San Jose State University beats Stanford, Cal in computer coding
San Jose State University has shot past Stanford and UC Berkeley to a top-10 spot in a ranking of U.S. universities based on a standardized computer coding test.
The school leapt to the No. 9 spot this year in rankings by CodeSignal, a San Francisco company whose General Coding Assessment is widely used by major technology companies to evaluate potential hires.
That position put San Jose State in front of Berkeley at No. 19 and Stanford at No. 25, a giant leap from last year, when the school was ranked 32nd, and from 2023, when it ranked 48th.
"This is great news," said San Jose State engineering school dean Sheryl Ehrman, who attributed the result to eager students, talented tenure-track faculty, and part-time instructors with tech industry experience who are "really trying to impart those real-world skills."
Whether the university could continue its trajectory to the top of the rankings would require a dramatic upset. This year and last year, Carnegie Mellon took No. 1 and Massachusetts Institute of Technology came in No. 2, while in 2023, MIT came out on top, followed by New York's Stony Brook University, with Carnegie Mellon at No. 3.
The downtown San Jose school is an "under-told story" behind Silicon Valley's success, said South Bay Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna.
"It's always been such a key component of churning out engineers, churning out people in technology," Khanna said this week. "A lot of headlines go to Stanford and Berkeley. San Jose State and Santa Clara (University) are really important contributors, and San Jose, of course, being a public school, is more accessible for folks that can't afford Stanford or Santa Clara."
CodeSignal CEO Tigran Sloyan said the general coding assessment is taken by the vast majority of U.S. computer science students, and is intended to provide a "data-driven view" of people's coding ability. Students generally take it annually starting in their junior year, and can share their results with prospective employers, he said.
The 70-minute test includes four questions to measure different coding skills.
Launched six years ago, CodeSignal's assessment has become very popular among tech and financial companies, Sloyan said.
The test, Sloyan contended, gives prospective employers a much better idea of a software engineering or software development candidate's qualifications than a resume, which may attract an employer's attention for the presence of a particularly prestigious school without any guarantee the student or graduate developed the commensurate skills. Every school has brilliant, average and mediocre students, Sloyan said.
"Most companies want to go beyond resumes and find great people regardless of which schools they came from," Sloyan said.
Sloyan believes San Jose State's rapid climb toward the top of the university pack in CodeSignal's rankings reflects the effectiveness of the school's faculty and programs. "Clearly San Jose State is doing something right when it comes to tech education," Sloyan said.
"So far, the observation is that what they might be doing different from other schools is having a more hands-on approach to education."
UC Berkeley and Stanford declined to comment on the rankings.
Harshil Vyas, soon to graduate from San Jose State with a master's in software engineering, pointed to the school's tech-veteran instructors as a key benefit, along with large numbers of fellow students like him who have worked in tech and share their varied experiences with each other. The school's location in Silicon Valley is another boon, said Vyas, 25.
"It's somewhat a motivation when you see the tech industry around you," Vyas said. "It helps you push to the goal."
