5 ms·
I wouldn't be so down on vocational training for software...It is a field that has an unusually high requirement for ongoing learning. And when you have to lear
by dthal 11y ago
I wouldn't be so down on vocational training for software...It is a field that has an unusually high requirement for ongoing learning. And when you have to learn some new tech, usually you have to do it now, and in-place, not next September, in the nearest college town. Given the high ongoing learning requirements that software has, I think there is a pretty clear need for training that's delivered where you are and when you need it, and traditional schools won't be able to do that.
- ghaff 11y agoOh. To be clear. I think on-going training is great especially given the pace of change. And things like automated evaluation of code is something that actually works pretty well in MOOCs in my experience. (Unlike peer grading.) However, the argument for platforms like Udacity hasn't in general been that they're a great advancement for vocational training but that they disrupt higher ed generally. And that's probably a different valuation metric.
- cwyers 11y agoThat depends on how sensitive higher ed is to competition from vocational training for things like programmers, right? Something like Udacity isn't going to replace a traditional CS degree, but something more like an IT degree could just be high-end vocational training offered by a traditional four-year institution, and as college costs rise, it could start to eat into the lower end.
- cortesoft 11y agoI feel that the ongoing learning requirements that software has lead to developers becoming VERY good at learning new software.... which means they don't need training, because they can self-teach. At least that has been my experience.
- waterlesscloud 11y agoSure, but if they can spend $50 or $100 for an online course as part of their "self-teaching", then a goodly percentage probably will.