7 ms·

Reading the headline I was like WTF that sounds like government run a muck. Then I got to this part... "The programs typically last 10 to 12 weeks. Potential

by pmorici 13y ago

Reading the headline I was like WTF that sounds like government run a muck. Then I got to this part... "The programs typically last 10 to 12 weeks. Potential recruits are often told that they have a shot at a job or internship at a competitive tech company like Facebook or Google. Tuition costs vary widely. At Hackbright Academy, it’s $15,000 for a 10 week program. Full scholarships are available, and students who land a job at a company in the Hackbright network can request a partial refund. At Hack Reactor, where tuition costs over $17,000, 99 percent of students are offered a job at companies like Adobe and Google. The average salary is over six figures, Phillips told me." To sum up these companies are charging a lot of money (more than college tuition) while at the same time advertising extraordinary results "99% job placement" with the likes of Google and Adobe. I'm guessing that some of them are making false advertising claims with respect to the chances of landing a job and that is why there is scrutiny here. There was a similar case with cooking schools not long ago also in CA[0] After reading that paragraph I'm a lot more skeptical of these companies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/06/culinary-school-grads-ripped-off_n_950107.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/06/culinary-school-gra...

ajross 13y ago
That's exactly what I'm thinking. If you're going to charge tuition in excess of what existing community colleges do, I think you need to expect to be regulated like one. I just don't see how the cost structure of putting a dozen students and an instructor in a room with laptops for a week comes to ~$20000. That seems pretty suspicious.
- pmorici 13y ago
  It's not even the price that is a problem per se the problem is the extraordinary claims. It's like the Bernie Madoff of education schemes. Who wouldn't invest 15k to have a "99%" chance of getting a 6 figure job with Google? Of course when you think about it that is almost certainly a false claim but someone w/o engineering experience probably doesn't realize that.
  - eqdw 13y ago
    Meanwhile, I invested $15k in a CS degree, and eventually got a six figure job at a tech company. Canadian universities rock.
ryguytilidie 13y ago
Man, I have to say that as someone who has interviewed students from these classes, I would bet a lot of money that 99% of these students aren't being hired. It made me really uncomfortable thinking about how many people in the room had just spent 15k to hack around with some people in an almost "engineering fantasy camp" type environment. I'm all for this law honestly.
- wpietri 13y ago
  I'm with you there. I was here for Bubble 1.0 as well, and there was a similar frenzy around hiring and job seeking. The big difference now for me is that in 1999, the tools were much more primitive. Then, it was more plausible to me that somebody smart with a little technical training could just leap in and figure a lot out. Now, though, the technologies are much more elaborate.
- coderbot 13y ago
  I participated in App Academy. The program had strengths and weaknesses, but to their credit, they culled the class at the halfway point, and gave folks who had no chance of getting hired within a reasonable timeframe a full refund of their deposit. There was some bait-and-switch with regard to their "free unless/until you get a job" pitch. I think the competition for students in the space is increasing pressure, and oversight is probably a necessary thing. In my opinion, students who went on to A-list companies probably could have gotten a job without the bootcamp. But the offer is still compelling if you get a couple months of intense introduction to an in-demand framework, and don't pay anything out-of-pocket (App Academy collects when you get hired).
  - srunni 13y ago
    I also participated in App Academy, and there was no culling. The students went on to successfully find well-paying jobs in the tech industry.
    - ryguytilidie 13y ago
      I find the second sentence to be as ambiguous as possible.
ynniv 13y ago
Indeed, I too started off wondering what kind of regulation the state was interested in imposing. While the article does not mention any specific regulation, the inclusion of a "bootcamp's" claim that 12 weeks and $17,000 would get you on average a "six figure" job made it pretty clear why the state is interested. (For quick reference, keeping an average of 13 students enrolled for a year is $1M revenue, and "getting a job offer" for a "six figure" job doesn't actually make a verifiable claim that these people get or keep those jobs.)
wallawe 13y ago
What happened in this country to personal responsibility? It's gotten so bad at this point that if a company charges what seems to be a large amount, that we justify imposing ridiculous laws just because it seems "right" or "fair." As long as these companies aren't guaranteeing 100% a job and merely advertising the statistics, it is solely on the student to decide whether or not 20k is an absurd price for a 70% (or whatever chance). If the company guarantees a job and doesn't fulfill, then you have a law suit and you recoup your money that way. There is absolutely no regulation necessary in this instance. Take responsibility for your own actions. Edit: Downvotes? Let me clarify. I want Americans to prosper. Absolving people of the need to make sound decisions and placing the burden on the government in more and more scenarios is not going to help our populace become any wiser. If a law suit doesn't work, report them to the BBB. If that's a joke, write a post and leverage the internet to inform people of the company's malpractice. Getting the government involved hurts everyone, from the higher barrier to entry to comply with regulations, to higher consumer prices due to lack of competition for the incumbents who can afford to enter. This isn't what we stand for.
