| Doc_id | Review | Left | Term | Right | Sentiment | Polarity | Rating |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | The other modules that I have done in this specialisation have been great. The lecturers are insightful and the courses have been at the right pace. This particular module was flat, to say the least. I paid €43 to learn a small amount of markdown syntax, and the quizzes and the weeks didn't even match up! | amount of markdown syntax, and the | Quizz | and the weeks didn't even match | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Overall a good course for self-study. The assignments in particular are excellent for data cleaning, analysis and interpretation. The quizzes are very basic though and appear to be there only to check if the student has gone through the lectures. The knowledge needed to answer the quizzes and achieve the desired results in the assignments are vastly different and should be addressed. The case studies at the end are insightful and more use could be made of them in a more advanced course. There is a lot of repetition of concepts throughout the course and this can become distracting. THe format for the lecture videos varies throughout and this inconsistency (along with extreme audio volume changes) also becomes distracting. Other than that, excellent for driving the need for reproducible research (RR) home, presenting and explaining some tools available to achieve RR and ways of publishing results/reports from these studies. | data cleaning, analysis and interpretation. The | Quizz | are very basic though and appear | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Overall a good course for self-study. The assignments in particular are excellent for data cleaning, analysis and interpretation. The quizzes are very basic though and appear to be there only to check if the student has gone through the lectures. The knowledge needed to answer the quizzes and achieve the desired results in the assignments are vastly different and should be addressed. The case studies at the end are insightful and more use could be made of them in a more advanced course. There is a lot of repetition of concepts throughout the course and this can become distracting. THe format for the lecture videos varies throughout and this inconsistency (along with extreme audio volume changes) also becomes distracting. Other than that, excellent for driving the need for reproducible research (RR) home, presenting and explaining some tools available to achieve RR and ways of publishing results/reports from these studies. | The knowledge needed to answer the | Quizz | and achieve the desired results in | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| -A_ToPNPEeSAEiIAC9TCSQ | Don Hornstein is a very engaging instructor in his lectures, which makes watching the videos a breeze. I wish there was more though for reading materials. I gave the course five stars because it does as it states, it is an very brief introduction into Environmental law. However, I feel there are things lacking that can be improved upon, like written work and more in depth study. Perhaps a specialization where the subjects are taught in courses of 4 weeks, where they go in more depth. Such as common law and nuisance, wildlife protection act, clean water act, and air pollution. Then finishing off with a capstone project. If a specialization was offered, I would sign up. I feel the missing requirement of coursework beyond the quizzes is detrimental to my retaining the information learned. | missing requirement of coursework beyond the | Quizz | is detrimental to my retaining the | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Very interesting information about dogs that's also a 'myth burster' of sorts for me. Dr. Hare 's video's were not only well made but also well spaced. I found a few quiz questions difficult to understand even though I paid close attention to all lessons. But hey- I passed the final quiz in first attempt so Its all good! Thanks Dr. Hare & Duke University for making this 'different' course available!! | well spaced. I found a few | Quizz | questions difficult to understand even though | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Very interesting information about dogs that's also a 'myth burster' of sorts for me. Dr. Hare 's video's were not only well made but also well spaced. I found a few quiz questions difficult to understand even though I paid close attention to all lessons. But hey- I passed the final quiz in first attempt so Its all good! Thanks Dr. Hare & Duke University for making this 'different' course available!! | But hey- I passed the final | Quizz | in first attempt so Its all | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | very well presented and enjoyable to listen to, the summary's helped a lot and the quizzes were a good way to remember what was learnt in the lessons. Thank you | summary's helped a lot and the | Quizz | were a good way to remember | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Elegant. This course teaches us how scientists have been able discover the ways in which dogs think and behave and presents those lessons within the broader context of evolution, domestication, psychology, ecology and society. The course reveals surprising and practical insights about how having a better understanding of dogs helps improve our understanding of ourselves, our human history, and contemporary society. The course explains how science helps to correct many of our common misunderstandings about the intelligence of animals, and summarizes how the manner in which we study animal behavior and cognition is changing today. The course is fun. The video lectures are clear and concise. Everything is very well organized and delivered with enthusiasm and clarity. The quizzes are not technical nor particularly challenging but do help with learning the course material. The course has references to optional reading materials and optional activities from dognition.org that you can explore with your own dog at home. I would recommend for anyone interested in animals, psychology, or behavioral science and certainly anyone with a pet dog. I personally enjoyed seeing so many examples of controlled experiments being used to discover new knowledge about the inner workings of animals. | delivered with enthusiasm and clarity. The | Quizz | are not technical nor particularly challenging | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Overall, I enjoyed this course, but it gave just a bit too much information on cognitive studies in other species, and it left me still wanting to learn more about dogs. The last 2 weeks were great! The professor was engaging and his work was very interesting, but he said ummm and ahhh so many times that it was a little distracting. The quizzes were good, but some of the questions were worded very oddly so I just couldn't get them right without several attempts. I didn't feel like he covered dog emotion at all. I thought there would be some discussion of facial expressions, the meaning of different tail wags, and the extent of dog emotion (for example, how they grieve and how long they grieve after a loss). | it was a little distracting. The | Quizz | were good, but some of the | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Very interesting and thought provoking course, I have learned a lot. However some quizzes we not moderetated and some answeres seems to have mistakes. | have learned a lot. However some | Quizz | we not moderetated and some answeres | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I really enjoyed the material of this course. Well worth the money paid. I feel that I learned a lot. I definitely suggest reading the book also. The only issue I had with the course is that there were a couple times wording on the quizzes were incorrect/misleading | a couple times wording on the | Quizz | were incorrect/misleading | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Very interesting course. The quizzes were challenging, which was good, and I liked that there was a final exam, too. The lecturer was maybe a bit too "wordy" and could have cut to the point faster without repetition but he was being enthusiastic about his topic, so that is forgiven. Overall, a good course! | Very interesting course. The | Quizz | were challenging, which was good, and | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | While the subject matter was extremely relevant, I didn't think this course was taught well. Much of the lecture and exercise focused on providing direction than actually teaching. I felt as though I was just copying and pasting sample code. At times it was as though the professor was rushing to introduce new modules rather than discussing how and why certain concepts should be used. In most cases, I could have learned the Ionic modules just as well by reading the documentation and looking at sample code, which is often what this course felt like. I'd have much rather seen the concepts explained in more detail than rushing to add new modules without any context. The quizzes are not challenging (the professor always puts the correct answer as the first choice) and the exercises just provide cut/paste code snippets without any reasoning or explanation. I would have preferred to have the exercises conducted by providing a high level goal and then a solution to check against rather than the "put this code here" approach that's used. The assignment grading is either far too obvious (whether a required module was injected or not) or completely arbitrary. Generally the assignments lacked nuance and complexity as well. I didn't feel like I really learned any of the concepts behind this material after going through the course. | new modules without any context. The | Quizz | are not challenging (the professor always | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Excellent course! Subjects are explained very well! Excellent quizzes that allow understanding of lectures better and excellent (challenging ) programming assignments. | Subjects are explained very well! Excellent | Quizz | that allow understanding of lectures better | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Good class, But it would be much better if the quiz is open to those who doesn't pay. | would be much better if the | Quizz | is open to those who doesn't | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | Great course on introductory computer programming! The video lectures are clear, concise, and well-produced. Quizzes and assignments integrate and reinforce learning objectives well, while still adding new challenges. The fact that Instructor Areti Manataki is gorgeous, very articulate and knowledgeable, and enthusiastic is an added bonus!! | lectures are clear, concise, and well-produced. | Quizz | and assignments integrate and reinforce learning | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | You will have to make a Scratch account (free) for this course. Areti is a very clear instructor that explained concepts very well for complete beginners into programming, like myself and I found the course insightful. 