Correct approach means knowledge and the ability of logical thinking.

Trouble writing the code means practice experience missed.

Give her another chance to ensure that is not random luck. If you get the same result, let's hire her and train her in the actual projects.

It will only depend if your company is looking for someone with knowledge or if it's looking for someone who's eager to learn.

It would be perfect if the candidate has both.

Thanks for the A2A Syed Fazle Rahman.

Well, a great man once said "I hire for attitude, not aptitude". That's how I will hire anyone. Of course, we need to ensure that they at least understand the basics. Everything else can be learnt from others.

Assuming we have the time and staff, I think the type of trouble she's having matters. Is she having trouble in the sense that she just doesn't understand programming at all or is she having trouble because she's just nervous? If it's #2, that's a lot more reasonable. If she's having trouble because she's not sure this is for her yet and she may just "not get" coding, I think that could be a lot more dangerous. But as the other guys said, this all depends on the project because if we're talking about a small job with a couple of people, it's much less likely to want to hire someone like this, whereas the big employers can afford to train some newbies.

I think logic is important more then code.

in general as Tommy Hodgins said. I wont hire someone who can't help me or for whom I don't have a longterm agenda in mind.

However if it's a longterm project where I have to hire an employee for my customers, I will give it a try. If my customer is paying me for the teaching time or he is willing to have less qualified workers because he's cheap ;D ...

If it's my project and I would have to hire qualified workers, because of the time-frame. The answer is:

not for the job, but maybe in general. If I can afford it I probably would hire someone, but I wouldn't factor them into my plan and just let them do redundant things. So i can easily replace what they've built. Best case I get time, worst case I still am in my time-frame.

If they reach usable levels they can work side by side, before that they are basically interns to me.

This is basically wasting money, but I've been given a lot of chances in my life and will try to do the same for others if possible.

Personally I think logic beats language.

Yes and No

Yes: If she's having less than 2 years of experience and has the right problem solving attitude.

No: If she's having more than 2 years of experience and still doesn't know the right methodology to solve tricky issues.

Personally no, I wouldn't be able to afford to hire a person like this. I'm a freelancer and contractor, so any time I hire people I'm hiring a person onto a project for a limited time for one specific task or skill I don't have, or I need help with my workload in general. Either way, when I hire somebody I'm really relying on the fact that they are a master of their little corner of web development and won't need time for training before being able to get right to work.

For perspective, when I'm hiring people for a project we're talking timeframes of hours, not weeks or months, I need people who can jump onto something, make a massive dent, and then their part is done :D