recentpopularlog in

bootcamps

« earlier   
Lambda School’s Job Placement Rate Is Lower Than Claimed
Internal company documents obtained and reviewed by Intelligencer, plus interviews with former staff and students show a company selling unprepared students an incomplete education, fueled by overpromising marketing and misleading, if not downright fraudulent, figures.

Allred: His previous work was mostly concerned with “growth hacking,” which is Silicon Valley jargon for finding underappreciated (or, less charitably, underhanded) ways of marketing something.

Lambda is also unusual in that it does not charge an upfront tuition to attend. Its home page proclaims, “We don’t get paid until you do, so we’re in this together, from your first day of classes to your first day on the job.” Lambda School is free, but with an asterisk: To attend, you sign a contract that says that if you get a tech job paying $50K or more, you have to pay 17 percent of your pre-tax income to Lambda School for two years, or until you pay back $30K, whichever comes first. These are called Income Share Agreements, or ISAs.

Only, it’s not always clear to students who actually owns these ISAs. Last year, Lambda partnered with Edly, an ISA marketplace co-founded by former Merrill Lynch banker Chris Ricciardi, the “grandfather of collateralized debt obligations,” to sell Lambda ISAs to investors. Wired reported in August 2019 that, “For about half of the ISAs, the company sells the rights to a portion of its returns to investors; in return, it gets cash up front.” On Twitter, Allred has vociferously denied this claim, suggesting that the author of the piece was mistaken. In October, he tweeted, “We never, ever get paid up front for ISAs.”


The school’s secret financing arrangements are a violation of Lambda’s central promise to its students — that Lambda only makes money when the students make money.

Lambda’s lies regarding graduate outcomes, financial structure, and curriculum quality are not merely hyperbole to drive sales of a product. The real human cost of underprivileged students who have been sold the dream of a new career is significant.

Investors now own 40 percent of the company, and Allred now needs to deliver them a return. Lambda’s internal documents show that the school can be profitable so long as at least one in four students manages to find a tech job, and that it intends to enroll more than 10,000 students in 2020.
lambda-school  nymag.com  austen-allred  trevor-mckendrick  vincent-woo  bootcamps  sabrina-baez 
4 days ago by yolandaenoch
Eric Mustin on Twitter: "Quick thread: I think what everyone is missing about Lambda School / bootcamps is this: they are first and foremost Recruiting Companies before they’re an educational institution. They get paid on placement. It’s what drives a
"Quick thread: I think what everyone is missing about Lambda School / bootcamps is this:

they are first and foremost Recruiting Companies before they’re an educational institution. They get paid on placement. It’s what drives all the curriculum hyperbole+outcomes sleight of hand

They’re trying to sell to two groups of people:

1. the *partner* tech companies who either explicitly or implicitly pay for their placement services

or

2. the really good applicants that want to move into SWE and feel confident about their outcomes chances

This is why so many students feel abused by bootcamps, if they aren’t in the top X% of their class or seen as having good placement potential, the schools can just stop allocating them resources, abuse/force them out so they aren’t considered a “graduate”, then fudge the outcomes

The clusterfuck of bootcamps unable to formalize consensus on how to represent outcomes stats speaks volumes. These ppl speaking out about feeling ripped off aren’t *all lying* , understaffing forces LS+others to be stingy with who gets allocated instructional resources

It’s not that bootcamps are maliciously trying to rip off students, but bc *everything* is driven by the recruiting side of the company , it makes them push the envelope everywhere else, overpromising instructional quality + results to entice good applicants and good partner co’s

The best applicants will be *fine* regardless. They have good resumes and , having quit jobs and already bet on being able to level up fast enough as a SWE, will just learn autodidactically. They’ll still have to play life on hard mode for the next few years to stay employed tho.

