11 ms·

Students paid thousands for a Caltech boot camp that Caltech didn't teach

84 points by goldfishgold 2y ago

NohatCoder 2y ago
https://archive.ph/BgZZu https://archive.ph/BgZZu
hadthischat 2y ago
[flagged]
progbits 2y ago
Are any of these bootcamps actually good? Every time I looked into them it seemed like a ridiculously shallow syllabus that would leave you far from being able to do the job they claim. Maybe you could pass HR interview by knowing some keywords and last a month or two before getting fired.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  About 2018 I was helping with Operation Code (tech for vets) and doing their podcast. There was one guy who said he knew people in his bootcamp who got job offers before they were even finished. A number of my interviews got jobs that lasted. The job market is different now, from what I hear.
  - ta988 2y ago
    At that time people making bootcamps was a way to show that they were willing to learn, a big positive factor when hiring somebody. Today it doesn't mean much, a lot do the bootcamp and believe that they now know everything and that there is no need to do any additional learning effort. And it is difficult to filter those people out to get to the genuinely interesting ones.
    - AlbertCory 2y ago
      > a lot do the bootcamp and believe that they now know everything and that the effort is not necessary to pursue anymore. I don't understand this. What does "the effort is not necessary to pursue anymore" mean?
      - everforward 2y ago
        That they don't need to study anymore. That they think they've studied enough in bootcamp that they don't need to learn anything else to get a job and be a functional engineer.
      - ta988 2y ago
        fixed it
- ta988 2y ago
  No they are not. They are mostly one additional way to take money from people who are desperate and bury them under loans making them believe a sticker on their resume will make it more appealing.
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    On the other hand, they were a way to get large numbers of people into the field and staff unfilled positions. The market was very hot a couple of years ago.
    - ta988 2y ago
      Sure and a lot of those are being kicked out in the current layoff cycle. So it helped, maybe, companies with their engineering seats beeing filled, but didn't necessarily help at all with getting things done.
      - HPsquared 2y ago
        Easy come, easy go. Now everyone is looking for machine learning engineers instead of front end for the "current thing".
- sneed_chucker 2y ago
  Some are good, some aren't. The problem is, a Bootcamp student can't tell the difference and there's nothing like an accreditation system for them so it's full on market for lemons[1]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons
  - vunderba 2y ago
    This exactly. It reminds me of the "ESL certifications" you can get online - there's no presiding international body for guaranteeing some minimal level of quality / competency.
    - sneed_chucker 2y ago
      Well at least for those CEFR and TOEFL exist.
      - vunderba 2y ago
        I should have been more clear. Those are for students who are learning, ESL is for people who intend to teach English. There are only two real recognized certificates for it - Trinity which is Oxford, and CELTA which is Cambridge.
- sputknick 2y ago
  I used General Assembly to learn frontend web development about 5 years ago. It was a positive experience, the two types of people I saw succeed were 1. people with some kind of tech background already and 2. people who were really smart but not technically oriented (we had 4 former professional artists and musicians in my cohort, one of whom was a Princeton undergrad). The people who failed were people who had no curiosity to genuinely grow their knowledge and were just there because they wanted to check a box before getting a better paying job.
  - underlipton 2y ago
    I've found that my curiosity drops commensurate with my savings (and therefore the chance I'm going to get kicked out of my home, my belongings repossessed, and find food unaffordable). If people are so insecure that this opportunity to retrain an entire workforce was squandered - the money was there, the desire was there, the expertise was there - it comes off to me as more of a, "If you owe the bank $1 billion...", sort of problem, for society.
game_the0ry 2y ago
I find it very surprising that prestigious colleges are willing to outsource their online courses at the expense of diluting their own brand. I guess I should not be that surprised, college admins are some of the worst business people on the planet.
- hnfong 2y ago
  But they are already delegating teaching (of undergrad level at least) to people who generally aren't interested in teaching...
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    Academia is mostly about multi-level marketing. Teaching and research are side effects. There are a lot of similarities to nightclub promotion.
  - tmpz22 2y ago
    University of Oregon did a lot of this around 2015. Imagine the passion a post-grad math scholar has for teaching calculus to undergrads. Zero.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - linguae 2y ago
    Yup; this is common at research universities, where professors’ tenure evaluations are largely based on research accomplishments and fundraising. I’ve had many friends tell me that they had better experiences with community college professors compared to university professors, since the community college professors are there to teach. (Disclaimer: I am a new community college instructor of computer science who worked as a researcher in industry for nine years before wanting a career change.)
    - akomtu 2y ago
      What's "tenure evaluation"?
wongarsu 2y ago
> The university, he learned, had largely outsourced the program to a company called Simplilearn. > A spokesperson for Caltech, Shayna Chabner, said that the university viewed its online programs as “a way that we can bring value” Sounds more like Caltech views its online programs as a way to exchange credibility for short-term profits
- octopod12 2y ago
  The same can be said of Stanford which charges ridiculous amounts for "certification" courses. Basically cashing in on the institutions reputation and student's hunger to get the institution's stamp on their resumes. Glad to see the pushback. eventually stupid money runs out.
  - XenophileJKO 2y ago
    I think there is a fundamental difference if the content is created by and taught by Stanford staff.
    - octopod12 2y ago
      fair, but is there are too many such courses, the exclusivity of the brand dilutes.
      - XenophileJKO 2y ago
