IXL Learning reviews

1. No competitive salary 2. Small company

- Bad management choices: I was a new-grad placed in a new team where I was the only engineer, and at the same time, the management supervising me had never managed engineers before, so it seemed the compay itself didn't value either side enough to give adequate training/preparation - Bad communication/practices: we used a Waterfall methodology and all of my projects ran into issues with unclear or changing requirements - Misleading offer: I was offered a position in Java but when the job started, I was quickly moved into developing in Perl - Bad code quality: The Perl codebase was badly maintained; there were many occurrences of copy-pasted code, there were no attempts at using Object Orientation (even for large projects), and I was the first person at the company to write automated tests for our Perl code - Low level of average experience: among engineers, a large percent had been hired as new-grads and had less than 3 years of experience - No one wrote unit-tests: the main codebase (mostly in Java) had less than 5% code coverage when I was there, which meant that many people did a lot of manual testing. It was costly, repetitive, and possibly lead to the deployment issues we had with many of our releases