I think it comes down alignment.
Codesmith has like no staff left and none of them have extensive AI experience. They hired random people on Upwork to manage this thing, from marketing to program management to working on the contracts. I don't see students in 2026. I don't see placements in 2026. The "CIRR Audited Outcomes" haven't been updated this year, and CIRR has not responded to why. Their website doesn't even have a privacy policy. A 2024-2025 lawsuit said that their financials required six months of forensic accounting to assemble and could not be provided on demand. Codesmith's AI curriculum is minimal and created by recent alumni. I'm not an expert but I would guess they would have trouble with the most basic government audit.
Additionally, the AI "Lead Engineer" on the IRS stuff is a full time engineer at a top tier bank. I also suspect that's problematic to have them on c…
</BOOTCAMPS> ❤️ OFFICIAL MEMORIAL POST: share this around and tell your old bootcamp stories in the comments. So we can close the bootcamp chapter on a positive note.
I asked **CIRR 30 days ago** where the 2024-25 **missing reports** are. I did not get a response. This tells me CIRR is dead and its flagship Codesmith is dead. Other bootcamps we've lost are: Rithm, Turing, Codeup, Kenzie, Launch Academy, Momentum, Alchemy, Epicodus, Lighthouse Labs, 2U/Trilogy, Lambda School, and more.
Unlike the embarrassing end that CIRR and Codesmith are experiencing - too ashamed to end on a positive note and instead end in layoffs and utter silence, I want things to end on a positive.
If you graduated from a coding bootcamp in the past, and it changed your life, TELL US YOUR STORY. No selling or shilling, just tell us how coding impacted your life and in the right time and right place your bootcam…
I can clarify that, sorry I have a felling this will be long but it's important details IMO to make sure my opinions are clear.
So "fuzzing the numbers" doesn't mean intentional deception, but it means representing the numbers in a better light than they are. So by that definition - yes, CIRR was created through a marketing lens to promote bootcamps and it was designed to be rigorous enough to build trust, but also marketing-tilted enough to present numbers in a good light.
For example, there is a number that's like 'median salary'. But the only absolute number of people is the number of graduates and you have to chip away at that to get to the actual number of people in the people. E.g illustrative numbers: 100 people considered in the report, 90% graduated, 10% self employed, 5% not looking for jobs. 60% of what's left actually report income. So right off the bat the salaries only in…
No CIRR 2024-25 reports? Never taken this long for them to come out, and CIRR did not respond within 2 days to my request for comment prior to publication of this.
I'm going to call it a wrap on CIRR, the self proclaimed "gold standard" of bootcamp stats.
I'll I'm going to say it that I think it's ridiculous how when the times are good, bootcamps are throwing around CIRR as proof of their excellence.
And then when times are bad, they are fuzzing the numbers (Codesmith's report has so many people who did not respond with placement information and they counted because of LinkedIn, that the integrity of the reports is garbage now in my opinion.... or Codesmith publishing a press release that CIRR verified "85-90% of graduates placed within 12 months" - which isn't even verifiable with CIRR).
I hope all of you who yelled at me over and over and over, with anonymous now-banned accounts, j…
I'm not a lawyer. If things are laid out clearly in the fine print for a reasonable person to understand I do think the onus is on the reasonable consumer. But if the debate is over whether this is "reasonable" or not, I won't chime in on that.
My person opinion is that even the bigger bootcamps are small businesses in the grand scheme of things and have so few customers in the grand scheme of things that I think the market and actions of the bootcamp will ultimately be their demise if they are not communicating transparently and openly... like I said, bootcamps are shooting themselves in the foot if their numbers look unrealistically good in this environment and it's actually a negative signal in my opinion. Like what in my opinion happened to Codesmith... covering up a majority of ghosting alumni by counting 'LinkedIn verified placements' that boost numbers. Everyone can see with thei…
Facts and accountability are foundational. You can troll all you want, but facts are the facts and your assumptions about my intentions are not facts.
