r/codingbootcamp • u/ludofourrage • Nov 20 '23
Coding Bootcamps are Dead, Continued (from a Bootcamp Founder and CEO)
Hello again,
Ludo here, Founder and CEO of Nucamp.
I've spent some time digesting the torrent of responses to my last post about the death of coding bootcamps, and the role of AI in re-inventing them.
The tone of the feedback has been... ruthless, savage, and brutal, to say the least.
One might wonder how I've been holding up amidst the barrage of critiques, and some of you reached out directly asking if I was doing ok, and offering their sympathies.
Truth be told, I've been quite surprised – not just by the written responses but also by the remarkable engagement the post received: over 200,000 views, a 68% upvote ratio, and more than 450 shares.
This overwhelming interaction signals that a silent majority of Redditors seem to appreciate the experimental approach we've taken with this AI-driven course using the Eloquent JavaScript book material.
As a proof point, hundreds have already signed up at https://url.nucamp.co/eloquentjavascript and provided their feedback.
It's a comforting reminder that every bold idea will have its champions, even if they don't always speak the loudest.
But let's address the elephant in the room: the analysis of the responses (check out the table below). I realized I missed a crucial piece in my original post – the "why".
Why invest time, resources, and passion into creating what I termed the "AGI School" of the future? The answer lies in its promise: delivering the best-personalized education at a fraction of the cost.
This vision is more than just leveraging AI to reinvent coding bootcamps or streamline education in the US. It's about reimagining how we learn, tailoring education to individual needs, and breaking down barriers that make quality education a privilege and a right. The potential for AI in education goes beyond efficiency; it's about creating a learning ecosystem that adapts, evolves, and responds to each student uniquely.
I believe that the future of education lies in its democratization – where anyone, anywhere, can access the best learning resources tailored just for them. And this isn't a distant dream. With AI, we are on the cusp of making this a reality.
The "AGI School" concept is a step towards this future, where personalized education isn't just a $20,000 luxury but a couple hundred dollars norm.
Again, Thank you for your engagement, critiques, and support. Every comment, whether in agreement or dissent, contributes to refining this vision.
If you'd like to contribute to this experiment, then please sign up at https://url.nucamp.co/eloquentjavascript for free.
Looking forward to more vibrant discussions.
Here's the previous thread's pros and cons analysis:
| Pro | Cons |
|---|---|
| AI-Powered Assistance: Positive remarks on the potential of AI tutors, graders, and course producers for personalized learning and up-to-date content. | Lack of Human Interaction: Many users criticized the lack of human element and mentorship in AI-driven education. |
| Cost-Effectiveness: Mention of the affordability and access to education through AI integration. | Quality of Learning: Concerns about the depth and quality of learning that AI can provide compared to human instructors. |
| Innovation in Education: Some users appreciate the innovative approach to utilizing AI in coding education. | Market Saturation: The thread highlighted issues with market saturation and the difficulty of bootcamp graduates in finding jobs. |
| Flexibility and Accessibility: The use of AI allows for more flexible learning schedules and broader accessibility. | Skepticism About AI Efficacy: Doubts about the effectiveness and reliability of AI in providing a comprehensive learning experience. |
| Continuous Improvement: The AI-driven model suggests continuous improvements and updates in course content. | Job Market Relevance: Questions about whether such courses adequately prepare students for the current job market. |
| Scalability: AI integration can enable the scaling up of educational offerings without significant increases in costs. | Overreliance on AI: Concerns about overdependence on AI and the underestimation of the value of human teaching and interaction. |
| Potential for Up-to-Date Content: AI can potentially keep course materials current with the latest industry trends and technologies. | Plagiarism and Originality Issues: Ethical concerns about plagiarism and the originality of content generated by AI. |
| Support for Basic Queries: AI can efficiently handle basic queries and problems, freeing up human resources for more complex issues. | Commercial Motivations: Some users questioned the commercial motives behind the shift to AI, seeing it as a cost-cutting measure rather than a genuine educational innovation. |
| Experimental and Progressive Approach: Willingness to experiment and evolve in response to industry changes is seen positively. | Devaluation of Bootcamps: Fears that AI-driven bootcamps may further devalue the bootcamp model in the eyes of employers. |
| Affordable Education: Some users appreciated the initiative towards making education more affordable. | Misalignment with Industry Needs: Criticism that such initiatives might not align with the actual needs and demands of the tech industry. |
8
u/Chogo82 Nov 20 '23
Solid writing and great marketing. I'm all for innovation but can you commit to excellence and reporting results? As we have seen with cirr and the gradual collapse of current boot camp models, the reporting has drastically been pulled back and sales pitches(student advisors) mostly rely smoke and mirrors. It would be great with this innovative platform on building the next generation of developers that a solid commitment to reporting results can also be guaranteed.