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
18 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Column: Record budget continues Democrats' tax-and-spend spree
If Illinois smokers needed a reason to quit the evils of tobacco, the legislature's hike in the state's tax on cigarettes has been handed to them. Or it gives them a chance to visit Kentucky and Indiana to stock up on their smoking supplies. The tax increase on anything with tobacco — cigarettes, cigars, vaping devices, snuff, chewing tobacco — is part of the rushed budget the Democratic-controlled legislature adopted last week. The jump in the tobacco tax from 36% to 45% for cigarettes, and 15% for vaping products, takes effect July 1, when the state's fiscal year begins. Taxing the shrinking number of state smokers — revenue officials expect to raise $50 million — is one easy way to fund the largest budget in Illinois history. Current state tax on a pack of smokes is $1.98, and the current cost averages $7.56 per pack, according to the 'Sales Tax Handbook.' Another taxing target is gambling now that most of the Land of Lincoln is replete with gaming devices and casinos. To that end, the budget bill creates a tax of 25 cents per wager for a sports betting licensee's first 20,000 wagers accepted, and 50 cents per wager above that. That is expected to generate $36 million in the new fiscal year. There are other increased taxes, $1 billion worth, in the $55.2 billion spending plan, which totals 3,000 pages. Wonder how many Lake County lawmakers actually read this document that received little public review and was hastily adopted in the last 48 hours of the session? But lawmakers did read enough of the document to increase their salaries, sending their pay to nearly $100,000 a year for what is supposed to be a part-time job. State legislators who happen to be lawyers also got an added perk thanks to the Illinois Supreme Court: They can collect credits for continuing education classes just by attending legislative events. Yet, Illinois property owners again did not receive property tax relief, while lawmakers kicked the can down the road when it came to funding regional mass transit, while including $8.2 billion in new spending on infrastructure projects. Regional Transportation Authority officials claim they need a $770 million funding injection or cuts are coming at the CTA, Metra and Pace. Legislators also failed a push for more renewable energy sources, like solar and wind. In the power department, Illinoisans served by ComEd will see a nearly 11% increase on their utility bills come July 1. Democrats seem overjoyed with the allegedly balanced budget bill, which is nearly 4% more than the current year's. However, it appears to be stuffed with spending that the state can't afford. One estimate is that since Gov. JB Pritzker took office in 2019, Democrats have jacked up state spending by $15 billion. That totals about $1,170 more per resident every year. Something to remember next April 15. Three Lake County Democratic state senators — Julie Morrison of Lake Forest, Mary Edley Allen of Libertyville and Adriane Johnson of Buffalo Grove — voted for the budget bills. Their Democratic counterparts in the Illinois House — Rita Mayfield of Gurnee, Laura Faver Dias of Grayslake, Bob Morgan of Deerfield, Daniel Didech of Buffalo Grove and Nabella Syed of Palatine — also were all in on the whopping budget bill. Legislative Republicans voted against the measure. Their excuse for having to vote in favor of the budget, they maintain, is because of President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans. Pritzker, too, blamed the president, pointing to Trump's tariff policies. 'In a year where limited revenue and shifting federal support presented real challenges, we passed a budget that aligns with our core values and the needs of Illinois families,' Morrison commented in a statement after her vote. 'At a time when chaos from the federal administration is causing uncertainty and fear within our communities, Illinois presented a compassionate budget that reflects our priorities and values, including supporting the working middle class and those seeking quality education,' Edley Allen said in a statement, echoing other county lawmakers' stances. Didn't hear of any sightings of President Trump or his minions in Springfield last week, twisting arms to vote for the bloated state budget. Lawmakers can try to blame an obvious scapegoat. They are accountable only to themselves for their votes for a record Illinois budget.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Democrats' online problem: They're not doing enough year-round
It turns out, Democrats aren't online enough. Conservative organizations spend more than left-leaning ones on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram in non-election years, capturing a large audience while those Democratic-aligned groups go more dormant in the digital space. And it's making Democrats' election-year persuasion game that much harder. That's the warning of a new report from Tech for Campaigns, a political nonprofit focused on using digital marketing and data techniques to support Democrats, that argues one of the party's major problems is that its communication falters in non-election years. While Democratic spending and presence online surged leading up to the election, for example, Republicans quickly regained the spending advantage this year. Democrats, in other words, aren't putting in the work online during 'off years.' The report, shared first with POLITICO, comes as Democratic donors and officials have grappled with how online personalities and social media content boosted President Donald Trump in 2024, and openly acknowledged Democrats need to fix their brand. 