• Forum
  • Lounge
  • So that whole coding bootcamp thing is a

 
So that whole coding bootcamp thing is a scam, right?

Interesting comparison between coding bootcamps and CS at college.
http://www.gayle.com/blog/2016/11/so-that-whole-coding-bootcamp-thing-is-a-scam-right
Author feels biased toward bootcamps, and its almost like made up the scam title then refutes something that no one said.

4 are foundational computer science classes:... blah blah

^^^
this glosses over the 6 math classes I had. It skips my engineering stats class. It glosses over electives, which are more than just experience. One of the 'electives' that 'you could go without' for example would be something like sql and databases …. something an IT company kinda expects you to know coming in the door!

So, its basically saying you are 'good enough' with zero time spent in solving problems (algorithms, proofs, thinking type classes, senior group project class...), zero math skills, zero experience in tools used by corporations (stuff you get in sr level electives), zero knowledge of how a computer works, possibly zero unix experience, and so on.

I am sure the bootcamps give you a decent starting point and I may even be tempted to compare them to a 2-year degree sans fluff classes. That seems more of a fair comparison (though its less than even a 2 year, which has math and a bit more CS than the BC). And, you probably can do some jobs with little more than this much to get started if you learn quickly and well on the job and your job has a nurture culture. I have nothing against them. My concern is that this nonsense paper devalues the rest of the program, esp by totally ignoring the math side of a classic degree.

the smart * in me wants to say you get what you pay for, but 4 year degrees have a hefty price tag & a lot of unnecessary total rubbish and indoctrination classes too. Would love to see a happy medium, a 2 year only your major and related classes program, eg ONLY math and CS related for the degree, anything else you take is extra.
Last edited on
...then refutes something that no one said.

I think she refers to her own original opion.
I have neither a degree is CS nor attended a coding camp so I have to idea how valid her opions are..

Maybe someone who has attended a bootcamp can share his/her experience.
How old are you? I think a bootcamp makes more sense to an older person who's trying to change careers. If you're still in high school you should still have enough free time to learn everything you need by yourself. Now, the question is whether you can get a job without any kind of certification, but then the question is also whether the certifications offered by bootcamps are worth a damn in the industry.
@helios,
I am 54 years old and not interested in a career change any longer.

to learn everything you need by yourself

I doubt that you can learn programming by yourself - at least I couldn't and when I see many posts here I doubt that many others are able to do it.
plenty of people learned to code on their own. And honestly, the % of good, bad, and average self-taughts may actually be *ahead* of university taught, because a fair number in school cheat or skimp their way out while self taught people are usually motivated and work hard at it.

c++ is perhaps not the best choice for the learn on your own first try, mind you. I struggle with that one -- one the one hand, if you can learn c++, you can learn anything else easily. On the other hand, its a rather challenging language. It was my second language, and I am glad I had another before it.

getting a job self-taught is tougher than ever.
I feel that certifications are largely a scam, $200 to take classs, $100 to take a test, then expires very quickly. The system has gotten the big corporations on board and its as much a self feeding money mill as the schools are, with about the same results.
Last edited on
I feel that certifications are largely a scam

True. Although there are certifications that are meaningful - the ones from corporations like Cisco, Oracle, or Microsoft, confirming understanding of their products., even those aren't typically relevant in hiring.

getting a job self-taught is tougher than ever.

it helps to have a degree in something, at least - my chemistry PhD carried me through HR barriers of many software interviews.
I doubt that you can learn programming by yourself - at least I couldn't and when I see many posts here I doubt that many others are able to do it.
The sampling is biased. The people who don't need help don't need to ask questions here, and a lot of the people who do post are doing homework assignments anyway.

True. Although there are certifications that are meaningful - the ones from corporations like Cisco, Oracle, or Microsoft, confirming understanding of their products., even those aren't typically relevant in hiring.
I think employers only care about those if you're in IT.
Last edited on
I sat through university with all kinds of people in my classes and, honestly, most of them could barely program themselves out of a paper bag.

(It isn't until you get to the 350–500 level classes that you are learning with the 7–8 people who actually can program with any degree of actual skill.)

Programming is hard, and takes dedication.

I am primarily self-taught, but taking university courses taught me things I would never have learned on my own.

Likewise, actually working for someone teaches you things you simply cannot learn elsewhere. That is one of the reasons hiring is so difficult — it costs a lot of money to on-board someone and get them familiar with your systems and practices. And if your new hire turns out to be a dud six months in you're kind of screwed for the worth of that time.

Anything that shows you can actually do something, like A+ certs and acing boot camps and online programming challenges, etc is another weight on your side of the scale when hiring.

