| 1 |
On 13 February 2015 at 19:45, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:51 AM, NP-Hardass <np.hardass@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> So, in summary, my suggestion is to consider transforming the quiz process |
| 5 |
>> into two separate sections, the first is a standard text based test like the |
| 6 |
>> current system, and the second is an (semi-)interactive system where the |
| 7 |
>> user has to problem solve, giving a more practical approach to quiz |
| 8 |
>> questions. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> The current process is more interactive than the quiz itself might |
| 12 |
> suggest. After the quiz is completed there is an interview to go over |
| 13 |
> it. This allows for free discussion. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> One of the goals is to focus on interaction between the candidate and |
| 16 |
> the recruiter, because they are assessing maturity/social skills/etc |
| 17 |
> in addition to technical ones. In addition to having the knowledge |
| 18 |
> that they shouldn't go messing with eclasses without posting them on |
| 19 |
> -dev or whatever, we want to make sure they have the sense/maturity to |
| 20 |
> actually do it. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Certainly that is something that is impossible to accomplish in a |
| 23 |
> perfect way, but it is still important. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> So, I'd probably focus more on interactivity between the candidate and |
| 26 |
> a recruiter/mentor/whatever, and less on interactivity between the |
| 27 |
> recruit and some kind of computer-based-training software. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Why not do both? I have been thinking along those lines too. I think |
| 30 |
improvements are possible in both areas. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Cheers, |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Ben | yngwin |
| 36 |
Gentoo developer |
Archives