What is the point of live coding questions when you have a relevant degree/experience? /u/VanellieIce CSCQ protests reddit

I’m a 2024 CS grad from a T30 school with a 3.7 GPA. Over the past several months, I’ve applied to well over 500 positions—most of which I’m fully qualified for—but I’ve only landed three interviews. None of those interviews progressed to the technical portion, though I’ve taken about ten online assessments, all of which I felt confident about.

This isn’t a spite post—I haven’t had an interview in months—so I genuinely want to understand this from a logical perspective. I’ve even asked ChatGPT this question, but I still can’t fully grasp the reasoning.

My question: If an applicant has a relevant degree in software engineering, data science, or a similar position, what is the point of live coding questions?

A degree should demonstrate, at minimum, that the applicant can code (or have above-average problem-solving skills within a certain domain). Yet, live coding seems to be treated as a make-or-break test.

The reasoning I most often see is that companies need to ensure an applicant “can code.” Presumably, this means: “Can this person effectively contribute to our existing codebase to generate value?”

I’m trying to steel-man this argument, so I’d love for someone to correct me if I’m misunderstanding.

My perspective: As a new grad, the honest answer is that I likely won’t contribute value immediately. I don’t have experience with the exact tech stack or coding style of any given company. However:

• My degree demonstrates my ability to learn these things.
• A behavioral interview can assess whether I’m willing to learn and collaborate.
• Live coding questions don’t seem to test whether someone can generate business value in a real-world context.

(Stepping out of my shoes, let me know if this is inaccurate.) For mid-to senior-level devs, the ramp-up time might be shorter because they’ve likely worked with similar tech stacks and styles. But even at that level, wouldn’t their professional experience already prove they “can code”?

So, in both scenarios—new grads and experienced devs—I don’t see the logic behind live coding questions. The only case where I understand their use is when the applicant doesn’t have a degree or prior experience.

I want to learn: Please pick this apart. What am I missing about the purpose of live coding interviews? I want to learn why these questions are used so I can better prepare, rather than focusing solely on solving them efficiently. Surely, the purpose isn’t just to test problem-solving speed, as that doesn’t directly correlate with generating business value.

I’m a 2024 CS grad from a T30 school with a 3.7 GPA. Over the past several months, I’ve applied to well over 500 positions—most of which I’m fully qualified for—but I’ve only landed three interviews. None of those interviews progressed to the technical portion, though I’ve taken about ten online assessments, all of which I felt confident about.

This isn’t a spite post—I haven’t had an interview in months—so I genuinely want to understand this from a logical perspective. I’ve even asked ChatGPT this question, but I still can’t fully grasp the reasoning.

My question: If an applicant has a relevant degree in software engineering, data science, or a similar position, what is the point of live coding questions?

A degree should demonstrate, at minimum, that the applicant can code (or have above-average problem-solving skills within a certain domain). Yet, live coding seems to be treated as a make-or-break test.

The reasoning I most often see is that companies need to ensure an applicant “can code.” Presumably, this means: “Can this person effectively contribute to our existing codebase to generate value?”

I’m trying to steel-man this argument, so I’d love for someone to correct me if I’m misunderstanding.

My perspective: As a new grad, the honest answer is that I likely won’t contribute value immediately. I don’t have experience with the exact tech stack or coding style of any given company. However:

• My degree demonstrates my ability to learn these things.
• A behavioral interview can assess whether I’m willing to learn and collaborate.
• Live coding questions don’t seem to test whether someone can generate business value in a real-world context.

(Stepping out of my shoes, let me know if this is inaccurate.) For mid-to senior-level devs, the ramp-up time might be shorter because they’ve likely worked with similar tech stacks and styles. But even at that level, wouldn’t their professional experience already prove they “can code”?

So, in both scenarios—new grads and experienced devs—I don’t see the logic behind live coding questions. The only case where I understand their use is when the applicant doesn’t have a degree or prior experience.

I want to learn: Please pick this apart. What am I missing about the purpose of live coding interviews? I want to learn why these questions are used so I can better prepare, rather than focusing solely on solving them efficiently. Surely, the purpose isn’t just to test problem-solving speed, as that doesn’t directly correlate with generating business value.