General Assembly

This bootcamp has serious limitations. Unless you have a  background in design, graphic design and/or have previously started working on a portfolio you might probably be better off investing in a different bootcamp that is serious about the quality of its teachers. There is some learning, but it is important for a  prospective student to seriously ponder if such learning justify $14,000, and forgoing at least 3 months of salary.

The bootcamp is designed for the student to deliver fast in a high pressure environment but without adequate knowledge transmission and feedback, students are left on their own. We were aware, from week 1, of the lack of quality of the lectures and teacher support. However, few people will speak up about the program limitations and demand for improved curricula and better teaching quality.

Unfortunately, it seems that such limitations are caused by GA corporate modus operandi. Its focus on making short term profits and to be competitive drives them to hire poor quality assistant teachers and to fail in providing an adequate training and support for teachers. There are standards for teaching adults in a bootcamp setting, it seems that corporate GA is not aware of such standards and as a result the teachers consistently failed to give clear adequate guidance and to communicate knowledge effectively. Teachers spent valuable time an energy of students discussing irrelevant anecdotes about their professional lives, reading from slides without providing any valuable insights and/or correcting concepts conveyed wrongly the first time. On top of that, none of them were available outside class hours and their feedback about our projects was consistently delayed. We were required to ask our questions to the assistant teacher before asking a question to the teacher. Which wouldn’t be a problem if the assistant teacher were slightly competent at his job. He was close to student level knowledge and his feedback was most of the time irrelevant. Most of us would ask feedback to a teacher from a different class.

While the main teacher was clearly competent at his craft, had numerous industry connections and sound professional judgement he lacked teacher training background. Although he was very open to feedback he carried all the weight of the class and of organizing class related activities that limited the time he could connect with students. Instead of helping him, the assistant teacher was a liability to the whole class.

The assistant teacher was a GA graduated with no professional experience and no disposition to help students. Even when he wanted to help he had no insight. He would repeat what the teacher said and most of the time had to idea of what he was saying. He will read slides and will find about the content of such slides at the time he was lecturing. He never prepared before the class and wouldn’t know about class concepts even though he was a student like us just 6 months prior. When asked for help "he would respond ask your classmates". He will sit in the back of the class and play video games, do shopping or fall sleep. He had no work ethic, no self awareness and no-one that would held him accountable. Most of us were frustrated and voiced our concerns about it but nothing was done.

The Bootcamp format is demanding and it has the potential to be rewarding but most of the success depends on the quality of the teachers. We did not have an assistant teacher and our teacher, in spite of his best intentions was overwhelmed by the amount of work he carried on his own. It was unacceptable for GA to provide such quality of support to the students given the high stress that the Bootcamp model was already causing to us. More than Ginger.io memberships we deserved and needed decent quality academic experience.

We learned from this bootcamp, we had to, after all the time we invested. Was it worth the investment? This is something that each of my classmates might answer differently. It depends on the quality of your academic experience at other institutions and it certainly depends how much you put into. Without going too far, I had much more rewarding experiences at Community College classes. The Bootcamp format worked for me, I put a lot of energy and time and I got what I put into in spite of the quality of this institution. Most people would want to convince themselves that the investment was worth to avoid the depressing thought that the class was not worth more than half the price. I won’t do it again or recommend it to anyone whether anyone has the money and resources or not. This course is an overpriced introduction to UX. There were so many concepts not explained or explained wrongly in the class. Our portfolios are competing with other portfolios elaborated with much more technical knowledge and honed by much more rigorous critique process. If you don’t have a background in UX, design, graphic design or something similar this course is not a good investment. There are much better introductory classes and other online bootcamps where you can develop a portfolio with mentorship. This course won’t make you a UX designer. Learning in a Bootcamp setting can be very valuable and now there are other options in Seattle. You owe yourself to do your due diligence and invest your money wisely before you put yourself on the hands of GA or any institution without academic competency to deliver.

I took the Web Development Immersive in Providence which is supported by the Boston GA office. The immersive was everything I wanted it to be. Expectations for course content were very clear and there was support at every step from instructors and outcomes staff. 

Taking a bootcamp feels like a big risk and I looked into a few different options before choosing GA. I chose this bootcamp because it had positive reviews, friendly and informative staff, relevant programming langauages, and some convenience factors including cost and location. The full-time immersive curriculum is very challenging and definitely requires full commitment. 

When you finish the program there is still so much opportunity to stay connected with classmates and instructors. The job support staff hold ongoing weekly workshops and regularly check in about the job search. They are also available for one on ones to talk through any challenges and offer input on job offers. After two months of rigorous job search after completing the course I accepted a position as a software engineer and the GA reputation really helped get my foot in the door. The possibilities after GA are endless and you will walk away with a solid understanding of full-stack development and object oriented programming. You will also walk away with a sense of community. 

