桌面上的軟件圖標是白板

In 2017, prominent software engineers took to Twitter to confess that they would fail a whiteboard interview. A popular way to evaluate programmers of all experience levels, “whiteboarding” involves presenting candidates with a computer science problem to solve on a whiteboard in real time. Engineers have been complaining about them for years.

2017年，著名的軟件工程師在Twitter承認，他們會失敗白板采訪。 評估所有經(jīng)驗水平的程序員的一種流行方法是“白板”，涉及向候選人提出計算機科學問題，以便在白板上實時解決。 多年來，工程師一直在抱怨它們。

演示地址

David Heinemeier Hansson, the founder of Ruby on Rails, one of the most successful web frameworks in history, led the way. Top developers from Google, Microsoft, and the New York Times joined in.

Ruby on Rails的創(chuàng)始人David Heinemeier Hansson是歷史上最成功的Web框架之一。 來自Google，Microsoft和《紐約時報》的頂尖開發(fā)人員也加入了進來。

Yet whiteboarding still constitutes a core part of the interview process at many tech companies, especially at FAANG (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and Google) and unicorn companies.

然而whiteboardi體中仍然在許多高科技公司構(gòu)成了采訪過程中的核心部分，尤其是在舫(在Facebook，蘋果，亞馬遜，Netflix和谷歌)和麒麟公司。

But the new normal of remote recruiting during the coronavirus pandemic presents an opportunity for recruiters, tech leaders, and the entire software industry to reexamine the original purpose of whiteboarding interviews. We need to ask whether they deliver on those goals and look at who they serve — computer science graduates — and who they don’t — those coming from nontraditional backgrounds. We need to realize that remote interviewing only makes the problem worse.

但是，在冠狀病毒大流行期間進行遠程招聘的新常態(tài)為招聘人員，技術(shù)領導者和整個軟件行業(yè)提供了重新審查白板面試最初目的的機會。 我們需要詢問他們是否實現(xiàn)了這些目標，并看看他們?yōu)檎l服務—計算機科學專業(yè)的畢業(yè)生—而不是誰—來自非傳統(tǒng)背景的人。 我們需要意識到，遠程采訪只會使問題變得更糟。

We need to implement alternatives that more effectively and inclusively measure engineering talent, team fit, and growth potential in video and phone interviews. It’s the most important reform toward a more diverse and inclusive industry.

我們需要實施替代方案，以更有效，更全面地衡量視頻和電話采訪中的工程人才，團隊契合度和增長潛力。 這是朝著多元化和包容性行業(yè)發(fā)展的最重要的改革。

Image courtesy of the author 圖片由作者提供 Advanced algorithm/data structure question. Image courtesy of the author 高級算法/數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)問題。 圖片由作者提供

招聘開發(fā)人員的頭痛(The headache of hiring developers)

Getting into Google is more difficult than getting into Harvard. (The former has a 0.2% acceptance rate against the Ivy’s 4.9%.) Top tech companies are well-known for conducting grueling interviews, especially for software engineers.

進入Google比進入哈佛更困難。 (前者的接受率為0.2％，而常春藤的為4.9％ 。)頂尖的高科技公司以進行艱苦的采訪而聞名，尤其是軟件工程師。

When faced with thousands of applicants, how does a company sift through applicants, shortlist the best, and hire the very best? No matter the industry or role, recruiting is difficult. Companies inevitably hire a poor performer on occasion and allow excellent candidates to slip through.

當面對成千上萬的申請者，如何通過申請公司篩，候選名單是最好的，并聘請最優(yōu)秀的？ 無論行業(yè)或角色，招聘都很困難。 公司不可避免地會聘請表現(xiàn)不佳的人，并讓優(yōu)秀的候選人脫穎而出。

It is incredibly difficult to evaluate a candidate’s technical skills without actually working with them.

如果不與候選人實際合作，就很難評估候選人的技術(shù)技能。

Hiring software engineers is particularly difficult. Competition for top talent is high. There are over 150,000 open roles on LinkedIn and “software engineer” consistently ranks as the most in-demand job, even during a pandemic. The primary pain point: It is incredibly difficult to evaluate a candidate’s technical skills without actually working with them.