That's kind of what killed me. When my hard drive and backup hard drive died (within a week of each other!) I lost everything. So I haven't worked in the industry and have nothing to prove I can do what I say I can do. (I haven't had time to do much that post here every now and then for years.) That, and I'm old, so the scale tends to weigh against me these days.
I am primarily self-taught
I do not reckon you have invested in note-taking strategies and techniques which you would advise for learning to program in any language, other than practice.
Last edited on
Note-taking is something you do when someone else tells you something you want to remember. If you're studying by yourself you're either
* reading, in which case the notes have already been taken (the text), or
* practicing, in which case you're generating the ideas directly in your mind.
IDK, I always take good notes.
What do you take notes of?
I doubt that you can learn programming by yourself - at least I couldn't and when I see many posts here I doubt that many others are able to do it.

I was self-taught, best thing I ever did. I don't know how I'd of passed with these professors had I gone in with no knowledge of coding beforehand. Though, as Duthmohas said, plenty of students aren't actually good at coding, yet they seem to pass these classes anyway.


What do you take notes of?

When I was learning C++, I "took" notes on a text file on my desktop. I needed quick references while I was coding, would be inconvenient to have to look up the tutorial every time I needed some information. Notes were concepts I'd think I'd forget, libraries, functions, tricks, and other things that you wouldn't just read/practice without jotting down to have it for reference.


Note-taking is something you do when someone else tells you something you want to remember. If you're studying by yourself you're either

Not quite, if you're studying by yourself, you might find out something and make note of it. For example, in high school, my geometry class, we needed to be able to solve a certain kind of problem but I completely hated the method. I looked at some of the problems with their solutions and came up with an easier to use method and made note of it.

When studying by yourself, you might figure out something you want to write down.
Note-taking is something you do when someone else tells you something you want to remember. If you're studying by yourself you're either
* reading, in which case the notes have already been taken (the text), or
* practicing, in which case you're generating the ideas directly in your mind.
In that case of a person teaching to you it might be most ideal to take questions you answer later.

When reading from text, note-taking, apart from regurgitation, may be ideal for some, if done in a compendious manner, as if the learner re-interprets the information, further reiteration is potentially achieved.

Otherwise, ( @helios @Duthomhas ) have you further advice? Such as in the like of the Feynman method or Cornell notes?

Last edited on
Good note taking is an aid to understanding and remembering material. In other words, it is a short-term aid to organizing your thoughts.

Many technical materials are well-organized, so they often suffice as notes in-and-of themselves — for those sufficiently familiar with the subject matter.

For example, when first confronted with a Unix shell, I made myself a ~30 line note of all the commands I needed to learn. These days I rarely have to refer to man pages for stuff I do at the prompt, but when I was trying to simply cat a file or switch between processes, I needed help.

When learning linear algebra, I made myself notes about upper and lower diagonal matrices and how to build them and what they were for and all that stuff. These days if I forget some detail I know where and how to look it up, because I am not a complete noob anymore.

When designing an algorithm, I make notes to organize the conditions that control it until I have a good understanding. By then, the notes are basically a crib-sheet to write the final algorithm.
Notes are personal, you have to find what suits your style.
Today, you can record the class on a phone, audio and images of what is written on the board is easy to do.

I often found that notes distracted me from paying attention. I could either have pages of info that I didnt have a clue what meant, or I could listen and absorb with simple, keywords only notes.

Today as well, you can look up the concept online and find it explained at various levels of detail. Also many profs put their lecture notes up for you. You don't have to rely on a pencil and paper anymore.
I often found that notes distracted me from paying attention.

Same. The notebook I started college with is the same I have right now, I don't take notes. This semester I first started taking a few pictures of the board only because the professor would give some much needed assembly code.

Otherwise, I've only "really" taken notes when I was learning C++ from the online tutorial.
Hence there should be no issue in simply revising ahead and using classes as a reiteration of the knowledge you acquired hitherto, for you may provide full attention during the lesson and have adequate knowledge?

Should such be the case, the enquiry is how these notes you take alone should be taken.

Duthomhas wrote:
I made myself notes about upper and lower diagonal matrices and how to build them
With no particular strategy? Such as ensuring one line of writing, on the paper, is not as long as half a line?

Many technical materials are well-organized, so they often suffice as notes in-and-of themselves
I am in no position to agree. Hitherto I have mainly read textbooks for exams. When I do so for personal projects, I find note-taking is paramount. For instance, I am not entirely certain regarding how I would learn the c++ data-type storage values like the back of my hand without a pen

These days I rarely have to refer to man pages for stuff
Of course. I believe the note-taking, in it's own way, enabled for the information to become further internalised.

Good note taking is an aid
However could you elucidate what is meant by
good


Last edited on
Registered users can post here. Sign in or register to post.