Running a coding
bootcamp for non-engineers
Code Camp is an internal bootcamp taught by engineers and open to non-technical employees — a 4-week course covering Python, HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, followed by a full Hack Week where participants build and demo real software. Over three years, the role expanded from running individual cohorts to restructuring the entire program and building the Teaching Assistant framework from scratch.
What I brought to this
What I learned
We ran three location-based cohorts every year because that's how it had always been done. It took a pulse survey and an honest look at application numbers to see what was actually happening: one cohort was consistently oversubscribed, another couldn't fill seats, and the schedule was creating friction that kept eligible people from applying. The data made the case for a structural change that instinct alone wouldn't have surfaced.
When each cohort was managed by a different person in a different location, participants had meaningfully different experiences — different selection criteria, different feedback processes, different Hack Week support. Moving to role-based admin (one person owns selection, one owns pre-camp, one owns post-camp) wasn't just more efficient; it made the program more equitable.
The Teaching Assistant role came from recognizing that past participants had exactly the knowledge new participants needed — not just technical knowledge, but the experience of being a non-engineer in a coding class, knowing which parts are confusing, knowing how to encourage someone who's stuck. Formalizing that as a structured role changed what the program could offer.
Three years, three phases
Each year brought a different challenge and a different scope of work — from running cohorts to rebuilding the infrastructure to creating a new role that didn't exist before.
Managed the end-to-end operations for multiple cohorts — application process, selection committee, ERG outreach, participant communications, Hack Week coordination, and the all-hands presentation where alumni shared their projects.
A 2023 retrospective surfaced three structural problems: documentation gaps, inconsistent cross-cohort experience, and a scheduling model that didn't reflect actual demand. The 2024 work was about fixing all three.
No formal TA role had existed before. Identified the opportunity to leverage alumni knowledge as a structured support layer — between participants who needed help and instructors who couldn't always be available in real time.