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

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#31

Post by antisthenes »

cwp wrote: post #27

As someone trying to hire web developers, it looks to me like Bootcamps are more like finishing school than trade school. Candidates that come out of a bootcamp have learned how to signal membership in the Silicon Valley in-group. Their resumes have all the right keywords, and refer to "projects" they've worked on, built with all the frameworks and tools currently in fashion. They've practiced their interview techniq…

> So I'm a bit ambivalent. Yeah, we desperately need more developers in the tech world. Yeah, startup culture is ridiculously tribal and unfairly biased against those who don't know the secret handshakes. But 3 months does not a developer make. When I'm hiring, I now look very skeptically at candidates that have been to a bootcamp. Experience has taught me that interviewing them is usually a waste of time.

That's all the more reason these bootcamps should be way more transparent than they are.

There are people for whom the cost of attending such a bootcamp is enormous - they might spend their entire life savings or finance the attendance of such a camp, putting them in a bad debt spiral. And while many of the camps are selective and only hire people with previous development experience, I'm sure there are some with more 'flexible' standards so to speak that will happily take your money, regardless of your background.

One of the things they could do to make it more transparent is to signal that software development may not be for everyone - just like being a doctor or an athlete or some other profession that requires extreme passion and dedication.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#32

Post by antiffan »

Love this. Some bootcamps are doing the world a great service, but there are also an increasing number of sharks in the water.

I run a 4-week "pre-bootcamp" program to help advise students on making the right choice. I hold my classes in the evenings so students can try out coding before they make the HUGE commitment of quitting their jobs and shelling out 10-20k for a bootcamp.

Sometimes, the right choice is to not try to be a coder. People get excited about six figure job prospects, but the truth is that coding isn't for everyone. The right approach is allow students to "fail fast," just like a startup. I do believe everyone should at least be exposed to coding so they can make an educated decision about it though.

On a slight tangent, I'd love to see more coding schools putting their money where there mouths are by offering income-based repayment (IBR). I've worked as an instructor at a coding school offering IBR, and I've seen first hand how much of good thing it is for everyone when success incentives are aligned.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#33

Post by beetlejuice235 »

hanginghyena wrote: post #29

Speaking as a hiring manager, I place a much higher value on verifiable project experience (either I can see it or you can walk me through your unique/non-trivial app in our interview) than any credentials. I've seen a lot of candidates who are focused on credentials crumble in the technical interview. Granted, there's a huge universe of people out there who are more than willing to take your money (including Microso…

/s/guys/people

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#34

Post by dbpatterson »

fuzzybassoon wrote: post #23

General Assembly is working towards just such an approach: https://generalassemb.ly/blog/measuring-what-matters/ Note: Most of the interesting stuff there is in a PDF. (Also, I work for GA, but am not speaking on behalf of the company.)

The PDF is interesting, but reports no actual data from GA... Seems like that would be relevant, if they are trying to push for more transparency!

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#35

Post by lowglow »

I agree. I originally wrote this article "Are dev bootcamps a scam? A hacker's perspective."[0] which actually caused quite a bit of drama when I then had dev schools up in arms about opening up the books and proving their success/placement rates, etc.

Then I decided there should be a better way to find reliable, quality bootcamps so I built a review site for Dev Bootcamps.[1] The response has been great and what was once reviled by dev schools is now seen as a source of distribution and qualification for validation because we help so many people decide where to go.

[0] https://www.techendo.com/posts/are-dev-bootcamps-a-scam-a-ha... [1] http://schools.techendo.com/

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#36

Post by antiffan »

my_username_is_ wrote: post #11

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…

Something else to consider - how sure are you that you enjoy coding and it's something you can be good at? I highly recommend taking the time to evaluate this before you commit to a bootcamp as well. Feel free to email me (address in my profile) if you'd like me to elaborate.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#37

Post by antiffan »

wonder_er wrote: post #2

Title is a bit click baity, but I agree with the author's points. He sees it as a negative thing, but I see it as a massive improvement on college/uni/grad schools, who wouldn't even know where to start with gathering/publishing this data. Bootcamps are subject to market forces in a way most colleges are not, and it's initiatives like this (what the author is proposing) that give me a sense of optimism for how they'l…

This is a great point. Can you imagine if every college major published its job placement stats and average salary?

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#38

Post by xentronium »

lowglow wrote: post #35

I agree. I originally wrote this article "Are dev bootcamps a scam? A hacker's perspective."[0] which actually caused quite a bit of drama when I then had dev schools up in arms about opening up the books and proving their success/placement rates, etc. Then I decided there should be a better way to find reliable, quality bootcamps so I built a review site for Dev Bootcamps.[1] The response has been great and what was…

https://schools.techendo.com certificate is expired

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#39

Post by the_watcher »

I agree with the author that bootcamp "statistics" should have some kind of standard (that bootcamps are free to use or disregard, but that way applicants will know the methodology being used is either the published standard or one that is not published). My one quibble is with his claim that no one goes to these schools to become product managers - plenty do. There are enough PM jobs that require software development experience (reasonably - the best PM's I've worked with could all code well enough to bang out a prototype or proof of concept) to justify learning to program. Outside of that, couldn't agee more.

Re: Bootcamps should be more transparent

#40

Post by jthree »

Name three great for-profit colleges.

Ok, name one.

Now you see the average for-profit bootcamps being acquired by traditional for-profit colleges.

The duty to make financial returns for investors necessitates extracting money from students. Like an ecosystem with the oxygen slowly extracted out, the good things happening there eventually die.

I believe the only two non-profits in this space are Ada Academy in Seattle and our Turing School in Denver. At Tuting, we believe in a world where the people building technology represent the people using it. We'll still be here in 10, 25, and 100 years working towards that vision.

Post reply on HN