Don't be Fooled by the IT Gold Rush

 

To me, the best thing about tech-related subjects is that they are probably easier to learn online than any other. In fact, that's exactly how I created the Computer Science Foundation that supports my work. Without the resourceful internet, I wouldn't be where I am today.

Like many who share my path, I initially devoured every online resource I could lay my hands on. But as I've invested more years in my career, I've increasingly realized the flaws in the material that's most likely to surface.

First, I had to relearn some concepts that I thought I understood. Then, the stronger I became, the more I discovered that even my self-taught colleagues had been misled at points.

This led me to examine how misconceptions are propagated. Of course, not everyone gets everything right all the time. To err is human, after all. But with such a wealth of knowledge available online, in theory, misinformation shouldn't be widely disseminated.

So where did it come from? In short, the same market forces that make computer science-driven fields profitable create fertile ground for questionable training materials.

To give back to computer science education in a small way, I would like to share my observations on determining the quality of teaching resources. Hopefully those of you walking the same path will learn the easy way that I learned the hard way.

Getting Started with our Self-Dev Environment

Before I begin, I want to admit that I understand that no one likes to be told that their work is great. I'm definitely not going to name names. For one thing, there are too many to name that a heuristic is the only practical way to go.

More importantly, I'll give you the tools to diagnose for yourself, rather than just tell you where not to go.

Heuristics are also more likely to point in the right direction. If I declare that website X has subtext and I'm wrong, nobody gets anything. Worse, you are missing out on a better source of knowledge.

However, if I point out the signs that any website may be off the mark, while they may still accidentally lead you to discount a reliable resource, they are more In all cases, the correct conclusion should be drawn.

The Invisible Hand of the Market Shakes a Firm Hand

To appreciate where information of questionable quality is coming from, we have to dig out our Econ 101 notes.

Why do tech jobs pay so much? High demand offsets low supply. There is such an urgent need for software developers, and software development trends evolve rapidly, that many resources have been quickly developed to train the new wave.

But market forces have not yet worked. When demand outstrips supply, production feels pressured. If the speed of production increases, and the price remains the same, then quality falls. Sure, prices can easily add up, but a big draw of tech training is that much of it is free.

So, if a site can't suffer a rapid drop in traffic from going free to paid, can you blame it for staying free? Multiply that by even a fraction of all the free training sites and the result is training, overall, of lower quality.

Further, as software development practices repeat due to innovation, so does this cycle of decline in educational quality. What happens after hastily prepared training materials are used? Over time the workers who use it become the new "experts". Over time, these "experts" produce another generation of resources. And it goes.

Bootstrap Your Learning with your Own Bootstraps

To be clear, I'm not going to tell you to regulate this market. What you can do, is learn to identify reliable sources yourself. I promised heuristics, so here are some that I use to estimate the value of a particular resource.

Is the Site Operated by a Non-Profit Company? It's probably not that Concrete, or at least useful in your specific use Case

Many times, these sites are selling something to tech-illiterate customers. The information is simplified to appeal to non-technical company leadership, not detailed enough to address technical concerns. Even if the site is aimed at someone in your shoes, for-profit organizations try to avoid giving tradecraft away for free.

If the site is for the technically minded, and provides independent company practices, their use of a given software, tool, or language may be very different from how you would. are, would, or should.

Was this Site set up by a Non-Profit Organization? If you choose the right type, their Content can be Extremely Valuable

Before you believe anything you read, make sure the nonprofit is reputable. Then confirm how closely the site is related to what you're trying to find out about. For example, python.org, which is managed by the same people who make Python, would be a good bet to teach you Python.

Is the Site Ready for most Training? Be careful if it is profitable too

Such outfits generally prefer to hire and speed up trained personnel. The quality of the trainee comes second. Sadly, that's good enough for most employers, especially if it means they can save a penny on salary.

On the other hand, if the site is a large non-profit, you can usually give it more weight. Often these types of training-driven nonprofits have a mission to develop the field and support its workers—which relies heavily on people being properly trained.

For Further Consideration

There are a few other factors you should consider before deciding how seriously to take the resource.

If you're Looking at a Forum, Measure it by relevance and Reputation

General-purpose software development forums are wrong a frustrating amount of the time because no customization means specialists are less likely to hang around.

If the purpose of the forum is clearly to serve a specific job role or software user base, chances are you'll get better mileage, because you're more likely to find an expert there. will go

For things like Blogs and their Articles, it all Depends on the Strength of the Writer's Background

Writers who develop or use what you're learning probably won't do you wrong. You're also probably in good shape with a developer at a large tech company, as these organizations can usually capture top-notch talent.

Be wary of writers writing under non-profit companies who aren't even developers.

Summary assessment

If you wanted to extend this approach to a spell, you could put it this way: Always think about who is writing the advice, and why.

Obviously no one ever tries to be wrong. But they can only deviate from what they know, and the person sharing the information has other focuses than being as accurate as possible.

If you can identify the reasons why a knowledge producer can't keep textbook accuracy in mind, you are less likely to uncritically internalize their work.