Forum: Ruby Wondering About Flatiron School

Hi everyone!,
Do any of you have some information on FlatironSchool?
http://flatironschool.com/

I hear many good things about the program.  They guarantee molding
students with no to little previous programming experience to become a
competent Web/Ruby Developer in 12 Weeks!

I am considering going there- But four things about the school make me
hesitate to apply.
1.Tuition = $10k
2.It is very new and is untested.
3. Can't you achieve the same effect alone or studying through
Skillshare/MeetUps?
4.Job Placement

Their syllabus look great and many outsiders in programming communities
praise students' work. I was just hoping that perhaps some of you have
more information on this school and whether you think it is worth the
investment.
Thanks!

i don't know Flatiron School.

Learning is one way, job placement is another story.

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:51:08AM +0900, Kevin Y. wrote:
> 1.Tuition = $10k
> 2.It is very new and is untested.
> 3. Can't you achieve the same effect alone or studying through
> Skillshare/MeetUps?
> 4.Job Placement
>
> Their syllabus look great and many outsiders in programming communities
> praise students' work. I was just hoping that perhaps some of you have
> more information on this school and whether you think it is worth the
> investment.

It all comes down to how best you learn, your priorities, and your
resources.  $10K is a hell of a lot of money for something that *can*
conceivably be learned on your own.  On the other hand, a structured
class setting offers a form of mentorship and some help with rapid skill
uptake, including the time pressures from externally imposed deadlines.

Ultimately, I do not think that these programs are worth anywhere near
that much money in and of themselves.  Two things that might make them
worth more are both tangential to the skill acquisition:

1. possible job placement help
2. employers valuing documented instruction over autodidactic learning

The first is mostly valuable only because of the second, which means 
that
the biggest benefit from such a program in the general case is bypassing
employment gatekeepers who feel the need to justify hiring
recommendations through key resume bullet points rather than relying
solely on actual suitability to the job.

There are specific cases where the benefits of the hands-on 
instructional
model might be more valuable to a given student than the increased
ability to slide into the job market.  This relates specifically to
people whose best prospects for learning come from that instructional
model, though -- and not to people whose learning is best served by 
other
approaches to acquiring skills.

So . . . the upshot is that, unless the Flatiron School is just garbage,
the answer is "It depends."

Just to put in a spanner in the works here. I'm the guy who decides who
gets employed at the company I work at and any CV that has nothing more 
to
show than some paper qualification that was bought would go straight in 
the
bin without a second glance.

Just saying

Peter Hickman wrote in post #1089175:
> Just to put in a spanner in the works here. I'm the guy who decides who
> gets employed at the company I work at and any CV that has nothing more
> to
> show than some paper qualification that was bought would go straight in
> the
> bin without a second glance.
>
> Just saying

HI Peter, thanks for you input.
Just wondering, at the risk of looking naive (and I am at this point), 
what are the most important elements of a candidate you look for? Yeah, 
I did not expect the 'degree' from the school would help at all. It was 
more of the connections the school may provide.

Thanks!

Chad Perrin wrote in post #1089161:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:51:08AM +0900, Kevin Y. wrote:
>> 1.Tuition = $10k
>> 2.It is very new and is untested.
>> 3. Can't you achieve the same effect alone or studying through
>> Skillshare/MeetUps?
>> 4.Job Placement
>>
>> Their syllabus look great and many outsiders in programming communities
>> praise students' work. I was just hoping that perhaps some of you have
>> more information on this school and whether you think it is worth the
>> investment.
>
> It all comes down to how best you learn, your priorities, and your
> resources.  $10K is a hell of a lot of money for something that *can*
> conceivably be learned on your own.  On the other hand, a structured
> class setting offers a form of mentorship and some help with rapid skill
> uptake, including the time pressures from externally imposed deadlines.
>
> Ultimately, I do not think that these programs are worth anywhere near
> that much money in and of themselves.  Two things that might make them
> worth more are both tangential to the skill acquisition:
>
> 1. possible job placement help
> 2. employers valuing documented instruction over autodidactic learning
>
> The first is mostly valuable only because of the second, which means
> that
> the biggest benefit from such a program in the general case is bypassing
> employment gatekeepers who feel the need to justify hiring
> recommendations through key resume bullet points rather than relying
> solely on actual suitability to the job.
>
> There are specific cases where the benefits of the hands-on
> instructional
> model might be more valuable to a given student than the increased
> ability to slide into the job market.  This relates specifically to
> people whose best prospects for learning come from that instructional
> model, though -- and not to people whose learning is best served by
> other
> approaches to acquiring skills.
>
> So . . . the upshot is that, unless the Flatiron School is just garbage,
> the answer is "It depends."

