CIRR 2025 Standards out - does not close loopholes to force transparency, only change is one that extends the list of reasons to exclude people from the data and increase placement rates on paper - I don't think anyone cares anymore though :(

CIRR 2025 Standards out - does not close loopholes to force transparency, only change is one that extends the list of reasons to exclude people from the data and increase placement rates on paper - I don't think anyone cares anymore though :( CIRR Standards for 2025 are out [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zuNf-58OcxVyY1KnTxnfqhfftiNexb6S/view?usp=drive\_link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zuNf-58OcxVyY1KnTxnfqhfftiNexb6S/view?usp=drive_link) In a year where bootcamps are disappearing left right and center and pivoting to AI programs and abandoning SWEs, I would have wanted CIRR to tighten up a number of the loopholes in their standard that schools get to exploit. Here is a list of issues I pointed out last year: [https://www.reddit.com/r/codingbootcamp/comments/1bug0lv/linebyline\_critique\_of\_cirr\_standard\_document/](https://www.reddit.com/r/codingbootcamp/comments/1bug0lv/linebyline_critique_of_cirr_standard_document/) Not a single one of these were addressed and the only change this year was that "illness" was added to the list of reasons to exclude someone from the data. One of the biggest problems is that CIRR allows sources like "LinkedIn" to be used to count someone as a placement - while being able to exclude all other information, like salary. We saw a massive drop in Codesmith's placement rate from H1 2022 (about 80%) to H2 2022 (about 60%) and a massive increase in people being marked as a placement via LinkedIn as well (about 10% of all people). The combination of these two mask the fact that outcomes were already tanking and trying to verify placements from LinkedIn spiking could be a sign of grasping at straws from unresponsive alumni to boost numbers. A number of LinkedIns I reviewed showed people with "jobs" listed at open source projects or personal projects, and someone could easily mistake that for a placement. I think it's clear that CIRR's priority is to protect it's bootcamp members and not the students reading it. The person who made the changes to the specification documents worked at a member bootcamp, Codesmith, for a number of years as their 'head of marketing' role.

I don't think they advertise themselves as "impartial", they are a not a charity but a 'non profit business league' which is AKA a lobbying group promoting the interests of an industry = bootcamps. I don't think anything about them is impartial... the spec was updated by a former head of marketing at Codesmith lol.

I'm waiting with popcorn to see Codesmith's CIRR 2023 outcomes in Feb/March 2025, specifically some of those fields like "did not respond" (but were included because of LinkedIn verification). It will be a humbling experience for them to face reality instead of trying to convince everyone water isn't wet but water is gold.

If they go to someone's LinkedIn and the job has a start start, then they can count that as a placement. Codesmith's auditor called LinkedIn the "gospel"... which makes me want to flip a table because many Codesmith grads have all kinds of embellished "jobs" listed. The people I know there tell me there are hardly any placements anymore and it's becoming a ghost town. Is Codesmith acknowledging this and talking about it? No, they double down on one off edge case placements from years ago to try to make an illusion that everyone is getting mid level and senior jobs. The more I dig, the more I see it's an illusion... fake accounts promoting AMAs, etc... There are incredible alumni who went to Codesmith and they deserve credit for that. But it's like not at all the normal outcome right now and this charade has to end.

The CIRR Standard says this: "Documentation for "unknown" roles must: ● Be a screenshot of the student's LinkedIn profile. ● If the profile includes the month the position started, the last day of that month may be used for the start date. If the profile does not, the date of the screenshot may be used. ● The "unknown" status may only be used if a student would otherwise qualify as "non-reporting" or the student has requested that the school not contact them."