雇用軟件工程師特別困難。 頂尖人才的競爭非常激烈。 在LinkedIn上有超過15萬個公開職位，即使在大流行期間，“軟件工程師”也始終是需求最大的職位。 主要的痛點：如果不與候選人實際合作，很難評估候選人的技術(shù)技能。

Common ways companies conduct technical screens include:

公司進行技術(shù)篩選的常見方式包括：

• Take-home projects where a candidate is given a few days to build a simple web app
  帶回家的項目，給候選人幾天的時間來構(gòu)建一個簡單的Web應用程序
• Code review of existing work
  現(xiàn)有工作的代碼審查
• Quiz questions on coding and web fundamentals
  關(guān)于編碼和網(wǎng)絡基礎知識的測驗問題
• Solving algorithm and data structure questions in a one-on-one whiteboard interview
  在一對一的白板面試中解決算法和數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)問題

With all the criticism and ample alternatives, why do companies still conduct whiteboard interviews?

有了所有批評和足夠的選擇，為什么公司仍然進行白板采訪？

有禮節(jié)或必要的邪惡？ (Hazing ritual or necessary evil?)

When computers were first invented, time on the computer was expensive. It was not uncommon to write code on a piece of paper before inputting to a computer. Computer programming has changed a lot since then. Although sketching out a system or handwriting code can help one plan and more deeply understand a piece of software, real-world programming today leans heavily on different frameworks, libraries, and Google searches. Building functional and beautiful software requires a profound understanding of how all of these tools build upon each other and at least a basic understanding of how they work under the hood.

最初發(fā)明計算機時，計算機上的時間很昂貴。 這是并不少見輸入到計算機之前，寫在一張紙上的代碼。 從那時起，計算機編程發(fā)生了很大變化。 盡管草繪一個系統(tǒng)或手寫代碼可以幫助制定一個計劃并更深入地了解一款軟件，但當今的現(xiàn)實世界編程在很大程度上依賴于不同的框架，庫和Google搜索。 要構(gòu)建功能強大且美觀的軟件，需要對所有這些工具如何相互構(gòu)建具有深刻的了解，并且至少需要對它們在幕后的工作方式有基本的了解。

seldo 塞爾多

Why remove the normal tools a programmer now has at their disposal, including the obvious: a computer? Why ask algorithm and data structure questions?

為什么要刪除程序員現(xiàn)在可以使用的普通工具，包括顯而易見的工具：計算機？ 為什么要問算法和數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)問題？

Some say it is an important “rite of passage,” an inevitable hurdle to conquer on the road to becoming a software engineer. Interviewing should not be used as a hazing ritual.

有人說這是重要的“通過儀式”，這是征服成為軟件工程師之路的必然障礙。 面談不應該用作令人討厭的儀式。

Some posts about the topic argue that studying algorithms shows a candidate’s eagerness to learn. Successful candidates, beginners and experienced programmers alike, spend hours preparing for these types of interviews.

有關(guān)該主題的一些文章認為，學習算法表明候選人渴望學習。 成功的應聘者，初學者和經(jīng)驗豐富的程序員都花時間準備這些類型的面試。

There is an entire industry built around technical interview prep — from subscription-based practice sites like LeetCode and InterviewCake, to mock interview platforms like Pramp, and entire boot camps devoted to algorithms and data structures. The fact that even experienced developers use these supplemental and often costly resources proves the point: In general, a developer’s real everyday work has little to do with the questions asked in a whiteboarding interview. (There are also plenty of other ways to measure curiosity and hustle.)

整個行業(yè)都圍繞著技術(shù)面試準備而建立-從基于訂閱的實踐站點(如LeetCode和InterviewCake )到模擬面試平臺(如Pramp) ，以及致力于算法和數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)的整個新手訓練營。 即使是經(jīng)驗豐富的開發(fā)人員也會使用這些補充性的且往往是昂貴的資源這一事實證明了這一點：總的來說，開發(fā)人員的實際日常工作與白板面試中提出的問題無關(guān)。 (還有許多其他方法可以衡量好奇心和忙碌程度。)

The most compelling reasons I found for using technical screens are to determine whether a candidate is lying about their programming abilities and to better understand their thought process and collaboration style.