- ericd 13y ago
  Lawsuits are not an efficient way to recoup money, and from the sound of it, they're not offering accurate statistics.
- ubernostrum 13y ago
  What happened in this country to personal responsibility? What happened to fraud being frowned upon? If you take someone's money in exchange for something you can't follow through on, that is fraud, pure and simple. Shouting "caveat emptor" doesn't change that, and doesn't change the fact that fraud needs a remedy.
  - wallawe 13y ago
    Of course fraud is frowned upon. You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that these companies are definitely up to no good. Can you provide any evidence of that anecdotal or otherwise that they are defrauding people?
xiaoma 13y ago
As a graduate of Hack Reactor, the one program that places 99% of its students, I find this comment offensive. I've known students in every cohort from the first one (which was halfway finished when I started as part of the second) to the current group. I was in the interview pike at Google, a Japanese game company and a number of start-ups when I took my current position. One of my classmates took a position at Adobe. Many of my good friends from the program took jobs at YC companies. Google has been interviewing pretty much everyone from the two most recent classes. Not to mention the fact that a few students are already profitable on their group projects before even leaving: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/honeybadger/ http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/honeybadger/ Hack Reactor has been extremely active on Quora answering exactly how their hiring rates are calculated. The stats only include base salary and don't yet include the most recent couple of classes, which have done even better. The mean result is significantly over 100k/year and are a far better ROI than any credentialed degree I know of. The level of transparency Hack Reactor offers is unparalleled. Their directory has been updated to include what every single student from the first three cohorts was doing before and after the program here: http://www.hackreactor.com/engineers/ http://www.hackreactor.com/engineers/ I do not work for the school and have no financial incentive to say this. I've kept close to the HR network out of gratitude for what truly was a life changing inflection point for me. Doing the program was one of the very best investments I've ever made. It saddens me to see the school threatened by reactionary bureaucratic regulators and it angers me to see people like pmorici quoting their extremely conservative report on student outcomes and making accusations of false advertising.
- pmorici 13y ago
  My comment wasn't direct at Hack Reactor in particular which if you read it carefully you would realize. If they are different than the typical for profit education outfit that's great but I really doubt the state is out on some witch hunt for no reason in general.
hnexp 13y ago
I feel like GA's involvement was seriously underplayed, and even made to look like a more valid option than the others. I think I know why: The author Christina Farr is really good friends with the growth/community manager of GA - Olivia Clement. They even have a club together (Ladies Who Vino): http://i.imgur.com/JJsUmTw.png http://i.imgur.com/JJsUmTw.png This really seems like a problem with collusion among press and tech companies in the valley. Tough luck for anyone not included.
mekebra 13y ago
It sounds extra-ordinary to have 99% hiring rate. However it isn't as an amazing claim as it sounds. Hack Reactor is the only boot camp to advertise this 99% hiring rate (and they weren't all at Adobe and Google...) and they have a few reasons for it: 1) There's roughly a 1 million deficit of developers in the US right now - If you can set up a website, you can get a job. If you can get a job, you will get a job in the Bay Are at some crummy startup. 2) They don't count people who aren't looking for employment afterwards. In the bay a lot of people have money and ideas but not skills and sense. A good portion of their students are startup wannabes who go on to try and start a company. If you're not directly looking for employment after the class is over, you're not included in the statistics. 3) $17,000 to get in. This cuts out all and any non-invested students. No degree, no diploma, only $17,000 and an ad. Those applying are guaranteed to believe they can succeed. 4) There's an interview process. All boot camps have interviews, however Hack Reactor has probably the strictest there is and their heaviest hitter. The interviewers aren't HR people, they're veteran developers, and they screen out anyone who isn't already employable. 5) They hire students as 'hacker-in-residence'. These are people they deem either fit to teach, or want to train more. Or both. These are now employed, for however short period of time. These things combined, Location, Cost, Screening, Being an Employer and Selective population, all add up to being able to boast an honest 99% hiring rate. And in the end, even if it sounds amazing, again keep in mind that the market is still exploding and anyone who can set up a website and write a few scripts can get a job as a developer right now. It sounds amazing and, honestly, it is.