The press release I quoted says that "Federal selection followed rigorous evaluation of Codesmith's independently verified outcomes: 85-90% of graduates placed within 12 months, two-thirds promoted within three years, and an average starting salary of $130,000. Unlike competitors, Codesmith relies entirely on word-of-mouth referrals rather than advertising, with all outcomes verified by the Council on Integrity in Results Reporting."
Website: "Codesmith has proven this thesis true with 5000+ alumni. 90% of graduates get hired within 12 months, most land leadership roles within big tech & AI labs and many directly contribute to the world’s largest open source projects"
**There is nothing at CIRR that says that 85 to 90% of the 5000 gradu…
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 allowe…
In my opinion, these numbers wouldn't encourage me personally to go to a bootcamp, but it's also a fact that some people get SWE jobs via bootcamps as well.
The conditions are important. I agree on more transparency about what jobs, where and what backgrounds people is critical for any individual who is trying to figure out if they are one of the few it will work for.
However I have to be careful because Codesmith published an official press release on the wire that claims they have a "85% to 90%" placement rate of the "5000" graduates, "$130,000" "average" salaries, "all outcomes verified by by CIRR". So that has to be assumed as fact because stating incorrect information on a press release is a whole other can of worms to deal with.
So you can't make assumptions really.
The report that's coming out in April-ish is the 2024 report for CIRR, which includes nationwide students, not just California (which was about 200 students) and CIRR also has 12 month placement numbers.
The 'did not respond' rate for CIRR last year was similar to the 2023 CA report (about 40% did not) but this year's CA report had an increase in non responders.
So that's the number to watch.
This is a rough example, but if you have 100% students start, 90% graduate, 63% had jobs in a year, and 34% (of starters) approximately reported a salary.
So the 'median' salary of $110,000 includes about a third of the students, which is fine, but it's not a median salary of 'students' or of all 'graduates'. Since the data is pretty clear on this, if people feel like this representation of 'the typical grad makes $110,000' is reasonable then I think it's important to call out the qualification…
DEVELOPING: Codesmith 2024 California Government Outcomes report is out today. Only 12% are placed within 6 months with reported salary (50% including 'no salary information available') but press release also out today says '85% to 90% placement rate within 12 months' 'CIRR verified' (no time frame)
SOURCE: [https://bppe.ca.gov/webapplications/annualReports/2024/document/98d87f0e-23c1-4af7-aabf-7c91d4ea7312](https://bppe.ca.gov/webapplications/annualReports/2024/document/98d87f0e-23c1-4af7-aabf-7c91d4ea7312)
I can't legally comment much on this so instead I ran it through a neutral AI with the following prompt:
"Summarize this document and compare it to information about Codesmith you can research and flag any good things and flag any concerning things. Summarize in 5 bullet points."
* **Completion is very high, but placement is not.** Codesmith’s Software Engineering Immersive show…
We'll see when their next CIRR report comes out. I periodically look at OSLabs-Beta and OpenSourceLabs GitHub projects and check if the students have jobs and the number of people with jobs about six months after graduation seems lower than it historically has been.
The next CIRR report though is people who graduated in 2024, not 2025, so the information will already be outdated. It would be really useful to get six month numbers for H1 2025.
The Codesmith Federal website says 90% of the 5000+ graduates get jobs within a year. Their own CIRR reports dispute that so I'm not sure if that's a preview of the 2024 outcomes or if it's just a mistake.
There also appears to be a new Codesmith FULL TIME program from August 7th, 2026 to November 9th, 2027, which is a whole 15 MONTHS!!! I'm very curious about that option.
Launch School though is crushing Codesmith on six month placement data…
Do they have open source projects? I know for places like Codesmith and Launch School you can just go through the open source projects that every student does and figure out placement rates. Anyone can do this and see raw information - with the caveat that LinkedIns could be out of date. However CIRR and Codesmith's auditor considers LinkedIn "LinkedIn is almost as gospel as anything else" (quote) so if you go off of LinkedIn you can figure out the placement rates.
I can't comment on that right now but encourage people to spend like an hour digging into it themselves and correlating it with public messaging if they are curious about this, and if they don't care then don't! haha.
