Our support structure is based on our pricing, which itself is a consequence of our focus on Mastery-Based Learning.

We could charge, for example, $20/mo or $2000/mo, and that affects how much support we can provide. At $20/mo, we would have to remove all human contact, and everything would have to be automated. We don't want to remove human feedback from our program, and feel that it's really important to be able to monitor students and give meaningful feedback to help people improve. At $2000/mo, we could hire people to be around all the time, and anytime you have an issue, someone would come right over and help. But at that price point, financial pressure will be very high and it'll be very difficult to learn to mastery. For example, if we ask that you do some more practice, you will think about how much that costs, rather than what it takes to learn to depth.

At our pricepoints ($199/month), it allows us to maintain a balance between offering human-quality feedback without introducing overbearing financial pressure, allowing the focus to be 100% on mastery-based learning. But this also means that there are some types of support we can't provide. For example, we don't tutor people and you are not assigned a mentor. We want to move human interaction and feedback to the highest impact areas, where you get the best return on investment. To us, that's assessments and code reviews. We also staff TAs around the clock and will monitor the course forums and pull down your code to help you get unstuck. But this type of asynchronous support combined with the lack of tutoring means that you have to be a certain type of student.

If you are very new to programming and need more tutoring or support, then our program may not be the best fit. If you are a bit farther along on your learning journey and can respond well to guidance and can take feedback in the form of code reviews, then our program may be a good fit.

Most bootcamps that take a few months to complete don't compare appropriately with our program. It's not better or worse, but there's a quantitative difference in the level of proficiency one can reach in a few months of cramming compared with following a multi-year Mastery-Based Learning approach. One is a quick intensive immersion experience geared towards short-term results, while the other is structured for a slow mastery of fundamentals meant to last a career. The Launch School courses go far and beyond what one can learn in a few months, and that's why it typically takes 8-16+ months for people to work through our courses.

There are a few top-tier bootcamps who can seem to drive people to high salaries after just a few months. If you look closer, the typical learning sequence may involve 6+ months of preparatory work, then an intense 3-month experience, then another 3-6 month post-bootcamp learning journey before the job; that's roughly in line with our expectation of 8 - 16+ months. On top of that, our teaching pedagogy believes that learning slowly and to mastery results in a higher level proficiency in the long run. Yes, we are saying our graduates are better developers than those from top bootcamps. This is hard to prove, but you can decide which learning journey makes more sense for you when it comes to learning to depth. Please see our Results & Outcomes page and compare with training programs that measure their duration in months as opposed to years.

Finally, you might be interested in reading our answer to a similar question for the Capstone program.

In many ways, the goal of Launch School aligns very closely with the goal of a Computer Science undergraduate degree, with one major exception: we focus on software engineering practices and not on computer science theory. In other words, we focus on producing software engineers and not computer scientists. That is, if you wish to pursue an advanced degree in computer science, Launch School won't help with that. We also don't have the general education requirements that you'd find with a traditional computer science degree.

Launch School is on par with most computer science programs when it comes to core application development languages and tools, and is in fact much closer to industry practices than most computer science courses. We have many computer science degree holders in our program, and all of them tell us that Launch School complements the knowledge and skills acquired from their computer science degree very well.

We recorded a conversation with one such student that you may find relevant: https://launchschool.medium.com/meet-a-student-tommy-caruso-8062fc84d8b6

For most people, Mastery-Based Learning is going to be unlike any learning experience they've ever experienced. Most people buy-in to the idea of MBL, which at the core is about learning one thing well, then learn another thing well, etc. Most people agree with that pedagogy in theory but haven't experienced the practical consequences of such a learning approach. We've noticed that practitioners of Mastery-Based Learning tend to suffer in two major areas:

Most of your time will be spent on topics you find difficult or do not enjoy.
In traditional education, courses are taught in a fixed time duration. If you encounter a course that you have previous experience in, you can expect to have a relatively pleasant time for the duration of that course. In Mastery-Based Learning, you don't have an easier semester or quarter, but just get through the course much faster. On the other hand, if you encounter a course you dislike in traditional education, you can sometimes "tough it out" for the duration of the course. We've all experienced courses like that, where the topic or textbook or instructor just didn't resonate with us, and we couldn't wait until that semester is over. You might have even thought that receiving a lower grade would be an acceptable trade-off just to get through this topic. In Mastery-Based Learning, you can't wait for the course to be over and you cannot take a lower grade; mastery based means you must reach a sufficiently high level of proficiency before you can move on to the next topic. Therefore, your experience in an MBL learning program will be mostly working on topics you need to improve on, whether it's because the topic doesn't come naturally for you or because you dislike the textbook or whatever reason. Because the topics you find easy or have prior experience with get completed rather quickly, the vast majority of your time in MBL will be spent on topics that you can't complete quickly, for whatever reason. This is why you cannot put a time limit on how long it will take to finish a course and must set aside performance goals; you must have mastery goals and just show up to work every day, regardless of how fast or slow you're going.

