It turns out that there is nothing to do with the high level of engineer's skill and educational qualification


In order for companies to adopt talented people, it is not undoubtedly a guideline for evaluation,Educational backgroundIt can be said that it is. Although "It should be high performance because it was in a school with a high academic ability," and "It should be getting a good stimulus from the surrounding environment at school" etc. It is the basis for that, but the result which was investigated about the ability of a computer engineer It is clear from the fact that there is absolutely no relationship between being highly educated and having a high level of ability.

We looked at how a thousand college students performed in technical interviews to see if there went to school mattered. It did not. - blog

This survey was conducted on a platform on which an employee recruiter and a recruiter of an enterprise can conduct an interview anonymouslyinterviewing.iois. This service is actually used by recruiters of companies such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Microsoft, and mainly job seekers and recruiters looking for jobs as programmersMatching based only on skillIt is what makes it possible. As a result, while companies can gather people with high skills widely and efficiently, job offers are advantageous in that they can win a selection race that is often dependent on academic background with their own abilities.

free anonymous technical interview practice | free anonymous technical interview practice |

In this way,, which makes it possible to get rid of the edges of educational background, race, and sex, investigated how much correlation is actually between engineer skill and educational background. The company first classified the university in the United States into four categories, "Elite", "Top 15", "Top 50", "Remaining", and what statistical evaluation was given to the people belonging to each cluster It took. The breakdown of 4 clusters is as follows.

· Elite (Elite): MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Stanford University, Carnegie Mellon University, University of California Berkeley, etc.
· Top 15 (Top 15): University of Wisconsin, Cornell University, Columbia University, etc.
· Top 50 (Top 50): Ohio State University, New York University, Arizona State University, etc.
· The rest (remaining): Michigan State University, Vanderbilt University, North Eastern University, University of California at Santa Barbara, etc.

In the survey, each cluster is divided into "Junior" (active student · intern) and "Senior" (new graduate) and statistics are taken. First of all, the person who passed the initial test of receives the interview of start-up. Since this interview is totally non-face to face and anonymous, the company side can not know the identity of the partner other than the skill. After the interview, the company interviewer evaluates the applicant's evaluation in four stages from 1 to 4 from the lowest one.

The following graph plots the evaluations made in this way for each of the four clusters. First of all, if we look at four evaluations of Junior (active student / intern), we can see that the number of "Evaluation 3" is exceptionally large for every cluster. In addition, it is interesting that the evaluation is arranged in descending order of number, and it is wonderful that every cluster has "3 → 2 → 4 → 1" brilliantly.

Next, the graph of Senior (new graduate) is like this. The ratio of "3" is increased more than Junior, the difference between "2" and "4" is small, but the basic tendency is almost unlikely to be said with Junior.

What is important in this evaluation method is that the graph shows not the deviation value of distribution in each cluster but the absolute evaluation that the company has made. In fact, it is clear that the skill of recruitment applicants is hardly influenced by their academic background, and it is clear that superior people exist in the same way regardless of which education cluster they belong.

in Note, Posted by darkhorse_log