1) Presentation - I couldn't help but wonder whether they had a lower target age (teenagers or younger) in mind, which was entertaining at some points but also distracting at other times. // Also, I only realized halfway through the course that it is in fact possible to see what Areti is doing on the Scratch program once the quality of the video is adjusted. 2) Projects/Time Commitment - Going through the lectures and quizzes are not time consuming at all, but the projects (especially the final project) takes a lot of time. It took longer than expected because I felt like much of the practical instructions on how to use Scratch for specific purposes were not provided during the course, leaving me to work by myself. 3) Discussion Forum - When I took the course, the discussion forum was close to being dead (especially compared to some of the other courses that I was taking simultaneously on Coursera). Gerry (mentor) did an amazing job responding to my inquiry, but I noticed that although there were a lot of students talking at the beginning, introducing themselves, there weren't that many discussions concerning the final assignment, making me feel like I was working alone. It would be great if there was more time to work on the final project, and perhaps a way in which students can collaborate and help out others when faced with a bug (ie preliminary project submission and feedback session). I recommend taking this course, but realistically, you won't be program proficient after 5 weeks. You will, however, learn some basic programming theory, understand how programming works, and learn how to make a fun interactive game on Scratch! | - Going through the lectures and | Quizz | are not time consuming at all, | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | Anlatımlar ve ders planı çok iyi şekilde planlanmış. Pedagojik olarak anlatımlarda her öğrenci seviyesi düşünülmüş. Konu anlatımı sırasında sorulan sorular, ders sonlarında yapılan quiz sınavları ve proje çalışmaları oldukça güzel. Dersleri ingilizceniz yeterli olmasa bile ingilizce altyazılar ile kolaylıkla dersleri takip edebilirsiniz. Öğrendiğiniz konuları derslerinizde kullanabilir, ders dosyalarını kaydedebilir daha sonra yeniden takıldığınız yerleri seyredebilirsiniz. p.s. This review is wriiten for Turkish Users. | sırasında sorulan sorular, ders sonlarında yapılan | Quizz | sınavları ve proje çalışmaları oldukça güzel. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This was a great class for me. I had fun learning about programming concepts and Scratch. There are weekly quizzes and two projects to work on. Both the quizzes and the projects will definitely help you learn more about software design principles. You will have fun while learning and working on your coding skills. I took toward taking more courses on Scratch if they are available. | concepts and Scratch. There are weekly | Quizz | and two projects to work on. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This was a great class for me. I had fun learning about programming concepts and Scratch. There are weekly quizzes and two projects to work on. Both the quizzes and the projects will definitely help you learn more about software design principles. You will have fun while learning and working on your coding skills. I took toward taking more courses on Scratch if they are available. | projects to work on. Both the | Quizz | and the projects will definitely help | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| -Y69EP9dEeSa0SIACyGBQw | Very well made, great contents. The only reason I removed a star is it seemed to me there was more topics in the quizes than in the course itself in the first part. It was a bit confusing and the quizes required to look up information on the internet and there was no real way to know these topics would be in the quizes. Otherwise, I enjoyed the class and learned a gread deal. | there was more topics in the | Quizz | than in the course itself in | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| -Y69EP9dEeSa0SIACyGBQw | Very well made, great contents. The only reason I removed a star is it seemed to me there was more topics in the quizes than in the course itself in the first part. It was a bit confusing and the quizes required to look up information on the internet and there was no real way to know these topics would be in the quizes. Otherwise, I enjoyed the class and learned a gread deal. | was a bit confusing and the | Quizz | required to look up information on | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| -Y69EP9dEeSa0SIACyGBQw | Very well made, great contents. The only reason I removed a star is it seemed to me there was more topics in the quizes than in the course itself in the first part. It was a bit confusing and the quizes required to look up information on the internet and there was no real way to know these topics would be in the quizes. Otherwise, I enjoyed the class and learned a gread deal. | these topics would be in the | Quizz | Otherwise, I enjoyed the class and | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Simple and fast. Try to put more difficulty on the quizzes. | to put more difficulty on the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Great, straightforward course. It would be nice to have "practice" problems to help engage the information beyond the quizzes and video lectures. | help engage the information beyond the | Quizz | and video lectures. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Please include exercises for computing the ratios and the valuation methods. In-video questions would have helped more. The quiz does not actually test the understanding of the topic in-depth. There can be some external readings suggested - resources that help us get more understanding on the subjects discussed. | questions would have helped more. The | Quizz | does not actually test the understanding | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | This course gives a good introduction for financial knowledge. However, the quizes are too simple. | introduction for financial knowledge. However, the | Quizz | are too simple. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Excelent professor! Just include some more examples or quiz problems. Thank you UCI | Just include some more examples or | Quizz | problems. Thank you UCI | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | This course was quick and simple. I enjoyed the definitions and monetary examples. I would have more quizzes and harder questions. | monetary examples. I would have more | Quizz | and harder questions. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 0ayiYtaOEeWvEArBkQ8C9Q | Useful course for exposure to debates that animate the common law, with some bits about the relationship of English and European law, pre-Brexit. It's probably fair to say this course offers some experience in the elusive skill of how to think like a lawyer. The legal debates might seem a bit pedantic to all but the specialist. For example, the course attempts to sketch in the debates about proper use of precedent, with frequent reminders that the task of fully developing such debates is beyond the scope of the course--I'll bet some students were thinking, thank goodness it's beyond the scope. It's all clear enough, and delivered pretty much exclusively in traditional lecture format--there's even a lectern. Each of these lessons about the legal debates outlines and develops the opposing sides but doesn't give you a whole lot of new content to be tested. Thus, many of the quiz questions are on comprehending passages from cases, statutes, or commentary. Such quiz questions sometimes feel like those reading comprehension questions from a standardized test, rather than tests of the material covered in the lesson. | be tested. Thus, many of the | Quizz | questions are on comprehending passages from | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| 0ayiYtaOEeWvEArBkQ8C9Q | Useful course for exposure to debates that animate the common law, with some bits about the relationship of English and European law, pre-Brexit. It's probably fair to say this course offers some experience in the elusive skill of how to think like a lawyer. The legal debates might seem a bit pedantic to all but the specialist. For example, the course attempts to sketch in the debates about proper use of precedent, with frequent reminders that the task of fully developing such debates is beyond the scope of the course--I'll bet some students were thinking, thank goodness it's beyond the scope. It's all clear enough, and delivered pretty much exclusively in traditional lecture format--there's even a lectern. Each of these lessons about the legal debates outlines and develops the opposing sides but doesn't give you a whole lot of new content to be tested. Thus, many of the quiz questions are on comprehending passages from cases, statutes, or commentary. Such quiz questions sometimes feel like those reading comprehension questions from a standardized test, rather than tests of the material covered in the lesson. | from cases, statutes, or commentary. Such | Quizz | questions sometimes feel like those reading | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 0ayiYtaOEeWvEArBkQ8C9Q | I am an engineer with no background in law, but found it rather easy to follow Prof Gearey as he neatly unravelled the hidden logic of a complex, amorphous subject. The lectures build on the topic from first principles and the quizzes are well designed. I am hooked on the subject and am ready to tackle some of the more difficult subjects. | topic from first principles and the | Quizz | are well designed. I am hooked | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 0EqoQy7_EeWPngoW78wA_Q | I wish they could let us take the quizzes without having to pay to verify that we have understood the lectures. However, the topic of the course and the lectures are clear and on point. Love the lessons so far! | they could let us take the | Quizz | without having to pay to verify | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 0EqoQy7_EeWPngoW78wA_Q | Interesting overview of group psychology - but in essence just a bunch of definitions and statistics. I would have liked more focus on how