Re: Testing job applicants

["Ruff Records" <ruffrecords@geocities.com>]

Pete Fenelon wrote in message <68rmq7.er7.ln@fenelon.com>...
>In alt.folklore.computers Ruff Records <ruffrecords@geocities.com> wrote:
>> This may be controversial but as a rule we find people with computer
science
>> degrees don't make good software engineers.  This is at least in part
>> because nearly all our developments are cost sensitive embedded
>> applications.  We find computer scientists have insufficient appreciation
of
>> the hardware aspects.
>
>Depends on the CS course. Good ones emphasise an engineering/systems
>approach encompassing high- and low-level software, and the way it
>maps onto hardware. The fact that there are tradeoffs to be made, and the
>tools for deciding how to make them, underpin the course.
>
>Bad ones teach "flavour of the month" programming languages and
>trendy techniques.
>
>A graduate from a *good* CS programme should be capable of working at
>any level from high-level requirements capture for a GUI down to
>bit-banging on bare silicon... and should adopt a rigorous engineering
>approach to both ends of the spectrum.
>
>pete


But how to tell good from bad?  Our experience of CS qualified candidates at
interview was that their engineering knowledge was very poor so we abandoned
recruiting them.  If we knew which colleges ran the 'good' courses we could
only select those for interview.  Any suggestions??

Ian