Evaluating IT profiles, specifically, developers have always implied a complex process. Technical interviews are useful, but they tend to favor those candidates who know how to sell themselves best. Although knowing how to sell yourself is important, it is not one of the most important factors in a developer’s job. Theoretical written tests help but can be biased according to how much the candidate has used the specific knowledge measured by the test. I know this firsthand because I remember some interview a couple of decades ago when, in an exam, one of the questions was \u201chow to make a Power Builder database connection?\u201d. I had some years of Power Builder experience and mastered the language, but… the company I worked for already had a class created that managed the connection, so I never had to make a connection myself and did not know the answer. After all, theoretical knowledge does not guarantee that a person is a good developer. It’s quite like believing that someone who knows music and is familiar with a lot of melodies and techniques, necessarily knows how to play an instrument very well. It is, therefore, necessary to evaluate programming skills, but doing this on paper is almost impossible and asking each candidate to write code to compile it yourself is also complicated.<\/p>\n
This is where the advantages of a platform like Evalart come, as it includes both practical and theoretical programming questions. Practical questions are evaluated automatically. The candidate writes and runs their programs online and then the platform assigns a score based on various factors, and that is just one of the principal advantages of Evalart over manual alternatives or other platforms.<\/p>\n
Scenario Evaluation<\/strong><\/p>\n Evalart evaluates the code written by the programmer by executing it in several scenarios, in order to validate that the programmer has considered border cases and other cases where a trivial solution could fail.<\/p>\n Performance Evaluation<\/strong><\/p>\n Evalart has questions where the efficiency in terms of performance of the code written by the candidate is evaluated. An answer that obtains the results in a faster way obtains a higher score.<\/p>\n Code Efficiency<\/strong><\/p>\n Sometimes candidates can solve the problem, but their code is inefficient. For example, programs that repeat the same code many times instead of using a more general code.<\/p>\n Evaluation of proximity to the correct answer<\/strong><\/p>\n A problem that affects some online programming test platforms is that, if the candidate writes a perfect program but fails to print the result, he receives a score of zero. Evalart uses advanced algorithms to recognize for example that if the program responded “Greater 10” instead of “Greater: 10” the candidate receives part of the score, differentiating it from the candidate who achieved nothing at all.<\/p>\n