the group dynamics works and how to influence these - and break the circle of unpopularity, the tools to overcome the aggressive stamp etc. Also, I found the quizzes often had unclear and ambiguous wording. Generally happy to have taken the course - but did not quite meet the description or my expectations. Off to the next :-) | stamp etc. Also, I found the | Quizz | often had unclear and ambiguous wording. | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 0HiU7Oe4EeWTAQ4yevf_oQ | Nice resource for missing data. Several problems with the course: Quizzes are not aligned well with instructional material. Low quality of sound in videos. No feedback mechanisms. | data. Several problems with the course: | Quizz | are not aligned well with instructional | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| 0HiU7Oe4EeWTAQ4yevf_oQ | I wrote some indepth feedback, but par for the course, I can't save it - either here or on the discussion board. Nothing obscene, but certainly some major frustration with format, inconsistencies in scoring and format, information not reviewed in the course on some of the quizzes, the fact that Coursera keeps trying to sell me the specialty, the lack of ANY moderator on the discussion board to provide assistance...and can go on with the technical issues to but I won't! | the course on some of the | Quizz | the fact that Coursera keeps trying | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| 0HiU7Oe4EeWTAQ4yevf_oQ | Aside from a little hiccup with one of the quiz questions during week 1, this course was worth my time. | little hiccup with one of the | Quizz | questions during week 1, this course | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 0jVDw8z0EeSMfSIAC4tSZw | Great course for Teachers or those, like me, who want to gain general knowledge. I like the diversity of reading, video content and quizzes and the aspects of geology that were covered. | diversity of reading, video content and | Quizz | and the aspects of geology that | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 0MxqCTygEea1gAouz62QPw | Appropriate difficulty and quiz, etcs. | Appropriate difficulty and | Quizz | etcs. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 0SYC5bspEeScJSIAC0aWWQ | Un MOOC vivant, complet, et évidemment passionnant. On commence à bien voir l'intérêt de telles plateformes avec tous les formats abordés (interviews, quizzes, tribune...) | avec tous les formats abordés (interviews, | Quizz | tribune. . . ) | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | I like the structure of the course that different professor is in charge of different chapter but the contents of each chapter are linked to the others. Each chapter offers different topic (of course) but the style and structure are the same. In detail, there are always theoretical and practical part as well as small quizzes in each chapter. In addition, the guideline and syllabus provide students with great details. On top of that, chapter assignments are provided with solution which are necessary for students to check their knowledge. I would love to participate in follow up course which might deal with more advanced topics after this basic one. | practical part as well as small | Quizz | in each chapter. In addition, the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 1cjJ8SGJEeWa6hIFcmm3AQ | Overall good quality course, interesting and relevant. The only drawback are the quizzes because sometimes the answer is not clear, even after watching carefully the video and reading material. | relevant. The only drawback are the | Quizz | because sometimes the answer is not | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 1cz3WSsXEeWccAqzeA4VPw | Good introductory course. I felt the wording of some of the quiz questions to be uneccessarily ambigous. | the wording of some of the | Quizz | questions to be uneccessarily ambigous. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | A good course have lots of Quizzes and lecture material takes some time thats all. | A good course have lots of | Quizz | and lecture material takes some time | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good Job I really enjoyed having this course and learn new tips but if you can open the quiz parts so participants are able to solve them without having to purchase the Course Certificate that will be better. Thanks for your effort. | but if you can open the | Quizz | parts so participants are able to | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Too basic! Can't even do the quiz without payment! | Too basic! Can't even do the | Quizz | without payment! | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | great content. learnt about strategic reserve times, and other practical tips. if only I could see my quiz results for free | if only I could see my | Quizz | results for free | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I liked the course, however I'd like to give some feedback that might be useful to you: I was surprised a bit how short the course is. When I read this "4-8 hours of videos, readings, and quizzes" I thought that there will be 4-8 hours of videos _besides_ readings and quizzes. So this one is a bit misleading. Despite of this I liked the course. It gave me a lot of tricks and tips. However I don't understand the final 96.4% either. Maybe I missed something because after the last assignment the result has gone away in less then 1 second. As far as I know all my assignments were 100%. The design of the videos is a bit "spartan" :) I finished a couple of other Coursera courses (HCI, Gamification etc.) where the videos were much more delightful. This white background, black text is very disappointing. Anyway: Thanks! | 4-8 hours of videos, readings, and | Quizz | I thought that there will be | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I liked the course, however I'd like to give some feedback that might be useful to you: I was surprised a bit how short the course is. When I read this "4-8 hours of videos, readings, and quizzes" I thought that there will be 4-8 hours of videos _besides_ readings and quizzes. So this one is a bit misleading. Despite of this I liked the course. It gave me a lot of tricks and tips. However I don't understand the final 96.4% either. Maybe I missed something because after the last assignment the result has gone away in less then 1 second. As far as I know all my assignments were 100%. The design of the videos is a bit "spartan" :) I finished a couple of other Coursera courses (HCI, Gamification etc.) where the videos were much more delightful. This white background, black text is very disappointing. Anyway: Thanks! | hours of videos _besides_ readings and | Quizz | So this one is a bit | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Quizzes could have been harder. The presentations were great. Took back a lot from this short course. | | Quizz | could have been harder. The presentations | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Maybe a little too short. Quite easy on the quizzes too. The information is very good though. Many of these techniques I am already doing, so this was more of an affirmation of being on the right track for me than much of anything else. | too short. Quite easy on the | Quizz | too. The information is very good | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I soon got bored with the simplistic solutions, lack of challenge, and frankly, a condescending attitude. I then took all the quizzes, guessed or surmised the answers, got 100% right, and went on to something more productive. | attitude. I then took all the | Quizz | guessed or surmised the answers, got | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | A nice blend of statistics, applied labs using R, and a final exploratory data analysis project that the course prepares you for very well. The instructor is informative, easy to understand, and brings enjoyment to the video lectures. The open textbook is well aligned and easy to read. The quizzes and labs are challenging. The mentors are responsive and helpful. | aligned and easy to read. The | Quizz | and labs are challenging. The mentors | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | occasions, concepts are used in the | Quizz | questions (either directly in the questions | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | in the " correction" for the | Quizz | after you have submitted it) that | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | a gap between course content and | Quizz | questions was on a quiz question | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | and quiz questions was on a | Quizz | question about inference. I failed the | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | well). But in one of the | Quizz | question, there was one of the | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Excellent course. Very engaging. The amount of effort the team has put in is very evident. The quizzes in the lecture make you pause, think and reinforce the concepts. I am currently doing John Hopkins data specialization as well, but this is way better. Thank you! | put in is very evident. The | Quizz | in the lecture make you pause, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | I am an O Level graduate and the course is perfectly designed for anybody to start learning basic statistics and R. The quizzes and assignments make it more interesting. | learning basic statistics and R. The | Quizz | and assignments make it more interesting. