3 ms·

How about a math major from a top ivy? Physics grad student? Consultant? Chem-E engineer? Founder of a successful startup? Product managers? We had all those an

How about a math major from a top ivy? Physics grad student? Consultant? Chem-E engineer? Founder of a successful startup? Product managers? We had all those and more at my bootcamp cohort. Look, you do what you want with your hiring. But don't just make the blanket claim that bootcamp grads aren't competent. People in my cohort were contributing right away. Looking at people few years above me, they're launching successful open source projects, becoming team leaders, giving talks at conferences, etc. If you're insulted by their success, maybe that's on you.

smt88 9y ago
> Physics grad student? Consultant? Chem-E engineer? Founder of a successful startup? Product managers? Those would be the same in that they don't have coding experience. Those people might be great hires, but they're not going to be great coders after a few short months trying to learn HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and possibly a backend language. I didn't say that they're stupid or anything. I mentioned that even a highly experienced coder wouldn't be competent with a new stack in that amount of time. > People in my cohort were contributing right away. Contributions aren't the same as good contributions. Bad contributions are much worse and more expensive than no contribution at all. > launching successful open source projects, becoming team leaders, giving talks at conferences, etc. Again, none of these things indicate competence necessarily, and they certainly don't indicate that someone is a great hire. Coding is not just knowing facts and writing code. It's having the experience to know how to structure things, what tradeoffs to make, etc. > If you're insulted by their success, maybe that's on you. I'm not insulted by their success, but I am concerned that bootcamps are taking lots of money from people and not delivering what they say they're delivering. Edit: If you look at other comments in this thread, I think many bootcamp grads agree. There's also going to be some survivorship bias here: you succeeded due to your bootcamp, but does that mean it works for everyone? Would you have been able to do it on your own? Are you smarter than the average person who would be interested in a bootcamp?
- tannhauser23 9y ago
  What basis do you have for asserting that their contributions are bad? That their open source projects and promotions to team leadership aren't signs of competence? Look, you can go on believing whatever you want to believe about bootcamp grads - no one's forcing you to hire them. But it is interesting to me that my cohort mates keep getting hired by everyone from small startups to Google, and they keep progressing in their careers. That tells me the bootcamps have done a good job of prepping them to begin their coding careers. And wait, who said bootcamps is for everyone? My bootcamp never made that claim - they specifically said that it's hard, they're selective about who they let in, and that they kick out people who aren't cutting it. And who cares whether I (or anyone else) could have done it on my own? Could you have learned to code without taking comp sci classes? Probably, right? Does that mean your college was pointless/useless/fraudulent? Of course not. Bootcamps showed that entry level developer jobs at most web startups don't require four years of studying computer science. It's a craft that many people can pick up without formal education in the subject matter. And if you ever want or need to learn about 'deeper' subjects? We can just pick up a book and learn it. This isn't rocket science.
  - smt88 9y ago
    > What basis do you have for asserting that their contributions are bad? That their open source projects and promotions to team leadership aren't signs of competence? I didn't assert that. I asserted only that "contributions" are not evidence of competence. Competence isn't even always sufficient to make someone a good hire. > That tells me the bootcamps have done a good job of prepping them to begin their coding careers. I agree and said this in my original comment. I said that bootcamps are "teaching to the test" and prepping people to get past the hiring process. > And who cares whether I (or anyone else) could have done it on my own? The people who pay for a bootcamp and don't get their money's worth. It's not easy to part with $10k+ for most people. The top comment on this post is someone who felt that way. > Could you have learned to code without taking comp sci classes? Probably, right? Yes, and I did. I'm self-taught. But it didn't take me 16 weeks. I still look back on my skills a year ago and think, "Wow, I sucked a year ago." And I've been programming for 20 years. > Bootcamps showed that entry level developer jobs at most web startups don't require four years of studying computer science. They certainly don't necessarily show that. If you hire someone who needs months of training to be a productive, independent employee, that's not a success. That's evidence of a shortage of entry-level coders. I think that shortage is starting to wane. > This isn't rocket science. It's not rocket science, but besides being something that requires understanding the way computers work, it also requires learning and understand a staggering number of technologies. I regularly use CSS, and I can't even keep up with just CSS. There's too much to know. There are also many layers to being a great programmer that people rarely get early on. Many people don't realize that readability/maintainability are the most important qualities of (most) code. Even if they do, they don't necessarily know how to achieve those things. You seem to be suggesting that web programming is unique among professions in that experience is mostly unimportant and someone can figure it all out in a few months. Would you argue the same about plumbing, repairing air conditioners, accounting, or sales? None of these things are rocket science, but they are things you can't just think your way through and understand how to be good at. It takes time and practice, like everything.

