In my opinion, people who leave prior to "finishing the program" are the largest problem with ISAs because that's when people get the most upset.... not only did they not get a job, but they didn't even finish everything!
For the ISAs we have, we don't have a "end of the program" and there is a clear refund policy if you leave early, but we try REALLY hard to proactively reduce costs to the value a person got if someone leaves early based on what they actually did and not just the calendar time in Formation the person is contractually required to pay. Like if Formation didn't work for you, but you had 25 mentorship sessions and did 100 hours of practice tests and tasks, and no issues reported in your weekly surveys and 1-1 checkins, then it's not fair to pay zero because you were on an ISA.
Wow what's with the tone? I think the biggest criticism of my view is that I was there 2009 to 2017 and left like 7 years ago now so I have an old view, but it's not a wrong view so I don't appreciate the attacking tone this is coming across as.
I did 450ish interviews. I trained interviewers on the ground. I attended dozens of hiring committee meetings and packet reviews with Shrep and Jay and Boz and the execs.
The amount of details they consider in those reviews is crazy. They look at the exact questions asked, and the interviewers history asking that question and their interviewers feedback history, etc...
It's not just like you memorize 50 questions and pass. I assure you that it's theoretically possible pass that way, and I assure you that's not the right way to do it.
I don't want to talk about this much because it seems like product placement, but I professionally mentor peop…
1. "I know people from Codesmith"... yes but if you look at all the Codesmith students you see that it is a very small number of people compared to the "3500+" alumni. Outside of Capital One, Amazon is a highest with a couple dozen, Apple, Google, Intuit, Square are single digit-ish special cases.... out of 3500 people. I'm not making any comments about Codesmith here, like if it can get 5 out of 100 people amazing outcomes then that's notable, but anyone who portrays that as the norm is misleading people as to how Codesmith works - that's my point. If I think you have a very strong chance of being one of those people, I will 100%, no strings attached, recommend you go to Codesmith, and I actively try to do that.
2. 100% agree Codesmith does NOT encourage any lying. It's almost awkward how they tell you so upfront "don't lie". But I thoroughly agree with this. That said, I cought the Di…
The resume itself would get through to an interview, and a recruiter or hiring manager at a big tech company would definitely figure it out during the interview.
I think this is why Codesmith grads who do this approach specifically typically end up at smaller companies. By the time they get the interview, if they do well, the companies is more open to taking a chance at that point... and like you said, they don't always do or care about background checks.
At Meta, the hiring committees will grill your resume too and it's just not possible to get through without having several errors take place. It's why if you look carefully at the Codesmith alumni at Meta, most were TEMPORARY CONTRACTORS FOR A CONTRACTING COMPANY!! and didn't work there, one or two were in non-SWE roles, and almost all of them are no longer there.
So short answer - it works at smaller companies and that's why Codesm…
It depends on what kinds of jobs and how you are framing your resume.
I've seen LinkedIn after LinkedIn full if extreme exaggerations and it might not even matter what you say about your bootcamp :(
Example:
There is a Codesmith grad that has the following LinkedIn (I'm not disclosing it for DOXing reasons but I'm characterizing it 100% accurately):
Jan 2024-Present: Senior Software Developer: - Large Fashion Company
Jul 2023-Dec 2023: Software Engineer, Contract - Small Company
->\[NOTE: Undisclosed subsidiary of the bootcamp itself\]
Jan 2023-Dec 2023: Software Engineer - Small Company
->\[NOTE: Undisclosed bootcamp side project framed as a company\]
Jan 2022-Jan 2023: Software Engineer - Small Company
->\[NOTE: Undisclosed 4 week long bootcamp group project framed as a company with no mention of the bootcamp\]
2016-2022: Full Stack Web Developer - Self Employer
-…
+1 to the industry needs to stop focusing on outcomes. I push the arguments for this a lot and often and get tremendous pushback from the Codesmith alumni and staff (including a leader that pushed back publicly).
Bootcamps shouldn't be 12 weeks and they shouldn't be about getting jobs only. Those types of bootcamps are done and over with.
They should be about the quality of the experience and education and about marketing to the right people that they think their program will work for.