我發(fā)現(xiàn)使用技術(shù)性屏幕的最令人信服的原因是確定候選人是否對自己的編程能力撒謊，并更好地理解他們的思維過程和協(xié)作風格。

With these goals in mind, technical interviews should be centered around answering these questions:

考慮到這些目標，技術(shù)面試應圍繞回答以下問題進行：

Can you code?

你會編碼嗎？

Can you collaborate?

你可以合作嗎？

Coding on a whiteboard, or during Covid, on a noncompiling text editor or Google Doc while on Zoom (I have been asked to do both) are not the best ways to evaluate these skills.

在白板上或在Covid上進行縮放時，在非縮放文本編輯器或Google Doc上進行編碼(要求我同時執(zhí)行這兩種方法)并不是評估這些技能的最佳方法。

多樣性問題 (The diversity problem)

I recently shared my path to starting my first software engineering role. After failing to make it through the University of California, Berkeley’s introductory computer science courses, I spent the early years of my career in a communications role before eventually finding my way back.

最近，我分享了我開始擔任第一個軟件工程職位的道路。 在未能通過加州大學伯克利分校的入門計算機科學課程取得成功之后，我度過了職業(yè)生涯的早年，擔任溝通職務，后來終于找到了歸宿。

My key learning was that although companies rarely require a computer science degree (job postings will often say something like “CS degree or equivalent”), the interview process heavily favors a formal background in computer science. As someone with experience in university CS as well as a boot camp — I did Flatiron’s full-stack program earlier this year — people often ask me the difference between the two types of education.

我的主要學習是，盡管公司很少需要計算機科學學位(職位招聘通常會說“ CS學位或同等學歷”)，但面試過程在很大程度上有利于計算機科學的正式背景。 作為具有大學CS經(jīng)驗和新手訓練營的人-今年早些時候我做了Flatiron的全日制課程-人們經(jīng)常問我兩種教育之間的區(qū)別。

College courses primarily focus on computer science concepts and principles including algorithms and data structures, which are necessary to succeed in a whiteboarding interview. Most boot camps spend little-to-no time on this type of material. Flatiron focuses on learning web development, and you build several full-stack applications in the program. I never built a web application or used a framework in college CS.

大學課程主要關(guān)注計算機科學的概念和原理，包括算法和數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)，這對于成功進行白板面試是必不可少的。 大多數(shù)新手訓練營都花很少甚至沒有時間在這種材料上。 Flatiron專注于學習Web開發(fā)，您可以在程序中構(gòu)建幾個全棧應用程序。 我從未在大學CS中構(gòu)建過Web應用程序或使用框架。

While both types of education are valuable, boot camps provide an important entry point to software engineering for underrepresented groups. Boot camp grads come from a diverse range of backgrounds. Many slipped through the cracks in college or didn’t see software engineering as a viable path until later in their careers.

盡管兩種教育都很有價值，但新手訓練營為人數(shù)不足的群體提供了軟件工程的重要切入點。 新兵訓練營的畢業(yè)生來自不同背景。 許多人在大學里經(jīng)歷了裂痕，或者直到職業(yè)生涯后期才將軟件工程視為一條可行的道路。

Vox Vox Vox Vox Vox Vox

Whiteboard interviews are also intimidating, especially for those who suffer from imposter syndrome (which disproportionately affects women and people of color). The remote experience could compound the intimidation factor. It did for me.

白板面試也令人生畏，尤其是對于那些冒名頂替綜合癥的患者(這種現(xiàn)象對婦女和有色人種的影響尤其嚴重)。 遠程體驗可能會加劇威嚇因素。 它對我有用。

We are all now experiencing how difficult it is to form a personal connection on Zoom, especially with someone new. It’s that much more difficult when working outside of your confidence zone.