'The Right, especially Trump, recognized that persuasion is no longer about last-minute convincing, but about shaping beliefs continuously — building trust, shifting opinions, and staying visible through frequent engagement — just like commercial brand building,' the report's authors wrote. 'Democrats may acknowledge this shift but continue treating digital communication as a campaign-season sprint.' Republicans' audience advantage spans from podcasts, where Democrats have fretted about the influence of hosts like Joe Rogan, to social media and digital sites. On Facebook and Instagram, for example, Republican-aligned pages outspent those associated with Democrats throughout former President Joe Biden's term, the report found. The only exception of the fourth quarter of 2024, when Democratic-aligned spending surged ahead of the November election. Republicans regained the spending advantage in the first quarter of 2025, suggesting Democrats are not making up ground. 'Democrats have a brand and customers who require consistent and constant communication,' said Jessica Alter, co-founder of Tech for Campaigns. 'And ads … 3-6 months before an election can certainly supplement that strategy, but they can't be the main strategy, not when Republicans never stop talking to their audience.' The online spending gap is not coming from political parties or campaigns. Instead, Republicans' digital advantage largely stems from allied groups and digital media companies, such as PragerU and the Daily Wire. Those sites and other similar ones are not focused strictly on electoral politics. But they have cultivated broad audiences, and spent years sharing content about issues — such as transgender students' participation in sports and opposition to diversity, equity and inclusion programs — that are electorally potent. And Republican candidates are primed to take advantage of those large, sympathetic audiences when an election draws near. While there are newer left-leaning media competitors, such as Courier Newsroom and NowThis Impact, the conservative pages and websites still have a larger audience and spend more on to boost their content across the platforms. When it comes to campaigns, Democrats do have a financial advantage. But although Democratic campaigns consistently outspend Republicans on digital platforms, that's often more focused on fundraising than persuasion and mobilization ads. That's a mistake, Tech for Campaigns argues. While former Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign spent nearly three times as much as Trump's across Facebook, Google and CTV after she entered the presidential race in July 2024, only a small share, 8 percent, was devoted to mobilization, the report finds. That allowed Trump and his allies to close much of the gap when it came to digital content designed to get voters to the polls. But the report cautions against simply trying to recreate what Republicans have done well — for instance, by trying to find a Democratic equivalent of Rogan or even assuming that podcasts will be the most important medium for 2028. Instead, it argues, Democrats need to be willing to try different formats, testing what works and adapting as needed. 'Simply increasing funding to replicate Republican tactics from the last cycle won't be sufficient — nor will continuing to rely primarily on the same networks of talent,' the report concludes. 'Successful right-wing influencers emerged largely organically outside party structures, not through top-down creation.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Over 5K sign petitions to recall Spilsbury from Mesa City Council
JoAnne Robbins arrived at Mesa City Hall May 27 with a box containing petitions signed by over 5,000 voters wanting to boot Councilwoman Julie Spilsbury from her District 2 seat. Robbins, who filed for the recall Jan. 30 and needed to gather 3,070 signatures, turned in the petitions three days before the deadline. The petition cited Spilsbury's vote to hike council members' salary, allowing the purchase and renovation of a former hotel for an emergency homeless shelter and raising the city's utility rates as the reasons to remove the second-term councilwoman. 'A lot of people are not happy,' said Robbins, who lives in Spilsbury's district, which covers central and south-central Mesa. 'The main reason is she's not representing her constituents. She voted for the homeless hotel despite the outcry from her constituents. 'Basically, she said, 'I'm going to vote what I believe is right. I'm never going to say what people want me to say. Elected representatives represent their constituents, not their own well-being.' Robbins also rapped Spilsbury for 'tripling down on DEI practices' and 'maintaining the transgender agenda of men (using) women's bathrooms and boys competing on girls' sports and using their locker rooms and bathrooms.' And there's the council pay raise, according to Robbins. 'They voted to give themselves a raise out of our pockets,' she said. 