u/Humble_Warthog9711 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
At this point I'm even very skeptical regarding their placement claims during the peak 2015-2020
u/michaelnovati replied · ★ FEATURED
I mean there are anecdotal spreadsheets, and you can pull up GitHub and LinkedIns and get more insights.
The key thing I'm watching right now is the number of 'did not respond' entries. That used to be almost zero, which means that the data was based on most people's reported outcomes that got audited.
Things went downhill last year in 2023 and got worse in 2024 where that number skyrocketed. The first sign I called out was the H2 2022 numbers that were obfuscated into the full 2022 report with reverse engineering.
This number means that we have placements counted based on their LinkedIns. All those 'self employed' people could people people putting placeholders on their LinkedIns for all we know because there is no methodology on how LinkedIn verifications work.
I criticized CIRR about this and they updated the spec without changing this and instead just adding to the reasons allowed for excluding people from the counts (which favors bootcamps).
But look into it yourself. I feel like no one cares enough to do it and thinks it must take hours and hours and it's really just "simple" connecting the dots to me... maybe I'm not normal? haha.