Because there are no performance goals, there is tremendous uncertainty around when you'll finish, which brings a lot of anxiety.
For most people, not knowing when they'll finish means they get squeezed by either time or financial pressure. For example, it's common for someone coming into Launch School to set aside some time duration, say 12 months, to finish the curriculum. Taking a look at the entire curriculum, they may think that if they finish a course a month, they'll be on track to finish everything in their allotted time. However, their schedule is quickly shattered when it takes 3 to 4 months to complete the first course alone. Looking ahead at the rest of the curriculum brings extreme anxiety and doubt, and they're only in the first course. Don't fall into this trap. The fundamentals are important for a reason, and you must make time to learn them well, however long it takes. Saving a few weeks or months may seem like a short-term gain, but that's a knowledge deficit that you'll have to pay back with interest for the rest of your career. Another source of anxiety is around one's environment. Though family and friends mean well, they can also be a source of anxiety when they ask when you'll finish. Traditional education is something people understand, even if it takes years to graduate, but Mastery-Based Learning is something very few people truly understand. There's no graduation, but a continual learning journey of micro-improvements.

The two points above are the major derailment factors when it comes to MBL. You may have thought that Launch School is difficult because of the advanced technical concepts, but what we've seen is that very few people have trouble with understanding technical concepts from an intellectual perspective. Instead, the biggest problem is around giving themselves time to learn to mastery each step of the way and managing their anxiety. This is not something that can be fixed quickly, so we've started a series of conversations with some of our current students to share their experiences and struggles as they navigate the MBL journey.

Make sure to take a look at the Student Experience page to get a feel for how other Launch School students are dealing with the difficulties of studying in an MBL program.

A lot of people write in about their background and then ask us if they have the right experience to be successful at Launch School. What we've observed over the years is that prior programming background or experience doesn't necessarily correlate with success (by "success", we just mean being able to do well on the Launch School assessments and continuing through the program). There are some people with virtually no programming experience who ace our assessments, and there are also people with years of experience as working developers who can't pass the first assessment.

What we've seen is that people who know how to study intensely and consistently do really well in our program. Even with a lot of background information, it's hard to project who can study intensely and consistently for 8-16+ months. Having prior programming experience or even working as a professional developer doesn't convey one's studiousness. That said, there are certain things that seem to correlate with studiousness, such as finishing a Ph.D. or JD. It doesn't mean that you have to have a Ph.D. or JD to do well at Launch School, but it just means that those who have gone through an advanced degree know how to study deeply and have shown the ability to do it for a long time. Anything that shows prior evidence of consistent studying is a good sign.

But what does it mean if you have never studied consistently for a long time? The good news is that it's a skill, just like anything else, that you can pick up and improve upon. If you've never studied deeply and consistently before, or if it's been many years since you've been in school, you may want to first (re)learn how to study before starting Launch School. There are many resources on this topic, but one that serves as a good entry point is Learning How to Learn. We highly recommend completing that course prior to starting Launch School.

Another critical aspect of studying consistently is having a stable personal life. Many people don't think about their personal life when embarking on a new learning endeavor, yet personal stability is the key to consistent studying. For example, because we're an online program that gives people a bit of flexibility, some take advantage of this and attempt to travel the world while going through Launch School. That's possible in theory but nearly impossible in practice. Having such a chaotic personal life just doesn't lead to consistently deep studying habits. There are also some personal life situations that are not optional, like getting married, getting divorced, having kids, getting laid off, etc. Because we're such a long program, life seems to find a way to interfere. Be aware of this and do your best to control the things you can control to focus on Mastery-Based Learning.

To put learning at the forefront, you must have great study habits and a stable personal life. Prior technical experience is not required but consistency is, and stability in one's personal life is the only way to consistency.