我們所有人都在經(jīng)歷在Zoom上建立個人聯(lián)系的困難，尤其是與新朋友建立聯(lián)系。 在您的自信范圍之外工作時要困難得多。

Because my job search coincided with the first few months of Covid lockdown, all of my interviews were remote. Whiteboarding interview questions provided me with little opportunity to authentically convey my ability to work effectively with others. Even for something as simple as writing a clear commit message, collaboration, and communication are crucial for effective software development. I was unable to show these strengths or even just be myself. I know I’m not alone.

由于我的求職恰逢Covid停職的前幾個月，所以我所有的面試都是遙遙無期的。 白板面試問題為我提供了很少機會真實地傳達我與他人有效合作的能力。 即使只是編寫清晰的提交消息之類的簡單操作，協(xié)作和通信對于有效的軟件開發(fā)也至關(guān)重要。 我無法展現(xiàn)這些優(yōu)勢，甚至無法表現(xiàn)自己。 我知道我并不孤單。

有更好的方法 (There’s a better way)

Plenty of companies recruit talented engineers without whiteboarding. My previous company, Artsy, does not have any technical component in their interview process. Even early on, they were able to recruit some of the best engineers in the industry. There are simply so many better ways that more effectively answer: Can they code? Can they collaborate?

很多公司在招聘人才時都沒有白板。 我以前的公司Artsy在面試過程中沒有任何技術(shù)要素。 甚至在很早的時候，他們就能夠招募到業(yè)內(nèi)最好的工程師。 有很多更好的方法可以更有效地回答：它們可以編碼嗎？ 他們可以合作嗎？

我的前三種選擇： (My top three alternatives:)

1.配對程序 (1. Pair program)

Pair programming — working with another developer on one machine — has grown in popularity to boost code quality and help engineers grow. When I was interviewing at my current company, VTS, the second of my three interviews was a “pair programming” exercise in which the interviewer and I collaborated on implementing a few simple methods in JavaScript. Simply framing the interview as a collaborative exercise alleviated so much of the anxiety. I felt like I could ask questions and bounce ideas off of my partner. Remote pairing is now part of many developers’ daily workflow so is, in itself, a valuable skill to assess.

結(jié)對編程(與另一臺開發(fā)人員在一臺計算機上合作)已變得越來越流行，以提高代碼質(zhì)量并幫助工程師成長。 當我在當前的公司VTS進行采訪時，我的三個采訪中的第二個是“成對編程”練習，在這個練習中，我和訪問員共同合作，以JavaScript實現(xiàn)了一些簡單的方法。 簡單地將訪談定為一項協(xié)作練習，可以減輕很多焦慮感。 我覺得我可以問問題，從我的伴侶那里跳出想法。 現(xiàn)在，遠程配對已成為許多開發(fā)人員日常工作流程的一部分，因此，遠程配對本身就是一種有價值的評估技能。

Simply framing the interview as a collaborative exercise alleviated so much of the anxiety.

簡單地將訪談定為一項協(xié)作練習，可以減輕很多焦慮感。

2.討論過去的代碼 (2. Talk through past code)

A past project or pull request is preferable, but take-homes work too. Use the candidate’s previous code as a jumping-off point to determine how they understand code, make trade-offs, and communicate their decisions. I read that companies worry about cheating — candidates asking friends or paying a developer on Fiverr to complete the assignment. Instead of training interviewers to ask esoteric whiteboarding questions, train them to ask thoughtful and thorough questions about previous work.

過去的項目或請求請求是更可取的，但是實干也可以。 使用候選人的先前代碼作為出發(fā)點，以確定他們?nèi)绾卫斫獯a，進行權(quán)衡并傳達他們的決定。 我讀到，公司擔心作弊-候選人問朋友或向Fiverr付錢給開發(fā)人員完成任務。 與其培訓面試官提出深奧的白板問題，不如培訓他們詢問關(guān)于先前工作的周到且徹底的問題。

For companies who choose this method, be respectful of your candidate’s time. Many of my peers are balancing other jobs and taking care of kids at home. I completed several take-home assignments for companies that were either not seriously considering me or never had a conversation with me about the work and moved onto the next step. If take-homes are time-boxed, designed to help engineers learn something new, and followed by a comprehensive discussion, they can be well worth the effort.