Hi Chad, Thanks for your generous respond.
The case study you provide is something that has been replaying over my
mind for the last couple days. At this point, I decided on the following
things.

1.Flatiron School is legit in that the program will greatly help you
getting vast knowledge and experience in very little time.

2. Still, I can't count on being placed or finding a job right after
graduation. Rather, it is more likely that I will have to spend
1-2months finishing up portfolio and applying for jobs. (which cannot
happen with out #1)

3.10K is a rip off. However, the benefits outweigh. Colleges are bigger
rip offs.

4. Two alternatives: quit my job, spend 6 months preparing with the 10K
I won't spend on the school instead of 3months. Attend many Skillshare
classes and use CodeSchool and such.

or
 attend Other programs.
   Hunter College Front End Development Certificate Program: $3400.00
     http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/ce/certificates/compute...

    NYU Wed Develpment Intensive course:$4000.00
    http://www.scps.nyu.edu/content/scps/academics/cou...

Hi,

promising to "turn you into a web developer" in 12 weeks (even if
you have no previous experience) is just laughable and stinks of snake
oil.

Learning to program takes *years* of practicing. Just ask the guys in
this forum. In Germany, for example, becoming a "programmer" takes 3
years. And that's some pretty intense training, which consists of both
working at a company and going to school. Many companies even require
you to have solid programming skills beforehand.

So after those 12 weeks you will *not* be a web developer who's actually
fit for the job. If they're good, they'll give you a basic overview of
different techniques. If they are bad, they'll teach you nothing but a
bunch of buzzwords and tell you that you're a "Ruby rockstar" now.

So I'd be very sceptical about this. Personally, all that hipster-talk
alone makes we wanna close the page immediately.

On 15 December 2012 23:20, Kevin Y. <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> HI Peter, thanks for you input.
> Just wondering, at the risk of looking naive (and I am at this point),
> what are the most important elements of a candidate you look for? Yeah,
> I did not expect the 'degree' from the school would help at all. It was
> more of the connections the school may provide.
>
>
Well we are a RoR shop and so an ideal candidate would be someone with a
few years RoR experience. Having said that none have come forward over 
the
past two years when we were recruiting (maybe London is too much of a
backwater, but I suspect it is that our industry sector - sports data - 
is
not interesting / sexy enough).

What we ended up with were CS or hard science graduates (maths, physics)
with little or no Ruby experience who showed an interest in computing
beyond what was needed for their degree. It was this interest beyond the
needs of their degree that swayed us. One had written some Facebook apps
just for the hell of it. Another had taught themselves Android 
development
and created a scientific app that probably only twelve people in the 
world
will use.

An interest in computing without immediate commercial gain. The ability 
to
teach yourself new skills. A desire to learn. These things made us want 
to
interview them, the degree (while I would like to say having a degree is
not important it does show an ability to study and think analytically)
subject area is of less importance. I'm not sure how we would view a 
degree
in Medieval Literature but one guy in another department has a degree in
Theology so I suspect that it wouldn't be a problem.

So what we are looking for is:
1) The ability to study and think analytically - a degree is a good 
proxy
for this
2) The ability to teach oneself new skills
3) The creation of applications with those skills that have made it into
the wild - application of those skills
4) An interest in computing beyond marketable skills
5) Experience in a commercial computing environment (around 1 year is 
good)

But thats what it takes to be interviewed by us, other people will have
other criteria. We are a small shop so making a bad hire would be a real
pain but with the criteria I have given here we have not made a hire 
that
we regret in the slightest.

Ask yourself what adding Flatiron would add to your CV in light of this. 
I
suspect that by itself it would add nothing.

So the real question is "I have $10k, how can I make myself employable 
as a
RoR developer?"

Sorry, I have no answer for that.

On Dec 16, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Jan E. <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> promising to "turn you into a web developer" in 12 weeks (even if
> you have no previous experience) is just laughable and stinks of snake
> oil.

That might be a bit of an upsell, but 12 weeks of intensive training can
get you _very_ far.