smt88 9y ago

> Physics grad student? Consultant? Chem-E engineer? Founder of a successful startup? Product managers? Those would be the same in that they don't have coding experience. Those people might be great hires, but they're not going to be great coders after a few short months trying to learn HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and possibly a backend language. I didn't say that they're stupid or anything. I mentioned that even a highly experienced coder wouldn't be competent with a new stack in that amount of time. > People in my cohort were contributing right away. Contributions aren't the same as good contributions. Bad contributions are much worse and more expensive than no contribution at all. > launching successful open source projects, becoming team leaders, giving talks at conferences, etc. Again, none of these things indicate competence necessarily, and they certainly don't indicate that someone is a great hire. Coding is not just knowing facts and writing code. It's having the experience to know how to structure things, what tradeoffs to make, etc. > If you're insulted by their success, maybe that's on you. I'm not insulted by their success, but I am concerned that bootcamps are taking lots of money from people and not delivering what they say they're delivering. Edit: If you look at other comments in this thread, I think many bootcamp grads agree. There's also going to be some survivorship bias here: you succeeded due to your bootcamp, but does that mean it works for everyone? Would you have been able to do it on your own? Are you smarter than the average person who would be interested in a bootcamp?

tannhauser23 9y ago
What basis do you have for asserting that their contributions are bad? That their open source projects and promotions to team leadership aren't signs of competence? Look, you can go on believing whatever you want to believe about bootcamp grads - no one's forcing you to hire them. But it is interesting to me that my cohort mates keep getting hired by everyone from small startups to Google, and they keep progressing in their careers. That tells me the bootcamps have done a good job of prepping them to begin their coding careers. And wait, who said bootcamps is for everyone? My bootcamp never made that claim - they specifically said that it's hard, they're selective about who they let in, and that they kick out people who aren't cutting it. And who cares whether I (or anyone else) could have done it on my own? Could you have learned to code without taking comp sci classes? Probably, right? Does that mean your college was pointless/useless/fraudulent? Of course not. Bootcamps showed that entry level developer jobs at most web startups don't require four years of studying computer science. It's a craft that many people can pick up without formal education in the subject matter. And if you ever want or need to learn about 'deeper' subjects? We can just pick up a book and learn it. This isn't rocket science.
- smt88 9y ago
  > What basis do you have for asserting that their contributions are bad? That their open source projects and promotions to team leadership aren't signs of competence? I didn't assert that. I asserted only that "contributions" are not evidence of competence. Competence isn't even always sufficient to make someone a good hire. > That tells me the bootcamps have done a good job of prepping them to begin their coding careers. I agree and said this in my original comment. I said that bootcamps are "teaching to the test" and prepping people to get past the hiring process. > And who cares whether I (or anyone else) could have done it on my own? The people who pay for a bootcamp and don't get their money's worth. It's not easy to part with $10k+ for most people. The top comment on this post is someone who felt that way. > Could you have learned to code without taking comp sci classes? Probably, right? Yes, and I did. I'm self-taught. But it didn't take me 16 weeks. I still look back on my skills a year ago and think, "Wow, I sucked a year ago." And I've been programming for 20 years. > Bootcamps showed that entry level developer jobs at most web startups don't require four years of studying computer science. They certainly don't necessarily show that. If you hire someone who needs months of training to be a productive, independent employee, that's not a success. That's evidence of a shortage of entry-level coders. I think that shortage is starting to wane. > This isn't rocket science. It's not rocket science, but besides being something that requires understanding the way computers work, it also requires learning and understand a staggering number of technologies. I regularly use CSS, and I can't even keep up with just CSS. There's too much to know. There are also many layers to being a great programmer that people rarely get early on. Many people don't realize that readability/maintainability are the most important qualities of (most) code. Even if they do, they don't necessarily know how to achieve those things. You seem to be suggesting that web programming is unique among professions in that experience is mostly unimportant and someone can figure it all out in a few months. Would you argue the same about plumbing, repairing air conditioners, accounting, or sales? None of these things are rocket science, but they are things you can't just think your way through and understand how to be good at. It takes time and practice, like everything.