Assuming most people who do bootcamps are changing careers, how do you explain suddenly becoming a developer after years of another career?
> companies automatically categorize us into junior developer roles
in other words, correctly categorized
I do realize I'm making an assumption that there was no prior CS experience before the bootcamp, but isn't that the crowd they're targeting?
I also don't mean to typecast anyone, but the author's profile on that site reads, "Full-stack dev @Radius, ex i-banker, @HackReactor grad, @UCBerkeley," so perhaps he thought his prior experience in an unrelated field or his alma mater should've helped him get a leg up over other entry-level devs.
Again, I don't mean to judge since my path to software development was also non-standard, but my first gig paid about $30k/year and I was grateful to even be given the opportunity with my inexperience.
I might be wrong, I don't have any direct experience with boot camps, but stripping dev skills down to just the minimal, core, practical skills needed to build a working prototype in the language-of-the-month seems like just the latest version of the same short-sightedness that has been plaguing businesses for years. Low-risk, long-term success will always come from building on experience, not "hacks" and short cuts. There will be exceptions/outliers, but they're just lucky, not a model to be copied.
To use an imperfect analogy, who would be better at actually building houses; a vocational school grad (who built houses all day as part of his education) or a college educated architect? A lot of programming these days is "hammering nails" not architectural design.
Boot camps might very well be better than college programs in terms of preparing someone to use development tools and methods as opposed to focusing on the theory behind them, but at the end of the day, you're still not doing "real" work where your choices have consequences in a boot camp as you would on the job.
Working constructively with other people in the field (including answering to and being able to discuss and defend projects with colleagues and superiors), completing projects within time or budget constraints, and being able to make your own informed decisions with regard to things like project scope, methods, and direction, with a proven history of success -- those are the skills that separate "junior" from whatever comes after that, at least in my opinion.
According to a quick Google search, the average program length for these boot camps in 2015 was 11 weeks. That is on par with a single semester at a university. Even if you take a heavy course load of only practical CS courses, one semester is not nearly enough to prepare someone fully for a full-time dev position at top-tier companies. Sure, they may be able to answer the interview questions...but then what? I'm pretty skeptical of this trend and don't see it ending well for most of the boot camp graduates or companies who hire a large number of them.
If bootcamps were vocational schools things would be great. As it is, how many are more like for-profit scam courses handing out unrecognized certificates with the main aim of teaching people how to game the programming interview process?
Our current education system isn't always the most efficient way to learn. Skip the unrelated to programming classes, the extra curricular things, make people basically sleep, eat, and code for a few months and it's doable.
This attitude is the reason why I am strongly in favor of expanding vocational schools and training in the United States and Canada. People who do not actually care about learning or thinking should be discouraged from attending university and wasting the time of other students and faculty.
I don't want to waste money in our poorly-ranked, expensive schools where professors aren't even paid enough to live on. I instead utilize the resources available to me online to learn it faster and cheaper, supporting education reform. It's not apathy towards "learning and thinking" to take a more direct path. My goal was to learn to code so I could get a job, I've done it, plenty of people have done it. Do some people bootcamps and suck? Yes. Do some self-taught people suck? Yes. Have I seen people with college degrees suck? Also yes.
Discourse in topics irrelevant to my career doesn't put food on my table (usually). I'd rather graduate from and pay for a shorter, more focused program than spend $50k/year to have topics I once enjoyed ruined by misdirection and absurd coursework I have no control over.
What do you think a university is supposed to be? Of course it is a place for real scholars doing real scholarship. Your attitude is exactly the problem. Stop treating universities as trade schools.
But in retrospect, I actually think those extracurriculars were more valuable than the classes I majored in and made me a more well-rounded, empathetic, and socially tolerable individual.
For example, I took a public speaking course that I credit with helping me be able to confidently teach an entire class of introductory physics students when I was in grad school (around 150 people), and currently present in front of my entire company without breaking a sweat (~70).
I learned Canadian history, which allows me to be a better global citizen and more fully understand our relationship with America's largest trade partner.
I learned basic economics which helps me follow the stock market and the way commerce works.
I learned (basic) Japanese, which in its own way is a unique learning experience. There's a reason why when something is confusing people say it "looks like it's written in Chinese," with the implication that it's so crazy to understand that it's impossible (remember, Japanese kanji are just repurposed Chinese characters, so the analogy fits). Tackling that sort of obstacle, even to an elementary level, is very rewarding.
Living in dorms all four years forced me to learn about and how to communicate with people from different lifestyles and cultures, both good and bad.
Yes, a liberal arts university education isn't for everyone. Yes, it's way too expensive (I know I'll be paying off loans for at least the next decade). And yes, it's not the best route to take if you just want to get qualified for a job. But if I'm being frank, a lot of people, especially in the IT and software development crowd, could benefit from being forced to take "the unrelated to programming classes, the extra curricular things," if only just to become better people.
I'm not saying college is bad. It can be a good experience despite it having some cons(like price and time). I'm just saying you can learn to code (and well) in less time if that is the only thing you are focusing on....and there's nothing wrong with that. Education is not just limited to school, and some people have that attitude about it.
Just because you were able to fool the company into hiring you doesn't mean you "passed the final" and everything will be fine from now on. If you had experience, you'd know that.
But the thought of spending thousands to attend a school and you're encouraged to hide said school from your resume looks really bad.