I think part of the problem is the funnel. They don't charge students until a month in. They start off with a large number of student who they anticipate will d

I think part of the problem is the funnel. They don't charge students until a month in. They start off with a large number of student who they anticipate will drop before the ISA kicks in, then they prorate the ISA, although not evenly. The count should probably start once the ISA kicks in, even if the student doesn't get through the entire program. Fair enough right? Otherwise do not charge students unless they graduate. I think they aren't transparent about how the count/ outcomes are measured. My biggest concern with the program, however, is the instruction and the lack of one on one feedback with qualified people. The other concern is will their desire to fill diversity quotas. Perhaps this is coming from the market, demanding certain races in hiring, but in my personal experience, highly qualified people who can easily pass the entry exam were denied the female scholarship and given to racially diverse woman who couldn't pass the entry exam. Also, the founder tweeted out that over 50% of their students surveyed were LGBTQ like that was a goal of some kind. I think Lambda is more concerned with racial quotas than training software engineers. So if you want a token hire look towards Lambda.