Bootcamps work for a lot of people!
Look at CIRR data and the latest for Codesmith showed like 40% of people getting jobs within 6 months of graduating.
Launch School has like a 70% ish placement rate within 6 months.
These are the source of the massive negativity right now;
1. Trends are tanking and down. The trend is more important than the absolute numbers.
2. Salaries are down in these reports, despite inflation and SWE base salaries being up. This indicates more people taking worse jobs or tangential jobs instead of the SWE jobs.
3. Ghosts. Launch School doesn't have this problem but Codesmith's data shows about half the people NOT RESPONDING TO SALARY REQUESTS. Meaning that of the 100% of people who start, 90% graduate, 40% get a job, and 50% actually submitted a salary, so the "median graduate salary" for 6 months includes 18% of students. Historically far more people got pl…
BREAKING: Launch School Capstone 2024 Outcomes
SEE ORIGINAL: [https://www.reddit.com/r/launchschool/comments/1q2cvsx/2024\_capstone\_salary\_data/](https://www.reddit.com/r/launchschool/comments/1q2cvsx/2024_capstone_salary_data/)
Launch School is one of the remaining top programs, that announced a small cutback from 3 to 2 cohorts in 2026. These outcomes are very strong though still.
Overall for 2024 grads they had 66% placement rate for ALL ENROLLEES in six months (74% if you exclude non-job-hunting)
Early 2025 cohorts have a lower placement rate but a little above 50% so far.
Overall this is a good sign as the only CIRR reporting school that competes directly with Launch School is Codesmith and their 2023 data had a 42% placement rate (excluding non job hunting) in 6 months, which is almost HALF that of Launch School.
This isn't magic, Launch School's program takes a long tim…
PART 6
* Independent data from the Council on Integrity in Results Reporting (CIRR) verifies Codesmith’s student outcomes, showing around seventy percent of graduates securing relevant employment within one year and median salaries of approximately $110,000.
CIRR is not independent. It's a 501 6c business group/like a lobbying agency. It's charter is to represent bootcamps.
* Reddit’s Moderator Code of Conduct prohibits moderators from using their position for financial or competitive advantage.
I don't believe I am competing with Codesmith and my commentary hasn't changed from before and after being mod.
* As a co-founder and equity holder of Formation, Novati stood to benefit financially from reputational harm caused to a rival institution. This represents a direct conflict of interest and a potential breach of the moderation code.
I don't agree with this at all. We work with boo…
There was a fake account on LinkedIn liking all their stuff that is now suspended as well.
With my moderator hat on, I'm being accused of bias while actively protecting Codesmith from the consequences of their own marketing decisions. I approve posts that should probably stay filtered. I give them more leniency than other bootcamps. I've consistently tried explaining how Reddit works and how to fix their reputation signals.
On my criticism of their program:
Yes, I've been critical of specific Codesmith practices since 2022 - whether bootcamp grads should present 3-week projects as "4 months of mid-level experience" or market themselves as "mid-level engineers" with zero professional experience. I have strong opinions backed by outcomes data and CIRR reports.
But that has nothing to do with how I moderate. I've been equally critical of other bootcamps like TripleTen, BloomTech, App Ac…
Checking in on Codesmith a year later. After recommending Codesmith for 2 years I stopped recommending them a year ago because of massive staff loss, program cutbacks, and tanking outcomes. A year later, things are even worse 😭.
I'll try to summarize some history briefly and then get into the updates. I've been following Codesmith (and a handful of other programs) very closely for years now. I've spoken to dozens of students, staff, alumni, their CEO and have a very good idea what's going on. Codesmith doesn't like me. I've offered to help them, I've reviewed their students projects, I've pointed out security flaws, etc... but they see me as a "jealous competitor". I'm the founder of an interview-prep platform that has nothing to do with Codesmith and works with a bunch of Codesmith ALUMNI in the FUTURE job searches - all of whom thing we are very complementary. But nonetheless, I have…
Launch School H2 2024 grad outcomes. Placement rate within 6 months is lower than 2023 grads (50% versus 75%). Note that the denominator is all people who start, so will do comparisons in the body.