        I fail to see how. If the content quality and instructional quality is the same then there is no damage to the perception of quality. So then if they charge a lot for the targeted certification, then they don't diminish the value of the degree programs. The difference then is scope of instruction. I think high quality certification programs are quite valuable to the market and properly run ones but trusted institutions are a benefit for the institution and the marketplace.
        Cupertino95014 2y ago
AlbertCory 2y ago
Mixed feelings on this. I've taken Extension courses from UCSC and from Stanford, and was never under any illusion that the teachers were affiliated with the schools (although one was). For all of them, they tell you in the course description who the teacher is. There's always a course evaluation at the end. If Caltech isn't monitoring the content of their courses and the student evals, then they're being negligent, for sure. But I don't see this as a systemic problem, other than maybe lack of disclosure.
- Cheer2171 2y ago
  > I've taken Extension courses from UCSC and from Stanford, and was never under any illusion that the teachers were affiliated with the schools What does this mean? Someone from those schools hired a teacher to teach a class sold under their schools brand. That's an affiliation. If the teacher dropped out and you didn't get a refund, you would sue those schools. What this seems like are schools outsourcing their hiring to private companies. It's a problem precisely because the random teachers get affiliated with the school.
  - AlbertCory 2y ago
    > That's an affiliation. Wrong. The teachers aren't professors of any type, or student assistants, or even employees. Their classes don't give credit towards a degree. They're contractors. > It's a problem precisely because the random teachers get affiliated with the school. Wrong again. I haven't taught a class at UC Berkeley Extension, but if I had, I would not be entitled to say I was "affiliated with Berkeley."
    - goldfishgold 2y ago
      Classic game that universities love to play where they hire someone but that person isn’t “really” part of the university. Happens with extension but happens in degree granting programs too with adjuncts.
    - Cheer2171 2y ago
      > Wrong. The teachers aren't professors of any type, or student assistants, or even employees. Their classes don't give credit towards a degree. They're contractors. From Miriam Webster: affiliated, adjective, af· fil· i· at· ed ə-ˈfi-lē-ˌā-təd: closely associated with another typically in a dependent or subordinate position What you are saying is like saying "I've taken car rides from Uber and from Lyft, and was never under any illusion that the drivers were affiliated with the companies" If your organization sells services that are fulfilled by contractors who are vetted by your organization and branded with your organization's logos, then those contractors are affiliates of your organization.
SamuelAdams 2y ago
This is the problem with “branding” and ranking in the American university system. People believe Caltech is a good school, so they automatically assume it is worth the high price. Maybe a solution is to be clear if a class or program is taught by an FTE instructor, or if the program is outsourced? There’s nothing wrong with trying new things to make more money (student enrollments are declining), but be clear about who is teaching the course and how they are affiliated with your brand.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  There's a pretty clear delineation between courses that lead to a degree, and "extension" courses that don't. > automatically assume it is worth the high price Data needed: what do "regular" bootcamps cost and is Caltech's cost any higher?
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    Is there really a difference? Most of these universities outsource the actual teaching to grad students.
    - galleywest200 2y ago
      Grad students who are technically under the employ of the University...that is not outsourcing.
      - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
        To me the difference is just a technicality. My point is you’re not getting taught by who you’re paying for.
        Cupertino95014 2y ago
        > who you’re paying for Only ignorant people think that all beginning courses are taught by real professors. That hasn't been true for generations.
jmyeet 2y ago
What we're seeing is how the profit motive is anathema to higher education. Colleges view their reputation as their brand that can simply cash in on for even more profits. Some colleges are basically hedge funds masquerading as colleges at this point. What we need is a high-quality, no or low cost state university system (like California and other places used to have) as a balancing force to keep skyrocketing tuition costs in check. I'd even go so far as to say that state college systems should not an athletics department at all [1]. Or let that aspect be completely privately funded. Now there's a lot to criticize with the military but the one aspect I'd like to emulate is the idea that you qualify to do a job, you choose to do that job, you get trained to do that job and then you do the job. We don't need to turn higher education into job factories to do that. As for these courses, almost all of them in every area is a scam. Any course teaching you to make money (eg in stocks or crypto) is a scam because if someone was capable of making money, they'd do that. They wouldn't tell you how. The course is their income. This is a little different but still, Caltech is selling their name to profit off of third-party courses. [1]: https://www.collegevine.com/faq/112712/do-most-college-athletic-departments-lose-money https://www.collegevine.com/faq/112712/do-most-college-athle...
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
  > What we need is a high-quality, no or low cost state university system (like California and other places used to have) as a balancing force to keep skyrocketing tuition costs in check. Doesn’t California show exactly why this doesn’t work? California has, today, a large system of well-supported state universities where tuition is under $10,000 per year. But the best students don’t want to attend them. Since most people understand high-quality to mean things like “will I be surrounded by some of the smartest people in the country” or “will employers looking for the smartest people seek me out”, they often don’t get perceived as high-quality no matter how good their instruction may be.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    > But the best students don’t want to attend them Admissions at UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD is near Stanford level for in-demand programs like EECS and Business, and plenty of us Ivy and Ivy-adjacents didn't get into a UC or didn't get Regents (thus potentially making an Ivy Adjacent cheaper). My sibling is much younger, and in their time (late 2010s/early 2020s), admission stats to CS or Business even in "middling" (imo criminally underrated) UCs like UCR or UCSC became comparable to UCB barely a decade ago.
