HN user

RosieA

34 karma
Posts4
Comments51
View on HN

But I am saying these types of courses cannot possibility teach you enough to truly know what you're doing, and I as a hiring manager would not consider hiring someone with no other experience than your organization's 3 month course and a couple of side projects without the benefit another 2-3 years professional experience on top of that.

I've agreed with parts of this statement several times throughout the various comments on this feed. Bootcamps that send their students out into the world without a realistic idea of where they stand and how to progress beyond their current knowledge are doing an injustice to their students, and to the people who have to sift through their resumes. Its something we try very hard to to work against, and set realistic expectations for with our active students. Its partly why we built our own curriculums.

I think your taking the context of small apples and putting them in the context of MASSIVE apples. But I like apples, so lets not get them tied into this mess.

I'm still very confused what you're arguing, as you present problems with the bootcamp model, but then what is the solution? How did you learn to code, and how was it better? How long were you restricted to education-only projects before "being allowed" to work on real things?

Hiring managers and advanced software developers lead teams for a reason, to filter out people they cannot trust from their team. I would also say though that something we do is take passionate people and give them the tools to kickstart a new career. Yes it takes time, and experience and lots of learning beyond a 3 month course, I think everyone can be realistic about that, but to say someone "shouldn't be coding anything" because that's where they started? Can't agree there.

So again, how did you learn to code, and how was it better? How can the bootcamp model be adjusted to do a better job?

I guess I heard talk about SWEBOK, but honestly didn't have it in a context that lead me to compare it to guilds and unions like that.

I DO like the idea of "coding malpractice" law suits though. ;-P

Well I appreciate your investigation into the entire article and associated content, that's awesome. Your dedication to the discussion is also key here because again, its not that I'm disagreeing with you in principle, but I think we're talking about about slightly different things.

Please please correct me if I'm wrong, but your perspective as I understand it right now is that if you code at all, anything, what you should adhere to is an equal practice of social concerns and responsibility as someone coding international train schedules that manage thousands of lives in transit. Anyone who doesn't teach, or doesn't want to learn that way... ?

Emil's quotes from the video speak, from my perspective, more to the reality of learning from the standpoint of no infrastructure. No real previous experience with code. We want to get people excited about technology, excited about learning to code. Part of that is making easy to grasp, making it easy to problem solve. Teaching people in ways that keeps them energized and self-sufficient to make quick progress, and see that progress happening. We want people to grow and study, to explore their interests in code and perpetuate their own learning. I don't see how what he recommends in the video goes against any of those principles as they are starting points to becoming a developer. Ways of investigating new code, ways to problem solve when you're stuck. Coding complex and life-changing pieces of software is not where it starts, its not what we're trying to, or claiming to teach.

But lets flip that. Lets assume I'm still totally off base here (that's alright, you don't have to assume, you can just keep thinking it! ;-)). How would YOU motivate and excite people to learn code. How would YOU educate them, help them take the first steps from total beginners towards being able to build pieces they can be proud of? What are the basic and easy to grasp, easy to understand "go do it"s for you within the context of software development as a total noob?

If we're going for worldly examples to coding dangers: what happens when you're mechanic misses a screw when replacing your brake pads?

Firstly, if your a biz doing transactions, you better damn well be insured, just like your car, just like your health.

Secondly, your mechanic might be a junior, but little mistakes get left by the most experienced of people as well. Especially on things they think beneath them or simple. I hold no doubts that you and I have both at some point made a simple but critical mistake on the most "simple" part of a project. Its human nature.

6 weeks is a bit of an extreme example for someone to trust the building of a transaction site worth hacking, but even so I'm not sure that type of risk is something anyone can argue as a problem with bootcamps. What if I teach myself for a few weeks and want to start getting jobs and trying stuff out? Same issue, and some of the best developers I know in the world are self taught.

I think if we're talking about someone coding portfolio websites and ecommerce shops using validated API's, we're not talking rocket science but we are talking the basis of a career.

I have a hard time believing that wordpress developers end up endangering many people. Even more advanced software technicians, guys who are brilliant are making games and a great living but aren't putting anyone in harm's way.

Cardeology? Yes. Draw bridge tech, probably. Car computers, for sure. A social responsbility to recognize that you're good enough for that? Yes but I'm sure the people hiring you aren't going to mess around with that kind of thing.

People who want to learn web development to make fun/cool products and living don't need to be concerned about the complexities of banking software unless that's what they want to be doing with their lives, and I would hope that people like you, people advanced enough to do the hiring, aren't going to hire any dummies to do it.

You're selling people something they can "sell" to others (marketable skills).

Of course we are, but that's part of any career motivation so I'm not sure I see this as criticism. "I went to university to learn XYZ skills, which are marketable to the industry and people I want to work with...". At the end of Uni most people are lucky to get an internship. Students leaving our program are looking for exactly that, at best a junior position or their first couple small freelance contracts.