Resharing the original post: [https://www.reddit.com/r/launchschool/comments/1n8s8mr/cohort\_2408\_salary\_outcomes\_6month/](https://www.reddit.com/r/launchschool/comments/1n8s8mr/cohort_2408_salary_outcomes_6month/)
**As usual Launch School is very clear and transparent about their analysis so I really don't have to read between the lines, you should read their original post.**
**INDUSTRY COMMENTARY:**
In the bootcamps world, Launch School and Codesmith are the two remaining bootcamps with consistent six figure outcomes over a decade, so it's really the main comparison.
Codesmith hasn't given any numbers for a while so we'll extrapolate there's based on the patterns.
**Also note that C…
1 YOE is taking a long time right now overall in the market and at Formation but I don't have exact averages because each person has different commitments and goals and it's not meaningful to average all people.
Additionally, we have people that had 1 YOE that joined like 2 years ago that it took 2 years to get a job... but the market when they joined was different then. So it's even harder to try to average people who started at different time because the market has been changing. It's like a bootcamps touring 2023 CIRR number when they very well know things are different now... I feel that kind of thing is misleading.
So to help advise I would need to know:
1. what is the 1-2 years of experience and what kind of company?
2. have you been promoted yet?
3. are you getting interviews either directly from recruiters or from applications?
If you work at a solid company, commit fully to F…
Here is an analysis of my commentary purely about Codemsith "sporadic but consistent"
"Here’s an unbiased summary of Michael Novati’s commentary on Codesmith over the past few years—covering the topics he addressed, frequency, tone, and the overall vibe:
---
Topics & Themes
1. Curriculum Stagnation & Slow AI Integration
Michael pointed out that Codesmith’s curriculum has remained largely unchanged over the years. For example, in early 2024 he noted:
> "Codesmith's curriculum has been the same for YEARS but in Feb 2024 they added 5 lectures on AI… This is 'not changing'… 12–14 weeks of the same structure they did 5 years ago… I guess they think it's enough to raise prices to $22,500 this year."
---
2. Deteriorating Placement Outcomes
He emphasized a steep decline in graduate outcomes. He shared CIRR-based figures showing that six-month placement dropped from ~90% in 2021 to…
In case anyone is curious, here is what AI said about my last 3 years of Reddit activity:
"Here’s an unbiased summary of Reddit commentary by Michael Novati over roughly the past three years (from mid‑2022 to mid‑2025), covering common topics, frequency, tone, and the overall vibe:
---
Topics & Themes
1. Bootcamps & "Learn to Code" Critique
Skeptical of the bootcamp model. Novati has been notably critical of coding bootcamps—and especially the broader "Learn to Code" ideology. He highlights structural issues like oversupply of CS graduates, declining outcomes, and economic realities often overlooked by bootcamp marketing .
For instance, in /r/codingbootcamp he wrote:
> “The tech unemployment rate now exceeds the national average…” and argued “Learn to Code… ignored basic economics (oversupply depressing value/wages)” .
He has also raised doubts about data reporting by entiti…
They pivoted to doing this because the next CIRR report for 2024 students will be out in April 2026 and they want to give some idea of what's going on, but their reports are very problematic to me.
Why?
CIRR reports account for people who graduate in a specific time window. 2023 report means people who graduated in 2023 and got offers.
The reports Codesmith is publishing are offers in a specific time window but from any cohort. Meaning people who got those 102 offers could have graduated in 2022, 2023, 2024, 2021 even.
For all you know many of them are 2022 grads who took 1.5 years to get a job?
I actually like salary lift as a metric but they are confusing things by providing these reports side by side with CIRR reports with completely different definitions.
I used to give more benefit of the doubt, but last year this time they were defending against word of mouth of reports of de…
I'm restarting my comment:
Formation is not a bootcamp or generally competing with Codesmith. Codesmith has marketing adds explaining what a for-loop is and assuring you that even if it's too confusing Codesmith is for you. You can't join Formation without industry work experience as a SWE. The closest overlap is the AI program because we're offering AI productivity courses soon and they offer AI leadership courses. But there is very little overlap.
