terryp

Wow, I've never seen this one! And yes, this is great bridge between "learn how string interpolation works" or "here's OOP." But still, practically applying a static site generator for a business or to solve a particular client or customer problem is where I think the rubber hits the road.

Totally agree. It's the great 'sword in the stone' methodology that shows if someone has the skill and ability to become a developer. But this is why I think you need both these kinds of sites/programs but also compliment them with some of your own organization's ethos of developing talent.

As someone who has taught himself how to program - badly at times - I applaud these kinds of efforts, but I wonder if they're subverting the actual problem.

See, companies - I think - need more technology people. And the pool of technology people is limited. The laws of supply and demand say that limited supply and increased demand will drive up the cost.

This is great for individuals, but a losing proposition for companies unless they have limitless resources.

The one thing that Starter League, Code Academy and every other site is that they teach individuals the real rudimentary elements of programming. And while vital, these are not a substitute for battle hardened experiences of crappy code, terrible mistakes or the ability to work as an apprentice.

I think it's more incumbent on organizations to figure out how to build talent from within which is really a more holistic and basically an amalgamation of everything.

- Find motivated individuals. - Validate that they have the skills to be an apprentice. - Accept that they're a beginner and commit to training them. - Learn their strengths and weaknesses and tailor a development plan for them. - Promote the shit out of them and make them your next generation of software, test and system engineers. - When they eventually leave - say to yourself 'Mission Accomplished' and hopefully rely on a talent pipeline.

I don't know if this is a teaching hospital methodology or developmental leagues in sports. It's probably somewhere in-between.

So these sites are great. The organizations are great. But transforming people into functional experts in the field can only come about with BOTH training and experience. I feel like Exercism only deals with the training aspect, not the experience aspect.

My $.02.

Actually, I do write functional tests and I have been for a long time. However, I'm not a developer ... I'm a failed developer and figured I could best continue to develop if I had a QA title. The ammo that I always could use for functional tests was that they reveal a different dimension of wrong than a unit or integration test. And when you have unit, integration and functional tests development speeds along at a pretty rapid clip.