Software engineering is part knowledge and part application of knowledge (problem solving) and part ability to acquire and apply new knowledge. We remain current in our jobs and roles by making sure we're constantly learning. Interviews should be part testing of knowledge, but a lot more discussions to evaluate problem solving and ability to acquire & apply knowledge.
Also, knowledge in many cases becomes stale if not used. If I learn a new language/framework but don't use it in a project immediately, I'll forget almost all of it. I may learn react via books/tutorials, get a great score in the test, never use it and/or forget it by the time I get a job based on the score. Am I a good hire?
Given that it's not clear as to what problem such a test will solve and moreover it's unclear as to the long term impact of such a test. Is this just for initial filtering, or will become an actual hiring criteria?
If graduates from colleges are expected to take such a test to prove something, then what is the value of the work these grads did in their colleges? How is a score in these taking in regards to the work students do in colleges?
Some people are better test takers than others. An a good interviewer is able to probe and work with the person. So such tests may end up discriminating, not on purpose of course, against bad test takers if they become the sole filtering mechanism. People may have to take tests again and again till they get a good score. An effort, which in no way helps in their job per se but is simple an additional burden.
The only potential place where I can see some value for such a test if to evaluate the coding camp folks, since different coding camps have different quality. However, even there, it's unclear how this will pan out.
Thats one of the point of programming test, there are tons of framework/language out there, every company might use different language/framework, a standardize test streamline the interview process, make it easy for you to interview in many different company.
>Given that it's not clear as to what problem such a test will solve
It very least shows that you are care enough for the job that you willing to prepare time to prepare for it.
>Some people are better test takers than others
Sure, life is never fair, but for those who are worse test takers then it just mean you have spend more time and effort to practice it.
As you said, they're very different. The thing is it might not be possible, as the technology develops and diverges, to have this one standardized test.
> It very least shows that you are care enough for the job that you willing to prepare time to prepare for it.
It applies to grinding leetcode as well, so not really related here.
> Sure, life is never fair, but for those who are worse test takers then it just mean you have spend more time and effort to practice it.
It can't be like, because some people are just not good at being tested, sorry, we don't want to work with you. They're of different purpose.
Yes just like grinding leetcode, is at least shown that you are willing to put the effort.
If you are someone who just not good at being tested then well you have to make it up with some other skills. For example being a really2 good domain expert that the company seek for you instead of the other way around or having excellent networking(as in relationship) skills.