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Professor Cetinkaya-Rundel's explanations are clear and she gives many examples, the quizzes are fair and I think it is an excellent idea to have a lab in R to get students familiar with that tool. I recommend that students read the book chapters and do the practice problems there, it's very helpful. My one criticism is that the amount of R taught in the course is not really enough to do a good job on the capstone project, because the data in the given database is formatted very differently. I think maybe the course staff could reformat the database to make it more user-friendly for beginning R users, but in the meantime you may want to study a little R on the side at, say, DataCamp. | and she gives many examples, the | Quizz | are fair and I think it | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | and has included some very effective | Quizz | and lab exercises. I first encountered | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | criticism is that the non-graded exercise | Quizz | are way easier than the real | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | are way easier than the real | Quizz | and do not really prepare you | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | more complex questions in the actual | Quizz | It's a petty and unimportant kind | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 2g7bdO-KEeWTgg7cwVeSqQ | I think it's a good way to introduce the world of "accounting" but I think videos need to be more specific and I would have appreciated if there was some practical exercise and not only quiz! But all the informations are exposed clearly. | some practical exercise and not only | Quizz | But all the informations are exposed | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 2gfgMl2JEeWY_RLuY5ZrOQ | The professor is very clear, repetitive which is easier to retain all the information. The course is easy, with great short quizzes at the end of each module! | course is easy, with great short | Quizz | at the end of each module! | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | This is an incredible first course in game design with Unity3D. The professor does a great job teaching the material with perfect sized lessons. The quizzes help reinforce the lessons topics while having a good depth of knowledge. | material with perfect sized lessons. The | Quizz | help reinforce the lessons topics while | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Excellent course to get started with. Concise and fun lessons with really fun assignments. I do wish the quizzes were slightly more challenging/longer. Would recommend, 8/10! | fun assignments. I do wish the | Quizz | were slightly more challenging/longer. Would recommend, | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | quality of the video-presentations is top! assignments and quizzes are fair | the video-presentations is top! assignments and | Quizz | are fair | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I loved to follow this course and learn the basics of Unity3D to start making my own games. The material was well structured, and Brian challenged the students to learn and test what they learned with the course quizzes and the projects. I have recommended this course to my all friends. | what they learned with the course | Quizz | and the projects. I have recommended | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Awesome Awesome ! You have to pay for quizes Thank you a lot for the cource like this | ! You have to pay for | Quizz | Thank you a lot for the | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Was very, very usefull and totally worth the time, energy to watch the videos, do the quizes. Dr. Chuck is a really great person, easy to understand. Recommend this class for everybody whose a little interested in the making of the biggest innovation in the 20th century. | to watch the videos, do the | Quizz | Dr. Chuck is a really great | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | I am an English language professor. I took this course for "fun"--my BA minor was in history and I am a curious person. I love this course and Dr. Chuck! The way he explains things is "IN ENGLISH!!" I mean that the way he explains things makes sense to a non-literate IT person. In addition, the content is both interesting and informative. The structure of the course is easy to follow. I have taken a few courses where I was not sure what I was supposed to do next, but not in this course. Frankly, I prefer a course where I take quizzes. Projects can be educational and interesting and sometimes necessary to the course content, but I am working 40 to 60 hours a week and don't always have time for courses with projects--and those are the courses I have not completed. I liked just taking quizzes about the content. So far, this has been the best course I have taken in Coursera. And I have already signed up for a second course with Dr. Chuck and the University of Michigan. | prefer a course where I take | Quizz | Projects can be educational and interesting | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | I am an English language professor. I took this course for "fun"--my BA minor was in history and I am a curious person. I love this course and Dr. Chuck! The way he explains things is "IN ENGLISH!!" I mean that the way he explains things makes sense to a non-literate IT person. In addition, the content is both interesting and informative. The structure of the course is easy to follow. I have taken a few courses where I was not sure what I was supposed to do next, but not in this course. Frankly, I prefer a course where I take quizzes. Projects can be educational and interesting and sometimes necessary to the course content, but I am working 40 to 60 hours a week and don't always have time for courses with projects--and those are the courses I have not completed. I liked just taking quizzes about the content. So far, this has been the best course I have taken in Coursera. And I have already signed up for a second course with Dr. Chuck and the University of Michigan. | not completed. I liked just taking | Quizz | about the content. So far, this | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Great at teaching the basics of Internet. Quizzes should be more challenging. I liked very much the videos. | at teaching the basics of Internet. | Quizz | should be more challenging. I liked | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | One of the strongest cases for enrolling in this course is that it will really help to round out the student's understanding and background of how and why computers work the way they do. The history portion is presented in a really accessible and palatable way, and it looks like it is a thorough job. Charles Severance knows his computers! I started reading Where Wizards Stay Up Late by Katie Hafner because of his interview with her that he includes in the course materials, and it complements the course completely. The quizzes also do a good job of making sure you've retained the important points and are following along. | it complements the course completely. The | Quizz | also do a good job of | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Good scenario and a good learning opportunity. I don't think the quizzes related well to the problem we were trying to solve and introduced a red herring, however. Predicting the next best word is not the same as predicting the relative probability of 4 words where one is the "right answer" but not necessarily the best prediction of a text prediction algorithm. | learning opportunity. I don't think the | Quizz | related well to the problem we | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 33tTdzylEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | very well explained! pronunciation is clear and easy to do quizzes! enjoying every bit of it :) thank you !! | is clear and easy to do | Quizz | enjoying every bit of it :) | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 3791_tdbEeS2-SIAC4-TTw | This is the best course if you want to learn the Fundamentals of Management. Dave keeps it very simple and explains the topics lucidly. I have trained in some topics as part of my job which made it easy for me to get certified in this course. Some of the questions on the quiz have real world scenario's which are pretty fun to work on. | Some of the questions on the | Quizz | have real world scenario's which are | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 3791_tdbEeS2-SIAC4-TTw | too easy quizes( | too easy | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 39iAT2nMEeSqESIAC44MZQ | Can't actually be done as a free course, like others on the site; you have to pay just to get a quiz grade. | to pay just to get a | Quizz | grade. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course covers many aspects of classification, with each section building on the one before. The lectures cover the theory, with a little bit of practical information, fairly well. The instructor tries to make the lectures interesting, and they are. The quizzes seem designed both to reinforce what the lectures taught and to expand on them. The quizzes, particularly those based on programming, could use proofreading by someone newer to the subject. | lectures interesting, and they are. The | Quizz | seem designed both to reinforce what | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course covers many aspects of classification, with each section building on the one before. The lectures cover the theory, with a little bit of practical information, fairly well. The instructor tries to make the lectures interesting, and they are. The quizzes seem designed both to reinforce what the lectures taught and to expand on them. The quizzes, particularly those based on programming, could use proofreading by someone newer to the subject. | and to expand on them. The | Quizz | particularly those based on programming, could | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Good class, But it would be much better if the quiz is open to those who doesn't pay. | would be much better if the | Quizz | is open to those who doesn't | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The quizzes can be a bit more challenging | The | Quizz | can be a bit more challenging | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The videos are fine. But, It's SIMPLY TERRIBLE to force people to pay to be able to do the quizzes. There was no such a thing in the first two courses (by the way, I gave high rates for both). It is OK to pay for the verified certificate, however, disabling the functions in the course is a wrong way to earn money, because people who want to learn the course might not necessarily want the certificate, and this is unfair to them because it limits the resources available. This whole Specialization thing starts to make me feel like you guys are in urgent need of money, rather benefiting the community. Remember there are tons of free resources on the internet, and this only undermines your strengths. You will lose tons of potential fans. Stop being seemingly arrogant. | to be able to do the | Quizz | There was no such a thing | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | I'm not a musician and have little knowledge of classical music, but I figured that an on-line course would be a great way to gain some understanding of this type of music. Mr. Biss made the course both enjoyable and educational. While I wasn't able to comprehend all of the concepts, it wasn't for lack of a clear explanation and demonstration. Somehow, I managed to pass all of the quizzes and came away with an appreciation of Beethoven's music. | managed to pass all of the | Quizz | and came away with an appreciation | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I learned Korean nearly 20 