We are harmed if Codesmith declines because because 75%+ of Codesmith grads that join Formation like Formation a lot and it's a wonderfully complementary service.
There's a difference between continuous demonstration of incompetent engineering practices, tons of security issues and such.
I meant that this was the last straw about engineering practices because I had been privately telling them all kinds of problems for a while now and th…
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
Google wasn't down because the team has incompetent engineering practices.
CIRR also has incompetent processes and deserves equal criticism.
In my opinion Codesmith is full of liars and exaggerators. For god's sake the founding advisor's own sign had a LinkedIn and resume full of lies and exaggerations.
I meant that this was the last straw about engineering practices because I had been privately telling them all kinds of problems for a while now and they keep telling me how great their engineers are.
Alright these are my well informed PERSONAL OPINIONS UNLESS FACTUAL DATA IS EXPLICITLY MENTIONED BELOW:
Codesmith is the worst of the worst and their "transparent" data is smoke and mirrors and everyone needs to be cautioned about it. I'm taking a hit to my reputation calling them out so aggressively but I'm so morally against what they are doing I can't stand silent. Share with your friends and carefully review my arguments your self - don't listen to them without doing so.
Hack Reactor - they have been fully rolled into Galvanize with Tech Elevator, which was fully rolled into Stride Learning. My understanding from people there is that Stride Learning isn't putting that unit high on the priority list and it's kind of a drag on the company. You can read the investor updates here and see what you think: [https://investors.stridelearning.com/events-and-presentations/default.aspx](https…
This has been up for a while but I feel like Outco is dead anyways. Like I think the founders moved on to something else. A number of people have been sued by them (and threatened to be sued) for not paying them after they thought they were eligible for the job guarantee refund and the collectors they talked to didn't seem that organized.
Pathrise also shut down.
I have a business principle that you ruthlessly have to focus on delivering value to people for what they are paying you or you shouldn't exist.
More bootcamps, interview prep programs, immersive, mentorship communities should follow this advice because far too many offer like a $50 Udemy course, add on recent alumni as mentors/teachers, add on intangible benefits like 'community' and charge $20,000.
You might get by if people get really good jobs and credit the intangibles.
But if you aren't trying to deliver value and are…
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
Hopeless but not impossible yeah.
So look at Codesmith's stats since we're talking about them and they release numbers.
2021 grads: about 90% of grads placed within 6 months
2022 grads: about 80% of grads placed within 6 months
2023 grads: about 40% of grads placed within 6 months (and very notable that there was a huge double digit percentage increase in people who ghosted Codesmith and got counted as a placement because of LinkedIn
2024 grads: no data yet, but based on Codesmith's little bits of data there have been about 250 offers in h2 2024 -> h1 2025, which covers some 2022 grads, 2023 grads, 2024 grads, and then 2024 grads.
Now enrollment has declined because they cutback from 4+1 to 1+1 cohorts in Feb 2024 so it's hard to tell what the placement rates are but they definitely aren't good.
Codesmith also should have plenty of information about 2024 grads now that i's 6 mon…
That's not what I said, I said it would be wasted money because we can't think of a "report" that would be useful.
So we spend even MORE MONEY person by person going over these things.
I think that is better but if you don't then you can call it a scam and not join, thats totally fine if that's your opinion.
We are very diligent about feedback and actioning it and people wanting data is on the list, and the way we are working on that and have worked on it is by providing them more data.
We have a bunch more data but it's only for people who apply and we get more info about you to provide you with more relevant data.
That's how it should be - deliver the best product, not superficial garbage CIRR reports so that we APPEAR legit. We actually BEHAVE legitimately with integrity the best we can and over time that compounds into trust.
If you behave sketchy and focus on superficial you e…
We don't have zoomed out data as I've stated a number of times over the years extensively why.
We don't have a way to aggregate date into a consistent "report" that makes any sense and we won't want to spend time making a superficial one that we don't think is useful.
When you apply we show you anonymized before after data based on your background.
