****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
code.likeagirl.io
****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#2Translation: women are not interested in programming. This is the fault of everybody but women. (I'd love to see counter arguments to this instead of clicks on the "flag" button, but, alas...)
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#3> I spent twelve weeks, ten to twelve hours per day, of my boot camp working primarily on algorithms and data structures, and was tested on that knowledge every three weeks. So that can’t be the skill I’m missing.
Wow, 3 whole months? I wonder why they didn't want bootcamp applicants...
But, in general, I agree. They should be filtering by ability rather than putting a blanket ban on people who have done a bootcamp. But playing devil's advocate, I can totally see why they put a blanket ban on people who have done a bootcamp.
Also, this article was flagged, and I vouched it as I don't think it's totally unsubstantive. But I would prefer it if we lost the stars from the title.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#4There are a lot of universities which taught the core CS worse, and also didn't teach any of the stuff taught in bootcamps, by Professors who were more focused on research than fixing the problem.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#5Not a great article. I can completely understand the rejection of bootcamp applicants. I've personally interviewed people for algorithm / math heavy positions (explicitly mentioned in the article) and bootcamp applicants just do not cut it.
The genuine knowledge in a field like this cannot be conveyed to anybody over the course of a few months. Teaching someone with a stats or physics background to code is pretty doable on-the-job. Teaching someone years of math isn't. And it's not really possible in the workplace either.
I'm not saying that a bootcamp education is completely insufficient and there surely are jobs on the market where they make for a nice fit, but in jobs that tend more towards the theory side of things the general aptitude that someone has after years of rigorous education doesn't even compare to someone out of a bootcamp.
Not to mention that the comparison to race or gender issues in the beginning is in extremely bad taste. The question here is qualification for the job, not discrimination of a protected class.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#6Hiring is expensive, distracting and having an unfilled position can result in other staff leaving. No good company wants to leave a post unfilled. If you're capable and a good fit for the job nothing is going to stop a company hiring you. No matter what the advert says, if you can do the job and you want to work at the company just apply anyway.
But think hard about whether or not you really want to work for a company that says things like this in their ads, because you probably don't.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#7Last night I had the pleasure of meeting some of the students set to graduate from the Tech Elevator Cincinnati program. I emphasized that as someone hiring developers, I'm much more interested in how the applicant approaches solutions to problems presented in the interview than clever code. I'm more interested in the potential of a new hire that can work well with the existing team instead of a know it all.
One of the questions that I was asked was "What's your go to tricky interview question"? Truth is, I don't have one. My advice for these graduates was to make sure when presented with a kobayashi maru that they do the best that they can to clarify the scope of the question before blindly falling into a trap.
I'm a bootcamp grad. I've hired bootcamp grads and will continue to hire them. If companies are that quick to eliminate potential new hires, then you likely wouldn't enjoy working for them anyway.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#8Translation: women are not interested in programming. This is the fault of everybody but women. (I'd love to see counter arguments to this instead of clicks on the "flag" button, but, alas...)
How on earth is that your takeaway from reading the article? It's not even a long article.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#9While I agree it's definitely something that should not go on a job posting, I can see what it stemmed from. And it's probably the fact that they did indeed give bootcamp grads a test.
The author seems like a motivated person and while she speaks inclusively of all the bootcamp participants(a lot of "we"), I am willing to bet that many of them do not share her drive. It's also worth noting that just because someone taught you something and you studied, it doesn't necessarily mean that you can apply it to the real world. Which is why experience is probably still the best learning tool.
In the end, I do feel sort of the same even toward normal grads. I believe that it's not where your knowledge comes from but what do you do with that matters. The question then becomes, how do you weed out the bad ones? Well, we are back at square 0, with an interview.
To recap, I agree that you shouldn't have a job post like that but for different reasons than the author's.
Re: ****** No Bootcamp Applicants ******
#10> I spent twelve weeks, ten to twelve hours per day, of my boot camp working primarily on algorithms and data structures, and was tested on that knowledge every three weeks. So that can’t be the skill I’m missing. Wow, 3 whole months ? I wonder why they didn't want bootcamp applicants... But, in general, I agree. They should be filtering by ability rather than putting a blanket ban on people who have done a bootcamp.…
I've worked with developers who have 20 years of development on their résumé who haven't spent 3 months thinking about data yet. I've also worked with interns who are weeks in to their first professional role who have taught me things about data I haven't seen before. Time served is a terrible way of measuring knowledge and passion for a subject.