by pmorici 13y ago

ajross 13y ago

That's exactly what I'm thinking. If you're going to charge tuition in excess of what existing community colleges do, I think you need to expect to be regulated like one. I just don't see how the cost structure of putting a dozen students and an instructor in a room with laptops for a week comes to ~$20000. That seems pretty suspicious.

pmorici 13y ago
It's not even the price that is a problem per se the problem is the extraordinary claims. It's like the Bernie Madoff of education schemes. Who wouldn't invest 15k to have a "99%" chance of getting a 6 figure job with Google? Of course when you think about it that is almost certainly a false claim but someone w/o engineering experience probably doesn't realize that.
- eqdw 13y ago
  Meanwhile, I invested $15k in a CS degree, and eventually got a six figure job at a tech company. Canadian universities rock.

ryguytilidie 13y ago

Man, I have to say that as someone who has interviewed students from these classes, I would bet a lot of money that 99% of these students aren't being hired. It made me really uncomfortable thinking about how many people in the room had just spent 15k to hack around with some people in an almost "engineering fantasy camp" type environment. I'm all for this law honestly.

wpietri 13y ago
I'm with you there. I was here for Bubble 1.0 as well, and there was a similar frenzy around hiring and job seeking. The big difference now for me is that in 1999, the tools were much more primitive. Then, it was more plausible to me that somebody smart with a little technical training could just leap in and figure a lot out. Now, though, the technologies are much more elaborate.
coderbot 13y ago
I participated in App Academy. The program had strengths and weaknesses, but to their credit, they culled the class at the halfway point, and gave folks who had no chance of getting hired within a reasonable timeframe a full refund of their deposit. There was some bait-and-switch with regard to their "free unless/until you get a job" pitch. I think the competition for students in the space is increasing pressure, and oversight is probably a necessary thing. In my opinion, students who went on to A-list companies probably could have gotten a job without the bootcamp. But the offer is still compelling if you get a couple months of intense introduction to an in-demand framework, and don't pay anything out-of-pocket (App Academy collects when you get hired).
- srunni 13y ago
  I also participated in App Academy, and there was no culling. The students went on to successfully find well-paying jobs in the tech industry.
  - ryguytilidie 13y ago
    I find the second sentence to be as ambiguous as possible.

ynniv 13y ago

Indeed, I too started off wondering what kind of regulation the state was interested in imposing. While the article does not mention any specific regulation, the inclusion of a "bootcamp's" claim that 12 weeks and $17,000 would get you on average a "six figure" job made it pretty clear why the state is interested. (For quick reference, keeping an average of 13 students enrolled for a year is $1M revenue, and "getting a job offer" for a "six figure" job doesn't actually make a verifiable claim that these people get or keep those jobs.)

wallawe 13y ago

What happened in this country to personal responsibility? It's gotten so bad at this point that if a company charges what seems to be a large amount, that we justify imposing ridiculous laws just because it seems "right" or "fair." As long as these companies aren't guaranteeing 100% a job and merely advertising the statistics, it is solely on the student to decide whether or not 20k is an absurd price for a 70% (or whatever chance). If the company guarantees a job and doesn't fulfill, then you have a law suit and you recoup your money that way. There is absolutely no regulation necessary in this instance. Take responsibility for your own actions. Edit: Downvotes? Let me clarify. I want Americans to prosper. Absolving people of the need to make sound decisions and placing the burden on the government in more and more scenarios is not going to help our populace become any wiser. If a law suit doesn't work, report them to the BBB. If that's a joke, write a post and leverage the internet to inform people of the company's malpractice. Getting the government involved hurts everyone, from the higher barrier to entry to comply with regulations, to higher consumer prices due to lack of competition for the incumbents who can afford to enter. This isn't what we stand for.

