Coding Experiment Anonymous Feedback

This repo includes feedback on individuals' code responses for our coding experiment. This experiment was performed for the final project of W241 Experiments and Causality.

Guidelines

We will be looking at the following aspects of the code.

1. Formatting and readability of the code evaluation (length of lines, naming of the variables, formatting friendly to the reader's eye etc.)

2. 'scoring' by the technical reader (on a scale 0-100%) that would represent to what extend the solution meets the expectations from their perspective

3. Thumbs up or down for the candidate base in his performance, assuming they would be in an actual recruitment process, i.e. as a hiring manager - would you recommend this candidate to go to the next stage of recruitment?

Formatting and Readability Scoring Rubric

The rubric for grading the code based on formatting and readability is as follows:

Component	Poor	Okay	Good	Excellent
Good Naming	Variable names are too short, undecipherable, or misleading.	Variable names are understandable and relevant, but maybe too short or too long.	Names are of appropriate length and make sense, but there is room for improvement.	Variable and function names are meaningful, concise but not too short, and there is no room for improvement.
Legibility	Code is too terse to be legible, has whitespace inconsistencies, and is otherwise formatted in a way that is very difficult to follow.	Code is only somewhat readable, and may suffer from whitespace inconsistencies and cramped code.	Code is well-formatted, but may have issues with spacing inconsistencies or run-on lines.	Code is well-formatted so that it is easy to read and understand.
Conciseness	Code is overly verbose or terse and short to the extreme.	There are possibly more concise ways of solving the problem, but the code isn't too verbose.	Not much code is wasted, redundant or superfluous.	All code is of an appropriate length and gets the job done using code that is easy to read, yet brief.

• Poor: 0-25 pts
• Okay: 26-50 pts
• Good: 51-75 pts
• Excellent: 76-100 pts

Example:

Component	Score
Good Naming	90
Legibility	95
Conciseness	50
Total (Avg)	78

Solution Scoring Rubric

A subjective score from 0-100 on how well you think the code solves the problem correctly and appropriately.

Hiring Process Criteria

A subjective thumbs up or thumbs down based on your opinion as to whether or not you think this person should be moved on to the next step in a hiring process. For context, the job is a programming job that requires at least a basic-to-intermediate level of competency.