Its not that I disagree with the claim that many, most, maybe almost all bootcamps fail to educate their students on the status they leave the course in (before they do the course) and on how to effectively approach the industry, but that's business side unfortunately.

I also don't see it hurting the industry at all, but that's not what you're saying. What you claim is that it hurts the individuals who are misguided, therefore the guinea pigs. Totally fair. We work pretty closely with each student and though we might sell big at signup, the conversations before enrollment are all based around realistic expectations and getting them psyched to start the long haul towards a new career. Of course I could just be saying that, but its one way we try to define ourselves and the quality of our students.

I'm not sure I understand the Facebook comment. Do you work there? I had a friend at Facebook and there were all sorts of CPD programs available to him in different formats. He did several I believe...

I keep coming back to the topic of traditional education because I think that's where the saturation and awareness should be happening, instead of the bootcamp level. Lots of governments and school systems working towards this. We actually launched something today which is part of our first attempt at helping this effort along, providing training specifically designed for teaching teachers how to teach code, as that's currently the ed system's biggest barrier. Would love your thoughts on the concept, not as a business but as a way of advancing technology, filling the "skills" gap by creating early awareness, and then putting bootcamps in a position to advance people with perspective should it come to that... http://bit.ly/teach-the-teachers

Hahaha, I see your point. But casually designing something that endangers people's lives really isn't much of a comparison.

yes, you can absolutely argue that developing the next piece of medical software for defibrillators is of equal importance, but if I'm sticking to coding front-ends of ecommerce shops and happy being great at that and staying on top of it as it grows... I'm not sure I see the point...?

Well you nailed it pretty much on the head. UK is already placing mandates that begin enforcement next year that state secondary schools must supply a rudimentary coding education to all students. Other EU countries are soon to follow, and the US government is essentially running tests across certain districts of similar ideas.

Problem at the moment is that we don't have teachers in the world who can code, much less teach it. We actually launched the first pieces of a platform today that approaches this issue. We'll be releasing more news soon about our efforts to collaborate with schools and governments to Teach Teachers to Teach Code!

http://bit.ly/teach-the-teachers

This is a crazy interesting concept. In part because I just never considered it before, but also because its kind of a midway: Let the elitists feel elite and set the standards, and the rebels and riff-raff fight amongst themselves for status.

Honestly, having worked in media (film) and with those guilds (SAG, DGA, etc) its very difficult for me to say this is a good idea. The guilds were constructed the way they are because of the in-and-out nature of working in production. Without going into detail, the model just doesn't fit unless all devs turn freelance.

Now a union, as the states has for many different labor professions etc: this is a concept that could work, but without an effective standardization system (something VERY hard to do in a world of open source, fast moving technology development, and new coding languages) it would be for show and simply an opportunity for the 5% who shook the right hands to sit on their golden thrones. Sounds very American though. ;-)

The thing is, neither guilds or unions were really built to enforce standards of work-quality. They were built to protect the workers against potential abuse from corporations/foundations/government firms/private sector contractors. So this would be inverse to the problem we're trying to solve, which is qualification of good devs versus "bad" or under qualified.

So what would work? Well if we all started by doing Oracle IT and Microsoft certificates, the furiously patient devs of the world could at least recognize each other for it. Actually... they already sort of do. :-p

I think ultimately the next form of standards is going to have to be written by the academic world OR some other government sponsored party of incredibly savvy individuals who's entire "business" revolves around standardization testing for devs. Not that there aren't companies kind of doing this, but well? And on a government level of respect and reach? Nope.

I suppose the only back draw is that it risks removing the creativity and how problem solving abilities are associated to personality type. I'm sure you could eventually formulate that as well, but sheesh, what data mayhem. Would be awesome. I guess one point for it is hell, if google and amazon can do it for themselves, who's to say evaluations couldn't be built across the board?

That was really long, sorry, but super interesting question!

Our operating theory right now is that the best (and most useful) evaluator of developer talent (particularly new developers) is the projects they did for themselves. Or their solutions and learning through a single-dev job.

Thoughts?

Its an article headline, so absolutely intended to be click-happy and instigate two things: 1 - interest from as many people as possible 2 - discussions and disagreements like this!

To be fair, this isn't a sales pitch but a guest post on our blog! ;-)

We present a number of companies and bootcamp angles in the article, to each their own how they "sell" the mission, or as some would call it "the dream". In our case we paint a picture of the ideal but crack down pretty hard when on boarding potential students about their goals and expectations.

I could of course be "just saying that", but we're an education company. Drop outs and sucky results aren't really our thing!

I think that mentality could end up being the death of many companies. Though for certain business models the "slave" is preferable to any alternative. The great leaders of the coming decade though are going to be people-centric, just you wait!