We don't have end dates, graduations, or "school" concepts and it's very hard to make some kind of report.
We explain our process in multiple paragraphs on our website.
It's INSANELY more costly for us to discuss outcomes 1-1 with each person that applies and is interested but we think it's the best way to make sure someone is on the same page and we will keep doing that for the Fellowship.
I wish we could have a report that was as effective and clear because it would save time and money.
It's not perfect but that's the transparent answ…
That's why integrity is so important.
I have an email chain with Codesmith leaders about literally the math having problems on their California reports on their website and they never responded or acknowledged those concerns and answered other things.
Like if you publish things that were made up for marketing purposes, rushed in a panic because you realized how terrible the numbers were and did a massive LinkedIn profile sprint not so diligently that's fine but don't tell the public that.
If you keep telling everyone your data is audited but you and CIRR don't answer me about where the audited version is (historically CIRR publishes the audit paperwork after they are audited) it's sloppiness.
People make mistakes here and there but almost everything here is a mistake and when I talk to former employees that proactively tell me how clowntown everything is run there... everyone "in ove…
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
I don't care either way, but if a program is publishing how amazing their outcomes are when they are good and goes RADIO SILENT when they are bad it pisses me off.
Codesmith's CIRR results tanked so they started publishing random time windows of absolute number of placements and then then even stopped doing that because in the past six months it's like fifty or something and a number of them have been looking for over a year.
I criticize them LEGITIMATELY and they come back with garbage data.
I bet their response to this is 'Michael is an asshole our placements are amazing, we had an average increase in salary over previous work of $70K so far this year! who cares if there aren't as many placements it's take people longer that's fine, it's all about average increase.'
My point is that changing the goal posts and each time telling everyone how "transparent" you are is garbage behavio…
Short answer yes. But long answer - Launch School still publishes detailed reports exactly 6 months after the cohort finishes and Codesmith published garbage reports to cover up their collapsing results.
I would put Codesmith worse than the ones that don't publish reports because it's been misleading the public in my opinion and that is worse than if they didn't say anything at all. They keep saying how "transparent" they are and it's a giant performance and bull shit from people with no integrity.
I spoke directly to one of their leaders on a phone call and I really just don't think they understand how messed up their own data is, or they won't admit it publicly because their company is collapsing and this is the nail in the coffin for them.
More details on what that why I feel this way.... I'm a very centrist person and I have been centrist with Codesmith for 3 years. I used to reco…
Thanks for sharing. Yeah I'll +1 that March was particularly strong for Formation in the mid-late career stages, FAANG offers of every logo color of the rainbow.
And I got really nervous that if bootcamps saw similar bumps in entry level, they would promote stronger March without any acknowledgment of what's going on in the market.
I'm absolutely shocked that CIRR can't even keep their website up while they transition it to a new page and comes back without even explaining what is going on.
When the economy changed in the other directly and was super hot, it wasn't "the economy's fault" that Codesmith and others had such amazing placements right? It was the school's pedagogy and curriculum and community and network. Times are shit, 'not my fault, can't do anything about it'.
It's indeed a good lesson for all these leaders. The bootcamps are not going to make it but whatever they do…
Codesmith is pumping out marketing about their most recent outcomes as exceptional outcomes, even though they tanked - and while they acknowledge the market they pat themselves on the back still. Internally almost all their lead instructors quit or were laid off except for one - who is now leading two entire tracks (as of two weeks ago) - and one person who has been teaching for a few months was promoted to be a lead instructor as well.
I'm exhausted with leaders, like Turing too, who want to pour their heart and soul into something with such good intentions but seeing all of that passion make people delusional - desperately trying to keep the thing alive without realizing the industry is burning down.
I admire Launch Academy for pausing gracefully, and a few others that explicitly opted to 'preserve their legacy' (their words) and shut down instead of taking the industry's credibility…
I mean I feel bad for the companies too and there are many lessons that should have been learned but weren't.
Like when times were good, Codesmith was marketing that anyone who left CIRR it was because their outcomes got worse and that they were above them all by haveing 'transparency'. Now Codesmith's outcomes started tanking (based on 2023 data in California) they haven't published yet. I understand they are still planning on it, but it's April now and results have historically come out in March - last year was mid-late March for example.
