The two things that consistently delight me are AI and my AVP. I'm trying to combine the two.
1,697 karma · joined May 18, 2007
The two things that consistently delight me are AI and my AVP. I'm trying to combine the two.
So, the advice of selling to businesses seems better, but I also hear you on selling to K-12 or higher ed as having all the negatives of enterprise sales without the lucrative upside.
So then we're left to selling ed to businesses. But I feel despite all the lip service paid to training and upskilling, corporations don't *actually* want to upskill their workforce. Or at least not at the sacrifice of productivity.
Education is very unnatural, but that's what makes it a worthwhile problem to solve, too.
Agree that ISAs can be useful. But it's a tool that can be used to harm or help. Elevating it beyond a financial tool to some sort of educational breakthrough was a disservice, imo.
We agree on the value of community colleges. I wish they were better funded and more people worked to drive CC graduates to six-figure jobs.
Education has a couple of unique attributes that makes it difficult to assess:
1. the value cannot be perceived until much later after the service is rendered
2. alternatives are mutually exclusive; eg, people usually just attend one university or coding bootcamp, not all of them (or even two of them)
This is in contrast to, say, a restaurant where diners can immediately determine if they like the food and can compare it with competitors (because they dine at all the restaurants).Those two attributes make it very easy to lead with hype and marketing and vulnerable people are particularly susceptible to it. imo it's not appropriate to deploy the standard startup playbook in edu, especially if you find yourself attracting vulnerable students.
Ok, now combine that with ISAs, which has some positive qualities but are not as incentive aligning as marketed. And then if you sell the ISA in bundles, then it becomes even less incentive aligning. Well, I guess it's now aligning with investors and loan brokers. But it's certainly not aligning more with student outcomes.
It all makes for a very delicate situation where you have vulnerable students biting on the ISA bait.
I know it seems like I'm just complaining but I've been thinking about these problems for a long time and I come with solutions. Or, particularly, a solution: imo the best thing an edu institution can do is allow students to leave easily.
Why do we never think of restaurants as predatory? The idea is ludicrous to even consider. There are of course terrible restaurants but we can just not dine there again and eat elsewhere. There are lots of restaurants around.
And here's the issue: there are also lots of edu institutions around but every single one of them deploy the marketing->entrapment playbook.[3]
How does marketing work when you have a bad school? Because of the time-lapse between value received and service rendered. The ISA is easily abused in this environment because it's both the marketing and the trap.
Anyway, I'm just riffing here... btw, huge fan of your books and work! Despite what I wrote above, I knew Lambda was making an honest attempt at their curriculum when they hired you.
[1] https://failstatemovie.com/
[2] imo, edu institutions need to be judged on how they treat their most vulnerable students, unlike startups who are judged on their best wins (https://twitter.com/cglee/status/1781129096250179640)
[3] https://medium.com/launch-school/educational-entrapment-f5cc0472051e - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30782967
- https://x.com/cglee/status/1232512904953335808
Always happy to chat about ISAs and how to best deploy them. Or, find better alternatives.Entry-level technical jobs are some of the worst jobs to help you ramp up as a programmer. It's chaotic, demanding, emotionally taxing, and a lot of blind leading the blind. And most importantly, employers expect you to perform "just in time" learning, which is detrimental long-term if you don't yet have strong foundations.
Here's an article I wrote a few years ago about Learning at Work: https://medium.com/launch-school/learning-at-work-c81b6866b0...
Of course, map these thoughts to your specific situation.
Here's our take on mastery if anyone is interested: https://medium.com/launch-school/mastery-based-learning-2095...
Further, it feels like there's a corollary here to companies, where financially constrained companies who are smaller and more focused provide better customer experience than cash-flush competitors.
Further, grads can (and should) apply to companies that aren't partnered with us. I don't want them to only apply to a limited set of partnered employers.
We've been operating for about a decade, so we've tried basically everything once :) Our current corporate partnership program is here if you're interested: https://launchschool.com/employers/placement
The idea is that we want to set expectation that people should focus on searching for a job and not, say, go on vacation. The wording here also is far more severe than reality only because we want serious participants.
That said, I believe there's a lot more we can do to help ease the financial burden from students and I love the direction of trying to move the cost of education from students to employers. I'm working on that.
a) commission based pricing (aka, incentive alignment pricing)
b) deferred payment
Of the two, imo the second is by far the most important thing for students. To the first bullet, I don't personally find commission based pricing to be all that incentive aligning. For example, it's not uncommon for me to advise someone to take a much lower offer because it seemed like a better long-term opportunity. This is in line with Sean's observation that quality education outcomes is difficult to reduce to salary numbers alone.To the second bullet, the major problem of deferring all payments, however, is that you attract a lot of people looking for a shortcut. This is exactly the opposite attribute top employers are looking for. This is the "adverse selection problem" Sean mentioned.
Ultimately, the solution here is in selecting for the right type of students into the ISA-based program. Sean mentions that credit scores track with the type of students they're looking for. Other ISA-based programs have stated that they've found a secret sauce other than credit scores for detecting the right students.
We've found a different selection criteria:
We ask students to do a lot of work before we engage them with an ISA. I'm calling this model the ISA-later model, just so we can contrast this with an ISA-first model, which is what Sean and everyone else is doing.
An ISA-later program solves nearly all the problems associated with an ISA-first approach:
- adverse selection is mitigated since you have a long track record of student behavior and performance
- can still be egalitarian, without relying on credit scores or degrees or any socioeconomic markers
- still possible to defer all payments, without the lock-in of an ISA-frst approach
There are many other student-friendly benefits of an ISA-later model, but I'll stop here as this comment is getting long.[1] launchschool.com
All the debate for/against gifted programs fall into the same trap of not thinking critically enough about the pedagogical model that powers pretty much all of our education from childhood through higher ed. IMO, we're only debating about the symptoms of a outdated pedagogical model, and not talking enough about the underlying problem -- the factory model of education.
I'm not saying they're "right" or they're "wrong", but just that they have a perspective that's valid and reasonable.
Casting others as zealots only serves to confirm our own biases and doesn't lead to more understanding, which is what we need.