donatj 2y ago
I had the University of Minnesota's "Coding Bootcamp" reach out to me a couple years ago about possibly teaching a course. I was genuinely excited at the prospect, it's always been something of a dream of mine to teach, so I scheduled a call. I never talk to recruiters but I wanted this. The call very quickly went down hill and they became visibly angry when they found out I was not a NodeJS expert. You reached out to me. I never represented myself as such. You likely saw on my credentials on LinkedIn which shows I have been writing JavaScript since the late 90s. I hadn't entirely given up hope yet and said something a long the lines of "I am sure I could pick it up very quickly, I just haven't had the need so far" and the already visibly annoyed interviewer basically shouts "NO, we need someone who is an expert from day one!" I apologized for wasting their time. They say that they will contact me if anything changes. I, a grown adult of near 40, went in to the call giddy and left tearing up a little. Good riddance.
- kstenerud 2y ago
  You didn't waste their time. They wasted your time. They're the ones who contacted you and didn't check your abilities before scheduling a call.
- marcus0x62 2y ago
  Did you point out to this person that they contacted you, that you never claimed to be a Node expert, etc.? If so, did they have any sort of coherent response to that observation?
  - donatj 2y ago
    Yep, I sure did. I never got anything about why they reached out to me specifically or any such explanation. Just that they needed a "node expert". The call lasted maybe 5 minutes when they'd scheduled half an hour.
    - marcus0x62 2y ago
      Sounds like you dodged a bullet, even if you were a Node expert.
willmeyers 2y ago
I was cold called by one of these programs a while ago that was offered through Columbia University. They wanted around $13,000 for a 4-something week bootcamp. It's honestly disgusting that schools with billion dollar endowments feel the need to prey on people like this.
skyde 2y ago
Is MIT class also taught by outsourced instructor instead of MIT instructor?
- DANmode 2y ago
  Is it an MIT course? Or MIT xPro?
SSJPython 2y ago
Higher education has become too powerful and influential due to unlimited government loan guarantees. They used that to charge insane amounts and hired bloated administrations. Get the government out of the student loan business and take a lesson from the Germans: promote vocational and technical schooling. Not everyone needs to go to university or get a university education.
- piva00 2y ago
  > Get the government out of the student loan business and take a lesson from the Germans: promote vocational and technical schooling. Not everyone needs to go to university or get a university education. And while taking that lesson top with another: remove the profit motive from education, since you want to remove the government from providing loans you will need a backstop so the have-nots don't stay forever bound in the have-not enough money for education.
  - SSJPython 2y ago
    How exactly can you "remove" the profit motive without outright taking control of private educational institutions? If you want public education to become more affordable, then standards must be raised and it must become more scarce.
rich_sasha 2y ago
I suppose a root cause of sorts is that for the first time in millennia there is a surplus of ambitious people with the means to pay for education, but a shortage of adequate warm bodies to teach. This in turn means top universities can provide a low quality course taught by outsourced teachers and know it will sell regardless. I'm not sure how you fix it. There's only so many people who are smart and want to teach. It doesn't help that teaching doesn't pay well, but paying more only sort of helps: there would be a greater supply of teachers, but surely paying more can't make it cheaper.
- goldfishgold 2y ago
  Not sure about this. Generally there’s a line out the door of highly qualified people to teach at places like Caltech for little or nothing. A few years ago, UCLA tried to hire someone to teach a chemistry course as a volunteer position. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/21/ucla-criticized-advertising-adjunct-job-without-pay https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/21/ucla-criticiz...
  - rich_sasha 2y ago
    Sure, but somehow these people aren't teaching, one way or the other. Maybe it's not a shortage of able people (in fact you're right, it definitely isn't) but they aren't teaching at top universities. Or there isn't enough of these teachers.
- underlipton 2y ago
  People who feel comfortable and safe exploring topics govern their own learning, especially when there's a small but healthy amount of peer and supervisory pressure. So, don't pay a small army of adjuncts. Pay students to show up to a classroom and to complete standardized measures of progression.
paxys 2y ago
Students care more about the university's name on the certificate than who is teaching the course.
- cute_boi 2y ago
  Same applies to companies also. They also give more attention to people who studied in ivy leagues etc..
- fragmede 2y ago
  That depends on a view of students as a monolithic group of mouth breathing individuals who only care about the name on the certificate, and not being comprised of individuals who are nerds, which students who go to CalTech, a top private university, might possibly be. I'm sure some students were excited to be taught by astrophysicist and Nobel prize winner Kip Thorn, to the point that the fact that the fact that he was a teacher there landed him a spot on the TV show The Big Bang Theory about him being a teacher there.
omoikane 2y ago
I tried to go on Caltech's site to see if there was any indication that this bootcamp was taught by Caltech. After reading the bootcamp page for a few seconds, a chat window popped up on the side asking if I needed any help. So I asked: "is this bootcamp actually taught by caltech?" The response was: "Hello and welcome to Simplilearn! My name is Priyanshu and Your current Country would be?"
1024core 2y ago
> The federal government helped kick off the gold rush in 2011. The Education Department, under the Obama administration, loosened its guidance on revenue-sharing relationships between colleges and for-profit companies. Thanks Obama!
