I was a student and was affected by the changes. I'll clarify here for anyone that wants the details...

Prior to the changes, small groups of students in every cohort was led by a TL. This TL was a student further ahead in the program, probably in part-time if they were a TL for full-time.

The TL had many responsibilities. They would attend lecture with their group of students, conduct 1:1 everyday with each of their students for 15 minutes, grading their work and giving them feedback. They would lead a stand-up at the end of the day with their group, reviewing whatever was relevant, and every morning before lecture they would meet with the instructor and acted as an intermediary to the instructor, relaying important information such as how well the students were doing, what they were struggling on, etc. TLs also supposedly acted as project leaders in build weeks, but I did not get to experience that.

Everyday, our assignments were graded by a TL on a 3-star scale. Our "sprint challenge" at the end of the week was also graded by the TL, which would force a student to retake the challenge if they got at least one question wrong.

Fast forward to when Lambda announced they were removing TLs, adding student mentorship, self-assessment, and groups called "track teams". The school also reduced from 9 months to 6 months (probably to pump us out quicker. From what I've witnessed, the shortened curriculum has done students no favors).

Most students were upset at the assembly announcing these changes, and pointed out the myriad of obvious flaws to the student mentorship program. Lambda claimed that the change was to improve "consistency" in the program, but students kept publicly speculating whether this was a financial move (Lambda admitted 3 months later that is WAS motivated by costs, after ignoring student speculation).

I can’t help but think this is related to chasing venture returns. College needs to be “disrupted”, but there’s not necessarily a way to do this that creates the type of leverage of a SaaS company. I recall seeing Austen on here once boasting about how he’d raised upwards of $70m, and my first thought was that I hope this doesn’t destroy them... now they’re at $122m

I don't see bootcamp experience as being useful for a hiring metric. You can get the same exact results by independently studying yourself, and save yourself the stress and money. You're better off finding peers/mentors to talk to through programming meetups/conferences.

It very much felt like a bait-and-switch.

The experience prior to the changes was what I paid for.

The experience after the changes wasn’t what I paid for.

Lambda School’s pivot in this instance was way too big, way too fast, and way too poorly planned/executed.

My experience went from having excellent Team Leaders(TLs) who graded my work, compulsory attendance, excellent Build Week TL and team members to an involuntary Mentor who ghosted me, a Track Team that never attended meetings, a Build Week with zero support, no attendance verification, no grading, and no response from Lambda School after consistent and repeated requests for support.

It was a shocking difference in experience before/after.

I get that Lambda School isn’t a bank, insurance company, hospital, or traditional school/university where massive risk results in massive risk aversion.

But it’s no longer a “move fast, break things” MVP either.

I went from being a strong vocal advocate for Lambda School to seriously questioning its business model.

I do sincerely hope Lambda School’s program evolves in a positive direction for student outcomes.

But in my experience and opinion, the Lambda School value proposition has taken a significant hit.

I’m currently awaiting refund.

I don't disagree that Lambda School may have problems but they're still young and have a lot to improve. Just from my personal anecdote but I've worked with people from bootcamps (notably Hack Reactor), and they've been fantastic so I believe that they're (bootcamps) definitely capable of educating people for success.

I really leveled up my JavaScript and coding skills in general and ended up dramatically increasing my earning power. I was hired about a week after graduating and just the signing bonus paid most my tuition.

If I ever see a similar kind of school for the next skill I want to build, I'll probably enroll.

That said, I've heard some of the Lambda School claims and don't believe they're honest. Vincent Woo did some solid reporting on Lambda.

I went to Turing a few years ago. With the benefit of hindsight, I'm happy to claim that a Turing grad will be able to be competitive with most CS grads in a a junior position. In a lot of ways they will be more prepared.

I also disagree that you can get the same education on your own. Good bootcamps have an incredibly short feedback loop, and there are actual professionals in the loop. You simply won't get daily feedback about best practices, code reviews, git training, etc. from an experienced professional if all you do is watch youtube and read books.

I started coding in the 90s and learned solely from books, friends, web sites. I was lucky to get a job without a degree or anything on paper to show that I could do what I was doing.

I did some certifications and doubled my salary in a year. It was funny to me that they didn’t teach that much to make me 2x productive, but it fit into my org’s salary band structure because now I had some certs.

I think the challenge is that it sucks for people who need more help and actual experience. Now that so many people are taking them, the signaling is less useful.