It's why I push back on CIRR trying to force bootcamps into joining it by asking students to demand CIRR outcomes.
It's not 2021 and people focused on outcomes only are joining bootcamps for the wrong reasons - whether it ends up working or not.
In terms of ISAs though I just think you have to think of it as a loan nothing more. You have 3 options:
1. pay $X upfront
2. pay $Y a month for 4 years on…
Hi, most importantly we want to accept people into the Fellowship who we are confident we will help find jobs, and that can vary. But if we accept you, we are confident our mentorship approach will work, because if it doesn't and we support you for a really long time to find a job, our business doesn't work and we'll lose money and can't operate.
Second, our job is to prepare you for interviews, we are not a school or bootcamp that teaches curriculum and instead we are giving you a unique experience aiming to get you in shape for interviews - like a personal trainer for your job hunt.
The benchmark is one piece of the application and there is a minimum score - but for people around that score we will look deeper into the pieces of the benchmark.
You background and experience is also important. Currently we require 1+ years of SWE work experience and most people have more than that a…
Thanks that helps!
There are a few routes:
1. Try to get a data analyst-type internship this summer AND/or aim for data analyst jobs that will give you the chance to do scripting and coding on the job. And THEN try to transition to being a SWE - ideally at the same company by converting jobs there.
2. Do a post-bacc or extend a year and cram in as many CS courses as you can, and then go for new grad CS jobs. Big opportunity to cost to not working for a year, and a job is far from guaranteed, but his will give you the best computer science education.
3. Do a bootcamp. This is fast, so you don't lose as much opportunity cost from time. BUT bootcamps outcomes rely on a lot of luck right now and it's far from guaranteed. The cost is also probably higher than another year at Sac State (but arguably wouldn't matter because of the opportunity cost). If it doesn't work out, you don't rea…
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
Unlike normal Codesmith, it's a government requirement that people have "Limited or no prior experience with the basics of coding" so that is somewhat limiting for Codesmith's community I think.
Like Codesmith clearly advertises that CSX is all you need for a junior engineering job and that Codesmith is for midlevel and senior jobs.
So anyone who has done CSX likely has too much coding experience to join this program.
Ad hominem fallacy again, except you sprinkled in a personal attack too.
Logical fallacies don't win arguments. Facts do. Best lesson from my middle school debate class.
What public presentation of what data?
You have a completely wrong interpretation of what Formation is.
You are being condescending and offensive for you to tell me you know my company better than we know ourselves.
If Codemsith's CEO showed up we would have a very respectful back and forth I'm sure and he wouldn't be making logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks. If he did then I would tell him to his face what I'm telling you now.
I don't know what to say other than facts are facts and making up your own story based on your imagination doesn't hold up.
1. We don't compete with Codesmith. I've asked Codesmith to stop telling people that because it makes people like you think we do when it doesn't hold up in any capacity. The people that teach Codesmith do Formation, not the students, and maybe that is confusing but it shouldn't be.
2. "Often over 150 or 160k" is wrong and because you referenced CIRR earlier and should know that data. Their 2022 FTRI had about 780 starts, 732 grads. 708 job hunting. 574 had placements in 360 days. 499 had salaries and 121 had salaries over 140K. That is 15% of starts for 140K+ which is more people than make 150K, which is fantastic but it's not the norm.
Codesmith is an amazing choice for the right people and I tell those people to go to Codesmith, but portraying it as something…
Maybe the market sucks for bootcamp grads, and no one is going to them anymore?
Codesmith's enrollment is down 70% from peak and they laid off 1/3 to 1/2 their staff.
That's not a result of this sub...
Why can't this sub be trusted?
I've been talking very openly about Codesmith's problems in this sub and when they come true and Codesmith tanks doesn't that add credibility to all the stuff I'm saying rather than detract from it?
The only people submitting to CIRR left are: 1. Codesmith. 2. a school with 15 grads in 2022, 3. a school in Jakarta that didn't follow the 2024 guidelines.
Codesmith's outcomes for H2 2022 had a very large and unexplained jump in people who didn't respond tot the survey but accoridng to Codesmith's Director of Outcomes, were verified using "LinkedIn" as placements...