> Learning to program takes *years* of practicing. Just ask the guys in
> this forum. In Germany, for example, becoming a "programmer" takes 3
> years. And that's some pretty intense training, which consists of both
> working at a company and going to school. Many companies even require
> you to have solid programming skills beforehand.

Just because the formal apprenticeship takes 3 years to complete doesn't
mean that you need 3 years to learn "programming". Quite frankly, most 
of
the curriculum in Germany for programming apprenticeships is pretty
laughable.
For universities, there is a common joke: "Students know Java very well, 
all
you have to do is teach them programming."

I know more than one apprentice that were perfectly good and productive
team-mates in bigger projects after the first 2 month if you knew about 
what
they were good at and what they lacked and allowed for some time for 
self-training
on each tasks.

Also, the number of non-"certified" programmers in good positions in 
Germany
shows that programming itself is nothing that you have to be tought to 
work in
that field. Formal education certainly helps, but for many tasks, you 
don't need it.

> So after those 12 weeks you will *not* be a web developer who's actually
> fit for the job. If they're good, they'll give you a basic overview of
> different techniques. If they are bad, they'll teach you nothing but a
> bunch of buzzwords and tell you that you're a "Ruby rockstar" now.

Someone that can do many basic tasks is already a valuable asset if you 
know
how to treat that relationship right. It will certainly not make you a 
"i am a ninja
and get a lot of cash"-Programmer, but getting to a decent productivity 
level
for basic tasks in 12 weeks is certainly possible. Have him do landing 
page
for 3 weeks, you can never have enough of them :).

Also, the concept of having such intensive courses is pretty usual: 
pretty much
every database vendor sells you DB knowledge in 4 days or less (and 
you'd be
surprised how good some of these are) and most european universities 
have
courses on top of their studies that teach skills at a decent level in 3 
months.

> So I'd be very sceptical about this. Personally, all this hipster-talk
> alone makes we wanna close the page immediately.

Thats true, trust is another thing. I wouldn't accept an applicant just 
by merit of
having finished such a school alone, but thats a question of how the 
applicant
sells himself. Being upfront about "I am switching professions and took 
a course"
goes a long way.

Subject: Re: Wondering About Flatiron School
  Date: Sun 16 Dec 12 08:38:31PM +0900

Quoting Peter Hickman (peterhickman386@googlemail.com):

> So what we are looking for is:
> 1) The ability to study and think analytically - a degree is a good proxy
> for this
> 2) The ability to teach oneself new skills
> 3) The creation of applications with those skills that have made it into
> the wild - application of those skills
> 4) An interest in computing beyond marketable skills
> 5) Experience in a commercial computing environment (around 1 year is good)

I wonder how you deal with people who offer lots of experience (say,
around a quarter of a century). I mean: what could a person learn in a
year? If I compare myself now and after one year being employed, I
certainly wouldn't want to go back... And I had already done one
year's Fortran77 at the university plus an unforgettable year writing
administrative code in GWbasic (compulsory military service).

Carlo

@ Florian:

It seems we have a very different understanding of being a programmer.
Somebody who can do basic tasks within a team that looks after him is a
code monkey to me, not a programmer. Yeah, you can probably become a
decent code monkey in a few months. Many school kids today don't even
have to be taught the basics, because they've already published projects
on GitHub, maybe done some small jobs etc.

But that doesn't make them programmers! There's a big difference
between, say, writing an SQL query that kind of works -- and being able
to understand an execution plan and write a query that won't break down
even if thousands of customers visit the page simulatenously. A
programmer to me is somebody who actually knows what he's doing and can
come up with workable solutions in a short amount of time. And that's
something you won't learn in a few weeks.

Of course you don't necessarily need formal education. But it does help
to come down to earth and get *real* knowledge and experience as opposed
to "Hey, I've read some PHP tutorials, I'm a web developer now!".

It's like with any other serious job: I'm sure there are many great
self-taught  architects out there. But when you hire one, you *probably*
want him to have an actual diploma and not just a certificate from
"Learn statics in only 1 week!".

I'm not saying that those Flatiron courses are useless. I don't know
them. But I think they give a a very wrong impression of what you can do 
with your knowledge. What kind of jobs will that be when all you need is 
a few weeks of training?