It's very ironic, that after criticizing everyone for leaving CIRR, they push change the rules to 360 days and then they delay bad results. I expect they will still publish them, if they don't they should just shut down at this point... they have to life with the consequences of past decisions. They can delay them until they have some new data to ca…
1. This person was not in Formation, they did a different program , a Netflix program. They have a certificate from Netflix, signed by Netflix, showing this on their profile.
2. We don't hire Fellows as Teaching Assistants, we don't have Teaching Assistants at Formation and we don't have classes or lectures or courses or anything. Fellows is the name of engineers we work with to level up. It's a vague and ambiguous word so I understand the misunderstanding, but you also should be trying understand our language that we use consistently because this is a word that doesn't mean job universally and in our industry it's the standard word for our customer that places like Pathrise use as well. Like if you visit another country and insist on speaking English and being upset people don't understand you... it's your job to understand.
3. The industry standard is for students to put "pathways" p…
u/michaelnovatireplied·DELETED · archived copy★ FEATURED
CIRR is dead and deserves scrutiny because Codesmith's marketing of it has mislead hundreds of people to pay them $21,500 in 2024, it is indeed worthy of scrutiny.
When Codesmith had like 12ish cohorts in 2024 and 2-3 of them say that they only know about 1 person placed in 6 months, that's not a fact by any means but it raises flags and warrants questions.
Codesmith's response has been to entirely evade the question.
They clearly have 2024 data of some kind that they are publishing, but they aren't publishing H1 2024 placement rates - which they obviously have preliminary versions of or they can't publish the offer data they have.
Even if they don't have or want to publish placements rates they can say "warning, placement rates are down, we want to double down on finding and supporting the RIGHT people for Codesmith so if you want to become a SWE, work with us and we'll be honest wi…
CIRR is dead - missing audited 2022 reports were due last December and they have gone radio silence on where they are 3 months later
I've been very critical of CIRR before and the problems with it's specification with very fair critical analysis.
This post is not that, this post is about me trying to stand up for people being manipulated by a shell company that appears to primarily represents one bootcamp - Codesmith - to create an illusion of validation in outcomes.
**One of the misunderstood aspects of CIRR is that initial results are NOT AUDITED. The results are for 20222 were submitted in March 2024 and the official audited results were due in December 2024.**
The last sign of life of CIRR I saw was in January, when a Codesmith advisor who is on CIRR's board changed the specification to make it looser on who they can exclude from statistics.
Yet no audited results were posted.…
The thing Codesmith leaders won't accept is that even if they have good intentions and even if they built a great community, they can't beat the market and the market says they shouldn't exist anymore.
Instead they have raised prices to $22,500.
I bet you went it was $18,000 and 80% got jobs making $125K in six months.
Now it's $22,500 and 40% of people in that time frame get jobs making $110K.
Finally, their CIRR numbers have always showed relatively low 90 day placement and very solid 180 day placement, so people weren't getting jobs in a month that often.
Salary increase over previous job is a good metric to use in general because it's demonstrating the value the career change had.
It's not a CIRR metric, it's not audited, it has no rules or guidelines, but it's a good metrics. The problem we have here is presenting that along side audited data can make it seem like all of the data is equally valid. I don't see ANY KIND OF DISCLAIMER EXPLAINING HOW IT'S CALCULATED (which is the non-lawyer legal advice I would give them)
I've been on contact with Codesmith and they haven't offered a call.
I'm still trying to get answers for harder questions, like why the ghosting rate went from 15% to about 65% in their CA government report and what caused that.
They have been evading the hard questions but I have a channel of communication open.
I feel like this post from Annie is trying to change the goal posts now from CIRR placement rates and salaries to overall offer count and salary increases. These new metrics might make sense but they are changing the goal posts to try to frame the numbers better instead of being transparent.
They know preliminary H1 2024 6 months placement rates for example and haven't shared them - which would be extremely relevant given their past data, and instead made up new metrics, just like the bootcamps they criticized who failed during Codesmith's rise to success.