Meanwhile, partner co’s will churn pretty quickly after cherry picking 1 or 2 good hires (Of course the bootcamp will still tout the logo), + the bottom 80% of students will feel swindled and have lost income from not working. AND, upfront cost bootcamps rarely give a full refund

This is the bs that drives Austen’s “forgetting the denominator” tweet on outcomes the other day, and having a report “in the next 6 months”. These co’s are trying to value at *billions* of $ and you think they can’t calc the outcomes math for a few hundred entry lvl SWE? Cmon

They just can’t do it in a way that paints them well, so they fudge it, and they’re gonna kick the can on any real moderation of the misinformation about their value add and all that Joseph Smith style proselytizing, all for a “school” thats really just curated udemy + recruiters"
ericmusin  coding  bootcamps  education  2020  lambdaschool  money  capitalism  recruiting  codingbootcamps  instruction  via:audreywatters 
27 days ago by robertogreco
Opinion: Ottawa seems to be out of ideas on devising a new kind of China policy
JUNE 19, 2019 | The Globe and Mail | by DAVID MULRONEY. SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND
David Mulroney was Canada’s ambassador to China from 2009 to 2012.

A new approach is needed to managing Canada’s relationship with China – one that’s alive to Canadian vulnerabilities as well as our national interests.....There are many smart reasons for engaging China, but flattering the leadership in Beijing isn’t one of them. Good ideas emerge from hard thinking about long-term Canadian interests. Even summoning the vision and courage to think strategically would mark a significant improvement over our current China policy, which appears to be conjured up from equal measures of wishful thinking and parliamentary politics.....Thinking strategically requires asking why China is being so assertive, (e.g. building a blue-water navy, militarizing rocks and shoals in the South China Sea)....These are part of a patient and persistent Chinese effort to push the U.S. out of Asia and achieve regional dominance – and that is clearly not in Canada’s interest. The U.S.’s commitment to Asia enabled regional balance and, with it, peace and rising prosperity. More to the point, a China-dominated Asia would hardly be friendly to Canadian values and ideas.
(1) Abandon our current policy of “comprehensive engagement” – the notion that we should say yes to just about anything related to China. Cancel the commitment of $256-million over five years to the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
(2) reassessment of our relationship with Taiwan.
(3) move from talking about human rights in China to actually doing something about them. We normally count on the United Nations to address major human-rights abuses, but the UN, anxious to avoid offending Beijing, has been silent in the face of the government’s mass detention of Uyghurs and its brutal assault on their religion, language and culture.
(4) do the same for China’s beleaguered Tibetans. Canada’s commitment would be a welcome signal to both communities that they haven’t been forgotten.
(5) investment at home, too. Put more money into domestic security, combatting Chinese interference more effectively. And we shouldn’t be afraid to name and shame perpetrators when we discover examples of meddling; Beijing won’t like it, but it will also probably tone down its more egregious activities.
(6) invest in China competence in Ottawa, where the commodity is alarmingly scarce. Future leaders in key departments, in the security agencies and in the Canadian Forces need to be far more aware of how China works and how it thinks. This isn’t about agreeing with China, but about understanding it – something that we’re having a hard time doing at present. To do so, Ottawa should create a special “China School” that not only offers language training but also exposes top people across government to the best thinking on China’s politics, economics and security issues.
AIIB  Beijing  bootcamps  Canada  Canada-China_relations  Canadian_Forces  China  China_rising  David_Mulroney  DND  human_rights  ideas  idea_generation  maritime  national_interests  op-ed  policymaking  policymakers  political_staffers  reinvention  security_&_intelligence  South_China_Sea  strategic_thinking  Taiwan  Tibet  Uyghurs  values  wishful_thinking 
june 2019 by jerryking
Frontend Bootcamp: Frontend Workshop from HTML/CSS/JS to TypeScript/React/Redux
In this two-day workshop you'll learn the basics of frontend development while building a working web app. The first day provides an introduction to the fundamentals of the web: HTML, CSS and JavaScript. This is targeted at new and experienced developers alike. On the second day we'll dive into more advanced topics like TypeScript, testing, and state management. While the examples should be accessible to anyone, you'll get the most out of it if you have some prior experience with programming and web technologies.
fridayfrontend  cssbasics  html  css  javascript  typescript  react  redux  tutorials  bootcamps 
march 2019 by spaceninja

Copy this bookmark:





to read