ATC CONTROLLER HIRING PUSH CREATES CLASS STRUGGLE

Chris W writes:

I can't think of a less relevant still than the ability to spell, as an
indicator as to how good someone may be at programming.

Language ability, including and especially vocabulary and spelling ability,
are fairly strongly correlated with general intelligence. If you can give
only a one-item test to a candidate to assess intelligence, a vocabulary test
is a fairly good choice.

I have found that the best programmers are not poor spellers. Spelling and
programming are not directly related, but both are partially a function of
intelligence, and higher intelligence usually leads to better spelling and
better programming ability, and vice versa.

Programmers with poor written communication skills are usually at the lower
end of the skills curve. They can code stuff quickly and it usually kinda
sorta works, but they may not be suited to the most critical programming
tasks.

That said,
someone who doesn't know how to use, as well as understand the
limitations of, a spell checker, is bound to be a pretty pathetic
programmer.

Quite so. But if he needs a spell checker for everything, that may be a bad
sign as well.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Chris W writes:


I can't think of a less relevant still than the ability to spell, as an
indicator as to how good someone may be at programming.


Language ability, including and especially vocabulary and spelling ability,
are fairly strongly correlated with general intelligence. If you can give
only a one-item test to a candidate to assess intelligence, a vocabulary test
is a fairly good choice.

I have found that the best programmers are not poor spellers. Spelling and
programming are not directly related, but both are partially a function of
intelligence, and higher intelligence usually leads to better spelling and
better programming ability, and vice versa.

Programmers with poor written communication skills are usually at the lower
end of the skills curve. They can code stuff quickly and it usually kinda
sorta works, but they may not be suited to the most critical programming
tasks.


That said,
someone who doesn't know how to use, as well as understand the
limitations of, a spell checker, is bound to be a pretty pathetic
programmer.


Quite so. But if he needs a spell checker for everything, that may be a bad
sign as well.

I know some very bright and highly paid software engineers that can't
communicate worth a crap. Of course, one of them built their own
cable descrambler at home but wouldn't be able to tell you how to.
Probably wouldn't even greet you when they saw you just because they
don't think of those things.

Is there a Microsoft Human Resource simulator, too?

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

Language ability, including and especially vocabulary and spelling
ability,
are fairly strongly correlated with general intelligence. If you can give
only a one-item test to a candidate to assess intelligence, a vocabulary
test
is a fairly good choice.

I have found that the best programmers are not poor spellers. Spelling
and
programming are not directly related, but both are partially a function of
intelligence, and higher intelligence usually leads to better spelling and
better programming ability, and vice versa.

Programmers with poor written communication skills are usually at the
lower
end of the skills curve. They can code stuff quickly and it usually kinda
sorta works, but they may not be suited to the most critical programming
tasks.


I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdgnieg The
phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde
Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer inwaht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the
olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit
pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a
porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by
istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas thought
slpeling was ipmorantt!

"Chris W" wrote in message


The only exception would be if you need a people that can
jump into a project as quickly as possible.

This is my unenviable position.

I have been able to identify a few candidates that are more junior that we
can mentor and train, but most of the folks I bring on are expected to be
productive in very short order which means I don't have time to let them
learn the technology.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________

"Kev" wrote in message
ups.com

We're also looking for people who
can spell grin, which is rare these days.

No kidding. I've rejected resumes simply due to an apparent inability for
the candidate to run spell- and grammar checks on their resume. If they're
not willing to pay attention to detail on that, I shudder to think how much
they'll give the code they write.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


I suspect, that military ATC controllers are not required to possess a
college degree. Perhaps that's where the impetus for FAA dropping the
requirement stems.

Just a quick scan shows the Navy requires only a high school diploma.

From http://www.thetracon.com/atcjobs.htm#military:
"
US Navy
REQUIRED: High school graduate less than 34 years of age, Flying Class III
Physical, No Speech Impediment, Must be a U.S. Citizen.
"

I didn't bother checking the other services, but I suspect they're similar.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________

for some more insight look at
http://www.faafollies.com/
and
http://themainbang.typepad.com/

ATO is not a happy place.


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
Here's the FAA Air Traffic Control Workforce Plan web site:
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...ffing/#Scene_1
You can watch a lengthy video (closed caption) of the Administrator
and others talking on the subject, as well as a graph vindicating FAA
of not meeting the ATC staffing requirements.

On May 2, 12:08 pm, Chris W wrote:
Chris W wrote:
I can't think of a less relevant still than the ability to spell, as an
indicator as to how good someone may be at programming. That said,
someone who doesn't know how to use, as well as understand the
limitations of, a spell checker, is bound to be a pretty pathetic
programmer.

I have no idea how that T got where the K should have been.... must have
been a keyboard anomaly

Ah, it's okay. It's one of the first rules of the Internet, that
anyone who writes about spelling or grammar is guaranteed to have at
least one mistake in their posting. Nevr fales ;-)

Kev

On May 2, 9:28 pm, "John T" wrote:
"Kev" wrote in message
We're also looking for people who
can spell grin, which is rare these days.

No kidding. I've rejected resumes simply due to an apparent inability for
the candidate to run spell- and grammar checks on their resume. If they're
not willing to pay attention to detail on that, I shudder to think how much
they'll give the code they write.

Kids not only can't spell these days, they use tons of text-messaging
abbreviations that drive us nuts in formal emails. Ah well, in a few
decades more, dinosaurs like us won't matter.

At the same time, I have to add that some of the best programmers I've
ever known, were also dyslexic. They would make us crazy with
variables like "_reslut" instead of "_result". Even if you pointed it
out, they really couldn't see the mistake. Anyway, we just let it go
most of the time.

Cheers, Kev

Erik writes:

I know some very bright and highly paid software engineers that can't
communicate worth a crap.

I don't. Usually these are people who a particular skill that they've
developed through personal interest and motivation, but they are not
exceptionally bright overall. There's a tendency to assume that someone who
excels in a specific technical domain must be more intelligent than average,
but this is not necessarily so.

The brightest engineers I have known were also good communicators, written and
spoken. But you don't have to be a genius to be good at programming.

Is there a Microsoft Human Resource simulator, too?

Not that I'm aware of. FWIW, Microsoft has long placed a strong emphasis on
general intelligence in employee selection, which is one of the reasons for
its success.

Which reminds me: Lately I've been surprised at the poor writing quality in
official FAA documents. The AIM used "confliction," which is not a word. I
guess nobody proofs them, or the proofreaders are just as incompetent in
English as the writers. People feel compelled to "write smart" when writing
official documents, and often they get in over their heads.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.