It's not terrible, but "only trusted source" is factually incorrect.
This is a major reason why the to
Two reasons:
1. There has been a crash in the influencer economy too, so fewer people are around advertising them
2. Bootcamp market has crashed so not many people going to bootcamps and the conversion cost of ads is too high.
One interesting thing is Codesmith just STARTED advertising with display ads!
Because the larger players have stopped advertising so much, people stopped Googling for the "best bootcamps" and finding the smaller "higher rated" ones.
So it makes sense to see MORE ads from the remaining smaller bootcamps that are surviving.
Codesmith's new Future Code Program is coming together, (free program for NY residents with no programming experience, aiming for a $65K+ first computer job), applications in May, starts July 29th
This page has been around for a while but it's coming together and just updated with the dates and more info about the program: [https://www.codesmith.io/future-code-nyc](https://www.codesmith.io/future-code-nyc)
This is a great program if you meet the requirements below!
Note that you have to have **"Limited or no prior experience with the basics of coding, no paid professional web development or similar experience, and do not have a Computer Science degree"**
It's going to be very interesting to see how these alumni market their experience and resumes and what jobs they end up getting.
The job market is tough and maybe the government has jobs lined up, otherwise this might be the only ti…
This is a really good AMA and Stephen Script always has solid, clear advice. But you also shared this exact same link two weeks below just two weeks ago: [https://www.reddit.com/r/codesmith/comments/1bhkmki/switched\_careers\_from\_healthcare\_to\_tech\_in\_under/](https://www.reddit.com/r/codesmith/comments/1bhkmki/switched_careers_from_healthcare_to_tech_in_under/)
I've done some anonymous surveying and almost all of the randomly chosen engineers and recruiters mistook many Codesmith grads OSP as employment experience.
I'm assuming the auditors would make the same mistakes at least one some occasions.
Even Codesmith's website listed a graduate employed at their OSP as their job, which is a one time mistake, but just showing that this is a problem on multiple fronts.
Do you give them specific instructions to not count OSPs or is it possible OSPs are being counted if someone presented their OSP as a job - against Codesmith's instructions?
1. I've explained numerous times why Formation doesn't publish CIRR or similar outcomes and that we aren't a coding bootcamp.
Since you seem to know Formation better than I do, explain to me what "graduation" means at Formation? This is the core principal of all bootcamp outcome standards that I can't figure out what that means for us.
If you can't explain "graduation" accurately then just back off and stop spreading nonsense about us. If you can thoughtfully read the specs and propose what it means for us, then we can talk keep talking about it productively about why I agree or not.
2. We advertise all over Reddit and we re-target people who visit our website. Drawing false conclusions is not fact. Raw data is fact. So asking "Why do I see ads for Formation in this sub?" and getting a completely open and transparent answer is exactly what I'm talking about being open and transparent…
Copied:
3 schools left in CIRR: one had 15 students for their entire year of reporting. One didn't even follow the new standard and they decided to let them publish anyways because otherwise you would have just Codesmith and a 15 person school left.
Codesmith and CIRR are tightly coupled. Codesmith is the only school who cares about CIRR and CIRR would be collapsed if Codesmith left
3 schools left in CIRR: one had 15 students for their entire year of reporting. One didn't even follow the new standard and they decided to let them publish anyways because otherwise you would have just Codesmith and a 15 person school left.
Codesmith and CIRR are tightly coupled. Codesmith is the only school who cares about CIRR and CIRR would be collapsed if Codesmith left.
Facts are facts and trolling or mass downvoting doesn't change that.
So the good thing about CIRR is you have to report how many people fall in these buckets, so it's all transparent.
The inadequacies though are that just because it's there, that's not good enough. If it's there but people have to analyze it to understand the real picture, it can be improved. If it's there but then companies just ignore it and tout their top level numbers, and saying that these are rigorous CIRR numbers, the best, trust us! It's leveraging the fact that no one understands or cares about these between the lines details and those are there primarily to make the standard APPEAR more trustworthy.
I'm not putting this one way or the other in this reply, just laying out both sides.
In all fairness their standard says loud and clear that the number of people who reported salaries needs to be listed on the website and I don't see it anywhere on Codesmith's website.