'I wish I could vote to give myself a raise. We went to many council meetings and spoke out about that. You know, give us a year, give us a chance to rebound. But no.' The council in 2023 unanimously voted for a 7% salary hike that went into effect this year. Nearly 40 people showed up Tuesday morning at City Hall. Some also were unhappy that Spilsbury, a Republican, threw her support behind Democratic candidates. Spilsbury called the move against her politically motivated, pushed by an outside group. According to the City Clerk, the petitions bore 5,235 signatures but they haven't been verified yet. The clerk will have 10 days to do so. Afterwards the petitions will be forwarded to the Maricopa County Recorder, who has 60 days to check if any signatures must be disqualified for reasons such as the individual was not a registered voter, didn't live in District 2 or because the signature was illegible. If the petitions have the minimum required number of signatures, Spilsbury has the option to resign or fight for her seat in an election. According to Deputy City Clerk Lisa Anderson, the election would likely be in March. The deadline for submitting items for an all-mail ballot this November is June 9. Should the recall move forward, candidates who want to run for the seat would have to first gather signatures to qualify for the ballot – 2% of the total votes cast for the District 2 seat at the last election, or 246 signatures, according to the City Clerk. Spilsbury said she has no intention of giving up her seat. She won a second, four-year term in last year's primary. In that nonpartisan election, she captured 8,120 or 65.91% of the 12,320 votes cast. Her opponent Melody Whetstone garnered 4,158. 'I will not resign my position,' Spilsbury said in an email. 'I have been an extremely involved and engaged council member and I care deeply about the residents of District 2 and the whole city. 'We have accomplished some amazing things in Mesa during my first four years in office. This Council has seven individuals who belong to different parties and who run the spectrum of political ideology,' she continued. 'But we are able to work together to focus on the needs of Mesa residents and find real solutions rather than score political points. When we disagree and discuss really difficult issues we treat each other with dignity and respect, which allows us to end up with better solutions.' Spilsbury added that she will continue to work to continue that success. Recall supporters showed the material they handed out to secure petition signatures. Gender issues raised But Dorean Taylor had a different view. 'I've had many neighbors sign the petitions,' said Taylor, who gathered about 30 signatures. 'There's a lot of people in the LDS community that live in my neighborhood. I think they had a great deal of trust in her based on the platform that she stands on in their faith and she kind of, she basically violated what they have. 'It's called The Family Proclamation, which says gender is not fluid (and) we don't agree with what the LGBTQ community promotes.' Taylor also accused Spilsbury of 'breaking her code of ethics' by campaigning for Democrats Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov. Tim Walz during the Presidential election. 'In this (council) position, you can't campaign for anything,' Taylor said. 'On top of that she also campaigned for the morals – or the amorals, if you will – that they stand for. She showed herself through that, basically saying, 'I'm going against what I say my faith believes in, and I'm going to go for a man-made agenda.'' Taylor said her neighbors also were aware that Spilsbury (along with the entire council) voted to increase utility rates. 'She's OK to spend our money when we're already in debt,' Taylor said of the embattled councilwoman. 'She's OK for standing on platforms that the Republican Party traditionally does not support. 'You can do whatever you want to do in the privacy of your own home, but to allow males into female public restrooms and locker rooms and vice versa endangers not only young children and people that are maybe more vulnerable. It also puts liability on the City of Mesa.' The council in 2021 on a split vote approved an ordinance prohibiting discrimination in the city against protected groups like race, sex, age, ethnicity and gender identity. State Sen. Anthony Kern, R-Glendale, who also showed up, said he supported recalling Spilsbury because she 'was dishonest to her voters,' namely for supporting a homeless shelter in her council district and approving the non-discrimination ordinance. 'They would not have elected her,' Kern claimed. 'So you want honesty in front of the voters. We want to let the voters know who you are and what you believe, and then let the voters decide on whether or not they're going to cast their vote for you. So she was dishonest to the voters.' Kern also pointed to Spilsbury being part of a coalition of Republicans who endorsed the Harris-Walz ticket, calling it 'disingenuous to the voters.' Kern was endorsed by President Trump in 2022 for his current seat. 'We have thousands and thousands of signatures,' said Matthew Martinez, who was pointed out as the spokesman for the people gathered outside City Hall. 'So many people in Mesa are ready to recall Julie Spilsbury. 'The citizens of Mesa had no idea about her voting record, also that she's been campaigning for Democratic candidates. People are fired up. They don't like when someone is claiming she's a Republican but endorsing all these Democrats and campaigning as a Republican. And with all of her nasty voting record, too.' Martinez, who grew up in east Mesa and now lives in Phoenix, said he got involved with the recall because Mesa is his hometown and his parents still live there. He insisted the recall was a grassroots effort with students, teachers and moms who went out and gathered signatures for the petition because 'they're disappointed, they're let down by Julie.' According to his LinkedIn account, Martinez is a field strategist with Chase the Vote, Turning Point Action, which targets and brings out the conservative voting base in elections. Martinez, like the others, also pointed to the city ordinance that he says allows transgender women to use women's bathrooms and locker rooms. 