Software engineering is more than just software development. Writing requirements, drafting documentation, testing, verification, maintenance.
I hate to be hypercritical, but five weeks of javascript doesn’t make you a software engineer.
I hate to be hypercritical, but five weeks of javascript doesn’t make you a software engineer.
Software engineering is a relatively new field and segregates from computer science in the sense that software engineers typically are involved in interface design (electronic and software), architecture, documentation, and various other aspects of typical engineering. I feel like I’m being an ass but I find the use of the term “Software Engineer” in this case is erroneous. In the same way you wouldn’t consider someone who tinkers with an arduino an electrical engineer, I don’t think we can consider someone who knows full-Stack web development a software engineer.
100% agree. Which is why its important that students are working together on projects so they can write specs, documentation, tests and structure code in a way that the next engineer can take over easily. Our weekly sprint planning helps facilitate that.
Take this PR for example, it has tests and went through 15+ comments and approved by 2 other students before it got merged in: https://github.com/garageScript/c0d3-app/pull/243
I think your are thinking of a curriculum that just teaches students how to code and then have them build side projects by themselves and show it off. And I agree, that is not software engineering, it is just code.
On the one hand, I have some evidence that my job is hard: I have spent ten years learning to be proficient at it, still know only a narrow slice of it, and find it challenging every day. I have a solid degree from a world-renowned university, so I know I am not stupid. I also interview candidates, and know that many applicants simply cannot do the job.
But on the other hand, there is such a sheer volume of resources like this, which imply very clearly that becoming a programmer is a trivial thing. So many in fact that I am starting to doubt the evidence of my eyes and ears.
So which is it? Is there a weird drive to constantly undersell our skills, a knowing wink to the managers who have always secretly suspected us of being nothing more than glorified typists? Or are the bootcamps right, and I've spent a decade learning replaceable trivia? And why is making statement #2 seen as positive and inclusive?
It takes a few weeks to get to the first level. None of the people coming out of these bootcamps are building secure software at scale.
Imagine if you wanted to become a house builder. Coding bootcamps teach you to build a doghouse, which is easy to learn within a few weeks. People will pay for doghouses, so you may as well start there.
Over time, you build sheds, barns, and then move on to homes.
I think they imply that becoming a programmer is a matter of hard work and the right explanations. I'm 100% sure of the hard work part and maybe 60% sure of the right explanations part.
Managers don’t like this. They want to be able to hire programmers off the street with no experience and pay them a cheap salary. They want programmers to be plentiful and interchangeable. That is the dream.
But that’s all it is, just a dream that will never be realized no matter how many bootcamps and websites like this one come about.
The reason for this is there is no substitute for experience. Real experience. There are no shortcuts to becoming a developer. So don’t undersell yourself, your knowledge, or your experience.