Both CIRR and Codesmith's Director of Outcomes stated that they want or are considering expanding CIRR to work for interview prep platforms.
I co-founded one of the 3 main interview prep platforms (5 if you count interviewing.io and hello interview)
So if someone adamantly believes that my company should be reporting to CIRR then they could see this as not impartial.
I explained emphatically why we have never even considered reporting to CIRR and why it doesn't make sense for us (can't speak for all interview prep companies but I imagine Pathrise would feel similarly given the over a dozen types of jobs it supports and the drastic difference in junior.vs senior outcomes)... that this kind of thing just doesn't work.
So I feel impartial in my head.
Significant\_Wing has been pretty neutral and consistent for a long time, I think they are just asking why I posted such an intense review of this.
Clearly vert few people case because no one showed up to Codesmith's CIRR recap sessions. Very few people commented on CIRRs AMA.
So I think the person is more saying, why bother caring about this because CIRR is largely irrelevant now.
I do it because sometimes it's in the little places that the people get manipulated the most.
Rithm, Launch School, and Codesmith are the three I always suggest looking at as a wide range of styles and types of learning. I'm currently NOT recommending Codesmith because they had 1/3 to 1/2 layoffs, and announced a number of changes and I want to let those settle in before resuming recommendations. I've heard that instruction is stabilizing as those laid off depart, but it will take a bit more time.
Line-by-Line Critique of CIRR Standard Document. Opinion: good intentioned organization but spec is not rigorous and robust and I point out all of the problems that make it one of the weaker specifications I've read in my opinion.
There have been numerous discussions around CIRR lately and there are too many words being thrown around, along with ad hominem attacks, and no one other than me seems to be reading the standard - even the CIRR board misquoted it.
I refuse to debate anyone further on here until they acknowledge this post and read it because any counter arguments not based on a thorough analysis of the spec are garbage conversations that don't belong on here. Thoughtful debates over lines of the spec are appreciated.
This is long and thorough and if it's too boring for you to read the whole thing then don't share your opinions about it.
If someone calls CIRR "**rigorous"**,…
1. This is a completely different thread about CIRR and you didn't give any context, didn't give any feedback privately or on that other thread, and are bringing it up here on a thread about Codesmith - all without any context. **I absolutely copied that comment from that person from CSX Slack in that thread,** and I don't apologize for it at all. Anonymizing a comment from a 20,000 public Slack community that anyone is invited to join is not morally or ethically wrong.
2. She said she was new to the community and then that "we" (without clarifying) started the Codesmith sub for "especially those who are new to Codesmith like me!"... to me that implied that all the people who started it were new to the community. I agree this could be ambiguous, and I think I should have stated something like 'I am interpreting this to mean that it was started from people only new to the community for p…
I agree with this. I'm someone who has to navigate this challenge and I can't just have it all ways that work for me and dismiss the consequences of having a public identity because I don't want to acknowledge them.
I have my real name. Some people appreciate that, but others are skeptical.
I state clearly when something I say is an opinion, but if I say it when also talking about my company I have to think about the consequences. Is this something my company would agree with, and if it's not, I might have to extra emphasize where the opinion is coming from, rather than just throw it out there.
Working at Facebook from 2009 - 2017 through some really challenge times (some for Facebook and others for humanity) I really saw why it's CRITICAL to have integrity in pubic discourse.
It's hard. Someone insults me and I'm defensive and emotional in my head. But if I bring that online and it…
I talk to people as friends and give contract advice, helping people with HR violations, people complaining about their work environment, it's confidential because the people asks me not to talk about it. This isn't "content" and people have a right to complain about their work environment.
I actually have no idea what she's talking about and don't want to assume, but if you are interpreting it as content I shouldn't have access to the Codesmith needs to sound the alarms and call in their engineering team no matter what the time and address this stuff. At any company that would be an SEV 0 emergency.
I understand this is a tough situation and I wouldn't be so tough if someone reached out to me privately, told me this, and we have a human conversation about it.
