 5y ago
> What is the SAT/ACT if not jumping through hoops? I wouldn't call those "university tests." Also, you can do quite well by just mastering your High School subjects without extra test prep, and the stuff tested (e.g. Algebra) is stuff you'll actually build on in university. They're also standardized, so even if you decide to do test prep, it's not like you have to prep for different exams for each school you apply for.

johnwheeler 5y ago

> The point of university is to spend the time and energy to master the subject Really? I think most people go to college to get a good job before all else. With that line of thinking, an interview is just another of these “tests”. But you make a good point about these arrogant companies administering tests. College faculty are never arrogant, but always humble like this guy in the article who just can’t chalk his failure up to being a human being.

tablespoon 5y ago
> Really? I think most people go to college to get a good job before all else. With that line of thinking, an interview is just another of these “tests”. That's called credentialism, and it's a perversion of what universities are supposed to be. > But you make a good point about these arrogant companies administering tests. College faculty are never arrogant, but always humble What a red herring. > College faculty are never arrogant, but always humble like this guy in the article who just can’t chalk his failure up to being a human being. Let's review that professor's story: > Jacobson has no trouble admitting he totally blew a basic test at the beginning of an interview for a fairly elite job at Google. He has no expectation that had he passed the test, he would have earned a place at the company down the line. He has a problem with the fact that a company with the power, prestige and wealth of Google has developed a recruiting process that is so large and systematic that it can both ask for large amounts of time and energy from prospective candidates and then easily or accidentally hurt or dismiss those same qualified candidates because of a difference, like Jacobson's cognitive disorder. Does that sound like arrogance to you? Ignoring the sarcasm for a moment, there's a difference between being humble and being a pushover, and it's more of a pushover thing to overlook glaring problems in a process in order to blame oneself. His story also brings to mind another salient difference that undermines your attempt to compare a Google's interview process to the ACT/SAT: if you flub a standardized test, you can easily retake it. That's not so much the case with an interview.