'So when she votes like that, it gets everybody involved,' Martinez said. Spilsbury rebuttal Spilsbury said she is a proud member of the Republican Party and have been registered as such her entire adult life. 'I want my party to succeed but reserve the right to disagree with those in my party,' she said. 'That is America. Those filing the recall petitions against me did not list as a reason for their efforts my position on a partisan political race. 'The truth is that my loyalty to the City of Mesa and all its residents will always outweigh any allegiance to a political party, social group, church or any other organization or group.' She pointed out that the council seat is nonpartisan and that her duty is to serve all residents in the city without regard to political affiliation or position. 'The issues we deal with, police, fire, roads, water, etc. are neither Republican nor Democrat,' Spilsbury noted. 'They are issues that affect all Mesa residents without regard to political philosophy.' She also called out the critics of the city's non-discrimination ordinance. 'This type of political mis-speak would make George Orwell proud,' Spilsbury said. 'I voted to approve an ordinance that respects the rights of all community members under the law while protecting our religious liberties of conscience. Nothing more. Nothing less. 'Opponents forecast Armageddon-level upheaval if the law passed. However, nothing of the sort has happened. In the four years since the ordinance became law, there has not been a single instance or issue raised under it with the city. None.' Spilsbury also addressed the homeless shelter. 'Once again, this is a gross misrepresentation,' she said. 'Nearly every issue before the Mesa City Council draws support and opposition from residents, who are often passionate. The homeless shelter vote was no exception. 'Homelessness is a serious issue in our city, and we are constantly working to find solutions to manage it. Ignoring the homeless in our community will not make the problem disappear. "A necessary part of the solution is providing emergency sheltering for female adult homeless Mesa residents who are victims of domestic violence, their children, families and veterans. That is what this shelter provides.' She said that after she studied the issue in depth, she supported the action to purchase and convert the former hotel. 'I believe it makes Mesa safer and serves the most vulnerable members of our community,' she said. Among the recall supporters who helped deliver the petitions to the City Clerk were, from left, Matthew Martinez, Dorean Taylor, Antonnette Andruzzi and JoAnne Robbins. Outsiders slammed Proving her point that the recall is being spurred by an outside group, Spilsbury said that 'the signature gathering effort for this recall has been directed and paid for by Turning Point USA, a special interest organization who is active in partisan politics.' The flyer included a disclaimer that it's paid for by 'Turning Point PAC with 100% of contributions coming from out of state contributors,' according to Spilsbury. 'I have no intention of cowering to an organization who is funded 100% by out-of-state donors,' she said. 'Last July, the same people who now oppose me ran a hand-picked candidate against me in the city election. They had their chance to make their case with voters at that time. I won the election in a landslide. 'The losers of that election do not respect the will of the voters, and they are simply trying to undo the results of the election they lost, and have brought in a big-money partner in who is funded 100% by contributions not only from outside of Mesa, but from outside of Arizona. 'Their disrespect of our election process is disappointing, but unfortunately not surprising' Also, in February, a social media post offered to pay people to gather signatures on the recall petitions – $200 for 100 valid signatures. The contact person was Merissa Hamilton, a one-time Phoenix mayoral candidate and activist with ties to ultra-conservative groups. Anticipating that she might have to face a recall, Spilsbury in February reached out to her constituents asking for them to call her with any concerns before signing the petition. She also in March asked her supporters – over 400 names from her previous two elections – if they still backed her and if so to let her know so she could add them to a list on her campaign webpage. Also in March, the Mesa Chamber of Commerce's Good Government Committee issued a message on social media in support of Spilsbury, saying the chamber has been proud to endorse her twice. 'Councilmember Spilsbury is currently facing the prospect of a recall petition and election,' the state read. 'This effort is not supported by the Mesa Chamber or the business community at-large. "Throughout her tenure, Councilmember Spilsbury has displayed professional conduct and voted time and time again with the Mesa business community on issues before the Mesa City Council. 'Recall is not something to be taken lightly. The only basis for a recall should be professional malfeasance or misconduct while in office. Neither has yet to be identified by any of the Spilsbury recall petitioners. Councilmember Spilsbury deserves thanks from and the support of the Mesa business community instead. 'To be clear, the Mesa Chamber of Commerce does not support the recall of Julie Spilsbury and encourages the Mesa community to do the same.'