years ago and decided to work through this course as a refresher. The course is fairly well done. The pace is a little aggressive, which is fine if you take your time to learn each lesson before moving on. Language courses are not the kind where you can just listen and then take the quiz. Slow down. Practice. By week four the speakers in the audio files were speaking on a level where I was having difficulty distinguishing some of the words. In particular, the differences between the 20th and 21st of the month can be somewhat challenging for a beginning speaker of Korean. On the quizzes, I slowed down and repeated some of the audio. Even so, I missed a few questions. I think the course should take more care in producing the audio files and planning the questions. Some of those my be nearly impossible for beginners to get correct. | just listen and then take the | Quizz | Slow down. Practice. By week four | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I learned Korean nearly 20 years ago and decided to work through this course as a refresher. The course is fairly well done. The pace is a little aggressive, which is fine if you take your time to learn each lesson before moving on. Language courses are not the kind where you can just listen and then take the quiz. Slow down. Practice. By week four the speakers in the audio files were speaking on a level where I was having difficulty distinguishing some of the words. In particular, the differences between the 20th and 21st of the month can be somewhat challenging for a beginning speaker of Korean. On the quizzes, I slowed down and repeated some of the audio. Even so, I missed a few questions. I think the course should take more care in producing the audio files and planning the questions. Some of those my be nearly impossible for beginners to get correct. | beginning speaker of Korean. On the | Quizz | I slowed down and repeated some | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I have studied Korean for about 10 months and still found some of the information useful. The numbers and dates always confuse me till this day. Quizzes were on average too easy, just listening or multiple choice. The answers were easy to find without much thought. | always confuse me till this day. | Quizz | were on average too easy, just | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 3TdKKA-VEeWhsgqB1eduww | Not the best one on coursera. Included many details that are not really relevant and quizes just checked if you memorized it. | that are not really relevant and | Quizz | just checked if you memorized it. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 3TdKKA-VEeWhsgqB1eduww | It was amazing experience with all the course videos and the quiz at the end of the week was helpful. | all the course videos and the | Quizz | at the end of the week | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Very interesting and intriguing, quizzes are a bit hard because they cover so much material so if you are a working individual I feel it's almost impossible to accomplish but it's nice for general knowledge. Two notes- First, it would be nice if the professor wouldn't use "get yourself comfortable" in the beginning of EACH video - it is a bit annoying. Second, on quizzes & tests it's recommended that you omit the sentence "in the presentation" that starts EVERY question/quizz/test because obviously it is based on what we are presented in the videos so it's just time consuming, in my opinion. Besides that, great for general knowledge, awesome teacher, I really enjoyed this course, thank you! | Very interesting and intriguing, | Quizz | are a bit hard because they | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Very interesting and intriguing, quizzes are a bit hard because they cover so much material so if you are a working individual I feel it's almost impossible to accomplish but it's nice for general knowledge. Two notes- First, it would be nice if the professor wouldn't use "get yourself comfortable" in the beginning of EACH video - it is a bit annoying. Second, on quizzes & tests it's recommended that you omit the sentence "in the presentation" that starts EVERY question/quizz/test because obviously it is based on what we are presented in the videos so it's just time consuming, in my opinion. Besides that, great for general knowledge, awesome teacher, I really enjoyed this course, thank you! | is a bit annoying. Second, on | Quizz | & tests it's recommended that you | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | I think Professor Philip Zelikow is a charismatic speaker. I enjoy listening such an eloquent teacher. The content of the lesson is compact, complete, enlightening and inspiring. I find some of the quiz questions ambiguous. Thank you very much. | inspiring. I find some of the | Quizz | questions ambiguous. Thank you very much. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | The course covers an extensive important period of time and in a very organized way. You never get lost. The quizzes are of remarkable level, very well-thought and never superficial. The way things get related and start making sense helped me get to another level in my knowledge of history. I will never study any subject without making reference to other important events that happened elsewhere. And will always refer my readings on this theme to what I learned in this course. Great chance to watch Professor Zelikow's classes from Brazil. Thanks Coursera! | way. You never get lost. The | Quizz | are of remarkable level, very well-thought | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Good overview of available tools. Lack of practice exercises makes preparing for quizzes difficult. However, the course project does a good job to get your feet wet with Shiny Apps. | of practice exercises makes preparing for | Quizz | difficult. However, the course project does | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | The new platform is very versatile and easy to navigate. The page layout is much more clear. It is easy to navigate from course material to discussion boards. I like the Quiz format, including expanding the number of choices for the multiple choice selections, but the grading was confusing. For Quiz 3, some questions came back with multiple "Well Done" comments, even when I had not selected the answer for which I was being praised. I also was told I made errors on the same question.... and this was after I answered the question (Question 2, on R generic functions) the exact same as I had answered it when I took the course earlier this year. I was not a fan of not having to take a picture to submit work, so I am pleased that is no longer a requirement. I hope the typing pattern match is sufficient to affirm identity. I have one comment on content specific to this class. Week 3 content lacks relevancy to the project and data products in general. I agree that knowledge of R packages, classes, and methods is an important part of understanding R. I am not sure where that fits in the Data Science curriculum as a whole, though. Maybe expanding the curriculum to include a second, more advanced R class, with a project to write our own methods, build an R package, or do something with yhat. That would assign relevant work to reinforce the lectures. I would be happy to do further beta testing. DCP | to discussion boards. I like the | Quizz | format, including expanding the number of | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | The new platform is very versatile and easy to navigate. The page layout is much more clear. It is easy to navigate from course material to discussion boards. I like the Quiz format, including expanding the number of choices for the multiple choice selections, but the grading was confusing. For Quiz 3, some questions came back with multiple "Well Done" comments, even when I had not selected the answer for which I was being praised. I also was told I made errors on the same question.... and this was after I answered the question (Question 2, on R generic functions) the exact same as I had answered it when I took the course earlier this year. I was not a fan of not having to take a picture to submit work, so I am pleased that is no longer a requirement. I hope the typing pattern match is sufficient to affirm identity. I have one comment on content specific to this class. Week 3 content lacks relevancy to the project and data products in general. I agree that knowledge of R packages, classes, and methods is an important part of understanding R. I am not sure where that fits in the Data Science curriculum as a whole, though. Maybe expanding the curriculum to include a second, more advanced R class, with a project to write our own methods, build an R package, or do something with yhat. That would assign relevant work to reinforce the lectures. I would be happy to do further beta testing. DCP | but the grading was confusing. For | Quizz | 3, some questions came back with | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Taken this course in its old fashion style. Now reviewing the new design was a little bit displacing, but I ascribe this to the fact I've done all the specialization courses in the old design. However the structure of the course is quite good. Some typos were reported, as well as a bug on the unanswered questions in quiz 3. Main worst point was the missing format of several text boxes. I would have appreciated paragraphs, bold and italic, some links, picture, not only raw plain text. Overall review is nonetheless over the average. | bug on the unanswered questions in | Quizz | 3. Main worst point was the | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Quizzes kept requiring information that was oddly specific (needing an exact decimal number without multiple choice options), which would have been okay except that it was not covered in the lectures. Ended up dropping course because there is no way to get through the quizzes if the information is not covered. | | Quizz | kept requiring information that was oddly | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Quizzes kept requiring information that was oddly specific (needing an exact decimal number without multiple choice options), which would have been okay except that it was not covered in the lectures. Ended up dropping course because there is no way to get through the quizzes if the information is not covered. | no way to get through the | Quizz | if the information is not covered. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Excellent Presentations! Answers for Quizzes are typically not provided in the lectures and extremely hard to find in the textbook or challenging to enter. | Excellent Presentations! Answers for | Quizz | are typically not provided in the | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | This is a very good course. The material is formatted in a way that is very digestible even for those without a strong science background. Some of the quiz questions are harder than they should be, and challenging to locate the correct answer to. And it is not immediately clear that in order to pass the course a student must read the book the course is based upon. There are some spelling errors that should be corrected, and a few errors in the filmed dialogue. But the information contained in the course is good. | strong science background. Some of the | Quizz | questions are harder than they should | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 414OIyBREeWcQw5YiljpGw | Los profesores explican muy bien, pero el nivel de las lecciones es muy fácil a diferencia de los Quiz que el nivel es más fuerte, y eso es lo confuso, la gran diferencia de nivel entre explicación y el taller para el alumno. | muy fácil a diferencia de los | Quizz | que el nivel es más fuerte, | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | greed rules.... previously the course was free including the quizzes to check whether one learned something or not; now you have to pay 60$ just to check your learning progress (I do not need a certificate, just learning for myself) | the course was free including the | Quizz | to check whether one learned something | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I like this course. It took me about 5 hours per week including quizzes. Yes, assignment was a bit tricky to me due to language capacity and need to write about two pages for each. Hence, it took me extra 2 hours per week. I learn and took with me from course some easy and practical tools such as MU model of Leadership, SMART goals setting etc. Lectures were not boring at all and I enjoyed very much. Unfortunately I consider this Specialization overpriced yet very useful. I can not afford 530 USD for continuing. | about 5 hours per week including | Quizz | Yes, assignment was a bit tricky | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | This is hands down the best MOOC I've taken so far on any subject. Both instructor's lectures excel in both choice and presentation of content, and the writing assignments force students to think about and understand the material to some degree of completion. Suggestions: There should be a non-trivial graded writing assignment every week. In the whole MOOC format, peer-graded writing assignments are the only instrument developed so far serving as a meaningful assessment device while forcing students to think about the material in a more than casual manner. The multiple choice quizzes are easily passed by listening to lectures and the material is quickly forgotten afterwards. Students submitting late may also be given the option to transfer their work so far to the next offering of the class. | than casual manner. The multiple choice | Quizz | are easily passed by listening to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | across the supplementary readings after the | Quizz | has been taken. And when you're | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | once each step is completed. The | Quizz | at the end of each unit | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | I appreciate the ability to take | Quizz | at least three times and that | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | and that you use the same | Quizz | for each time it is retaken. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | Something I would change about the | Quizz | is, that the quizzes display the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | about the quizzes is, that the | Quizz | display the questions that were asked, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | question that was asked, once the | Quizz | has been submitted. The videos and | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | including the questions asked for each | Quizz | after submission I would change your | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | photo of the student before a | Quizz | might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | when the student is taking a | Quizz | later in the day and may | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 4G2HtIWlEeSlzyIACiGe0w | Estupendo. La dinámica, información, formato, quizes... todo súper acertado e interesante. Súper recomendado. | Estupendo. La dinámica, información, formato, | Quizz | . . todo súper acertado e | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 4gFDJxJhEeayXBIQdVd_6w | The course material and the instructor's lectures are excellent. However the quizzes are programmed incorrectly--marking wrong answers right and right answers wrong too often. I gained a few skills that I now put to use when writing songs. The course also provided some insightful information on prosody, phrasing, and a little bit of history. It was definitely worth the time I invested in doing this course. | instructor's lectures are excellent. However the | Quizz | are programmed incorrectly--marking wrong answers right | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | First certificate obtained! This is a rich course where we can learn theory and get to know the industry. The course provides guest speaker videos, detailed lecture notes, and other forms of interactive learning. Although the lecturers have an Italian accent, it does not hurt at all. Thank you so much! Suggestion: 1. making assignments a little bit more challenging, so students could have a deeper thought about the topics; 2. the final quiz could be an essay or branding/marketing plan. | about the topics; 2. the final | Quizz | could be an essay or branding/marketing | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Realmente ame el curso! los contenidos simples y facilmente explicados, el unico problema es que los quiz estaban malos a ratos | el unico problema es que los | Quizz | estaban malos a ratos | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Update: Coursera or the course content provider has changed this course in a bad way: You have to PAY for the course IN FULL AMOUNT JUST to get your assignments submitted and reviewed by peer learner. What a pity. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Great course! Material is very useful and interesting! The course introduces concepts in a progressive and comprehensive way so that knowledge is easy to be understood. Practise quiz and assignments perfectly reflects course materials. Also, professor Muppala is quite funny. Enjoy the course! | is easy to be understood. Practise | Quizz | and assignments perfectly reflects course materials. | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| 5AYG1NbQEeWEOQ7ZE5jC0Q | I find this to be a very nice and stimulating course. The teachers are enthusiastic and entertaining. The course material (slides, quizzes, captions) needs to be polished, but the general organization of the course is logical, clear, and systematic. The course presents an experimentalist's view of the subject, which I find very good considering that much related Coursera material is quite theoretical. There are plenty of historical notes and introductions of general neurobiology research viewpoints (don't miss the excellent bonus material interviews!). In particular, I enjoyed the "cherry picking" metaphor. Some students have had problems with the instructors' accent, but perhaps because English is not my first language, this has not been a problem for me at all. I'm looking forward to part two of the course! | and entertaining. The course material (slides, | Quizz | captions) needs to be polished, but | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5c9BeiTUEeW3AhKilvRZ0Q | I learn a lot from this class so far, but I'm having difficult for the Quiz, i know i should take some notes, hahaha | but I'm having difficult for the | Quizz | i know i should take some | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 5D-g-HEiEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | I found this course very interested since it covers some important tools for managing people through quiz, and some external HR people are being interviewed during the course session, where we can learn from them what they experienced as HR managers, one more thing is, regarding the peer assignment which helped me too, I would probably advise my friends to take this course, reason why I gave you 5 stars... | important tools for managing people through | Quizz | and some external HR people are | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 5D-g-HEiEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | A very enjoyable course: not as easy as the subject would let you think. It is a real preparation in the sense that you get an intensive crash course on basics of HR philosophy/history/trends and what's to be expected from a manager. The instructor really made an effort to render the course into a MOOC format. Each course is well documented, his speeches are clear and each sentence has been carefully selected. He summarizes a lot and makes an extra effort to make us understand how each subject is connected to the other. I found him a great pedagog. As for quizzes, you need to understand the subject and not just memorize. Very entertaining. I sure will watch it again! | him a great pedagog. As for | Quizz | you need to understand the subject | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 5g_hAYo4EeWTzg6WBWinhQ | A great course to start. IT bridges between Design Thinking and Agile. I found that very valuable, especially for Product Owners who need to understand what "Pre-Scrum" activities are required/helpful in their role, i.e. it doesn't make sense to define what you want before you know what you need. Some of the videos have a bit of lengths, if you're already familiar with the topic. But that might be part of the didactics for beginners. The Quizzes sometimes seem to be a bit 'awkward' - i.e. maybe they aren't very obvious for non-native speakers while they are for native speakers? It's often littel details, or rather the tone of the sentence, that seems to make it the right answer. The access to templates etc. is great although they are available in the internet anyway if you know where to look. The skits remind me the TV distance learning for English in the 70ies in Germany. I find the funny but not as usefull as they could be. But I like the idea. | of the didactics for beginners. The | Quizz | sometimes seem to be a bit | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5hRQhN9AEeWsvwp02yXW0Q | I would have enjoyed it more if I had had enough knowledge to do the Honors quiz! I downloaded all the videos so I could play them over without chewing up my data, but the quality is so poor you can't always make out the writing - i's and j's all look similar. It would be better if the presentation material was bigger and the facilitator images smaller - you need only see a face, not the whole upper body in the foreground. Nevertheless, I have been enlightened ! | enough knowledge to do the Honors | Quizz | I downloaded all the videos so | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Very much enjoyed the course; the instructor used good examples and the content was relevant and aligned well with the subject matter. Enough examples and quizzes to reinforce the theories. I'm looking forward to follow-up with the 2nd course. | the subject matter. Enough examples and | Quizz | to reinforce the theories. I'm looking | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Excellent Course with a good learning opportunity with Examples and Quiz at end of each topic | good learning opportunity with Examples and | Quizz | at end of each topic | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I really really enjoy the teaching. The professor explains concepts in a clear and concise fashion. The quizs are useful too in helping me consolidating and realising the gaps in my knowledge. Game theory is now one of my favourite themes in Economics. | a clear and concise fashion. The | Quizz | are useful too in helping me | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Great course for an introduction on competitive strategy. Easy to understand and follow and the quizzes keep you on track. Recommended! | to understand and follow and the | Quizz | keep you on track. Recommended! | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I have mixed feelings about this course. From a instructor and content perspective, this is by far the best. Tobias is a great teacher and he explains the concepts very nicely followed up by quizzes. What I hated about this course was the web exprience and how the final questions were set up. It gave a feeling that the intent was to "get you" vusrses questions that were more to see if a student has understood the concepts. Some of the multiple choice answers were borderline and a rational mind could go either way. So my suggestion is to significantly rewamp your quizzes. From a technical perspective, the system did not capture my results the first time, It graded me differently on the same set of questions (this needs to be really looked into) for example the first time I answered the question a certain way, it marked me correct, however the same answer in the next attemp was marked wrong??? This lead to a lot of confusion (and I am not saying because the numbers in the answers were changed on different attemps but the content itself was marked differently). I loved this course and would have loved to attempt the advanced strategy course however but for the above reasons will not. Its dissapointing that although the instructure and content is world class the technical glitches are too many for a student to have a seamless, learning experience. Hope this helps and topics mentioned aboove would be seriously looked into. I want this course to be a success as this the one of the most insightful courses that I have taken. | concepts very nicely followed up by | Quizz | What I hated about this course | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I have mixed feelings about this course. From a instructor and content perspective, this is by far the best. Tobias is a great teacher and he explains the concepts very nicely followed up by quizzes. What I hated about this course was the web exprience and how the final questions were set up. It gave a feeling that the intent was to "get you" vusrses questions that were more to see if a student has understood the concepts. Some of the multiple choice answers were borderline and a rational mind could go either way. So my suggestion is to significantly rewamp your quizzes. From a technical perspective, the system did not capture my results the first time, It graded me differently on the same set of questions (this needs to be really looked into) for example the first time I answered the question a certain way, it marked me correct, however the same answer in the next attemp was marked wrong??? This lead to a lot of confusion (and I am not saying because the numbers in the answers were changed on different attemps but the content itself was marked differently). I loved this course and would have loved to attempt the advanced strategy course however but for the above reasons will not. Its dissapointing that although the instructure and content is world class the technical glitches are too many for a student to have a seamless, learning experience. Hope this helps and topics mentioned aboove would be seriously looked into. I want this course to be a success as this the one of the most insightful courses that I have taken. | suggestion is to significantly rewamp your | Quizz | From a technical perspective, the system | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Excellent course with extensive amount of real world examples. Really gives you insight in the fundamentals of the business strategy that businesses pursue in competitive markets. Quizzes are not hard but do teach you the point. Definitely recommended if you are looking for some insight in competitive strategy and the reasoning behind it. | that businesses pursue in competitive markets. | Quizz | are not hard but do teach | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I liked the course, it opened my eyes to new ways of thinking, and I'm continuing the advanced competitive strategy course. The approach of making models and calculations to see what the best strategy for a given company is, can help greatly with making sense of a chaotic world. Minor points to better the course: The lectures are sometimes too simple, especially the examples given can be sped up, up the ante ;)!. In the quiz one whole answer is false if one of the sub-answers is false, especially with 10 answers to give, I sometimes had a hard time to pass a question due to this reason, can this be resolved a bit? Say for example, a question is passed if 80% of the sub-answers are correct? Overall... thanks dear Tobias for having me in your class! Greetz Floor | the ante ;)! . In the | Quizz | one whole answer is false if | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Very interesting and sometimes challenges understanding in the quiz. | and sometimes challenges understanding in the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Fantastic course except for the quiz questions. Many of them can be interpreted in a way that an answer different from the intended one can work too. | Fantastic course except for the | Quizz | questions. Many of them can be | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Really interesting subject, with helpful quizzes. Some technical issues with the videos but nothing there to stop you from gaining some really helpful skills, if you dig business related courses. | Really interesting subject, with helpful | Quizz | Some technical issues with the videos | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Good course especially for those involved in business strategy. It requires attention and a lot of quizzes to be solved. Nonetheless all information shared by the professor can be useful and a knowledge advantage. This course can be taken by people who aren't familiar with business/finance/economics. | requires attention and a lot of | Quizz | to be solved. Nonetheless all information | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 5JJoCSsxEeWWnhJMxi0Z9Q | Great course. Good explanations and examples. The quizes and tests are not very easy sometimes, but they do you let think again. Very enjoyable! Just the course I was looking for a long time! | course. Good explanations and examples. The | Quizz | and tests are not very easy | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 5JJoCSsxEeWWnhJMxi0Z9Q | Quizzes are great! | | Quizz | are great! | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | The data given in the first session was out of date, meaning that the quizzes were basically impossible (short of guessing). It's a shame because the structure of the course was nice - a document to follow and explain what to do and how to do it. | out of date, meaning that the | Quizz | were basically impossible (short of guessing). | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | This course is nice but very lengthy videos and at one points i didn't understand some topics , quiz are pretty tough to solve . | i didn't understand some topics , | Quizz | are pretty tough to solve . | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | quiz questions are well explained so much that I could follow easily! Good examples for learning! | | Quizz | questions are well explained so much | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Good campaign for abolishing illiteracy. It would be good to update answers for the final quiz (BLAST search and phylogenetic assay). | to update answers for the final | Quizz | (BLAST search and phylogenetic assay). | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Very practical introduction to bioinformatics tools from a biological perspective. Labs were excellent, and the quizzes were mostly well-designed. Only downside is that some required software/web tools are difficult to run on Linux, but that's unavoidable given the field. | perspective. Labs were excellent, and the | Quizz | were mostly well-designed. Only downside is | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | all video lectures feel like they are just read from a paper and it takes a lot of effort to follow and engage. It is the 4th course I'm taking to get ma digital marketing specialisation and is far off the poorest. The slides don't make much sense and a lot of times I have to research stuff again on other websites to actually get the point. The quiz questions are sometimes not related to the topic. It seems like, the professor does not know enough about the subject to speak freely and engaging about the topics. I'm quite disappointed about this course and can not recommend it. I think the course should be worked over. A great example of how to do it right is Aric Rindfleischs lecture, which was engaging, challenging and very well structured | to actually get the point. The | Quizz | questions are sometimes not related to | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The