I feel really bad personally if she feels this way and if she reached out to me personally I would listen and try to help with…
I don't see anything that I don't think I shouldn't see, other than perhaps confidential things people share with me that I never repeat publicly but certainly drives my opinions about how Codesmith is run. Anything I talk about publicly is stuff Codemsith is choosing to share. Since they always talk about producing the leaders of tomorrow and senior engineers with strong capabilities I treat this stuff like it's intentional. If it's not intentional and they communicate this to me then I would help and report all this stuff, but it would require admitting that their technical and operations team is super is not remotely up to even the industry standard, never mind the best in industry.
I appreciate the clarification about your personal feelings.
1. I don't think this is fair that you say above:
>The AMA is something I’ve done on my own volition as Codesmith’s Director of Outcomes, to provide an open space to talk about our CIRR reports, reporting standards, and graduate outcomes
Yet this was advertised by your CEO and in you CSX Slack in a giant image as an ["Official Reddit AMA" ](https://files.slack.com/files-pri/T7X3836NN-F06SK9BNY9W/ama.png)
I genuinely feel bad about the personal feelings, but unfortunately you are also the Director of Outcomes who was doing an Official Reddit AMA.
2. Similar to another commenter, I was also offended by this, in my personal opinion:
> Please all - go have a great weekend! Get outside, read a good book, spend time with family and friends.
I stayed up until 1am doing a super important infrastructure upgrade at Formation. The…
I mean it wouldn't surprise me at all if people are showing up at Codesmith and saying that they want to join Formation soon? and should they do Codesmith at all? But that doesn't mean that we are an alternative to that program. And people aren't choosing to do Formation VS Codesmith and comparing their options and outcomes the way Annie portrayed above. If someone is doing that it's because they misunderstand.
On our side we actually encourage those people to do Codesmith and come back later. On their side if they encounter confused people and are portraying Codemsith and Formation as similar options then they are not helping at all in getting people to the right place at the right time.
I explained this above that our primary competitor is interview Kickstart and they have similar numbers on their website and a lot of people ask us and then we try to explain to them why it doesn't mean that much. but since it comes up from people that are casually comparing us and Interview Kickstart we decided to put it there with multiple paragraphs of detail on how it's calculated.
We're going to updating it soon with our new highest offer with someone who really wants to put it up there for whatever reason.
I can state officially that I am not aware of anyone in the past 12 months who received an offer/acceptance from Formation to join the Fellowship that stated to us they were considering going to Codesmith or Formation at the time and choosing between them.
There are people who apply to Formation who we tell to go to Codesmith first and the come to Formation in 1-2 years but we reject them. So maybe they are telling you they are considering Formation but it's actually not an option for them in reality?
I am aware of one person in the past year who was advised to go to this path that got a job instead of going to Codesmith and then came to Formation after 6 months or so of that SWE job.
I am very much aware of the highest Codesmith offer and that person was not a SWE and had 8 years of very good experience in their field and received a role in the field at that company, so that wouldn'…
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
I can state officially on behalf of Formation that I am not aware of anyone in the past 12 months who received an offer/acceptance from Formation to join the Fellowship that stated to us they were considering going to Codesmith or Formation at the same time.
There are people who apply to Formation who we tell to go to Codesmith first and the come to Formation in 1-2 years but we reject them. So maybe they are telling you they are considering Formation but it's actually not an option for them in reality?
I am aware of one person in the past year who was advised to go to this path that got a job instead of going to Codesmith and then came to Formation after 6 months or so of that SWE job.
I am very much aware of the highest Codesmith offer and that person was not a SWE and had 8 years of very good experience in their field and received a role in the field at that company, so that would…
I stay told to not comment on the AMA, but my questions weren't critical. they were just hard questions. They are looking at data intelligently and asking questions from it. I saw a Launch School AMA where all of the questions were like that and they were extremely strong supporters of the program that asked them.
I was super concerned that the Codesmith poster also expressed concern that she feels like I'm ever present in her work and I have no idea where that came from and I've never seen her before until the call yesterday that they had where I was present camera on with my full name.