- alephnerd 2y ago
  Blame Harvard and MIT - they founded EdX and used it to print a buttload of money with extremely high margins. Everyone else is just copying that model.
  - __rito__ 2y ago
    In the cases of Harvard and MIT, actual, regular Harvard and MIT faculty taught the courses. That's a huge difference.
- underlipton 2y ago
  This feels like it might have had something to do with the likely demise of a bunch of for-profit "educators" (ITT, AI, and the like). That was still a few years away, but the writing was on the wall for investors who wanted to get off the sinking ships but still continue the grift. I suppose the view on the government side was that for-profit education wasn't an inherently corrupt venture, but that the independent nature of the companies involved made the profit motive take precedent, and that tying them to institutions with their reputation on the line would help to maintain instruction quality. So much for that.
OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
"This is an ugly word, this 'scam.' This is business. And if you wanna be in business, this is what you do." --- Marlon Brando, 'The Freshman' (1990) Caltech offers certs in Program Management, System Engineering, and a lot of other frobozz not in line with their deservedly Tier A+++ reputation. I work with people who've gone through these courses and 'unimpressed' would be an understatement. Of course, nearby UCLA and USC do this as do schools up and down the coast and eastward. These are Extensions and they bring in cash. https://ctme.caltech.edu/ https://ctme.caltech.edu/
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  These aren't even Extension courses, but a "bootcamp" cash grab. Extension courses are usually courses offered to students, but often taught at a lower level so that the general public can attend.
  - OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
    They have other offerings besides the explicitly titled "Bootcamps." Extension as I've seen it used are for people outside University enrollment (undergrad/grad/postdoc) who want some enrichment or additional training whether for curiosity or, in these cases, advancement.
mitchbob 2y ago
https://archive.ph/2024.09.29-101523/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/29/us/caltech-simplilearn-class-students.html https://archive.ph/2024.09.29-101523/https://www.nytimes.com...
belter 2y ago
https://archive.is/BgZZu https://archive.is/BgZZu
rchaud 2y ago
What is the point of having almost $5bn in endowments[0] if the school still has to chase after revenue like this, at the cost of its credibility and reputation? [0] https://investments.caltech.edu/ https://investments.caltech.edu/
- sifar 2y ago
  If you discount their JPL lab operations, it seems their revenue/expenses are ~$1Bn [0]. The investments would be able to probably cover half of that. [0] https://finance.caltech.edu/documents/23713/FS_21_22.pdf https://finance.caltech.edu/documents/23713/FS_21_22.pdf
musicale 2y ago
Always look at the faculty.
Bluescreenbuddy 2y ago
Here in Chicago I saw some bootcamps sponsored by University of Chicago and Northwestern University but when you dig deeper they're not actually teaching it. Some third party company.
moribvndvs 2y ago
I needed some extra money in 2018 after purchasing a new house. I was recruited to be a part time adjunct instructor “on behalf of” Case Western Reserve University. It was entirely operated by Trilogy Education Services. In exchange for allowing Trilogy to slap the university’s name on it, incorporate into the university’s official website and marketing materials, and borrow a room for a couple hours in the evening, they share some of the profit. It’s not clear to me what if any influence, decision making, or oversight the university had over the program, but I suspect little to none. I only talked to Trinity staff, most of which were good people but just cogs in the machine like me. Students received zero support from the university despite being advertised as an accreditation directly from it. It had been advertised as an intense 6 month alternative to a degree, which is a very wild stretch. In reality, it was a long and kinda brutal (if you were completely new to programming) guided tour of JavaScript-focused “full stack development”. The syllabus was predetermined by Trilogy and was very superficial, rigid, out of date, and focused on quantity of topics rather than quality. Students were largely frustrated how little time we had to ask questions or dig into a concept until being whisked off to another. It also required that the individual had to do most of then learning on their own time without support from myself or the TAs, although I did try to be available via email during the week and had office hours. Trilogy insisted they vetted applicants to make sure only qualified candidates were in classes to ensure a fair and high quality experience for everyone. The reality is the only vetting Trilogy did was that the payments cleared. I spent an inordinate amount of time doing tech support and teaching people how to use computers, which was frustrating for me, other students, and the poor person who was swindled into paying $8k for something over their head. “Graduating” just meant you had to pay, show up and submit something for assignments, the bar being so low that some students received their certificate but had learned virtually nothing. The post graduation professional services, which I was not involved in whatsoever, were the part that students were particularly angry with. Bare minimum, hand wavy, and the job placement was a joke. Graduation day was supposed to showcase the student’s skills and be a meet and greet with employers. The reality is only a couple of actual employers showed up, didn’t hire anyone AFAIK, and most of the “employers” there were grifters, scumbags, or clueless people. There was a lot of “I don’t have a business or any money yet but I have this revolutionary idea for a blockchain app and I’d like you to build it”. In the beginning, I was pretty into the bootcamp. I enjoyed teaching and there were some really great students and TAs. By the end, I felt really embarrassed and ashamed to be part of something so terribly misrepresented and overpriced. (As an aside, I was introduced to two professors at a party where someone mentioned I was teaching a CWRU… I carefully corrected them that I was only doing this bootcamp and only part time, not working for the university. The two professors were not happy with me. I learned that I was basically a scab, and which really just capped the whole experience for me)

