Diagnose flaky tests
“Fixes an intermittent failure at its cause”
Depth 0 · Scaffolded · Testing Foundations
What we train every troop to do, and how we check it.
A good software engineer finds the bug instead of guessing at it. Proves the fix with a test. Opens a pull request another engineer can review, and reviews someone else's code honestly. None of that comes from watching. It comes from reps, and from people who read your work and tell you the truth about it.
So we wrote the standard down and made it public.
The Hashflag curriculum is a map of 375 topics across 53 domains and 8 subjects, joined by 529 prerequisite links. Every topic names the evidence that proves you have it, and sets an exit depth: how much help is still there when the topic is signed off.
Every domain has its own public page at /curriculum/<domain>, with each topic’s evidence printed next to it. Troops, mentors and hiring managers can all read the same bar. The graph’s structure is adapted from the Marble open curriculum taxonomy (ODbL-1.0).
Eight criteria, quoted word for word from the curriculum, in prerequisite order. A topic's depth is the longest chain of load-bearing prerequisites beneath it. Code review is not a footnote: it is its own domain.
“Fixes an intermittent failure at its cause”
Depth 0 · Scaffolded · Testing Foundations
“Finds a bug by stepping rather than by print”
Depth 1 · Unassisted · Editor & Debugger
“Merges a PR after addressing review comments”
Depth 5 · Unassisted · Version Control
“Finds a real defect in someone else's diff”
Depth 6 · Scaffolded · Code Review
“Opens a PR merged without a round of confusion”
Depth 7 · Unassisted · Code Review
“Covers happy path, validation failure and auth failure”
Depth 7 · Unassisted · Backend Testing
“Executes a rollback under time pressure”
Depth 10 · Scaffolded · Delivery & CI/CD
“A disallowed action is refused before it runs”
Depth 15 · Guided · Harness Engineering
Every topic, with the evidence that proves it and how much help is left when it is signed off. Every domain page lists the same topics with what they rest on.
Each concept names the thing you produce and the criterion it is judged against. Trained to standard, or not trained.
At an evidence gate you prove it alone, graded by someone other than your mentor.
Within your first month we pair you with a working software engineer who runs 1-on-1s, reviews your code and challenges your thinking. The question they bring to your work: would this survive code review at a real company?
The platform teaches the material that doesn't change, so people spend their time pairing with you, reviewing your code and building real things. Your mentor reads your pre-gate artifact and returns it within 48 hours.
In weeks 07–10, the data layer, your mentor's job is correctness review. Bad schema and query decisions fail quietly, and gates alone will not catch them.
There is no capstone. You build a record instead: blogs, shipped features and pull requests.
Opened, reviewed, revised, merged, with the conversation still attached. A PR history is the most honest record there is of how someone works with other people.
The portfolio checklist asks for the same thing from the other side: code reviews you gave on merged PRs. See the work in the projects catalog.
The standard is what we train to, not a finish line. Meeting it doesn't end your mentorship, and the accelerator ending doesn't either.
“You never truly graduate. Here you truly are family. The door is open for as long as you need it.”
Earn the title
The Software Engineering Accelerator. Vets Who Code is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. EIN 86-2122804. What we teach is public and auditable.