The course content was nothing more than could be obtained for a fraction of the price on various sites: exclusively lectures that provided a very broad overview of JS and various flavors (jQuery, APIs, React, etc.) but never got into depth with any of them. The scope would have been excusable, but there was none of the interaction/cooperation with peers or the instructor that I expected from an in-person class. Additionally, the little homework that was assigned was barely graded and the only “project” was something that the instructor loosely defined as “anything that can prove you learned something from this class.”

Short version: look elsewhere for a cheaper introduction to JS.

Here is a honnest summary of my experience at GA:

The instructor was often disrespectful and would make fun of foreign student accents, show lack of patience or inappriopriate humour.

During projects, he would just go out to the hairdresser or disappear, and sigh when we ask questions.

The content of the curriculum was ok, but would not be explained in details. If you want to learn to code, then learn it beforehand...

At times, the teacher was showing a clear lack of mastery of the languages he was supposed to teach, being corrected by students on several occasions. Courses were lacking a clear structure.

They would spend more time telling you off if you run 2' late rather than making sure you understand it all...

Also, there is a pressure as they pretend they are supposed to be your future reference for employer which adds some tension.

If you say you don't understand, they will get rid of you and just say "You will understand later and this is absolutely normal".

Don’t expect any support from the Program Team either who will reply that this formula has worked perfectly for the previous cohorts.

Finally, the outcome team would stress you out so much about job search and provide minimum support, spending time correcting insipid details from your CV and expecting you to standardize your portfolio to fit the mold.

I am really glad I did the UX Design Immersive program! I did a lot of informational interviews with past graduates before enrolling in the program. I think that was helpful in terms of expectation setting. I knew the biggest value of the program would come from the fantastic instructors, the connections we would be able to make in local industry, projects we could display in our portfolio, and the immediate network we would have with the cohort. I was totally satisfied in regards to those thigs. I know there are cheaper ways to go about a pivot such as this, but the immersive experience and the connection with others going through the same process were both really important to me. 

There are some kinks that they are still working out in terms of on-boarding, curriculum, and career services - but most of that is due to the fact that the program itself is still fairly new and they had just brought on a new career services person (who works really hard to help out all the students and graduates from each immersive program GA offers). 

I felt like I received everything I needed to prepare me for the career search hustle. I was given concrete tools to work more effeciently in my search. And like others have said, it is important to check your expectations - GA will not place you in a job. But they will give you what you need to engage in that process. 

I found the landscape to be a slightly difficult for a junior designer. All the more reason a program like this worked for me. It provided me with an opportunity to build relationships with others in the industry and totally dive into this new world. 

GA and the immersive program is not for everyone. I definitely recommend speaking with graduates and finding out as much as you can given the cost. But it worked for me!

I'm so glad I found this class! I took this class to broaden my skillset and explore whether or not UX would be a good career choice for me. Our teacher had a great deal of experience in the field, plus he brought in several guest speakers to dive deeper into specific topics. Every class focused on an aspect of UX design, and the curriculum was incredibly thorough. We ended up with a polished final project to potentially use as a portfolio piece. Overall, this really was a great experience; GA puts together a very collaborative environment that's focused on students' growth.

Having wanted to learn Web Development for years—and having failed to do so in my spare time—I dropped everything and spent my savings to attend General Assembly's Web Development Immersive. The immersive nature of the course helped to make this a turning point in my life, where I left behind a career that was comfortable for me, but less and less satisfying. Between classroom time and homework, I spent up to 80 hours a week learning the technology. I liken it to holding on for dear life to the rear of a speeding train. Every day, a new subject folded into the tools we were taught. I felt more uncomfortable than most, moving on before feeling I had a firm grasp on the subjects we'd already covered, but that’s the model. Maximum exposure, minimum depth. And it has proved true in the real world of tech that I’m utilizing new tools constantly, and need to skim and integrate on the fly.     The curriculum varied depending on the teachers. A second Web Development cohort that ran concurrent with ours had somewhat different scheduling and subjects covered.    Since our cohort of around 24 students had 3 teachers, I'd expected more individualized attention than what we got. (Instead, it was an opportunity for the teachers to rotate lectures. Different teachers had different areas of expertise, and the lectures were excellent.) We were often told that this was a pedagogical choice, with the constant refrain, "Nobody will hold your hand in the real world.” As a person who had spent many years in the “real world,” I found this exasperating. I know that I’m not learning unless I struggle. I also know when I’m not learning because I need a push in the right direction. This was not the real world. It was an expensive one-time opportunity to learn all I could in 12 weeks. Teacher interaction would be a thing that separated the experience from, say, online courses.    In the same vein, we were provided a teacher’s assistant for a few hours, 4 nights a week. It was hard to take advantage of this, as the competition for the TA’s attention was overwhelming.    Overall, I'm glad I did it. The curriculum was fine, the lectures were interesting, the environment was pleasant, and it served to give me a new direction. But the promise given the night I attended an information session before enrolling—"It's hard, but you won't be struggling alone"—was unfulfilled.