84 points by goldfishgold 2y ago

NohatCoder 2y ago

https://archive.ph/BgZZu https://archive.ph/BgZZu

hadthischat 2y ago

[flagged]

progbits 2y ago

Are any of these bootcamps actually good? Every time I looked into them it seemed like a ridiculously shallow syllabus that would leave you far from being able to do the job they claim. Maybe you could pass HR interview by knowing some keywords and last a month or two before getting fired.

AlbertCory 2y ago
About 2018 I was helping with Operation Code (tech for vets) and doing their podcast. There was one guy who said he knew people in his bootcamp who got job offers before they were even finished. A number of my interviews got jobs that lasted. The job market is different now, from what I hear.
- ta988 2y ago
  At that time people making bootcamps was a way to show that they were willing to learn, a big positive factor when hiring somebody. Today it doesn't mean much, a lot do the bootcamp and believe that they now know everything and that there is no need to do any additional learning effort. And it is difficult to filter those people out to get to the genuinely interesting ones.
  - AlbertCory 2y ago
    > a lot do the bootcamp and believe that they now know everything and that the effort is not necessary to pursue anymore. I don't understand this. What does "the effort is not necessary to pursue anymore" mean?
    - everforward 2y ago
      That they don't need to study anymore. That they think they've studied enough in bootcamp that they don't need to learn anything else to get a job and be a functional engineer.
    - ta988 2y ago
      fixed it
ta988 2y ago
No they are not. They are mostly one additional way to take money from people who are desperate and bury them under loans making them believe a sticker on their resume will make it more appealing.
- HPsquared 2y ago
  On the other hand, they were a way to get large numbers of people into the field and staff unfilled positions. The market was very hot a couple of years ago.
  - ta988 2y ago
    Sure and a lot of those are being kicked out in the current layoff cycle. So it helped, maybe, companies with their engineering seats beeing filled, but didn't necessarily help at all with getting things done.
    - HPsquared 2y ago
      Easy come, easy go. Now everyone is looking for machine learning engineers instead of front end for the "current thing".
sneed_chucker 2y ago
Some are good, some aren't. The problem is, a Bootcamp student can't tell the difference and there's nothing like an accreditation system for them so it's full on market for lemons[1]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons
- vunderba 2y ago
  This exactly. It reminds me of the "ESL certifications" you can get online - there's no presiding international body for guaranteeing some minimal level of quality / competency.
  - sneed_chucker 2y ago
    Well at least for those CEFR and TOEFL exist.
    - vunderba 2y ago
      I should have been more clear. Those are for students who are learning, ESL is for people who intend to teach English. There are only two real recognized certificates for it - Trinity which is Oxford, and CELTA which is Cambridge.
sputknick 2y ago
I used General Assembly to learn frontend web development about 5 years ago. It was a positive experience, the two types of people I saw succeed were 1. people with some kind of tech background already and 2. people who were really smart but not technically oriented (we had 4 former professional artists and musicians in my cohort, one of whom was a Princeton undergrad). The people who failed were people who had no curiosity to genuinely grow their knowledge and were just there because they wanted to check a box before getting a better paying job.
- underlipton 2y ago
  I've found that my curiosity drops commensurate with my savings (and therefore the chance I'm going to get kicked out of my home, my belongings repossessed, and find food unaffordable). If people are so insecure that this opportunity to retrain an entire workforce was squandered - the money was there, the desire was there, the expertise was there - it comes off to me as more of a, "If you owe the bank $1 billion...", sort of problem, for society.

game_the0ry 2y ago

I find it very surprising that prestigious colleges are willing to outsource their online courses at the expense of diluting their own brand. I guess I should not be that surprised, college admins are some of the worst business people on the planet.

hnfong 2y ago
But they are already delegating teaching (of undergrad level at least) to people who generally aren't interested in teaching...
- HPsquared 2y ago
  Academia is mostly about multi-level marketing. Teaching and research are side effects. There are a lot of similarities to nightclub promotion.
- tmpz22 2y ago
  University of Oregon did a lot of this around 2015. Imagine the passion a post-grad math scholar has for teaching calculus to undergrads. Zero.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- linguae 2y ago
  Yup; this is common at research universities, where professors’ tenure evaluations are largely based on research accomplishments and fundraising. I’ve had many friends tell me that they had better experiences with community college professors compared to university professors, since the community college professors are there to teach. (Disclaimer: I am a new community college instructor of computer science who worked as a researcher in industry for nine years before wanting a career change.)
  - akomtu 2y ago
    What's "tenure evaluation"?

wongarsu 2y ago

> The university, he learned, had largely outsourced the program to a company called Simplilearn. > A spokesperson for Caltech, Shayna Chabner, said that the university viewed its online programs as “a way that we can bring value” Sounds more like Caltech views its online programs as a way to exchange credibility for short-term profits

octopod12 2y ago
The same can be said of Stanford which charges ridiculous amounts for "certification" courses. Basically cashing in on the institutions reputation and student's hunger to get the institution's stamp on their resumes. Glad to see the pushback. eventually stupid money runs out.
- XenophileJKO 2y ago
  I think there is a fundamental difference if the content is created by and taught by Stanford staff.
  - octopod12 2y ago
    fair, but is there are too many such courses, the exclusivity of the brand dilutes.
    - XenophileJKO 2y ago
      I fail to see how. If the content quality and instructional quality is the same then there is no damage to the perception of quality. So then if they charge a lot for the targeted certification, then they don't diminish the value of the degree programs. The difference then is scope of instruction. I think high quality certification programs are quite valuable to the market and properly run ones but trusted institutions are a benefit for the institution and the marketplace.
      - Cupertino95014 2y ago

