Comment by cwyers | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cwyers | Hacker News Reader

So, you need some sort of credential. A bootcamp would do well, some sort of certificate of a course of study from Coursera or edX, a non-degree certificate from a university. Pick a tech stack that's both modern and enterprisey -- Java, .NET, Ruby, Node.js are all fine, but if you go with them, get current. On the front end, you want to find something trendy. Try looking for some jobs you think you'd want to apply for and see what they're asking for on the requirements side and focus on that. You want to do some projects that can showcase what you can do. You need to tailor your resume to the jobs you want -- spend as little time as possible talking about your experience as a lab tech (enough to show where you've been the past ~10 years and showcase any soft skills you know), and as much time as possible talking about courses and projects that give you experience in the stuff the job ad wants. And you absolutely need to write a good cover letter and you need to avoid boneheaded mistakes like not changing the name of the employer you're submitting to. Your cover letter needs to sell how you can create value for the position you're applying for -- what have you done in the past that prepares you for this. Don't sell yourself as motivated, a quick learner, any of that... there are 30 other resumes in the pile that say that. Sell yourself on "I have done X, Y and Z as projects to develop my skills as a software developer, giving me these skills that I can use to create value for you."

I totally disagree. I don't think a credential will help at all. I think you need projects that you can point to and explain. I also feel like it will be easier for you to get a role at a company that also would utilize your past experience. This way it is easier for them to justify someone more technically junior at on the software engineering side.

I think it depends largely on the market you're in. In a rural area (or something far enough away from a large city) and may not have a lot of supply of software developers: credentials likely don't come into play as much. Raw experience may suffice.

But more populated areas will mean larger talent pools. Unless you're in a tech hub or a fast growing mid-size city, the amount of software jobs might not serve the pool. Credentials will matter more. Practically speaking :)

I switched into software with a non-STEM background, been an engineer for about a year now and have heard / seen a lot of hiring conversations both during my process and since then at my company. Projects that you can point to and explain are valuable if and only if you can even get on someone's radar. The amount of "projects" that people are doing in their own time is becoming dizzying, and for employers to actually spend time to parse through what is a good project vs. what is a boilerplate tutorial project is not realistic.

In my case, my employer happened to hire people from my particular bootcamp, and had good experiences with those hires. Coming from that bootcamp is what got me in the door, no amount of "projects" would have done the trick. It's very hard to say "I'm legitimate, see all these projects I've done", because unless you can have a very clear timeline of "I did this project two years ago, and I've been diligently learning ever since as noted by this, this, and this project", it's just another person with another github with another project. Absolutely zero reason to bring that person in when you have other applicants with actual backgrounds + a project or two.

All this is to say, I don't think this advice applies nearly as much as people believe it does anymore.

I actually think there are whole cliques of companies and people where credentials do act as lock and key. It's as if there are two totally separate programming worlds, one of which actually believes in credentials and which the HN world rarely communicates to. It's wild, and I'm not sure what to make of it.

At many employers you need to pass several screens before you can get into a position where someone is able to review your project that actually knows anything about how to evaluate it. Some places have systems that scrape text out of resumes and do keyword searches as filters. Your resume is often read for a first step by someone who doesn't understand the job at all. A clear credential of _any_ sort can often get you past these hurdles to a point where you can get to dealing with someone who can look at your project and determine if it has merit. But the best project in the world cannot help you if you don't even get to that point.

Is my shop the only one that is skeptical of bootcamp graduates? The thinking is that they have a deep skillset but in an extremely narrow track.

It's like they know how to use a hammer and a screwdriver, but they don't know why you would use a nail instead of a screw (or which thread pitch why) instead of a bolt instead of a jointery technique.

Maybe it is just that our company has a bunch of old timer generalists that aren't very good at interviewing someone with a narrow skillset? I know we try to, but it feels like the bootcamp people we've interviewed didn't have very good problem solving skills. We've successfully hired more junior people, but not from bootcamps.

What are we doing wrong?

not sure you're doing anything 'wrong', but the few times I've seen 'bootcamp' folks hired, it was specifically to be on a larger team that focused on 'team'. A bootcamp person is not going to be able to just be dropped in to any problem in the stack and manage it on their own.

In a company of generalists, this is very likely how you operate, and you'll see little value in bootcamp folks.

As a generalist, I tend to be in that camp - seeing little value in bootcamp folks. Or, I should be more precise - the way I operate I don't see that I could get much value from bootcamp folks (I'm either independent, or work with other generalists). I'm not set up to be able to get much value from narrow-skill bootcamp folks early on.

Their value will be for shops that have teams of people where dropping in one more pair of hands has some incremental value. From there they will get more experience and can learn to be of more value in more situations.

That's just been my own observations talking with some folks about their 'going through a bootcamp' experience over the last couple of years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com