u/joel-burton-rithm wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
u/michaelnovati: CIRR does a decent job in \*standardizing\* the outcomes numbers (not perfectly, but they certainly reduce the different ways that some bootcamp fudge those numbers). I agree that only focusing on a few outcomes numbers isn't great, but that's definitely somethin
u/michaelnovati replied ·
I've read the CIRR spec and the GRAD spec numerous times.
The CIRR spec sounds like it was written by outcomes managers at bootcamps. It's well intentioned but it's not structured like a legal document, with definitions, consistency, and rigorous thinking for loopholes and edge cases.
The GRAD spec looks like a legal doc with clear definitions and consistency throughout and looks like a lawyer looked at it.
Tech Elevator has to reissue their H12022 CIRR report because of issues in CIRR worksheets, which I have also found have issues and misalignment with the spec (ambiguities) when I've looked at them.
It's not terrible and it's well intentioned but people put way too much weight on it when making decisions.