3 ms·

Ratings border on being useless to begin with, but out-of-ten? What's the difference between a 6 and a 7? I'm skeptical that anything finer than a 5 "star" syst

by ashark 12y ago

Ratings border on being useless to begin with, but out-of-ten? What's the difference between a 6 and a 7? I'm skeptical that anything finer than a 5 "star" system is meaningful without hard data to back it up, and even with that you have to divine whether it's calibrated to their best skill setting the 5 mark, or whether 5 represents best-in-the-field knowledge (so it'll almost never be used, so why not make it a four scale, but then what does the four mean...) Ratings. Ugh. Also, is it really normal for people to list something like "clean code" as a skill at all? Let alone one that can be rated out-of-ten? It seems like putting "contains no cyanide" on breakfast cereal. (it does look very nice, though—I may, um, "borrow" some of that design)

memset 12y ago
The purpose of the ratings, I presume, is to show someone's relative strengths and weaknesses, rather than an absolute scale. "Relative to backend development, I have strong proficiency in frontend skills." It is isomorphic to listing technical skills under "Proficient" versus "Familiar" headings, which is not uncommon on resumes. With respect to "clean code", this resume lists specific skills that fall under that umbrella. "TDD", "BDD", "CI".
- ashark 12y ago
  I question whether anyone would ever include something like "clean code" and rate it under, say, an 8, under any circumstances. The backend-versus-frontend bit is useful info, but the 10-scale isn't necessary or helpful for that. "Proficient" and "familiar", as you put it, would suffice, or ratings on a scale of four or five, if a scale is really a must. My concern isn't for the interviewer, mind you, it's for the interviewee. Including a 10-scale is just asking to have to defend it. "What sorts of things might a person rated at a three on this scale know or be able to do? What would be different for a four? What makes you a 9 instead of an 8?" These questions suck. No way I'd want to open myself up to that, and IMO they're legitimate questions. You chose a 10-scale to represent your skills. No one made you do that. And you rated your front-end skills highly! Can I expect similar things from your level-9 "clean code"? If I ask you to put a bar graph on a page will you zoom it to an inappropriate scale or label an axis with values finer than we can even measure? That's the kind of impression I'd fear giving the interviewer.

by ashark 12y ago

memset 12y ago

The purpose of the ratings, I presume, is to show someone's relative strengths and weaknesses, rather than an absolute scale. "Relative to backend development, I have strong proficiency in frontend skills." It is isomorphic to listing technical skills under "Proficient" versus "Familiar" headings, which is not uncommon on resumes. With respect to "clean code", this resume lists specific skills that fall under that umbrella. "TDD", "BDD", "CI".

ashark 12y ago
I question whether anyone would ever include something like "clean code" and rate it under, say, an 8, under any circumstances. The backend-versus-frontend bit is useful info, but the 10-scale isn't necessary or helpful for that. "Proficient" and "familiar", as you put it, would suffice, or ratings on a scale of four or five, if a scale is really a must. My concern isn't for the interviewer, mind you, it's for the interviewee. Including a 10-scale is just asking to have to defend it. "What sorts of things might a person rated at a three on this scale know or be able to do? What would be different for a four? What makes you a 9 instead of an 8?" These questions suck. No way I'd want to open myself up to that, and IMO they're legitimate questions. You chose a 10-scale to represent your skills. No one made you do that. And you rated your front-end skills highly! Can I expect similar things from your level-9 "clean code"? If I ask you to put a bar graph on a page will you zoom it to an inappropriate scale or label an axis with values finer than we can even measure? That's the kind of impression I'd fear giving the interviewer.