Done updating the numbers, I would like some clarity on the California students numbers because something isn't adding up with my math.
I can't really comment on the 12 month placements rates, I estimated in other comments a 50 to 60% 12 month placement rate using CIRR rules and regulations but we don't have those on previous analogous reports to compare to.
I'm extremely loud about Codesmith in here and I have never once said that their CIRR results were fake. I argued with well documented evidence that graduates were exaggerating their experience, on average.
Why are you trying to polarize things? The world exists in shades of grey and things aren't just one way or the other.
Codesmith has a lot of good things about it and bad things about, as does pretty much everything.
Here's my analysis:
Based on my close view of the market for the past 5 years, I would guess 2024 students will have similar placement rates to 2023 students.
Based on the anecdotes people share with me from Codesmith, there are hardly any placement and hardly any alumni engagement - specifically in the second half of 2024.
Codesmith itself loudly touts a CIRR-violating salary outcome and placement number on their website of 168 offers between March and August 2024 that we can also factor in.
1. Salaries they reported were DOWN from peak about 10% - when inflation ran rampant and salaries have gone up, this tanking salary shows that more people are taking non-SWE jobs, going back to their old jobs or taking temporary jobs as part of a longer term plan.
2. It's possible that people taking non SWE jobs and worse jobs instead of waiting for their dream SWE job will result in a higher…
It's completely misleading yes and that's why I've been so hard on their marketing this past year! I've had anecdotal reports of numbers from reasonable sources for a while and found those numbers on their site completely misleading.
1. 29% is within six months of graduation. So people can get jobs after that and be reported int he 168 number of their website and also In their last CIRR report, they published 3 mo, 6mo, 12 mo numbers and their 6 month placement for 2022 grads was like 70% and their 12 mo was 80%, so of those 250 minus 70 people, I'm sure some of them got jobs in first half of 2024 (which would be post 6 months but less than 12 months)
2. The 168 number includes 2024 grads that got offers really fast. A small number of people with exceptional backgrounds, experience, networks, get jobs fast. Because they didn't specify how long those people were looking and when they gr…
Thanks for sharing and this is consistent with what I hear from people (plus some ghoster placements you don't see)
Rest assured if their CIRR 2023 numbers released in March look suspicious I will loudly call it out publicly. People need to know how things are right now and Codesmith is extremely non transparent about it, and in fact the opposite - makes it sound like everything is fine and everyone is getting senior jobs.
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.
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/li…
This is somewhat similar to what Codesmith (their competitor for "top bootcamp") does as well, called the "Where are they now report".
I don't see the complete methodology, but these kinds of reports can be extremely bias. I haven't seen them audit and track the number of people who did NOT reply, so all the people who failed out, gave up, changed jobs don't reply and they take an average of people who DID reply.
Just like any other reports, like CIRR, just because it looks legit it doesn't mean you shouldn't think critically and try to understand the words being used. Just like CIRR was created as a marketing group for bootcamps to promote bootcamps, and Course Report gets paid by bootcamps to send people to them (and wouldn't exist without bootcamps), thinking critically is extremely important in understanding the way things are.
Things to watch out for:
1. Not showing how many pe…
Hey, yeah CIRR is business league responsible to supporting the businesses of it's bootcamp members - it's not impartial.
1. CIRR has only 3 reporting companies left, one of which had like 15 grads in 2022, one is in Indonesia and didn't report FY 2022 properly, so **Codesmith IS CIRR at this point**.
2. CIRR changing the standards last year to report 360 day outcomes instead of 180 day outcomes was a massive coverup to conceal terrible H2 2022 outcomes. Since Codesmith filed H1 2022 and FY 2022 outcomes, you can calculate the H2 2022 outcomes from that data and they did indeed tank really bad.
3. Not only is a Codesmith Advisor on the board, but she brought in other board members who are friendly with her
4. A former Codesmith grad was temporarily working for CIRR to rebuild their new website after they got locked out and lost all their old website stuff.
\---------------------
I…