I'd be very surprised to see someone who could comfortably speak in a second language, professionally, but have trouble typing. I say this as someone who has some experience both learning multiple languages and having went through learning to teach English as a foreign language. These people would be exceptions to the rule. The blind audition equalizes for more people than for whom it disadvantages.
* The blind audition equalizes for more people than for whom it disadvantages.*
Maybe. Do you have evidence for this statement?
I haven't put myself to any sort of test, but my perception of myself is that I am far more attuned to lapses in English usage in the written form than the spoken. I don't think these interviews are very blinded at all. I can tell if you are ESL (unless you are very, very good), I can often tell if you are younger or older, I can tell if you come from my background or not. As well as if I were meeting you face to face? Of course not! But, how will I select people in each situation? Am I more or less biased in face to face or written communication?
We know tests like the SAT have a cultural and racial bias. I should hire programmers because they can deliver value to my company, not because they type like me. When I measure you by a proxy (how well you communicate via IM) I have the chance to make the wrong choice.
Don't get me wrong - I think there is a very good chance you are correct in that statement. But I don't believe these interviews are blinded (they are probably most blinded to gender, and least blinded to ESL), and no one has shown that the results are less biased than the alternatives.
