5 ms·

Ridiculous. Any tech company worth its salt will do technical evaluations of candidates, regardless of their education. So what advantage does state regulatio

Ridiculous. Any tech company worth its salt will do technical evaluations of candidates, regardless of their education. So what advantage does state regulation give, besides putting money in officials' pockets?

sethish 13y ago
Stopping people from being ripped off. I am waiting to see if there were registered complains about these schools.
- derwiki 13y ago
  I realize you're not saying anything about the effectiveness, but regulation hasn't seemed to stop diploma mills.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    You realize that there's an ongoing crusade against diploma mills, right?
    - derwiki 13y ago
      I do. I'd rather fix that before we try to "fix" dev bootcamps.
      - saraid216 13y ago
        Is it your contention that we should never try to solve one crime if another one is ongoing?
- sethish 13y ago
  Update from usatoday http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/31/california-computer-boot-camps-cited/5078521/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/31/california-com... " > He added, however, that the stern language in the cease-and-desist letters was designed primarily to get the operators' attention and that it was unlikely the bureau would be moving to shut them down as long as they made a good-faith effort to come into compliance. > "We are trying to get them to become licensed," Heimerich said, adding that the agency has not received any complaints about the boot camps and learned about them from a staff investigator who saw them mentioned on a technology blog. "So if they are doing that, they fall to the bottom or close to the bottom of our enforcement priorities because there are many more serious threats to student consumers."
chc 13y ago
You don't believe the state has a legitimate interest in making sure that schools actually teach what they claim to?
- mindcrime 13y ago
  You don't believe the state has a legitimate interest in making sure that schools actually teach what they claim to? No. Caveat emptor. The State should only get involved in the case of outright fraud - you pay your money, and they don't actually run the class, or the class is taught by a 6th grader or something. Outside of that, we should just let the market operate. Firms that don't deliver on their promises won't be around long.
  - seanhandley 13y ago
    Absolutely. Bright people are who I would hire. And bright people don't need state regulation. Caveat emptor.
  - chc 13y ago
    > No. Caveat emptor. The State should only get involved in the case of outright fraud - you pay your money, and they don't actually run the class, or the class is taught by a 6th grader or something. This sounds frighteningly arbitrary. So if I pay for a class that will teach me to be a programmer and I get a class that has no realistic hope of accomplishing that, it's caveat emptor, while if I'm in exactly the same situation but the teacher is a sixth grader, caveat emptor doesn't apply? How do we determine when a case of ripping people off is excused by caveat emptor?
    - Crito 13y ago
      I think the problem is with the claims these programs are making, not the expectations the students have. If I decide to go to a traditional non-profit university to study, say, paleontology, and I actually expect to get a job digging up dinosaur bones, that is my own problem. The state shouldn't step in and start slapping the University's hand unless the University was falsely advertising high placement rates after graduation. Slapping down educational institutions for the unrealistic employment expectations of their students will end poorly. The best that we should do is make sure the schools aren't lying to anybody.
jfarmer 13y ago
Is this a rhetorical question or do you actually want to know? The way you've phrased the question makes it seem like you've already decided what your opinion is. BPPE requires programs like these to assess $0.50 per $1,000 charged to students who are California residents. These assessments go into a state-wide "Student Tuition Recovery Fund," which is used to mitigate economic harm to the student in a variety of situations where the school might refuse or be unable to, e.g., the school closes mid-class. See http://www.bppe.ca.gov/lawsregs/regs.shtml#76020 http://www.bppe.ca.gov/lawsregs/regs.shtml#76020 for the full list. Programs like this charge students $10k-$20k, so we're talking $5-$10 assessed per student. This is like a very lightweight version of a surety bond. There are other fixed and variable costs related to complying, but (AFAIK) this is the only money that flows into the state's pockets.
- seanhandley 13y ago
  Is this a rhetorical question? There's a delicious irony in the phrasing of that! Yes, I really do want to know. Though I am a biased listener as my confidence in the motives of state officials is not high and I'm not a great believer in set curriculums or standardised testing. I know when I'm in the presence of a strong educator and I'd rather just spend time with them, talking and listening to what they have to say. You can get the details on tech by RTFM - it's the direction, the opinion, the experience and talent that is valuable to be around.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
dragonwriter 13y ago
The state is not even notionally regulating for the benefit of tech companies, but for the benefit of consumers, so raising the fact that tech companies will do evaluations is a complete non sequitur.
seanhandley 13y ago
I meet university graduates on a regular basis that have come through regulated programmes of education and paid plenty of money -- no, sorry, borrowed plenty of money -- to gain an accredited degree. I wholly believe in the quality of the subject matter in the books they read and written on the board in the lectures they maybe attended. Whether it absorbed, was digested and can now be readily applied is a different matter entirely. Regulation is not a guarantee of quality and if people want to sign up for code schools then good luck to them - they're the buyer so "caveat emptor" and let them assess whether the code school is providing what it has promised. Bright people are who I would hire. And bright people don't need state regulation.