On 16 December 2012 12:38, Carlo E. Prelz <fluido@fluido.as> wrote:


> I wonder how you deal with people who offer lots of experience (say,
> around a quarter of a century). I mean: what could a person learn in a
> year? If I compare myself now and after one year being employed, I
> certainly wouldn't want to go back... And I had already done one
> year's Fortran77 at the university plus an unforgettable year writing
> administrative code in GWbasic (compulsory military service).
>
> Carlo
>
>
We have come to the conclusion that experience is experience regardless 
of
the languages or technologies (personally I have been programming since 
the
late 70s and was originally a mainframe COBOL programmer, spent a few 
years
writing financial software in Basic). You can learn a lot in a year, but 
it
does depend on the year. As someone said "They know Java, now they need 
to
learn how to program", well that one year counts for a lot. Given the
choice between two candidates one who has left university with 3 years 
of
Java but no real world experience and one who has completed one years
employment as a PHP programmer the candidate with real world experience
actually has the upper hand.

But then again as I have said we are a small shop and need people who 
can
take on a problem and handle it by themselves. A large bank that is 
hiring
a dozen programmers probably has completely different criteria.

It is my experience that much of the technology that I have learnt over 
the
years is, of itself, completely useless (and as a consequence does not
appear on my CV). I have used languages and operating systems that are
almost extinct so they are not marketable skills. The real skills (the 
ones
that are not tied to a language or platform) accumulate very slowly. So 
the
difference between no real world experience and one years experience is
significant, but the difference between 1 year and 3 is less marked. 25
years experience is not 25 times greater than 1 year - I would only
consider the last 5 to 7 years of your CV to be of interest.

If however your CV showed that you had been doing the same thing for the
last 15 years then it might start to count against you - I like to see
someone learning new things (or at least new to them).

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 08:40:19AM +0900, Kevin Y. wrote:
>
> 3.10K is a rip off. However, the benefits outweigh. Colleges are bigger
> rip offs.

For purposes of pure learning . . . yes, they are.  Keep in mind, 
though,
that many employers simply will not hire anyone without a college 
degree.
A lot of those say they'll hire without a degree if you have 
"equivalent"
experience, but mostly (even if they believe it) they don't really mean
it deep down inside.  Exceptions tend to be made for people who are 
"rock
stars" (e.g. someone hiring for Ruby on Rails might not turn down DHH
even if he didn't have a degree), but most of us aren't famous that way.

Chad Perrin wrote in post #1089291:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 08:40:19AM +0900, Kevin Y. wrote:
>>
>> 3.10K is a rip off. However, the benefits outweigh. Colleges are bigger
>> rip offs.
>
> For purposes of pure learning . . . yes, they are.  Keep in mind,
> though,
> that many employers simply will not hire anyone without a college
> degree.
> A lot of those say they'll hire without a degree if you have
> "equivalent"
> experience, but mostly (even if they believe it) they don't really mean
> it deep down inside.  Exceptions tend to be made for people who are
> "rock
> stars" (e.g. someone hiring for Ruby on Rails might not turn down DHH
> even if he didn't have a degree), but most of us aren't famous that way.

Is that really true that employers will not hire a candidate without
programming related degree? I know at least two people who went to fine
art programs and one is doing very well as an iOS app developer and the
other something else I do not know at this moment. Also I attended few
SkillShare courses that are taught by professional programmers who were
self-taught and they definitely did not think that college degrees are
necessary as long as your work reflects certain level of skill. There
wasn't any conflict of interests as those classes were free.

Subject: Re: Wondering About Flatiron School
  Date: Sun 16 Dec 12 11:47:23PM +0900

Quoting Peter Hickman (peterhickman386@googlemail.com):

> It is my experience that much of the technology that I have learnt
> over the years is, of itself, completely useless (and as a
> consequence does not appear on my CV). I have used languages and
> operating systems that are almost extinct so they are not marketable
> skills. The real skills (the ones that are not tied to a language or
> platform) accumulate very slowly.

You are very right. Nevertheless, you seldom find those slowly
accumulating skills mentioned in job requirements. I see a clear
tendency at giving a predominant rank to the current buzzword in
whatever IT faculties have recently established as "best practice."

It boils down to the wisdom of the person who is called to
evaluate candidates. Difficult job...

Carlo

On Dec 16, 2012, at 3:28 PM, Jan E. <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> @ Florian:
>
> It seems we have a very different understanding of being a programmer.
> Somebody who can do basic tasks within a team that looks after him is a
> code monkey to me, not a programmer. Yeah, you can probably become a
> decent code monkey in a few months. Many school kids today don't even
> have to be taught the basics, because they've already published projects
> on GitHub, maybe done some small jobs etc.

