|
Re: Test validity
by KM (Priest) on May 26, 2000 at 20:00 UTC
|
Ok, I just took their test. It does have some questions that would likely be reasonably tough for a novice, but I am unsure what the worth of this test really is. I scored high (4.33), but what does that mean? Does it mean that someone with a score in the 2-3 range isn't a good programmer? Maybe some of the questions they had simply have not been things that come up in their past projects. Not everyone knows about shifting bits, or even map. Or, maybe someone does well on the test by knowing things conceptually, but has never put any of these things into practice.
I have taken similar tests for headhunters and never liked them. I simply don't like tests, but why judge someone on not knowing what a function does at that time, when they could learn in in 5 minutes by reading a man page.
I am not a certified Perl programmer because a website tells me I am, I am certifiably a Perl programmer because of the work I do, and have done.
Wow.. stop me from ranting.. please! :)
Cheers,
KM
UPDATE: On an aside, one of their pages keeps giving me a big fat java error. I wonder if the people working their pass their own tests :) | [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
I took the perl test to kind of add to my resume. Currently I am looking for a job programming and from my stand point any type of certification helps.
But you bring up a good point and I wonder what employers think of it.
Joe
| [reply] |
RE: Test validity
by eduardo (Curate) on May 26, 2000 at 20:06 UTC
|
I don't know if I'd consider it the very best test i've ever
taken. However, speaking as a manager and a CTO, if someone
came to me and has Master Perl certification from brainbench
it would at least tell me that they had enough skills to be
dangerous with it ;) | [reply] |
|
|
Why wouldn't it just tell you that they were smart enough to have a book and terminal handy while taking it? Any test in a non-controlled environment is suspect to cheating, and is therefore invalid.
Cheers,
KM
| [reply] |
|
|
Well, they do say you are allowed to use online references
and books, so that's part of the reason for the time limit.
In the real world, you're not expected to know everything,
but you had better know how to find the answers.
I scored higher than I expected, though (4.21). I was thinking
I got more answers wrong than that. I certainly don't feel like a
Certified Master Perl Programmer when I see some of the posts
on Perl Monks :)
One thing they could improve on: they give you lots of examples
and ask "What does this print out?". It's trivial to cut and
paste their code from the test window into an xterm and run it and
get the result without having to think about it critically.
They could fix this by having the code printed inside a PNG
image using GD or something similar, so cut-and-paste would be
not be an option.
Hmm, maybe Perl Monks could start some sort of certification
program...
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
Re: Test validity
by infoninja (Friar) on May 26, 2000 at 22:54 UTC
|
I've taken and passed the BrainBench Perl Programmer test, without much difficulty. However, I've never been asked about Perl certification by any of my clients - typically, their questions to determine Perl skills have either been "What can you show us for code that you've produced?" or "How would you solve problem x in Perl?" | [reply] |
RE: Test validity
by royalanjr (Chaplain) on May 26, 2000 at 22:26 UTC
|
All of you all have made some very great comments. While I
have not taken the Perl test, I have taken and passed four
others on that site. Other than pretty marks that might
impress someone, I am not sure how much use they truly are.
But, some yardstick has to be made to measure folks, and,
flawed as it might be, testing in one form or another is such
a yardstick. I still agree with the "show me what ya' got"
however *grin*
Roy Alan
| [reply] |
|
|
Didn't try brainbench Perl Programmer test, but have at
least 8 or 9 their other certifications - 4 of them at master
level. All without having too much of in depth knowledge,
just having a bit more than minimal understanding of the
subject.
| [reply] |
RE: Test validity
by mikfire (Deacon) on May 27, 2000 at 00:11 UTC
|
Hmm. Missed the part about using online materials. Several
questions I didn't know, but knew where to find the answers.
Of course, it came as quite a scare when I did the "See where
you stand" bit and missed that I had to enter the score by
hand. I thought for several seconds I really sucked - to
the point that I needed to find a new career ( no comments
from the peanut gallery, please ). I was very happy to
release my mistake. :)
They certainly had a thing for map in void context. Even I
wouldn't do some of the things they did with map and that
is saying something.
Mik
mikfire ( perlus bigotus maximus ) | [reply] |
|
|
there is a big err in the script of the test. if you refresh the page u are on the time will reset and give u the fill 180 sec. back and not mess up the test and u can go back and changer your ansers after u are finshed with the test
a bort test taker
| [reply] |
Re: Test validity
by vroom (His Eminence) on May 26, 2000 at 19:18 UTC
|
| [reply] |
Re: Test validity
by princepawn (Parson) on May 26, 2000 at 21:56 UTC
|
it doesn't test the knowledge of modules that are specific to your domain of Perl usage.
you can be more useful with less basic knowledge and more knowledge of how to use the modules in your domain of practice.
| [reply] |
RE: Test validity
by BigJoe (Curate) on May 26, 2000 at 20:15 UTC
|
I took the Brain bench Perl Programmer test and passed it. The problem I have with the testing is that the questions aren't difficult they are just worded enough to make them hard. I took it with no distractions and just the browser in about 25 min. I passed it on the 2nd try. | [reply] |