I interviewed with Faculty in November 2024. The process began when I was contacted through another job application platform, after which I submitted my CV and had an initial conversation with a representative from the hiring team. This was followed by a first-round technical interview, including a live coding assessment. The technical challenge itself started as a straightforward task, but it quickly escalated. The scope of the assessment seemed to expand during the session, with additional tasks introduced on the spot. It felt as though the goal was to push the task until either I ran out of time or encountered difficulty, at which point the interviewer would suggest moving on which felt like a setup to fail. This approach gave the impression that the assessment was designed to be overly challenging rather than a fair evaluation of my skills. At the beginning of the interview, I requested clarification on the requirements. I received a brief, one-sentence response in the chat, followed by what felt like an informal acknowledgment from the senior interviewer. However, in my feedback, it was noted that I hadn’t sought sufficient clarification on the requirements, which contradicted my experience. Additionally, my feedback mentioned an over-reliance on ChatGPT, despite the fact that I used it only once during the interview — within the allowed parameters. There were also comments on minor aspects of my code, which felt excessive given that the test was conducted live, in a high-pressure, screen-sharing environment. While I understand that I may not have been the right fit for this role, the feedback provided was neither actionable nor aligned with my experience during the interview.