I never wrote that it makes you a fully-fledged programmer - but it can 
make
you fit for working in a company. Many companies pass by perfectly good
talent because of exactly that mindset.

Also, the differentiation between "code monkey" and "programmer" on 
skill
is maybe the most snobbish thing I heard in a while, if not actively 
harmful.

Granted: there is a difference between someone that just copy and pastes
code and someone that applies skills. But if you apply programming 
skills
in a creative way - how meager they may be, you are nevertheless a
programmer - just not a good one (yet).

> But that doesn't make them programmers! There's a big difference
> between, say, writing an SQL query that kind of works -- and being able
> to understand an execution plan and write a query that won't break down
> even if thousands of customers visit the page simulatenously. A
> programmer to me is somebody who actually knows what he's doing and can
> come up with workable solutions in a short amount of time. And that's
> something you won't learn in a few weeks.

I've seen people with zero knowledge in either algebra and SQL doing 
query
optimization perfectly well _because they saw the need and learned what 
they
had to learn_. It took them long, but hey! Taking the right actions and 
learning
what you need for it is what makes a programmer, not your skill level.

And yes: I would never let such a person work alone, but with more 
experienced
supervision, you can see a lot of awesome things happening.

> Of course you don't necessarily need formal education. But it does help
> to come down to earth and get *real* knowledge and experience as opposed
> to "Hey, I've read some PHP tutorials, I'm a web developer now!".

We're not talking about "some guy who read some tutorials after 
midnight",
but taking a course for a quarter of a year. (assuming that the course 
is good)

> It's like with any other serious job: I'm sure there are many great
> self-taught  architects out there. But when you hire one, you *probably*
> want him to have an actual diploma and not just a certificate from
> "Learn statics in only 1 week!".

Now you are mingeling topics: I agree with you that a course certificate
does not give you any more credibility in the hiring process. I just 
don't
agree with the premise that such a course can only yield unusable
personnel. Even self-teching yields perfectly good people from time to 
time,
so how can a good

> I'm not saying that those Flatiron courses are useless. I don't know
> them. But I think they give a a very wrong impression of what you can do
> with your knowledge. What kind of jobs will that be when all you need is
> a few weeks of training?

As I said: basic jobs with an opportunity to improve. Lets face it: Many 
companies
are searching for people to make even the most miniscule tasks. At 
worst, they
allow very basic tasks to be done by expensive

Hi Everyone,

So I'm Avi, the founder and main instructor at the Flatiron School. I
guess I just want to address why I started the school and give you a
sense of what our program is about.

Our program is geared to people with no technical experience and our
goal is first and foremost to help them fall madly in love with code.
Once someone loves this, I know they'll never give up on learning it and
will value being great at their craft. Being a programmer, we take so
much for granted when we think of beginners. One of the first
assumptions we make is that a layman will connect in the same deep way
we have to code. It's important to show them what we take for granted.
That programmers change the world more on a daily basis then any other
profession. That technology now influences every aspect of our lives,
culture, economics, and politics. Just look at the US elections and how
better software helped Obama rally a vote where Romney's platform is
largely cited as having failed. That as a programmer we have the wealth
of human wisdom at our finger tips, able to bend it to our whim like
branches in the wind. That code presents a larger design pattern behind
all systems of massive complexity, of composition of synthesis, of
building up a system from smaller units of itself, like notes in a song
and atoms in a compound. So ya, that's Flatiron's first job, to help
people connect to the wonder of code.

Second, the mechanics and syntax of code are the easy parts. In fact, we
don't even teach that stuff, we expect you to learn it on your own
through our prework curriculum (which is open sourced
http://prework.flatironschool.com ). What we focus on isn't the science
of programming but the art of expression. Knowing how to define a method
isn't as important as understanding when methods are needed, what they
really mean, how they represent behavior. Programming is about
articulating an idea clearly, not to a machine, but to ourselves. I try
to show them how to break problems down, how to use the vocabulary they
have learnt to solve a problem, how to work in teams, how to come up
with effective plans, how to actually build. There is just so much more
to programming then the gestures of a particular language. We try to
teach all those other things.

