Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bootcamps should be more transparent

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#11

Post by my_username_is_ »

Thanks for actually getting into the details on graduation outcomes. I've considered doing a bootcamp but I've been held back by a lot of uncertainty about graduation outcomes. Being able to go through the raw data and find people like me is really helpful.

I would be interested in knowing more about the background of people before they joined. Do they have a STEM background, what was their job title before, how old are they/how long have they been working, etc. Also if you could categorize the types of companies they work for (startup, large tech companies, non-tech companies, etc.) that'd also be interesting to see.

Thanks for providing transparency to your program!

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#13

Post by itake »

Many people that attend code schools have no interest in getting a software engineering job. I think asking code schools to base their metrics on employment rates would have bad side effects.

This would cause schools to reject applicants that are interested in learning coding for alternatives reasons. These reasons range from Mom's wanting to learn so they could teach their children, wantrepreneur's wanting to build their MVP on their own, or just someone that is happy with their career path, but wants to take a break to learn coding for fun.

Do you think Mom's wanting to teach their children coding should be rejected from code schools, because they don't want to get a job and thus would hurt their numbers?

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#14

Post by runandcode »

itake wrote: post #13

Many people that attend code schools have no interest in getting a software engineering job. I think asking code schools to base their metrics on employment rates would have bad side effects. This would cause schools to reject applicants that are interested in learning coding for alternatives reasons. These reasons range from Mom's wanting to learn so they could teach their children, wantrepreneur's wanting to build…

Do you really think that people spend tens of thousands of dollars and countless hours (away from family, might I add) learning to code just so they can teach their children?

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#15

Post by emmab »

itake wrote: post #13

Many people that attend code schools have no interest in getting a software engineering job. I think asking code schools to base their metrics on employment rates would have bad side effects. This would cause schools to reject applicants that are interested in learning coding for alternatives reasons. These reasons range from Mom's wanting to learn so they could teach their children, wantrepreneur's wanting to build…

Maybe these deserve different kinds of code schools?

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#16

Post by elliotec »

yaddayadda wrote: post #7

I'm a graduate of an after-hours web development bootcamp who wants to move to a full-time web dev job. I certainly can't move to a full-time web dev job at a reasonable salary after the bootcamp I attended. If I was willing to intern for 6-12 months at minimum wage, I would be able to - but I could have done that without the bootcamp. The bootcamp doesn't share stats, only a post-graduation "employment" percentage.…

Every after-hours bootcamp I've heard of has had awful reviews. You're missing out on the whole "immersive" part of it, which is really what matters in a lot of ways.

Like how you learned Spanish a couple days a week in middle school. Do you remember more than how to count to ten and ask where the bathroom is? No, but if you had to live in Mexico for 3 months you'd get pretty adept and be able to make your way around and likely have conversations, assuming you put in the time to actually learn.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#17

Post by elliotec »

itake wrote: post #13

Many people that attend code schools have no interest in getting a software engineering job. I think asking code schools to base their metrics on employment rates would have bad side effects. This would cause schools to reject applicants that are interested in learning coding for alternatives reasons. These reasons range from Mom's wanting to learn so they could teach their children, wantrepreneur's wanting to build…

What are you talking about? Where is your source that people that attend code schools don't want jobs?

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#18

Post by runandcode »

itake wrote: post #13

Many people that attend code schools have no interest in getting a software engineering job. I think asking code schools to base their metrics on employment rates would have bad side effects. This would cause schools to reject applicants that are interested in learning coding for alternatives reasons. These reasons range from Mom's wanting to learn so they could teach their children, wantrepreneur's wanting to build…

I also think this comment misses the point of the article. The author is not proposing that bootcamps reject people based on their career objectives. He's pushing for greater transparency in reporting and urging other bootcamps to publish more than just the splashy stats displayed for marketing purposes. People make huge financial and emotional investments to attend a bootcamp; the author argues that bootcamps should do better by their prospective students by helping them to understand just what they're purchasing.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#19

Post by AcerbicZero »

danreedx86 wrote: post #9

I like the idea of transparency from these bootcamps, it'd be a great way to vet them before committing $20k and several months of your time. It makes sense that bootcamps wouldn't be willing to divulge that information though, especially if their numbers aren't great. But it feels a little unfair to hold the bootcamps completely responsible for people not being able to find jobs. Seems like people have this idea tha…

I agree that its not fair to blame the bootcamps entirely, though I still think releasing better statistics might allow people to make more informed decisions, or at the very least weed out some of the shadier bootcamps.

That said, I think your tl;dr sums it up pretty accurately. If you're not that into learning something, its going to be hard to make a career out of it.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#20

Post by runandcode »

drewrv wrote: post #6

In my mind including "tech-adjacent jobs" is a more interesting number. These programs attract a lot of professionals who are trying to add programing to their resume, but not necessarily become full time code monkeys. A designer who can write html/css/js is more valuable than one who does not. A PM who cannot code is a nightmare to work with. Working with a marketer who can hook up their own jquery plugin is a godse…

Why not include both sets of stats? There are a large number of bootcamps these days and I obviously cannot speak to all. However, for the program I attended, I'd say 90%+ of students were interested in full-time dev jobs. I'd want to know if most post-course jobs were not highly technical.

Aside from that reasoning, I see this as a means to differentiate different types of programs, if they do in fact exist. I don't actually buy that argument; while I obviously have not read the entire internet, I do have yet to encounter a bootcamp whose marketing strategy ISN'T centered around the promise of becoming a full-time developer upon matriculation.

Post reply on HN