Why I Chose App Academy Over Georgia Tech
By: John Anders
Tags: Learning To Code, Career Change, Georgia Tech, Software Development, Coding

A friend recently asked for my thoughts on Georgia Tech’s Coding Bootcamp, and whether I had considered it before enrolling at App Academy last Summer. Why did I commit to a remote program I hadn’t even heard of before 2020 over one of the country’s leading technical universities, which happened to be right down the street from my apartment?

Read on, and check out my review of App Academy’s 24-week full stack program!

Disclosure: all opinions expressed are my own and do not reflect those of App Academy (a/A), Georgia Tech (GT), or any other party, but are offered to help readers in selecting the best option for furthering their technical education.

Back in May of 2020, I had just finished a two year contract at a non-profit. My contract happened to run out just as job opportunities were at an all time low following the COVID outbreak. I won’t bore you with any additional explanation of the obvious circumstances that defined 2020, other than the fact was I faced the decision to either look for whatever jobs happened to be out there, or make a serious career shift.

There were a myriad of factors to consider as I realized I wanted to learn to code: Should I teach myself? Should I get a CS degree? Are bootcamps scams? The internet is a helpful place, but with so many options and very few credible sources on the subject, I felt a bit stuck and in the dark.

Ultimately, I was really close to enrolling in GT’s program. I completed their admissions process and had multiple conversations with their enrollment team. I was ready!

And then I discovered Career Karma, and the floodgates of bootcamp information opened wide (more on that below).

After all my research, I came to the conclusion that while GT’s bootcamp would be far from worthless, there are three major reasons it is a bad idea for those without prior experience developing software.

1. Georgia Tech’s Bootcamp is Outsourced

Yes, the Georgia Tech has launched a program that really has little to do with Tech beyond name. GT’s program is run by Trilogy Education Services, a third party, which was acquired in 2019 by 2U, a leading power in modernizing higher education. This pattern of outsourcing is becoming more and more common, and while not inherently bad, the reputation of the related university should have little or no implication for which learning experience is best for you.

GT is definitely not alone. LSU also “has” a bootcamp, but they really just outsource the entire experience to Fullstack Academy, another well-known coding bootcamp. I attended a two week trial of this program in early May and had a positive experience that convinced me a bootcamp could be worth it. It just didn’t convince me theirs was the best.

Many bootcamps and universities are developing these sorts of partnerships, and while I do know some who have had good experiences at outsourced bootcamps like these, you shouldn’t research the particular college to find out if the program is good, but rather the third party bootcamp.

Find out if the bootcamp is really known for providing positive outcomes (e.g. job placement, student satisfaction). And if you do look into it GT, you won’t find much, but you’ll see there’s no way to verify how Tech’s specific bootcamp grads are actually doing. Which to me seems to indicate they aren’t necessarily proud of their outcomes.

In preparation for this article, I did further research on U2’s website about their outcomes, and I found my prior suspicions to be confirmed by their 2019 benchmark outcomes report:

“Eighty-five percent of alumni from 2U partner schools are currently working full time for an employer. This employment rate is similar to the rate for recent graduate alumni nationally (84%) . . . [and] Nearly half of employed alumni (48%) are engaged at work, compared with 43% of employed, recent national graduate alumni.”

These are exactly the numbers you would expect if higher ed. tried to jump in on the bootcamp train. If you’re ok using today’s university outcomes as the job-placement bar, then by all means attend these outsourced programs. But for me, this outsourcing phenomenon means that while slapping GEORGIA TECH or LSU on your resumé sounds exciting, it is not a good reason for attending these programs.

2. GT Asks for Full Payment Up Front or Through Loans

Back when I was making the decision, GT was asking for around $10,000 for tuition. Other programs, like a/A or Hack Reactor, offer income sharing agreements (ISAs), which means a student will only pay once they get hired earning above a certain amount, $50,000 in the case of App Academy.

The caveats to ISAs are that you’ll still have to pay some amount if you were to fail out or drop out (calculated based on how long you’ve been in the program), but compared to paying in full up front this is not nearly the risk. It is, however, I greater amount of just under $30,000. But not until you really get hired.

If you’re still on the fence on this difference, think about it like this: a program that offers an ISA is betting on the same thing you are: your success.

3. The Entry Process Reveals It All

I found GT’s entry process to be laughable compared to a/A and Hack Reactor. GT technically has an admissions assessment, but it’s a joke and takes at most an hour. From what I remember, it was a simple logical reasoning assessment with no prep needed, and I couldn’t imagine many high school grads struggling through it. And it’s not even clear if anyone can really fail the test, even if they get it mostly wrong.

a/A or Hack Reactor, by comparison, both have admissions processes that are thorough and require applicants to actually go through learning modules and technical assessments. If an applicant is not able to pass after a couple attempts then they don’t admit you and recommend you look for another bootcamp. These assessments are not easy unless you’ve really spent the time studying. I remember spending around 60 hours on a/A’s entry assessments.

Let’s be honest, I can imagine any educational program lowering the bar of admission in certain cases. But at least a/A isn’t pretending to have an admissions test in name only.

On a similar note, a/A has students take assessments each week. GT, to my knowledge, does not. If an a/A student fails, they would get deferred to the next cohort (roughly a month). At GT, it is unclear if there is any process for assessing and really helping those who are having difficulty with curriculum. The point here is that if there are not tests, anyone can scrape by, so anyone can do it; anyone is wanted if they are paying the cost of admission. What sort of learning outcome is that?