Third, it's about seeing this as a career. We do our best to provide you
with the best leg up on a fruitful and long career as a developer. This
is not a program for people with great ideas that would make a billion
dollars if they could just learn to code. This is a program for people
wanting to spend the rest of their lives writing. We help find you jobs
that will continue to mentor you, teach you how to promote yourself by
writing blogs on technology and code, by presenting at meetups and
conferences, by contributing to open source, and by actually shipping
software.

Okay, this rant has gotten super long. But anyway, I hope that answers
some questions about our program and what we value. If it isn't for you,
that's fine. If you would never hire one of our students, that's fine
too. We aren't doing this for you. We are doing it because it makes us
happy.

Avi Flombaum

On Dec 17, 2012 2:44 AM, "Florian Gilcher" <flo@andersground.net> wrote:
> > have to be taught the basics, because they've already published projects
> > on GitHub, maybe done some small jobs etc.

I'm going to agree with Jan on this, and it doesn't have to do with just
programming.  My first job in IT, we had a guy that convinced his way in 
by
pretending he knew things. I was his "go to" for things he couldn't 
handle.
Needless to say, he's now a very unqualified system manager. It's
unfortunate for them, but it happens. I have a handful of similar 
stories
dealing with this or that person's clout, meaning, he's not the only one
that slipped invasively through the cracks.

In interviews, I take the middle ground with prospective help, all the
while keeping in mind that even though young blood is good, somebody 
that
has already walked through fire to get here is much, much better than a
signed piece of paper, and, in this case, one that carries little 
weight.

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Avi F. <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> So ya, that's Flatiron's first job, to help
> people connect to the wonder of code.

"Wonder of code" - that's too much for me.  Maybe it's necessary
marketing lingo - or I am too long in the field.

> with effective plans, how to actually build. There is just so much more
> to programming then the gestures of a particular language. We try to
> teach all those other things.

Absolutely agree.  If you regularly succeed at teaching that to people
who have no previous exposure to software development in 12 weeks then
hats off to you!

Kind regards

robert

It isn't marketing lingo. Don't you feel pleasure and wonder coding? 
Seeing what you can create and how you can express it? I mean connect to 
that - this isn't just a job, we're not code monkeys or pixel pushers, 
we're artists. It's wondeful. Connect to that. I know the job can get 
stale but let's not forget what we're doing here.

Things Flatiron Students built this semester:

http://openissu.es - open issues aggregator off github with bounties, 
difficulty rating, owner endorsements, and upvotes.

http://flatiron.teamline.io - timelines for teams based on activity like 
tweets, commits, and blog posts.

http://openexam.org - collaborative quiz generator

and more.

plus I think we've had like 8 open source commits, have open sourced all 
the student projects, written like 60 blog posts on topics, and built 
http://xta.github.com/HalloweenBash/

Happy to provide more pudding for proof.

I know my language can get lavish when talking about code, it isn't a 
gimmick, it's how I feel.

Avi

Avi, its not that we are saying that you are not sincere in what you say
(even though the language you use makes my skin crawl) or that you dont
help motivated people get to grips with programming. The issue for us is
that few, if any, employers will be swayed by a candidate that went on a
course. Rails, much like Perl and PHP in this respect, is something that 
a
programmer will have taught themselves because they were interested in 
it
(rather than a mandatory module on their degree) and so the culture 
around
it is of the self motivated, self taught programmer. Most of the people
here perhaps, like myself, read the DrDobbs article on Ruby and started
leaning Ruby or saw an article on a website that interested them enough 
to
see what was in it.

Waving certificates around like it means something is the province on 9 
to
5 Java programmers who took up programming because they heard you could
earn lots of money working for banks. If they had the chops they would 
have
taken up accounting or law but they are either not smart enough or too
lazy. These people collect certificates like talismans in lue of actual
practical experience. You might not remember how it was with people
becoming Microsoft Certified 'this and that' but not having the faintest
idea as to how computers actually worked, thank god those days seem to 
have
passed.

If a CV landed on my desk with nothing more that "I paid $10k for a 
course
and got a certificate" on it my first and last thought will be "you are 
a
fool and I dont want anything to do with you"

We have actually interviewed someone who taught themselves Rails and was
building a Facebook clone with the code on github, Turns out that the 
crap
code was his and the good bits were from his collaborator, but he did at
least get as far as having an interview.