AlbertCory 2y ago

Mixed feelings on this. I've taken Extension courses from UCSC and from Stanford, and was never under any illusion that the teachers were affiliated with the schools (although one was). For all of them, they tell you in the course description who the teacher is. There's always a course evaluation at the end. If Caltech isn't monitoring the content of their courses and the student evals, then they're being negligent, for sure. But I don't see this as a systemic problem, other than maybe lack of disclosure.

Cheer2171 2y ago
> I've taken Extension courses from UCSC and from Stanford, and was never under any illusion that the teachers were affiliated with the schools What does this mean? Someone from those schools hired a teacher to teach a class sold under their schools brand. That's an affiliation. If the teacher dropped out and you didn't get a refund, you would sue those schools. What this seems like are schools outsourcing their hiring to private companies. It's a problem precisely because the random teachers get affiliated with the school.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  > That's an affiliation. Wrong. The teachers aren't professors of any type, or student assistants, or even employees. Their classes don't give credit towards a degree. They're contractors. > It's a problem precisely because the random teachers get affiliated with the school. Wrong again. I haven't taught a class at UC Berkeley Extension, but if I had, I would not be entitled to say I was "affiliated with Berkeley."
  - goldfishgold 2y ago
    Classic game that universities love to play where they hire someone but that person isn’t “really” part of the university. Happens with extension but happens in degree granting programs too with adjuncts.
  - Cheer2171 2y ago
    > Wrong. The teachers aren't professors of any type, or student assistants, or even employees. Their classes don't give credit towards a degree. They're contractors. From Miriam Webster: affiliated, adjective, af· fil· i· at· ed ə-ˈfi-lē-ˌā-təd: closely associated with another typically in a dependent or subordinate position What you are saying is like saying "I've taken car rides from Uber and from Lyft, and was never under any illusion that the drivers were affiliated with the companies" If your organization sells services that are fulfilled by contractors who are vetted by your organization and branded with your organization's logos, then those contractors are affiliates of your organization.

SamuelAdams 2y ago

This is the problem with “branding” and ranking in the American university system. People believe Caltech is a good school, so they automatically assume it is worth the high price. Maybe a solution is to be clear if a class or program is taught by an FTE instructor, or if the program is outsourced? There’s nothing wrong with trying new things to make more money (student enrollments are declining), but be clear about who is teaching the course and how they are affiliated with your brand.

AlbertCory 2y ago
There's a pretty clear delineation between courses that lead to a degree, and "extension" courses that don't. > automatically assume it is worth the high price Data needed: what do "regular" bootcamps cost and is Caltech's cost any higher?
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  Is there really a difference? Most of these universities outsource the actual teaching to grad students.
  - galleywest200 2y ago
    Grad students who are technically under the employ of the University...that is not outsourcing.
    - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
      To me the difference is just a technicality. My point is you’re not getting taught by who you’re paying for.
      - Cupertino95014 2y ago
        > who you’re paying for Only ignorant people think that all beginning courses are taught by real professors. That hasn't been true for generations.

jmyeet 2y ago

What we're seeing is how the profit motive is anathema to higher education. Colleges view their reputation as their brand that can simply cash in on for even more profits. Some colleges are basically hedge funds masquerading as colleges at this point. What we need is a high-quality, no or low cost state university system (like California and other places used to have) as a balancing force to keep skyrocketing tuition costs in check. I'd even go so far as to say that state college systems should not an athletics department at all [1]. Or let that aspect be completely privately funded. Now there's a lot to criticize with the military but the one aspect I'd like to emulate is the idea that you qualify to do a job, you choose to do that job, you get trained to do that job and then you do the job. We don't need to turn higher education into job factories to do that. As for these courses, almost all of them in every area is a scam. Any course teaching you to make money (eg in stocks or crypto) is a scam because if someone was capable of making money, they'd do that. They wouldn't tell you how. The course is their income. This is a little different but still, Caltech is selling their name to profit off of third-party courses. [1]: https://www.collegevine.com/faq/112712/do-most-college-athletic-departments-lose-money https://www.collegevine.com/faq/112712/do-most-college-athle...

SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
> What we need is a high-quality, no or low cost state university system (like California and other places used to have) as a balancing force to keep skyrocketing tuition costs in check. Doesn’t California show exactly why this doesn’t work? California has, today, a large system of well-supported state universities where tuition is under $10,000 per year. But the best students don’t want to attend them. Since most people understand high-quality to mean things like “will I be surrounded by some of the smartest people in the country” or “will employers looking for the smartest people seek me out”, they often don’t get perceived as high-quality no matter how good their instruction may be.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > But the best students don’t want to attend them Admissions at UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD is near Stanford level for in-demand programs like EECS and Business, and plenty of us Ivy and Ivy-adjacents didn't get into a UC or didn't get Regents (thus potentially making an Ivy Adjacent cheaper). My sibling is much younger, and in their time (late 2010s/early 2020s), admission stats to CS or Business even in "middling" (imo criminally underrated) UCs like UCR or UCSC became comparable to UCB barely a decade ago.

donatj 2y ago

I had the University of Minnesota's "Coding Bootcamp" reach out to me a couple years ago about possibly teaching a course. I was genuinely excited at the prospect, it's always been something of a dream of mine to teach, so I scheduled a call. I never talk to recruiters but I wanted this. The call very quickly went down hill and they became visibly angry when they found out I was not a NodeJS expert. You reached out to me. I never represented myself as such. You likely saw on my credentials on LinkedIn which shows I have been writing JavaScript since the late 90s. I hadn't entirely given up hope yet and said something a long the lines of "I am sure I could pick it up very quickly, I just haven't had the need so far" and the already visibly annoyed interviewer basically shouts "NO, we need someone who is an expert from day one!" I apologized for wasting their time. They say that they will contact me if anything changes. I, a grown adult of near 40, went in to the call giddy and left tearing up a little. Good riddance.

kstenerud 2y ago
You didn't waste their time. They wasted your time. They're the ones who contacted you and didn't check your abilities before scheduling a call.
marcus0x62 2y ago
Did you point out to this person that they contacted you, that you never claimed to be a Node expert, etc.? If so, did they have any sort of coherent response to that observation?
- donatj 2y ago
  Yep, I sure did. I never got anything about why they reached out to me specifically or any such explanation. Just that they needed a "node expert". The call lasted maybe 5 minutes when they'd scheduled half an hour.
  - marcus0x62 2y ago
    Sounds like you dodged a bullet, even if you were a Node expert.

willmeyers 2y ago

I was cold called by one of these programs a while ago that was offered through Columbia University. They wanted around $13,000 for a 4-something week bootcamp. It's honestly disgusting that schools with billion dollar endowments feel the need to prey on people like this.

skyde 2y ago

Is MIT class also taught by outsourced instructor instead of MIT instructor?

DANmode 2y ago
Is it an MIT course? Or MIT xPro?

SSJPython 2y ago

Higher education has become too powerful and influential due to unlimited government loan guarantees. They used that to charge insane amounts and hired bloated administrations. Get the government out of the student loan business and take a lesson from the Germans: promote vocational and technical schooling. Not everyone needs to go to university or get a university education.

piva00 2y ago
> Get the government out of the student loan business and take a lesson from the Germans: promote vocational and technical schooling. Not everyone needs to go to university or get a university education. And while taking that lesson top with another: remove the profit motive from education, since you want to remove the government from providing loans you will need a backstop so the have-nots don't stay forever bound in the have-not enough money for education.
- SSJPython 2y ago
  How exactly can you "remove" the profit motive without outright taking control of private educational institutions? If you want public education to become more affordable, then standards must be raised and it must become more scarce.

rich_sasha 2y ago

I suppose a root cause of sorts is that for the first time in millennia there is a surplus of ambitious people with the means to pay for education, but a shortage of adequate warm bodies to teach. This in turn means top universities can provide a low quality course taught by outsourced teachers and know it will sell regardless. I'm not sure how you fix it. There's only so many people who are smart and want to teach. It doesn't help that teaching doesn't pay well, but paying more only sort of helps: there would be a greater supply of teachers, but surely paying more can't make it cheaper.

goldfishgold 2y ago
Not sure about this. Generally there’s a line out the door of highly qualified people to teach at places like Caltech for little or nothing. A few years ago, UCLA tried to hire someone to teach a chemistry course as a volunteer position. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/21/ucla-criticized-advertising-adjunct-job-without-pay https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/21/ucla-criticiz...
- rich_sasha 2y ago
  Sure, but somehow these people aren't teaching, one way or the other. Maybe it's not a shortage of able people (in fact you're right, it definitely isn't) but they aren't teaching at top universities. Or there isn't enough of these teachers.
underlipton 2y ago
People who feel comfortable and safe exploring topics govern their own learning, especially when there's a small but healthy amount of peer and supervisory pressure. So, don't pay a small army of adjuncts. Pay students to show up to a classroom and to complete standardized measures of progression.

paxys 2y ago

Students care more about the university's name on the certificate than who is teaching the course.

cute_boi 2y ago
Same applies to companies also. They also give more attention to people who studied in ivy leagues etc..
fragmede 2y ago
That depends on a view of students as a monolithic group of mouth breathing individuals who only care about the name on the certificate, and not being comprised of individuals who are nerds, which students who go to CalTech, a top private university, might possibly be. I'm sure some students were excited to be taught by astrophysicist and Nobel prize winner Kip Thorn, to the point that the fact that the fact that he was a teacher there landed him a spot on the TV show The Big Bang Theory about him being a teacher there.

omoikane 2y ago

I tried to go on Caltech's site to see if there was any indication that this bootcamp was taught by Caltech. After reading the bootcamp page for a few seconds, a chat window popped up on the side asking if I needed any help. So I asked: "is this bootcamp actually taught by caltech?" The response was: "Hello and welcome to Simplilearn! My name is Priyanshu and Your current Country would be?"

