skip to main content
10.1145/3159450.3159485acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Understanding the Software Development Industry's Perspective on Coding Boot Camps versus Traditional 4-year Colleges

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 February 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

This study reports on the perceived capacity of coding boot camps versus computer science (CS) undergraduate programs to instill a range of software development skills from an industry perspective. We present findings from a series of national focus groups and individual interviews with representatives from the software development industry, who spoke about their hiring procedures and preferences as well as how they perceived coding boot camp applicants in comparison to graduates from four-year CS degree programs. We also present findings on how the boot camp and university participants viewed their role in developing necessary skills for employability. Results indicate that hiring managers filling positions, generally have a favorable perspective of coding boot camp hires in relation to their demonstration of "soft" skills, such as teamwork, passion, and persistence; With regards to four-year university hires, several industry representatives indicated that a four-year degree is mandatory for hire, while also listing a solid understanding of CS principles and substantial exposure to mathematics. The Discussion section focuses on the future potential of coding boot camps as an alternative training ground for the software development industry.

References

  1. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2017. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Code.org. 2017. Computer science education stats. Retrieved from https://code.org/promote.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Computing Research Association. 2017. Generation CS: CS undergraduate enrollments surge. Retrieved from http://cra.org/data/Generation-CS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Course Report. 2017. Retrieved from https://www.coursereport.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. College Data. 2017. What's the price tag for a college education?" Retrieved from http://www.collegedata. com/cs/content/content_payarticle_tmpl.jhtml?articleId=%2010064.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Margo Greenman. 2016. Intensive training helps coding newcomers land technology jobs. (September 2016). Retrieved from http://425business.com/ intensive-training-helps-coders-land-technology-jobs/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Steve Lohr. 2017. A new kind of tech job emphasizes skills, not a college degree. (June 2017). The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.newyorktimes.com/2017/06/28/technology/tech-jobs-skills-college-degree,html?mcubz=2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Sarah McBride. 2016. Want a job in Silicon Valley? Keep away from coding schools. (December 2016). Bloomberg Technology. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016--12-06/want-a-job-in-silicon-valley-keep-away-from-coding-schools.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Paul Luo Li, Andrew J. Ko, & Jiamin Zhu, J. 2016. What makes a great software engineer?" n Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Software Engineering - Volume 1 (ICSE '15), Vol. 1. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 700--710. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. James Pellegrino. 2016. What is the evidence on teaching & learning 21st Century skills? Presentation at the National Research Council on 21st Century Skills. Retrieved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RctULp9Gugo.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. James Hiebert & P. Lefevre. 1986. Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics. Science and Education (pp. 1--27). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Giyoo Hatano & Kayoko Inagati. 1986. Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma, & K.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Matthew Lombard, Jennifer Snyder-Duch & Cheryl Campanella Bracken. 2010. Practical resources for assessing and reporting intercoder reliability.. Retrieved from http://matthewlombard.com/reliability/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. John L. Campbell. 2013. Coding in-depth semi structured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research ,42 (3), 294--320.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGCSE '18: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
    February 2018
    1174 pages
    ISBN:9781450351034
    DOI:10.1145/3159450

    Copyright © 2018 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 21 February 2018

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    SIGCSE '18 Paper Acceptance Rate161of459submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate1,595of4,542submissions,35%

    Upcoming Conference

    SIGCSE Virtual 2024

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader