Not sure what the big deal about asking for high school achievements is. To me that seems to be done to be inclusive of people who didn't graduate college, which seems entirely reasonable to me.
"What sort of high school student were you? Outside of required work, what were your interests and hobbies? What would your high school peers remember you for, if we asked them?"
Given how many people I know in the tech industry who had a horrible time at high school (nerds got bullied in the 80s and 90s, is that still true today?), this question carries a whole lot of baggage.
"Mostly they'd remember me getting wasted on super-strength cider, but people who knew me a bit better might also remember me playing Warhammer 40,000."
I reckon these questions started as "in college", then someone in meeting #8533 rightly said "but what about people who did not go to college?" and so it was turned into high-school.
I suspect what this tells us about Canonical is that they have too many HR folks running riot.
People in high school are children. I don’t expect an employer to ask me my favorite flavor of ice cream either, because I’m an adult. This is an absurd waste of time for any serious professional.
If they ask about "industry leadership experience" and "high school achievements" in the same form there is a lot wrong.
This is not a form for a junior hire as I understand.
Industry leadership experience should not be in the form aimed at junior staff and high school achievements should not be on the form for hiring "industry leaders".
Unless you really are hiring whizz kids it is total waste of time to ask both questions on the same form.
If someone has industry leadership experience you compare candidates based on that and if one of them had some high school achievements it might be a plus, but it would not have much weight on comparison. Because if two candidates would have industry leadership experience if one is better than the other it would show there.
It is absolutely not inclusive of people who didn't graduate college: those questions are followed with --- I swear I'm not making this up --- a question about which college you chose to attend and why you chose it.
You can just go read it it see what a nightmare it is; it's not that long (unlike the response it demands).
I don't have an engineering degree and let me tell you, if you asked me to answer these questions about my high school experience at this point in my now 23 year long career, I would not take you seriously.
Never mind people who didn't graduate high school or got a GED, at which point you've just excluded a different class of people for an even more irrelevant-to-their-work set of questions.
I applied for a Canonical job and was turned off by this. I was smart in high school but I wasn't an overachiever. In fact, I was into computers above and beyond what my high school was able to offer, and I was bored of the place as a result! But more importantly, that happened a lifetime ago; I'm an adult with 20 years of professional experience, focus on my high school is completely inappropriate and I don't think it's a stretch to call it ageist.
But the hiring manager told me that they actually hire people from the community -- in other words, folks who have done a free internship. So in truth, I'm not sure why I even jumped through their hoops (including the personality and intelligence tests). What a lark.
I've seen the application, and there are questions about maths and grades. I know a lot of people with great grades and this doesn't translate into programming or innate understanding of CS in general. Similarly I've seen people with mediocre grades and great academic careers.
Also, writing down all the questions will generate a sizeable document. That should be done orally, and even if it's done orally, there is some strong emphasis on the wrong points.
And exclusive of people who dropped out of (or barely made it through) high school -- which as a category includes some of the most responsible and accomplished people I know.