ericd 13y ago
Lawsuits are not an efficient way to recoup money, and from the sound of it, they're not offering accurate statistics.
ubernostrum 13y ago
What happened in this country to personal responsibility? What happened to fraud being frowned upon? If you take someone's money in exchange for something you can't follow through on, that is fraud, pure and simple. Shouting "caveat emptor" doesn't change that, and doesn't change the fact that fraud needs a remedy.
- wallawe 13y ago
  Of course fraud is frowned upon. You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that these companies are definitely up to no good. Can you provide any evidence of that anecdotal or otherwise that they are defrauding people?

xiaoma 13y ago

As a graduate of Hack Reactor, the one program that places 99% of its students, I find this comment offensive. I've known students in every cohort from the first one (which was halfway finished when I started as part of the second) to the current group. I was in the interview pike at Google, a Japanese game company and a number of start-ups when I took my current position. One of my classmates took a position at Adobe. Many of my good friends from the program took jobs at YC companies. Google has been interviewing pretty much everyone from the two most recent classes. Not to mention the fact that a few students are already profitable on their group projects before even leaving: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/honeybadger/ http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/honeybadger/ Hack Reactor has been extremely active on Quora answering exactly how their hiring rates are calculated. The stats only include base salary and don't yet include the most recent couple of classes, which have done even better. The mean result is significantly over 100k/year and are a far better ROI than any credentialed degree I know of. The level of transparency Hack Reactor offers is unparalleled. Their directory has been updated to include what every single student from the first three cohorts was doing before and after the program here: http://www.hackreactor.com/engineers/ http://www.hackreactor.com/engineers/ I do not work for the school and have no financial incentive to say this. I've kept close to the HR network out of gratitude for what truly was a life changing inflection point for me. Doing the program was one of the very best investments I've ever made. It saddens me to see the school threatened by reactionary bureaucratic regulators and it angers me to see people like pmorici quoting their extremely conservative report on student outcomes and making accusations of false advertising.

pmorici 13y ago
My comment wasn't direct at Hack Reactor in particular which if you read it carefully you would realize. If they are different than the typical for profit education outfit that's great but I really doubt the state is out on some witch hunt for no reason in general.

hnexp 13y ago

I feel like GA's involvement was seriously underplayed, and even made to look like a more valid option than the others. I think I know why: The author Christina Farr is really good friends with the growth/community manager of GA - Olivia Clement. They even have a club together (Ladies Who Vino): http://i.imgur.com/JJsUmTw.png http://i.imgur.com/JJsUmTw.png This really seems like a problem with collusion among press and tech companies in the valley. Tough luck for anyone not included.

mekebra 13y ago

It sounds extra-ordinary to have 99% hiring rate. However it isn't as an amazing claim as it sounds. Hack Reactor is the only boot camp to advertise this 99% hiring rate (and they weren't all at Adobe and Google...) and they have a few reasons for it: 1) There's roughly a 1 million deficit of developers in the US right now - If you can set up a website, you can get a job. If you can get a job, you will get a job in the Bay Are at some crummy startup. 2) They don't count people who aren't looking for employment afterwards. In the bay a lot of people have money and ideas but not skills and sense. A good portion of their students are startup wannabes who go on to try and start a company. If you're not directly looking for employment after the class is over, you're not included in the statistics. 3) $17,000 to get in. This cuts out all and any non-invested students. No degree, no diploma, only $17,000 and an ad. Those applying are guaranteed to believe they can succeed. 4) There's an interview process. All boot camps have interviews, however Hack Reactor has probably the strictest there is and their heaviest hitter. The interviewers aren't HR people, they're veteran developers, and they screen out anyone who isn't already employable. 5) They hire students as 'hacker-in-residence'. These are people they deem either fit to teach, or want to train more. Or both. These are now employed, for however short period of time. These things combined, Location, Cost, Screening, Being an Employer and Selective population, all add up to being able to boast an honest 99% hiring rate. And in the end, even if it sounds amazing, again keep in mind that the market is still exploding and anyone who can set up a website and write a few scripts can get a job as a developer right now. It sounds amazing and, honestly, it is.