Codesmith shares so much student and user information, code, content widely that if she is unaware of that I think that that's on them to figure out and not to blame on me. But now I see where this attitude comes from. If a leader feels like that, it tells me they have absolutely no clue whatsoever how…
I mean this is another flaw of CIRR. The data for it comes from the survey that bootcamps do at the end and they really don't need that much evidence for anything included in the results. The Most complex part of the specification is the documentation requirements for outcomes and there go through a lot of different cases for if someone gets a job or doesn't get a job etc. but the key thing is that they say that things like a text message counts as documentation as long as it includes the offer date or start date of the job, the type of job - e g. full time job, and that the person accepted it.
The data is audited but No auditor needs to check that the original data was provided is correct. the auditors are checking that you followed the process. so if you have a text message, the auditors check that the text message is documented following the process, but nowhere does it say how a sal…
No definitely not. They have good intentions and they try. I've read every word of the standard document five times and it's just not robust.
I could spend a day rewriting it to fix numerous ambiguities and gaps.
They just updated it too and didn't fix any of this stuff.
Like if you read the G.R.A.D standard document from Galvanize it reads like a properly written legal specification.
The CIRR spec reads like a marketing brief. No numbers sections, no clear definition of terms, ambiguities in the worksheets that don't match the spec.
Many people with good intentions don't do a good job executing and this is one of these cases.
CIRR changed the standard to go from 180 day reporting to 360 day reporting.
So there are H1 2022 numbers published from the old standard and full year 2022 numbers from the new standard.
I did the simple math to estimate H2 2022 numbers based on those two reports.
The fact that they tanked in H2 and we had to wait 6 months longer than usual to get the results is my biggest complaint about the process.
That and Codesmith said a couple times now they had an H2 2022 report six months ago they didn't share because of these last minute changes.
It's marketing.
There is no standard to publish that no. I think an increase in compensation is a really good metric though because it puts a dollar value on before and after to compare to the cost of the program.
Calculating it is hard. There isn't just one way to do it. The two options are 1. someone comes up with a reasonable way and then makes a standard that others agree on and use. 2. You calculate it however you want and then explain very clearly exactly how so people aren't misled.
I would LOVE to just share raw results per person, but you have to find a way to do it without people being able to figure out a person's identity.
I mean facts are facts, and upvoting and downvoting doesn't change them. People can follow me and downvote all my comments, doesn't make then false.
People in the bootcamp industry need honesty and transparency. They do not need the next level of manipulation: using transparency as a marketing tool, they need straight up open communication from the source.
This Codesmith AMA blog is no where near open communication from the source and no one is engaging in tough questions. The moderator told me not to reply to anything.
Nothing is perfect but if Codesmith doesn't confront it's imperfections it's going to fall apart, they seem to be intentionally spewing out user and student information, source code, and content all over the place and are upset AT ME for reading it and make me out to be some creepy person spying on them. They need to get their stuff together instead of putting lipstick…
I don't have explicit list of who is paying how much, but this is what I have:
1. They are on the "featured schools" list: "Schools may compensate Course Report for featured placement."
2. The mention sponsorship tiers here: [https://www.coursereport.com/connect](https://www.coursereport.com/connect)
3. I follow their Youtube and they release videos there (and on their blog) from the same list of bootcamps, that they also publish "weekly events" for on their socials. And all of them are "featured schools" on their website.
I wish they were more transparent about all this, it's not easy to tell.
I did report a review on there from an alumni who listed their name, so I found their LinkedIn and that they worked at the school they reviewed and didn't disclose that in the review. Course Report said it was totally fine and didn't remove it.
The marketing team was all laid off, correct. They hired a former student to write blogs and post in CSX Slack.
But this has always been their marketing strategy - they don't pay anything on display ads anywhere. The closest thing is sponsoring Course Report.
I think this kind of marketing is fantastic use of money and it's also more organic than seeing blatant ads like we do.
But it IS marketing, correct, and the person who ran it is a career long director of marketing. So if people think it's all fun and great community - it both is great community AND it's marketing, but anyone who thinks it's purely one or the other is choosing sides.
I mean if you look at what we do and IK does and Pathrise does, it's a really completely different way of operating.
Bootcamps are human-centric business. Codesmith has almost no actual code, the engineers work on their Main website and CSX website.
Pathrise, IK, and Formation are all platforms with a bunch of proprietary technology to help people prepare for interviews and job hunts.