Edit: Just realized I commented twice to this thread, but I like this response (my second one) better so I'll leave it!

We take this approach in our company, but its a risky cultural move for a startup who needs to progress fast, and a lot of corporations don't want to take the time/risk that you'll end up being a flop--generally because they're less connected to individuals as they are teams.

There is currently a huge movement, however, of "investing in people" as an ideology for entrepreneurship, investment and HR. Gary V. has been making a lot of noise about it recently. Subject of his next book? I'm not telling. ;-)

Inhouse and education and training is slowly getting trend again, and cool companies like friends of ours in Amsterdam (Acheived) and SF (Degreed) are starting to make it sexy again as well!

Really? I feel like most people I know who were developers before the bust are either millionaires or still rocking. A few moves on when the bubble blew out, I even lived in an apartment in SF of a failed 2 man company during that time period; they both went to back to being finance guys. But that was the catalyst of the industry we're now all talking about, and its grown more and faster than many other.

It also took a lot of crappy people to produce the few genuine talents that took the industry by storm. The industry is growing faster than talent because its not standardized or accessible enough for all potential to be found. The problem is greater than a discussion of the validity of bootcamps, and though business driven I would argue bootcamps are a step towards understanding the true needs on a global scale.

I can totally agree with you, accept that I would say that for the future to be brighter, to be more filled with highly qualified talent, you need to increase the pool of potentials. That means more education sources and building interest and awareness around it. That's what bootcamps are doing, whether its for that purpose or otherwise.

We're actually far MORE interested in the long long term solution, which is teaching code as part of standard education. Its inclusion in schools. We're actually joining efforts with teachers, administrations and government in both the US and the UK (closer to home for us) in the effort to make this possible.

For that tope 5% to exist, the other 95% have to as well...

Do you know off hand which ones really do? I'm not sure I've seen evidence of it apart from sort of a brief introduction to theory...?

Nothing automatically provides the job. We're talking about a process hidden behind a click-happy headline.

A huge part of the comments in this feed have been discussing the challenge of teaching bootcamp students what the actual career is about, what getting jobs is about, that realistically learning to code is just one small part of being a developer.

Does the headline say all that? God now. Does the article say that? Nope, because its trying to draw in all interested parties. The problem is that some, perhaps many, maybe even almost all bootcamps on that list? They might not clarify it until to late.

Some of us are trying to figure it out. Both how to communicate it, but maybe even the actual solution!

In the mean time, if you can code start pitching on elance, man! There is always work even for those of us who are, quiet frankly, sub-par developers> our CMO can code, he sucks at it.

;-)

I honestly never thought of it this way (your last sentence). But yes, to your first point many of our students are CS grads who realized they wanted to work as developers but didn't know how to code... They might start with a stronger theoretical understanding, and perhaps can code more complex functionality or software than our non CS grad students, but ultimately they're on a similar level. Just depends on what the individual wants to be doing long term.

I couldn't disagree more!

I know great, long time and successful web developers who have never studied maths and CS! I think this really depends on your goals, and the complexity of what you hope to be building. If you want to be at the top of the software development field you may be correct, but if you want to be a really strong web developer working at startups, building your own light weight apps and products, or freelancing as a digital nomad and building portfolios and private e-commerce stores? You don't need any of that.

I think there are a lot of self taught and bootcamp taught developers who would disagree with you, and while you could argue they are all "sub par", you and I both know it takes a lot of people trying to find a few people who are genuinely talented. That goes for any skill! That's what makes YOU stand apart! But that doesn't make them or their own pursuits any less valid.

But did he WANT to code that himself? Or was it really a job for you?

I actually agree, but as a business of course you go where the interest market is most stable. If nothing else than for the sake of your investor's heart-rate. ;-)

Jokes aside, I'm wondering if the increasing demand for education in school systems and traditional education is the long term solution to exactly this problem. We're working hard in Europe to participate as much as we can as we feel the skills-gap philosophy is actually an education gap it just hasn't been figured out yet.

Totally agree with this. Reaching the top level of anything takes time and dedication, but there is huge value to having a rudimentary understanding of code regardless of your professional focus.

Code is slowly becoming a mandatory part of education in primary and secondary schools in Europe. Do you think this helps approach the greater infrastructure of tech?

Our CTO was a project manager for 8 years. Picked up web development 2 years ago and now runs a major tech startup... anything is possible. He had a traditional engineering education, but CS has nothing to do with it. You might learn the fundamentals from a theoretical perspective, but a lot of our web dev students in Europe are CS grads looking for a way to access the tech industry.

Definitely. Do you think, however, that educational systems should be working to fix this? Or that the industry relies (and is ok relying) on private training resources like bootcamps, and the self taught wonders of the world?