sethish 13y ago

Stopping people from being ripped off. I am waiting to see if there were registered complains about these schools.

derwiki 13y ago
I realize you're not saying anything about the effectiveness, but regulation hasn't seemed to stop diploma mills.
- saraid216 13y ago
  You realize that there's an ongoing crusade against diploma mills, right?
  - derwiki 13y ago
    I do. I'd rather fix that before we try to "fix" dev bootcamps.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      Is it your contention that we should never try to solve one crime if another one is ongoing?
sethish 13y ago
Update from usatoday http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/31/california-computer-boot-camps-cited/5078521/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/31/california-com... " > He added, however, that the stern language in the cease-and-desist letters was designed primarily to get the operators' attention and that it was unlikely the bureau would be moving to shut them down as long as they made a good-faith effort to come into compliance. > "We are trying to get them to become licensed," Heimerich said, adding that the agency has not received any complaints about the boot camps and learned about them from a staff investigator who saw them mentioned on a technology blog. "So if they are doing that, they fall to the bottom or close to the bottom of our enforcement priorities because there are many more serious threats to student consumers."

chc 13y ago

You don't believe the state has a legitimate interest in making sure that schools actually teach what they claim to?

mindcrime 13y ago
You don't believe the state has a legitimate interest in making sure that schools actually teach what they claim to? No. Caveat emptor. The State should only get involved in the case of outright fraud - you pay your money, and they don't actually run the class, or the class is taught by a 6th grader or something. Outside of that, we should just let the market operate. Firms that don't deliver on their promises won't be around long.
- seanhandley 13y ago
  Absolutely. Bright people are who I would hire. And bright people don't need state regulation. Caveat emptor.
- chc 13y ago
  > No. Caveat emptor. The State should only get involved in the case of outright fraud - you pay your money, and they don't actually run the class, or the class is taught by a 6th grader or something. This sounds frighteningly arbitrary. So if I pay for a class that will teach me to be a programmer and I get a class that has no realistic hope of accomplishing that, it's caveat emptor, while if I'm in exactly the same situation but the teacher is a sixth grader, caveat emptor doesn't apply? How do we determine when a case of ripping people off is excused by caveat emptor?
  - Crito 13y ago
    I think the problem is with the claims these programs are making, not the expectations the students have. If I decide to go to a traditional non-profit university to study, say, paleontology, and I actually expect to get a job digging up dinosaur bones, that is my own problem. The state shouldn't step in and start slapping the University's hand unless the University was falsely advertising high placement rates after graduation. Slapping down educational institutions for the unrealistic employment expectations of their students will end poorly. The best that we should do is make sure the schools aren't lying to anybody.

jfarmer 13y ago

Is this a rhetorical question or do you actually want to know? The way you've phrased the question makes it seem like you've already decided what your opinion is. BPPE requires programs like these to assess $0.50 per $1,000 charged to students who are California residents. These assessments go into a state-wide "Student Tuition Recovery Fund," which is used to mitigate economic harm to the student in a variety of situations where the school might refuse or be unable to, e.g., the school closes mid-class. See http://www.bppe.ca.gov/lawsregs/regs.shtml#76020 http://www.bppe.ca.gov/lawsregs/regs.shtml#76020 for the full list. Programs like this charge students $10k-$20k, so we're talking $5-$10 assessed per student. This is like a very lightweight version of a surety bond. There are other fixed and variable costs related to complying, but (AFAIK) this is the only money that flows into the state's pockets.

seanhandley 13y ago
Is this a rhetorical question? There's a delicious irony in the phrasing of that! Yes, I really do want to know. Though I am a biased listener as my confidence in the motives of state officials is not high and I'm not a great believer in set curriculums or standardised testing. I know when I'm in the presence of a strong educator and I'd rather just spend time with them, talking and listening to what they have to say. You can get the details on tech by RTFM - it's the direction, the opinion, the experience and talent that is valuable to be around.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

dragonwriter 13y ago

The state is not even notionally regulating for the benefit of tech companies, but for the benefit of consumers, so raising the fact that tech companies will do evaluations is a complete non sequitur.

seanhandley 13y ago

I meet university graduates on a regular basis that have come through regulated programmes of education and paid plenty of money -- no, sorry, borrowed plenty of money -- to gain an accredited degree. I wholly believe in the quality of the subject matter in the books they read and written on the board in the lectures they maybe attended. Whether it absorbed, was digested and can now be readily applied is a different matter entirely. Regulation is not a guarantee of quality and if people want to sign up for code schools then good luck to them - they're the buyer so "caveat emptor" and let them assess whether the code school is providing what it has promised. Bright people are who I would hire. And bright people don't need state regulation.