I'm a facilitator at Hacker School, which makes me responsible for a large number of admissions decisions.

While we do make money through referrals, our ability to place someone at a company we work with is not something we consider while doing admissions. (This may be hard to believe, but trust me.) We have a significant number of international students, as well as students who we don't believe will get a job through us for one reason or the other, each batch. We admit based on whether we think someone will make a good Hacker Schooler.

We also try to respond to anyone who asks for clarification about a decision. I'd love to hear from you, and I'd be happy to look into your last application; especially so if you think we made a mistake! Ping me at [email protected].

Thank you Zach, those were the conclusions that I jumped into only to make myself feel less bad about not making the cut. It is clear by the comments here that your process gives an equal opportunity to each one of the candidates and referrals are not a decision factor.

I'll reach out to you by e-mail. With so many applicants, I thought you couldn't afford to explain the reasoning behind rejections on a case by case basis. That's why my reply to the rejection e-mail was the standard 'thank you for letting my try' note.

Curious about this - what if someone (say, me) has a job and has no immediate intention of leaving it, but also wants to get better at programming and is willing to take a 3 month sabbatical to do so. Recognising that you're unlikely to capture a referral fee for such a person, would you truly ignore that in the admissions process?

They would. Your scenario is not uncommon. Seasoned vets in a secure position still raise the quality of the batch and rub off on the newbies.

I'm a student in the current batch, and can confirm that their ability to make money off recruiting fees is not a factor in the admissions decisions - I made it very clear in the admissions process that I would not be looking for a job after the batch, because it only seemed fair to let them filter on that if they wanted to. It was and has continued to be a non-issue. In fact, the founders/facilitators I've talked to are enthusiastic about my plans, and offered me great advice.

I joined the last batch (winter 2013) after having been rejected from the prior one. The rejection sucked, I questioned my programming skills, my legitimacy as a real developer. Turns out I'm just awful at interviewing - spent most of the time talking about startups for some reason, probably because it seemed safer than exposing my relative programming inexperience at the time.

I'll second the sentiment that admissions are based purely on fit for Hacker School, not likelihood of making money for them, gender, or any other criteria. I just came across as too much of a "startup guy" first time around in the limited interview time.

There's an important thing I didn't mention in the post: Like any admissions process, ours isn't perfect, and we know we make mistakes. We have to make decisions on a relatively small amount of information, and even if we do a good jobs 90% of the time, we're still going to get it wrong dozens of times a batch.

Since I don't know who you are, I can't speak to the specifics of why we said no. In any case, I'm glad to hear you've had success learning iOS and are considering applying again :)