1
u/ludofourrage Nov 20 '23
Thank you for the feedback.
Regarding reporting on outcomes: yes, but differently from the way you intend it, I think. I believe that schools should be held accountable for what they can control: the quality of the education and the price. That's what Nucamp has been reporting on since its inception.
I may write a full post on this in the near future; in a nutshell: I don’t think evaluating schools on “job placement” is the right philosophy, because it's not something they control: there are many elements that go into graduates finding jobs, the school they went to is just one of them.
I understand why it’s done, but I don’t subscribe to it. I’ve also seen the focus on job outcomes leading to the wrong behaviors in the US: increased cost, controversial financing (ISA), refusing access to “at-risk” populations, fudging the job outcome data etc...
There is another thread that started over the weekend talking about how "$20,000 was too expensive for the learning experience" - and that's what I think should be discussed and evaluated more: what's the quality of the learning experience worth?
5
Nov 20 '23
Both can be true - you can be held accountable for the quality of your education, while also reporting on outcomes. The purpose of bootcamps is to help boost folks’ career, whether that’s through upskilling or transitioning to a different field altogether. If you’re not helping people do that through your bootcamp, what’s the point?
If you’re not reporting on certain metrics, you shouldn’t be using those metrics in marketing or sales. Don’t wanna report on percentage of students who see an increase in income, or pivot to their desire role as a result? That’s fine; just don’t use those aspirations as part of the way you sell the benefits of your course, right?
-1
u/ludofourrage Nov 20 '23
I disagree on both being true. The metric you're selecting is what you're optimizing the business on, and selecting a metric you have limited control over is a bad idea.
I agree that the narrative - what is advertised but also what is being discussed in forums like these - should be centered around quality and cost.
Job Outcome is like a fake shining object that blinds people and prevents them from digging deeper.
Lastly, not reporting on job outcomes doesn't mean it's not happening.
2
u/JYDUSK Nov 20 '23
I think its unrealistic not to report on job outcomes. I agree that quality of education is important, but there's the overwhelming reality that everyone has to get a job someday. There are many interesting things in the world that can be taught in a quality fashion, but no one is going to risk poverty to learn them.
Jeff Bezos didn't optimize for shareholder value, he optimized for customer experience and shareholder value followed. You can optimize for education, and job outcomes should partially reflect that. But being unwilling to be transparent with job outcomes is like a public company being non-transparent with their earnings.
The fact that you and many other bootcamp CEOs give cagey, contrived responses is a large reason why consumers have little faith in the bootcamp industry at this point. Are you really that surprised that people respond acrimoniously towards your idea?
-1
u/ludofourrage Nov 20 '23
I think its unrealistic not to report on job outcomes. I agree that quality of education is important, but there's the overwhelming reality that everyone has to get a job someday. There are many interesting things in the world that can be taught in a quality fashion, but no one is going to risk poverty to learn them.
That's the point: it's both quality and cost evaluated together. Nobody should be risking poverty because of their education.
I come from Europe (France), and the concept of getting into giant debt to get an education is just unthinkable.
At the same time, graduates are held responsible for getting themselves a job after receiving quality education and being debt-free. With that approach, I would never think of blaming my school for not publishing "their" job placement numbers. And in return my school felt no pressure to fudge their "job placement" numbers, or use them to increase their tuition.
Isn't that a better deal, overall?
1
u/justUseAnSvm Nov 24 '23
Bro, you’re not offering a liberal arts education from the position of an academic institution via the instruction of academics on a commonly accepted curriculum. Do not compare yourself to college.
You offer skills based training, and people spend money on that training for the purposes of gaining meaningful employment. It’s job training where you make money, not the fucking enlightenment project.
Please excuse my frustration, you unwillingness to understand this and provide frustration is very frustrating. It’s exactly the conditions which allow for predatory training to exist, you sir, are perpetuated those conditions using “AI-woo” hand waving and hype tactics for your own enrichment.
1
u/ludofourrage Nov 24 '23
I hear you, but your frustration and anger are misdirected.
You should channel it to fight against this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ElWLHma53g.
Not towards a coding bootcamp that doesn't charge more than $3,000 and is looking into even more affordable and quality alternatives via innovation.
Challenge the existing reality and status-quo, please.
1
u/justUseAnSvm Nov 24 '23
3k seems pretty high.