1024core 2y ago

> The federal government helped kick off the gold rush in 2011. The Education Department, under the Obama administration, loosened its guidance on revenue-sharing relationships between colleges and for-profit companies. Thanks Obama!

alephnerd 2y ago
Blame Harvard and MIT - they founded EdX and used it to print a buttload of money with extremely high margins. Everyone else is just copying that model.
- __rito__ 2y ago
  In the cases of Harvard and MIT, actual, regular Harvard and MIT faculty taught the courses. That's a huge difference.
underlipton 2y ago
This feels like it might have had something to do with the likely demise of a bunch of for-profit "educators" (ITT, AI, and the like). That was still a few years away, but the writing was on the wall for investors who wanted to get off the sinking ships but still continue the grift. I suppose the view on the government side was that for-profit education wasn't an inherently corrupt venture, but that the independent nature of the companies involved made the profit motive take precedent, and that tying them to institutions with their reputation on the line would help to maintain instruction quality. So much for that.

OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago

"This is an ugly word, this 'scam.' This is business. And if you wanna be in business, this is what you do." --- Marlon Brando, 'The Freshman' (1990) Caltech offers certs in Program Management, System Engineering, and a lot of other frobozz not in line with their deservedly Tier A+++ reputation. I work with people who've gone through these courses and 'unimpressed' would be an understatement. Of course, nearby UCLA and USC do this as do schools up and down the coast and eastward. These are Extensions and they bring in cash. https://ctme.caltech.edu/ https://ctme.caltech.edu/

pclmulqdq 2y ago
These aren't even Extension courses, but a "bootcamp" cash grab. Extension courses are usually courses offered to students, but often taught at a lower level so that the general public can attend.
- OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
  They have other offerings besides the explicitly titled "Bootcamps." Extension as I've seen it used are for people outside University enrollment (undergrad/grad/postdoc) who want some enrichment or additional training whether for curiosity or, in these cases, advancement.

mitchbob 2y ago

https://archive.ph/2024.09.29-101523/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/29/us/caltech-simplilearn-class-students.html https://archive.ph/2024.09.29-101523/https://www.nytimes.com...

belter 2y ago

https://archive.is/BgZZu https://archive.is/BgZZu

rchaud 2y ago

What is the point of having almost $5bn in endowments[0] if the school still has to chase after revenue like this, at the cost of its credibility and reputation? [0] https://investments.caltech.edu/ https://investments.caltech.edu/

sifar 2y ago
If you discount their JPL lab operations, it seems their revenue/expenses are ~$1Bn [0]. The investments would be able to probably cover half of that. [0] https://finance.caltech.edu/documents/23713/FS_21_22.pdf https://finance.caltech.edu/documents/23713/FS_21_22.pdf

musicale 2y ago

Always look at the faculty.

Bluescreenbuddy 2y ago

Here in Chicago I saw some bootcamps sponsored by University of Chicago and Northwestern University but when you dig deeper they're not actually teaching it. Some third party company.

moribvndvs 2y ago

I needed some extra money in 2018 after purchasing a new house. I was recruited to be a part time adjunct instructor “on behalf of” Case Western Reserve University. It was entirely operated by Trilogy Education Services. In exchange for allowing Trilogy to slap the university’s name on it, incorporate into the university’s official website and marketing materials, and borrow a room for a couple hours in the evening, they share some of the profit. It’s not clear to me what if any influence, decision making, or oversight the university had over the program, but I suspect little to none. I only talked to Trinity staff, most of which were good people but just cogs in the machine like me. Students received zero support from the university despite being advertised as an accreditation directly from it. It had been advertised as an intense 6 month alternative to a degree, which is a very wild stretch. In reality, it was a long and kinda brutal (if you were completely new to programming) guided tour of JavaScript-focused “full stack development”. The syllabus was predetermined by Trilogy and was very superficial, rigid, out of date, and focused on quantity of topics rather than quality. Students were largely frustrated how little time we had to ask questions or dig into a concept until being whisked off to another. It also required that the individual had to do most of then learning on their own time without support from myself or the TAs, although I did try to be available via email during the week and had office hours. Trilogy insisted they vetted applicants to make sure only qualified candidates were in classes to ensure a fair and high quality experience for everyone. The reality is the only vetting Trilogy did was that the payments cleared. I spent an inordinate amount of time doing tech support and teaching people how to use computers, which was frustrating for me, other students, and the poor person who was swindled into paying $8k for something over their head. “Graduating” just meant you had to pay, show up and submit something for assignments, the bar being so low that some students received their certificate but had learned virtually nothing. The post graduation professional services, which I was not involved in whatsoever, were the part that students were particularly angry with. Bare minimum, hand wavy, and the job placement was a joke. Graduation day was supposed to showcase the student’s skills and be a meet and greet with employers. The reality is only a couple of actual employers showed up, didn’t hire anyone AFAIK, and most of the “employers” there were grifters, scumbags, or clueless people. There was a lot of “I don’t have a business or any money yet but I have this revolutionary idea for a blockchain app and I’d like you to build it”. In the beginning, I was pretty into the bootcamp. I enjoyed teaching and there were some really great students and TAs. By the end, I felt really embarrassed and ashamed to be part of something so terribly misrepresented and overpriced. (As an aside, I was introduced to two professors at a party where someone mentioned I was teaching a CWRU… I carefully corrected them that I was only doing this bootcamp and only part time, not working for the university. The two professors were not happy with me. I learned that I was basically a scab, and which really just capped the whole experience for me)