Maybe I'm just old but I expect programmers to be self motivated and 
teach
themselves things that they need or are interested in. I expect them to
have tried to do something completely impractical and beyond their grasp
for no better reason than it seemed like a good idea at the time. I 
expect
them to have random fields of expertise because then just happened to 
get
deeply interested in something they stumbled upon at some point. I 
expect
them to have skills that are completely at odds with their jobs (a web
developer who is also an expert in FPGA programming).

Certificates are the opposite of this ethos.

Sorry to make your skin crawl.

We don't provide a certificate or anything. Just try to teach the 
fundamentals of software development, the ruby ecosystem, and the Rails 
framework. They build real applications and can point to code they have 
written. That's it.

"until programmers stop acting like obfuscation is morally hazardous, 
they’re not artists, just kids who don’t want their food to touch." _why

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 07:35:48AM +0900, Kevin Y. wrote:
> Is that really true that employers will not hire a candidate without
> programming related degree? I know at least two people who went to fine
> art programs and one is doing very well as an iOS app developer and the
> other something else I do not know at this moment. Also I attended few
> SkillShare courses that are taught by professional programmers who were
> self-taught and they definitely did not think that college degrees are
> necessary as long as your work reflects certain level of skill. There
> wasn't any conflict of interests as those classes were free.

Note three things:

1. I did not say a "programming related" degree.  I just said a 
"college"
degree.  My significant other has been working in software fields for
years on the strength of psychology and biology degrees (not in psych or
bio related software, mind you) in addition to her skills and experience
working her way up from entry level.  Regardless of her experience,
excellent recommendations, and kills, she almost certainly would not 
have
her current job if not for at least one of those degrees or some other
(at least four-year) degree to replace them.

2. Without a degree, "equivalent" experience may apply, as I mentioned.
This is largely only available to "rockstars" or (as I should have
mentioned, but unfortunately did not) people who are grandfathered in by
virtue of having more years of professional work in the field than many
college graduates have been alive.

3. My DHH example was intentionally extreme.  Lesser "rockstars" exist,
like people who've made iOS apps on their own time that have been bought
by enough users that it raises a hiring manager's eyebrows.  Mere skill
is not enough in the general job market.

There are exceptions to every generalization, including mine, but they
are called exceptions precisely because they are exceptional in some 
way.

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:28:48PM +0900, Jan E. wrote:
> to understand an execution plan and write a query that won't break down
> self-taught  architects out there. But when you hire one, you *probably*
> want him to have an actual diploma and not just a certificate from
> "Learn statics in only 1 week!".
>
> I'm not saying that those Flatiron courses are useless. I don't know
> them. But I think they give a a very wrong impression of what you can do
> with your knowledge. What kind of jobs will that be when all you need is
> a few weeks of training?

I have a question for you, if you don't mind getting slightly 
tangential:

What should an applicant for an "entry level" Ruby job have on his or 
her
resume?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Avi F. <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> It isn't marketing lingo. Don't you feel pleasure and wonder coding?

Pleasure yes, wonder no.  That was when I was 14 maybe, but most of
the magic went away when I looked behind the scenes.  But don't pity
me, I am content the way it is.

> Seeing what you can create and how you can express it? I mean connect to
> that - this isn't just a job, we're not code monkeys or pixel pushers,
> we're artists.

I would never describe myself as an artist - I am an engineer.  Note
also that artists usually do not work against deadlines or roadmaps
laid out by others.  Instead they have their own agenda.  While some
of us may actually be able to create something based on their own
preferences and be successful with that (the term "rock star" was
used), the overwhelming majority works in a different mode.

> It's wondeful. Connect to that. I know the job can get
> stale but let's not forget what we're doing here.

Exactly: to be good at our job one needs enthusiasm (like for
_everything_ you want to excel in), creativity and a certain level of
cold-bloodedness (otherwise you won't be able to tackle complicated
matter).  Not getting carried away by one's own creations is actually
a virtue.

> I know my language can get lavish when talking about code, it isn't a
> gimmick, it's how I feel.

Well, I feel different.

Kind regards

robert

I think the reason why some of us are so sceptical about this "euphoric
language" is that we've all seen too many hipsters with their MacBooks
jumping on the Ruby train, because they thought it's the new cool thing
to do. After a while, you'd never hear from them again, and all they
left was an abandoned GitHub page.

So when someone gets all enthusiastic about how cool and creative
programming is, it smells a bit of this lifestyle stuff. We are no "rock
stars", "code heroes", "artists" or whatever, just programmers -- or
maybe engineers, like Robert said.

But I guess nobody would be willing to pay $10,000 for something so 
boring as programming knowledge ...

On 18 December 2012 09:43, Jan E. <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> But I guess nobody would be willing to pay $10,000 for something so
> boring as programming knowledge ...
>
>
But $10k would buy you a killer computer, plenty of books and pay for a
years hosting to practice with :)

Hah! I got every available upgrade option and bought 3rd party RAM for 
my 2011 MBP (currently runs 16GB of RAM) like hi-res screen, fastest CPU 
they offered, etc etc. Cost me, even with the 3rd party RAM purchase, 
just a hair under $4000. Spent another 200 on books, and you don't have 
to pay for hosting anywhere with heroku, appfog.com, or Amazon's AWS.

You could spend more like $4500 at max and have everything you need, 
including a year enrolled at codecademy.com and all the courses for 
Ruby, RSpec, Rails, HTML+CSS, etc you could want!

Paying $10,000 for a non-accredited school's programming course when 
their focus isn't even really to teach you the language but to teach you 
the 'essence' of programming.. insane!

--
D. Deryl Downey

"The bug which you would fright me with I seek" - William Shakespeare - 
The Winter's Tale, Act III, Scene II - A court of Justice.

Kevin Y. wrote in post #1089156:
> Hi everyone!,
> Do any of you have some information on FlatironSchool?
> http://flatironschool.com/
>
> I hear many good things about the program.  They guarantee molding
> students with no to little previous programming experience to become a
> competent Web/Ruby Developer in 12 Weeks!
>
> I am considering going there- But four things about the school make me
> hesitate to apply.
> 1.Tuition = $10k
> 2.It is very new and is untested.
> 3. Can't you achieve the same effect alone or studying through
> Skillshare/MeetUps?
> 4.Job Placement
>
> Their syllabus look great and many outsiders in programming communities
> praise students' work. I was just hoping that perhaps some of you have
> more information on this school and whether you think it is worth the
> investment.
> Thanks!

HI,

 I just wanted to thank everyone for the input.
 I gained so much info here and it really helped me making my decision.
Special thanks to Avi, Peter and Chad for your generosity.
Kevin

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 01:16:38PM +0900, Chad Perrin wrote:
>
> 1. I did not say a "programming related" degree.  I just said a "college"
> degree.  My significant other has been working in software fields for
> years on the strength of psychology and biology degrees (not in psych or
> bio related software, mind you) in addition to her skills and experience
> working her way up from entry level.  Regardless of her experience,
> excellent recommendations, and kills, she almost certainly would not have
> her current job if not for at least one of those degrees or some other
> (at least four-year) degree to replace them.

    s/ kills/ skills/

I *just* noticed that typo.  Oops.

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 03:29:23PM +0900, Kevin Y. wrote:
> > hesitate to apply.
> > Thanks!
>
> HI,
>
>  I just wanted to thank everyone for the input.
>  I gained so much info here and it really helped me making my decision.
> Special thanks to Avi, Peter and Chad for your generosity.

You're welcome to as much help as I was able to provide.  I'm glad you
found it valuable.

Sorry about the late reply.  My schedule fell apart around the holiday
season, and I haven't checked this email address for a little while.

There's this one as well: https://www.hackerschool.com/

This one doesn't cost anything. Different model actually. I guess
after they ask the employers to buy out the student for $20k but there
is no financial risk put on the individual whom goes there. I believe
they even have financial assistance for people who can't afford living
by the school.

There's this one as well: https://www.hackerschool.com/

This one doesn't cost anything. Different business model actually. I
guess after they ask the employers to buy out the student for $20k but
there is no financial risk put on the individual whom goes there. I
believe they even have financial assistance for people who can't
afford living by the school.

This really all comes down to whether the connections made at the school
are worth it or not. Maybe if you get enough people who have no trouble
dropping 10k, profitable business connections are bound to be lurking
around.
And maybe, though I don't really know, that's just the way
business is done in the big apple..

But Jesus, this is so ridiculous. In Japan you take a $150 certification
exam to be determine whether your qualified for an entry level position
or not. Whereas in New York, you need to pay $10k for a 12 week program.
You could outsource so much work for $10k on
freelancer/guru/odesk/elance... Something's not right with the world..

world != fair # my logic is perfect.