I worked with a large group of a local graduates from a well-known coding camp. The results were horrible.
They would submit a lot of pull requests, but upon review it became very apparent that documentation was not being consulted resulting in unnecessarily hacky solutions. The reason: programming by trial and error.
In the face of that, the only thing I could do is: give them the benefit of the doubt by asking them to walk me through their problem solving approach. This insulted them, because there was no problem and solving approach, just bruteforcing code with live reload until the feature worked.
Unfortunately, sometimes the feature did not actually work, or would not handle edge or error conditions which caused the program to be unstable. Sometimes to the point of causing a live incident.
Since coding camp graduates graduate very frequently and because of referral bonuses, they were a majority in our team. They used their majority to deny code reviews (not allowing people to mark their tasks as finished), and took turns to pull off microagressions in a round robin manner so nobody is accountable enough to be retaliated against.
In the end, these people know they will not prevail through technical excellence but rather by pumping as much code as possible and by playing dirty: refer a lot of friends, become a majority, avoid situations where a relative rank can be established and bully any opposition until they quit.
I would say that although your situation is probably not unique, not all people from coding boot camps are like that. There are people who believe that an 8 week course will teach them all they need to learn, but this is true of all education, and I have seen similar results from people with 4 year C.S. degrees as well. Do they need to learn more, absolutely, but there are a number of students who understand that this is just the start of their journey.
Like anything, there is no absolute, and I like to evaluate each one on a case by case basis. Just because someone can't spend the time and money to go back and get another degree doesn't mean that person won't turn out to be a great developer with a little bit of practice and help.
If you are in an entry level software engineering job after having spent little time and resources, you have very little to lose by behaving in this way.
It's either that or the alternative: working harder than everyone else, learning on your own time, try to push your career forward while completing low risk tasks.
I'm helping my husband run a mini bootcamp. We focus on collaboration from the first day so they don't develop any bad habits and appreciate the value of feedback from code reviews. We do a lot of whiteboarding to make sure students have a solution well thought out before writing code. Our motto is "Think twice, code once."
A broken recruiting process might be also at play here. An applicant should not get an offer if they're producing trial & error based hacks, irrespective of background.
For them - good enough is good enough. This is extremely common in organizations that are interested in profit over quality - which's why they hire fresh graduates in the first place.
They would submit a lot of pull requests, but upon review it became very apparent that documentation was not being consulted resulting in unnecessarily hacky solutions. The reason: programming by trial and error.
In the face of that, the only thing I could do is: give them the benefit of the doubt by asking them to walk me through their problem solving approach. This insulted them, because there was no problem and solving approach, just bruteforcing code with live reload until the feature worked.
Unfortunately, sometimes the feature did not actually work, or would not handle edge or error conditions which caused the program to be unstable. Sometimes to the point of causing a live incident.
Since coding camp graduates graduate very frequently and because of referral bonuses, they were a majority in our team. They used their majority to deny code reviews (not allowing people to mark their tasks as finished), and took turns to pull off microagressions in a round robin manner so nobody is accountable enough to be retaliated against.
In the end, these people know they will not prevail through technical excellence but rather by pumping as much code as possible and by playing dirty: refer a lot of friends, become a majority, avoid situations where a relative rank can be established and bully any opposition until they quit.