41–50 of 74 posts
Their title is misleading. You are not guaranteed a job, just a refund of tuition if you fail to get a job. Still, this is a lot more than your average university will guarantee you.
Isn't that what a guarantee is? They are giving you a guarantee which in this case is getting a job (or your money back).
otherwise why would people bother stating the "or your money back" part?
Reminds me of a scam surrounding recruitment (in armed forces) in India. 100s of potential recruits come to the recruiting event. So scammers would go around pitching their services: give us 1000 rupees, and we'll get you in. If you are not selected, all your money back. In reality, they did nothing. If the guy got selected, they kept the money; if he didn't, they gladly refunded it. Easy money.
Reminds me of a scam surrounding recruitment (in armed forces) in India. 100s of potential recruits come to the recruiting event. So scammers would go around pitching their services: give us 1000 rupees, and we'll get you in. If you are not selected, all your money back. In reality, they did nothing. If the guy got selected, they kept the money; if he didn't, they gladly refunded it. Easy money.
Well, Udacity is providing training for the money. The job guarantee is on top of that.
Sounds good, so long as they don't pull what some bootcamps do, which is hire former students
Unfortunately, it sounds like you could end up as a mentor for the program you just graduated from. Also, rejecting any job offer at all invalidates the refund.
This situation makes me sad. Udacity played a big role in helping me become a professional developer. But I think there are too many caveats here...
Reminds me of a scam surrounding recruitment (in armed forces) in India. 100s of potential recruits come to the recruiting event. So scammers would go around pitching their services: give us 1000 rupees, and we'll get you in. If you are not selected, all your money back. In reality, they did nothing. If the guy got selected, they kept the money; if he didn't, they gladly refunded it. Easy money.
Here are the four Nanodegrees that are eligible for the Nanodegree+ program: Android Developer, iOS Developer, Machine Learning Engineer, and Senior Web Developer. The name scheme is interesting because it tells you what you will become rather than what you will learn. The ML and Web Developer Nanodgrees are pretty new, but we already have reviews for the first two: https://www.class-central.com/certificate/ios-devel…
One complaint: "Nanodegree" is awful branding. "Nano" implies "really small." So am I too understand that this degree will get me a really, really, really tiny bit of knowledge about the subject? I think using the traditional term "certificate" is a better bet. It's also an easier thing to sell employers since they're already familiar with that language.
I disagree. To me, certificate sounds like something tiny. I.e. you're a certified .NET developer. Traditionally, a degree can be very broad. For example, a CS degree can cover a lot of classes in different areas of Computer Science in addition to other non-major classes. In contrast, a Nanodegree, sounds like a specialized degree to me. The Nano implies that it is small, but degree has that well known definition to…
Sounds good, so long as they don't pull what some bootcamps do, which is hire former students
Why? Is it wrong for boot camps to do that? I am genuinely asking since I'm not familiar with that. What exactly goes on and why is it bad?
This happens whenever any organization optimizes towards maximizing some narrowly-defined KPI: they find ways to game the system to juice their numbers.
[1] http://www.c-ville.com/uva-law-funds-the-first-jobs-of-many-... [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/16/corinthian-colleges...
Although I was already quite technical (already running Debian as my OS of choice, back when it was not as frendly as it is now) I had a totally non-computer-related degree, so I decided to get some paper certs to get me started.
I found a recruitment company in London that also did training on the side - technical and also job application coaching. The deal came with a guarantee: job within 3 months paying £20K+ (at the time a very reasonable entry salary) or your money back.
I thought it was a great system - the company got a pool of candidates that they got to know well over a few months and supervised their training and we got a lot of help getting that entry job (more difficult at the entry level in my experience than later as you move higher up).
In the end I got a job before the end of the course and through a different agency but it was still a useful experience.
Reminds me of a scam surrounding recruitment (in armed forces) in India. 100s of potential recruits come to the recruiting event. So scammers would go around pitching their services: give us 1000 rupees, and we'll get you in. If you are not selected, all your money back. In reality, they did nothing. If the guy got selected, they kept the money; if he didn't, they gladly refunded it. Easy money.
The guarantee still doesn't prove that Udacity's credentialing process provides any incremental value above and beyond just taking the classes. Is it the knowledge, or the credential, that got you the gig? I'd like to see some kind of analysis comparing results for people who got certified vs. people who didn't.
Any hiring managers in this thread? Would you ever hire someone, say, with no degree or a BA in English Lit or something and no experience for an actual development role, if all they had was one of these nanodegrees?
Absolutely on the side of the 'disruptors' here, and agree that our existing educational model is hopelessly fucked from a cost-effectiveness and outcome perspective, but just not sure if it's worth it for someone to shell out $299+ for something that most employers won't recognize or value.