4 ms·

Totally agree. I took a class last year and learned a lot, but finding a job was extremely difficult. I finally found one in the early part of 2014, but now tha

Totally agree. I took a class last year and learned a lot, but finding a job was extremely difficult. I finally found one in the early part of 2014, but now that I'm looking again it has been just as hard. Everyone wants more senior people which is understandable. The problem is there's just such a shortage of talent. I argue that if you find someone who possesses the passion, curiosity, and ability to learn quickly and train them for a couple months, you'll have a decent developer. Unfortunately, I haven't come across many companies who share this viewpoint.

RosieA 12y ago
"I argue that if you find someone who possesses the passion, curiosity, and ability to learn quickly and train them for a couple months, you'll have a decent developer." I totally agree. This is exactly what we look for in all of our prospective students, as well as being passionate about it ourselves. Thanks for taking the time to comment.
- jlees 12y ago
  I would be interested to know how you look for these things. We find that although folks can seem very passionate and curious, sometimes they find out they just don't enjoy (or aren't particularly good at) programming. Would love to be able to figure that out before they enroll in our classes.
  - RosieA 12y ago
    Definitely! The reality of it is that sometimes you have to go somewhere to get somewhere, and that somewhere is often a lot different next week than it was last week! Students struggle all the time, and some find out (even very quickly) that they just don't like coding. We work across the board to just help people figure out what they want to be doing so sure maybe its hustle on our end for a dropout, but now they know right? I think its a bigger problem for bootcamps that are super intensive, particularly offline. The application process for these really has to include some coding prerequisites or you simply can't quantify someone's interest! I can't say we haven't considered implementing a set of entry tests to "prove interest", we may still do this.
king_magic 12y ago
The competing viewpoint is "why should our company pay to train you, when you could have paid to train yourself?" I'm not saying it's necessarily "right", but that it could be a reason why many companies do not share that viewpoint.
- gretful 12y ago
  Yeah, most companies treat people as replaceable cogs, when they should be treating employees as (for example) plants that need cultivation and care. Training should be considered part of the cultivation of the employee.
  - RosieA 12y ago
    100% behind you on this!
- RosieA 12y ago
  I think that mentality could end up being the death of many companies. Though for certain business models the "slave" is preferable to any alternative. The great leaders of the coming decade though are going to be people-centric, just you wait!
RosieA 12y ago
Edit: Just realized I commented twice to this thread, but I like this response (my second one) better so I'll leave it! We take this approach in our company, but its a risky cultural move for a startup who needs to progress fast, and a lot of corporations don't want to take the time/risk that you'll end up being a flop--generally because they're less connected to individuals as they are teams. There is currently a huge movement, however, of "investing in people" as an ideology for entrepreneurship, investment and HR. Gary V. has been making a lot of noise about it recently. Subject of his next book? I'm not telling. ;-) Inhouse and education and training is slowly getting trend again, and cool companies like friends of ours in Amsterdam (Acheived) and SF (Degreed) are starting to make it sexy again as well!

RosieA 12y ago

"I argue that if you find someone who possesses the passion, curiosity, and ability to learn quickly and train them for a couple months, you'll have a decent developer." I totally agree. This is exactly what we look for in all of our prospective students, as well as being passionate about it ourselves. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

jlees 12y ago
I would be interested to know how you look for these things. We find that although folks can seem very passionate and curious, sometimes they find out they just don't enjoy (or aren't particularly good at) programming. Would love to be able to figure that out before they enroll in our classes.
- RosieA 12y ago
  Definitely! The reality of it is that sometimes you have to go somewhere to get somewhere, and that somewhere is often a lot different next week than it was last week! Students struggle all the time, and some find out (even very quickly) that they just don't like coding. We work across the board to just help people figure out what they want to be doing so sure maybe its hustle on our end for a dropout, but now they know right? I think its a bigger problem for bootcamps that are super intensive, particularly offline. The application process for these really has to include some coding prerequisites or you simply can't quantify someone's interest! I can't say we haven't considered implementing a set of entry tests to "prove interest", we may still do this.

king_magic 12y ago

The competing viewpoint is "why should our company pay to train you, when you could have paid to train yourself?" I'm not saying it's necessarily "right", but that it could be a reason why many companies do not share that viewpoint.

gretful 12y ago
Yeah, most companies treat people as replaceable cogs, when they should be treating employees as (for example) plants that need cultivation and care. Training should be considered part of the cultivation of the employee.
- RosieA 12y ago
  100% behind you on this!
RosieA 12y ago
I think that mentality could end up being the death of many companies. Though for certain business models the "slave" is preferable to any alternative. The great leaders of the coming decade though are going to be people-centric, just you wait!

RosieA 12y ago

Edit: Just realized I commented twice to this thread, but I like this response (my second one) better so I'll leave it! We take this approach in our company, but its a risky cultural move for a startup who needs to progress fast, and a lot of corporations don't want to take the time/risk that you'll end up being a flop--generally because they're less connected to individuals as they are teams. There is currently a huge movement, however, of "investing in people" as an ideology for entrepreneurship, investment and HR. Gary V. has been making a lot of noise about it recently. Subject of his next book? I'm not telling. ;-) Inhouse and education and training is slowly getting trend again, and cool companies like friends of ours in Amsterdam (Acheived) and SF (Degreed) are starting to make it sexy again as well!