SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The New York Times has coverage on the phenomenon of Developer Bootcamps, that claim to do in a matter of a couple of months what used to take at least a couple of years for an associate's degree. These cram courses are apparently getting about a 75% job placement rate.
Have any Soylentils either gone through these programs, or worked with others who have? If so, what are your experiences?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Developer Bootcamps - Be a Programmer in Two Months!
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 46 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Love is the delusion that one woman differs from another.
-- H. L. Mencken
(Score: 1) by lizardloop on Wednesday October 15 2014, @04:47PM
From my own experience most of my academic learning was utterly useless when it came to being a professional programmer. All the main disciplines of writing good code in a professional environment were learnt over my first few jobs and continue to be learnt every project I work on. All the lecturers at university had never really worked in a real company and had spent their whole lives tinkering with whatever their pet field of research was.
This year I have taken on an 18 year old with no academic experience of programming. It has taken nearly six months but he is now able to carry out basic programming tasks with a little guidance and a good specification to work to. No he won't ever build his own compiler or create a better database. But if you need someone to "move box A from this screen to some other screen and change the validation" then he can do that. Quite a lot cheaper than most other programmers as well.
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Wednesday October 15 2014, @07:50PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 15 2014, @08:51PM
The problem is that they teach computer _science_ and then you work in computer software _engineering_. That's like studying physics and then working as an engineer. And from my professional experience as a structural engineer - this doesn't work. Physicists may be smart but they simply aren't engineers and they don't have the requisite skills - physics theories and building codes are miles apart even if they are based on the same basic science. Getting the theoretically perfect answer and getting a cost-effective solution are two different things as well.
When I switched to computer consulting after a big slump in my engineering field, I saw the same problem. Kids who were knowledgeable in computer theory couldn't solve simple problems in the real world. What the computer field needs is software engineering instruction - largely absent in the real world (most of what passes for "engineering" in software is a pathetic joke.)
What is also needed is professional standards. you need to be in the College of Physicians to be a doctor, a member of the bar to be a lawyer, a registered professional engineer to practice engineering, etc. If you know how to fart, you can call yourself a programmer.
(Score: 2) by clone141166 on Thursday October 16 2014, @12:30AM
There are some of us who took our software engineering education seriously and actually tried to go above and beyond just passing the courses. But you are right, with universities handing out degrees like candy there really needs to be a proper professional accreditation body similar to what most medical disciplines have. And the bar for being accredited as a programmer needs to be set MUCH higher.
With the entire world basically run by computers, it is extremely worrying that there aren't more stringent qualification standards placed on programmers as a profession.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 16 2014, @03:32AM
It goes beyond what the universities teach. Companies are willing to hire without regard for education. Furthermore, open source products are ubiquitous and no validation of credentials is required for contributors. While some projects have some minimum standards and are verified, there are others that are put together by hacks. I know of one where the lead (paid) programmer openly criticized the technology chosen for the project, yet had the final say on what was accepted. The result is that there is as much spaghetti code in that project as in any I have seen.
Given that trillions if dollars of wealth is tied up in the world-wide computer networks, the inconsistent standards make the thing something of a house of cards.
Heartbleed was estimated to have cost a half billion dollars ( at 500,000 servers worldwide, that's only $1000 per server to fix - nt an unreasonable estimate). That due to one line of code that was sloppily written and not properly verified.
(Score: 2) by clone141166 on Thursday October 16 2014, @12:44AM
I think both education AND experience are necessary to be truly great at anything.
I've heard a lot of people claim that degrees are useless and that they were educated by the "school of the world" or some rubbish. There are certainly a lot of holes in the current tertiary education system, and I'm sure there are some very motivated people who can just pick things up very quickly without much formal education. But for 99% of humanity, to be good at anything you need to learn about it first and then experience it.
Degrees expose you to a lot of great ideas and ways of thinkings that you may not otherwise ever encounter. But at the same time they can be filled with a lot of junk that you will never use ever again. On the other hand just working a job really only gives you a very narrow perspective. You might become exceedingly good at your particular specialised field of work, but without a formal education I think you would really miss out on a lot of opportunities to apply knowledge and ideas from other areas to your particular specialisation.