It would be like a small fine dining restaurant changing to selling food in the grocery store.
It's possible, but it's not as obvious as it sounds.
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
(Reposting my answer to the question because my previous one was removed and I'm not sure why)
/u/[annie-ama](https://www.reddit.com/user/annie-ama/): I talk on Reddit a decent amount about data, and I'm a fan of all data with scientifically reproducible methodologies so people can tell where it came from and evaluate it. CIRR's standard is full of ambiguous or not well defined sourcing requirements as well. Still a decent standard and I like that it requires enough info so people can calculate certain important things on their own.
I mean Codesmith website wrongfully says that $127,500 is the "Software Engineering Immersive Grads Median Annual Base Salary" without any asterix or adjacent explanation of that term.
The actual number is the "median annual base salary of graduates that placed and reported salaries" not of all graduates.
I'm much more concerned about that than our number…
There's a campaign against me right now since I criticized CIRR yeah. It happens every time I criticize CIRR.
That's why I'm here day in day out for 2+ years now and have a strong long term reputation.
There are some alumni that REALLY love Codesmith and some that REALLY DON'T love Codesmith, and it is what it is.... on both sides, anonymous people who have very little history making rude, angry, or personal comments.
I have nothing against Codesmith overall and up until their recent changes recommended a lot of people go there (and might again once things stabilize).
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy· edited★ FEATURED
/u/[annie-ama](https://www.reddit.com/user/annie-ama/): I talk on Reddit a decent amount about data, and I'm a fan of all data with scientifically reproducible methodologies so people can tell where it came from and evaluate it. CIRR's standard is full of ambiguous or not well defined sourcing requirements as well. Still a decent standard and I like that it requires enough info so people can calculate certain important things on their own.
I mean Codesmith website wrongfully says that $127,500 is the "Software Engineering Immersive Grads Median Annual Base Salary"
The actual number is the "median annual base salary of graduates that placed and reported salaries" not of all graduates.
I'm much more concerned about that than our numbers, because we explain in paragraphs of fine print how the numbers are calculated so no one is mislead.
RE: highest total compensation - I don't think it'…
1. Why was there such an increase in people not reporting salaries between H1 and H2 2022 data? It jumped about 14%, meaning that 14% more of the outcomes in H2 2022 did not have a reported salary (e.g. were verified by LinkedIn) compared to H1 2022.
2. How does the "Where Are They Now" data normalize for people who don't respond or cannot be reached? For example, CIRR requires you to verify the outcome of EACH graduate, whereas this data appears to be based on whoever replies to the survey. CIRR requires EACH graduate to be verified so that people who don't do as well, maybe leave the industry, etc... are counted, but in the "Where Are They Now" if people didn't do well and disengaged from the community, how are they accounted for?
3. Can you give preliminary six month placement rates for H1 2023 full time grads? Based on the CIRR reporting process, there should be a preliminary estim…
I told you repeatedly that I don't spend much time on Reddit and you and other Codesmith alumni keep saying otherwise. I can PROVE how much time I spend on Reddit relatively to work so I'm giving you warning to back off and stop lying about it.
You can talk about how you "perceive" me to spend all my time, but you can't make a factual statement like that that is not true, this is your warning, and I will consider further cases harassment.
Yeah I can't share much because people send me stuff in confidence, and since I can't share the evidence, you can't value that statement either, so I understand.
I don't know what's happened since the CIRR stuff came out but lots of accounts came out of nowhere that were a lot meaner.
Until the recent changes Codesmith underwent, I recommended it to a lot of people 1-1 for whom it was a good fit, and I'm pretty sure that some of their leaders know that. I still talk to those students while they are in Codesmith and then afterwards.
It's not so cut and dry, and I wish the people jumping straight to attacks would give me more wiggle room to present both sides. I'm not perfect, but I'm very fair. I was invited to be a moderator because I'm seen as a disciplined, high integrity person who is very responsive.
You can give me feedback in a nicer or more direct way instead of being passive aggressive on a thread about Codesmith involving other people personally attacking me who are affiliated with Codesmith.
You think that's great behavior, and my constant reasonable, fact-based comments and thoughtful opinions are toxic...