Submitted by Ralph (not verified) on Tue, 2006/11/21 - 22:24.
On November 15th of 2006, I took the Brainbench Java 2 test.
When I went into the test, I was expecting something that would test my general knowledge of the Java language and object oriented programming. The test that I took did not do that.
There were a large number of questions on special purpose API's that I have never used. There were some questions on development tools that I have never used. And there were a large number of "brain teaser" questions on code snippets which I could have answered, if I would have had more time.
As a result, my test score was very low (2.60).
That score shows that I'm not good at guessing at API's and tools that I've never used. And it shows that I'm not good at brain teasers with a three-minute time limit. However, it shows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about my Java and object oriented programming skills.
In 2002, I studied a book on Java, and then I took a college course on it. I got an A in the course. According to my Brainbench score, I should not have been an "A" student.
For over a year, I was the sole designer and developer of web software that my employer believes is marketable. That software involves thousands of lines of Java code, a large number of API's, and a large number of advanced object oriented constructs. According to my Brainbench score, I should not be able to accomplish what I have just accomplished.
When I was in college, I took secondary education courses. Later, while I was working for a former employer, I designed two computer courses which I taught for several years. As a trained and experienced trainer and tester, it is my opinion that the Brainbench Java 2 test has a number of very serious flaws.
It appears that there have been no sound scientific studies regarding the Brainbench claim that their tests predict employee success. And it appears that there are a large number of companies that are blindly accepting these unsubstantiated claims.
It seems to me that a sound scientific study for the Java 2 test would include the following elements: have thousands of working and successful Java programmers take various Java 2 tests; have thousands of inexperienced people with Java knowledge take the same tests; for individual test takers, have tests with a large number of questions on API's and tools that they have never used; for individual test takers, have tests with a large number of questions on API's and tools that they have used; for the latter, follow their careers as Java programmers for at least five years.
It appears to me that the creators of the Brainbench Java 2 test do not know what a typical Java programmer does, and they have no understanding of the art of testing.
I wonder how many careers have been derailed as a result of flawed Brainbench tests. I would like to see a scientific survey on that.
Brainbench Java 2 Test
On November 15th of 2006, I took the Brainbench Java 2 test.
When I went into the test, I was expecting something that would test my general knowledge of the Java language and object oriented programming. The test that I took did not do that.
There were a large number of questions on special purpose API's that I have never used. There were some questions on development tools that I have never used. And there were a large number of "brain teaser" questions on code snippets which I could have answered, if I would have had more time.
As a result, my test score was very low (2.60).
That score shows that I'm not good at guessing at API's and tools that I've never used. And it shows that I'm not good at brain teasers with a three-minute time limit. However, it shows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about my Java and object oriented programming skills.
In 2002, I studied a book on Java, and then I took a college course on it. I got an A in the course. According to my Brainbench score, I should not have been an "A" student.
For over a year, I was the sole designer and developer of web software that my employer believes is marketable. That software involves thousands of lines of Java code, a large number of API's, and a large number of advanced object oriented constructs. According to my Brainbench score, I should not be able to accomplish what I have just accomplished.
When I was in college, I took secondary education courses. Later, while I was working for a former employer, I designed two computer courses which I taught for several years. As a trained and experienced trainer and tester, it is my opinion that the Brainbench Java 2 test has a number of very serious flaws.
It appears that there have been no sound scientific studies regarding the Brainbench claim that their tests predict employee success. And it appears that there are a large number of companies that are blindly accepting these unsubstantiated claims.
It seems to me that a sound scientific study for the Java 2 test would include the following elements: have thousands of working and successful Java programmers take various Java 2 tests; have thousands of inexperienced people with Java knowledge take the same tests; for individual test takers, have tests with a large number of questions on API's and tools that they have never used; for individual test takers, have tests with a large number of questions on API's and tools that they have used; for the latter, follow their careers as Java programmers for at least five years.
It appears to me that the creators of the Brainbench Java 2 test do not know what a typical Java programmer does, and they have no understanding of the art of testing.
I wonder how many careers have been derailed as a result of flawed Brainbench tests. I would like to see a scientific survey on that.