對于選擇這種方法的公司，請尊重您候選人的時間。 我的許多同齡人正在平衡其他工作，并在家照顧孩子。 我為不認真考慮我或者從未與我進行過有關(guān)工作的交談的公司完成了幾次實地考察任務，然后轉(zhuǎn)到下一步。 如果帶回家是有時間限制的，旨在幫助工程師學習新知識，然后進行全面討論，那么值得付出努力。

A lot of people think references are fluff, but most companies conduct references poorly.

許多人認為推薦是虛假的，但是大多數(shù)公司的推薦都做得不好。

3.傾斜參考...但是要徹底 (3. Lean into references… but be thorough)

Past performance is the best indication of future performance. Talking to people who have previously worked with your candidate can provide invaluable insight into how they will perform in a new context. A lot of people think references are fluff, but most companies conduct references poorly. Asking a set of specific questions and digging for substantive answers will reveal more than you think. Here are some examples used by Artsy, which heavily weighs references in their interview process:

過去的表現(xiàn)是未來表現(xiàn)的最好標志。 與以前與您的候選人一起工作過的人交談可以為他們在新環(huán)境中的表現(xiàn)提供寶貴的見解。 許多人認為推薦是虛假的，但是大多數(shù)公司的推薦都做得不好。 提出一系列具體問題并挖掘?qū)嵸|(zhì)性答案將比您想像的更多。 以下是Artsy使用的一些示例，這些示例在面試過程中非常重視參考文獻：

In your capacity as [relationship to the candidate], how many people have you worked with in the candidate’s role?

以您與[與候選人的關(guān)系]的身份，您曾與多少人一起工作過？

In just terms of job performance, how do you rank the candidate out of that [X] many people?

僅就工作表現(xiàn)而言，您如何在[X]個人中對候選人進行排名？

What’s the difference between [the candidate’s rank] and number one? How would the candidate need to grow to get to number one?

[候選人的等級]和第一名有什么區(qū)別？ 候選人將如何成長才能獲得第一名？

害怕尋求幫助 (Fear of asking for help)

Whiteboard interviews were hard for me, not because the questions were too challenging or I didn’t want to put in the work. They were hard because I was scared to ask for help. Knowing when and how to ask questions, whether from your colleagues or Google, is one of the most important skills to develop as an engineer. Virtual whiteboarding sessions do not allow for sufficient back-and-forth between the candidate and the interviewer. In the remote setting, it is so hard to be vulnerable.

白板面試對我來說很難，不是因為問題太具有挑戰(zhàn)性或我不想?yún)⑴c工作。 他們很難，因為我不敢尋求幫助。 無論是從同事還是從Google知道何時以及如何提出問題，都是培養(yǎng)工程師最重要的技能之一。 虛擬白板會議不允許候選人與面試官之間來回充分的交流。 在遠程環(huán)境中，很難受到攻擊。

When I saw veteran software engineer Estelle Weyl’s tweet from the 2017 trend, I deeply identified with the fear of admitting you don’t know something. Amidst her mostly male colleagues revealing their inabilities to sort a binary tree, she said:

當我從2017年趨勢中看到資深軟件工程師Estelle Weyl的推文時，我深深地感到害怕承認自己不了解某些東西。 她在大多數(shù)男性同事中發(fā)現(xiàn)自己無法對二叉樹進行排序，她說：

演示地址

Eliminating whiteboard interviews didn’t happen in 2017, but maybe it can in 2020.

在2017年沒有消除白板面試的機會，但在2020年可能沒有。

翻譯自: https://onezero.medium.com/its-time-to-end-whiteboard-interviews-for-software-engineers-8a805abcb3ad

桌面上的軟件圖標是白板

總結(jié)

以上是生活随笔為你收集整理的桌面上的软件图标是白板_是时候结束对软件工程师的白板采访了的全部內(nèi)容，希望文章能夠幫你解決所遇到的問題。

如果覺得生活随笔網(wǎng)站內(nèi)容還不錯，歡迎將生活随笔推薦給好友。