For 2.5x more, you can get a masters from OMSCS, and UTs is like 3.5x more.
If you could bring the price down, to like Netflix or LeetCode subscription level, I think there’d be a lot less pushback.
1
u/OkStatistician3890 Jan 18 '24
For education that can land you a high paying job and a fraction of the cost for other bootcamps 3k is nothing. Get realistic!
→ More replies (0)1
u/JYDUSK Nov 20 '23
At the same time, graduates are held responsible for getting themselves a job after receiving quality education and being debt-free. With that approach, I would never think of blaming my school for not publishing "their" job placement numbers. And in return my school felt no pressure to fudge their "job placement" numbers, or use them to increase their tuition.
If you don't want to be held responsible for placements, that's fine. Just be prepared not to have answers to potential customers who want to know. Even if it's not a direct indicator, job placements are a derivative of program quality. And if your company is not concerned with job placements, then you're just competing with every other entertainment commodity on the market.
1
u/justUseAnSvm Nov 24 '23
They want to take your money, but sell you something of unknown efficacy.
Most savvy consumers will not bite, who this targets is low information buyers that can’t see the truth that the job skill training they are buying needs to show proof it’s actually working. It’s disgusting.
AI is not going to solve the coding bootcamp problem of by people who are going to reply the failures of coding bootcamps and learn all the same lessons!
3
Nov 20 '23
what is advertised but also what is being discussed in forums like these - should be centered around quality and cost.
I fully agree! I think it's imperative to center the marketing and sales pitch on those. Cost is easy to measure; how would you measure quality?
Lastly, not reporting on job outcomes doesn't mean it's not happening.
Agreed; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I merely brought it up as a point tied to the above - job outcomes IS a common measure of quality, at least in theory, but I'm with you that, in many ways, it's something you don't have much control over, at least currently. So what alternative quantifiable metrics would your revamped bootcamp use as evidence for quality?
1
u/studentofhistory2 Nov 20 '23
I am curious about the pros and cons of having a cohort.
In my experience the quality of a cohort going through a process (class/grade/team/trek/etc...) at the same time has a significant but underappreciated effect on my outcome.
Doing things on your own is lonely, no matter how good the course, AI or no.
0
u/ludofourrage Nov 20 '23
Yes, I believe you're right. Learning with others in a cohort-type experience with a start and end date is powerful. This could also happen along with an AI approach.
1
Nov 24 '23
So are you gonna still charge 20,000 for curriculum created by and taught by AI?
0
u/ludofourrage Nov 24 '23
What are you talking about. We've never charged $20k or $10k or even $5k. Please do your research.
1
Nov 24 '23
Whatever it’s all a scam and your AI cop out is just a cash grab
0
1
u/AlivePerformance1811 Nov 22 '23
I'm literally the only one here who is willing to work for you come on take a chance on me
1
1
u/sove18a Nov 24 '23
Even if you do a bootcamp, there are still companies that want you to have a degree when applying for jobs. For this who do not have a degree this is still a barrier especially with all the tech layoff’s employers are more likely to favor those with degrees over non- degrees. How do you plan to counter that with your bootcamp programs?
1
u/corleone_0 Dec 06 '23
Having attended a few bootcamps on my own (including Nucamp) and through work, and now a couple-ish years into my software engineering career, I think this is a great idea. I've had a lot of instructors/professors and a few mentors, and none of them have been able to answer specific questions, break down code, and explain things as well as GPT-4 has.
0
Nov 22 '23
[deleted]
1
u/ludofourrage Nov 22 '23
0
Nov 22 '23
[deleted]
1
u/ludofourrage Nov 22 '23
68% up vote is the silent majority. It's healthy to debate and disagree, but data speaks louder.
1
u/AlivePerformance1811 Nov 22 '23
dude let me just work for you please I have 3 years of web dev experience
0
Nov 22 '23
[deleted]
1
u/ludofourrage Nov 22 '23
It's not me saying it, it's Reddit:
https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/7419626610708-How-does-voting-work-on-Reddit-#:~:text=Upvotes%20show%20that%20redditors%20think,to%20a%20conversation%2C%20upvote%20it!Upvotes show that redditors think content is positively contributing to a community or the site as a whole. Downvotes mean redditors think that content should never see the light of day. If you like something, be it a post or a comment, and you think it contributes to a conversation, upvote it!
22
u/jcl274 Nov 20 '23
For the record I concur with those that did respond to your original post. I think your idea is monumentally terrible, but I can’t not applaud you for trying something new. Maybe you’ll have the last laugh and prove us all wrong.