instructor needs improvement on her presentation skills. She is just reading off the slides instead of providing more examples and scenarios to help student comprehend the material. I have to retake almost every quiz under her courses. In previous courses, I passed quizzes in one try. Please improve material or get a better instructor. | I have to retake almost every | Quizz | under her courses. In previous courses, | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The instructor needs improvement on her presentation skills. She is just reading off the slides instead of providing more examples and scenarios to help student comprehend the material. I have to retake almost every quiz under her courses. In previous courses, I passed quizzes in one try. Please improve material or get a better instructor. | courses. In previous courses, I passed | Quizz | in one try. Please improve material | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | For multiple modules, the questions were out of order. Some of the videos didn't seem polished to the point that it made me think it was not the final edits? Also, from other Coursera courses, I really valued interviews and summaries that highlighted the key points (vs a summary of the topics convered). Finally, the module quizzes didn't seem to highlight the key points, but instead had questions specific to not-so-important details (e.g., which agency created the MB campaign). | the topics convered). Finally, the module | Quizz | didn't seem to highlight the key | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | based on impressions after module 1: -quality of lectures: just dry material from books. not engaging - repetitions (videos in reading materials and in lecture) sometimes feeling that it is waste of time -quizz questions are hardly connected to lectures disappointed and discouraged. give a try to module 2 and will see. | that it is waste of time | Quizz | questions are hardly connected to lectures | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | This course seems to have interesting content and presentation, but the quiz concerns the materials not covered in lectures or readings (be it required or supplementary). This is totally confusing. | interesting content and presentation, but the | Quizz | concerns the materials not covered in | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The course offers a good mix of media used for the lectures. The book that accompanies the course is worth reading. The assessments and quizes are good to handle when completing all lectures and readings. The course requires some pre knowledge. | is worth reading. The assessments and | Quizz | are good to handle when completing | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 6-AmfoyrEeWbIxKn7M-nSQ | Awesome course, I never realized how fun a course could be. I am learning a ton of stuff and am passing all the quizzes and assignments so far and the professors are so easy to learn from, they really thought of everything when programing this business writing course. I would recommend that anyone that is thinking of writing as a career that you will learn a lot and that any career you are going for that writing will help you in every way. | stuff and am passing all the | Quizz | and assignments so far and the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | Good course, I enjoyed the fact that there was a lot of hands-on work rather than just lectures, however, there could be more of the latter aswell. Quizes would be nice too. The quality of the course is very high. Thank you for this course. :) | be more of the latter aswell. | Quizz | would be nice too. The quality | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | The course is a well thought and masterfully set of lessons on the main principle of journalism: it talks ethics starting from maybe old concepts that surprisingly are still fitting today. Being a basic course, it is very easy to follow and finish. Quizzes are alternating between very good and very bad. Tough ethical decisions and a space to discuss them is a really great thing, but peer grading two phrases essays with only the ability of telling yes or no doesn't make for a good use of the crowdsourcing the very course is advocating. The videos seem to have been made with an indecent knowledge of the technology, especially for journalists who are supposed to use it daily; green screens were used so badly as some parts of the professors "spark white", and slides are often cut away and put back in view while the teacher is talking about it, which was downright infuriating. It still qualifies for a very good opening course in journalism, but needs serious improvement. | very easy to follow and finish. | Quizz | are alternating between very good and | Positive | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Good: The video lectures cover a nice variety of topics giving you a good introduction of journalism, ethics, and other important considerations for becoming a journalist. Bad: The entire course feels hastily put together. Some of the videos have summarizing points, which is helpful when taking notes, but they flash on the screen briefly, then cut to a closeup of the lecturer, then cut back to the summery points so quickly that you can't copy them down and it becomes super distracting. The quizzes are a joke. They usually consist of 1-3 questions with two answers each and once choice so outrageous that they don't take any thought at all to complete. You could just skip to the quizzes without watching a single lecture and "ace" them easily. The assignments are also a joke. They ask for 1-2 sentence answers max! Some of them ask you to "use more than one word" to respond. I've taken free courses on here than involve 1000 word essays and then at least you're forced to process the information in the lectures. You can pass this course without watching a single lecture and that's a travesty to Michigan State. It is full of typos and oversights that could have been avoided if they had once person run through the course as a quality control. One of the quizzes has the answer included right beneath the question as a typo! The simple assignments are described in 3 different places, sometimes with conflicting instructions. They tell you what to do and how to review your peers in one section and then the actually assignment has different instructions on what to do than the page prior so you end up unsure of what the assignment actually wants you to do. For example: the final assignment at firsts asks you how to engage with your audience, and then you click next and the SAME question is now asking you how you distribute content. Did they even try?? In Summery: The content in the lectures are a good but shallow overview of journalism, but don't expect to be challenged to do anything but fill in ovals and regurgitate questions. Not too much to learn here. | and it becomes super distracting. The | Quizz | are a joke. They usually consist | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Good: The video lectures cover a nice variety of topics giving you a good introduction of journalism, ethics, and other important considerations for becoming a journalist. Bad: The entire course feels hastily put together. Some of the videos have summarizing points, which is helpful when taking notes, but they flash on the screen briefly, then cut to a closeup of the lecturer, then cut back to the summery points so quickly that you can't copy them down and it becomes super distracting. The quizzes are a joke. They usually consist of 1-3 questions with two answers each and once choice so outrageous that they don't take any thought at all to complete. You could just skip to the quizzes without watching a single lecture and "ace" them easily. The assignments are also a joke. They ask for 1-2 sentence answers max! Some of them ask you to "use more than one word" to respond. I've taken free courses on here than involve 1000 word essays and then at least you're forced to process the information in the lectures. You can pass this course without watching a single lecture and that's a travesty to Michigan State. It is full of typos and oversights that could have been avoided if they had once person run through the course as a quality control. One of the quizzes has the answer included right beneath the question as a typo! The simple assignments are described in 3 different places, sometimes with conflicting instructions. They tell you what to do and how to review your peers in one section and then the actually assignment has different instructions on what to do than the page prior so you end up unsure of what the assignment actually wants you to do. For example: the final assignment at firsts asks you how to engage with your audience, and then you click next and the SAME question is now asking you how you distribute content. Did they even try?? In Summery: The content in the lectures are a good but shallow overview of journalism, but don't expect to be challenged to do anything but fill in ovals and regurgitate questions. Not too much to learn here. | You could just skip to the | Quizz | without watching a single lecture and | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Good: The video lectures cover a nice variety of topics giving you a good introduction of journalism, ethics, and other important considerations for becoming a journalist. Bad: The entire course feels hastily put together. Some of the videos have summarizing points, which is helpful when taking notes, but they flash on the screen briefly, then cut to a closeup of the lecturer, then cut back to the summery points so quickly that you can't copy them down and it becomes super distracting. The quizzes are a joke. They usually consist of 1-3 questions with two answers each and once choice so outrageous that they don't take any thought at all to complete. You could just skip to the quizzes without watching a single lecture and "ace" them easily. The assignments are also a joke. They ask for 1-2 sentence answers max! Some of them ask you to "use more than one word" to respond. I've taken free courses on here than involve 1000 word essays and then at least you're forced to process the information in the lectures. You can pass this course without watching a single lecture and that's a travesty to Michigan State. It is full of typos and oversights that could have been avoided if they had once person run through the course as a quality control. One of the quizzes has the answer included right beneath the question as a typo! The simple assignments are described in 3 different places, sometimes with conflicting instructions. They tell you what to do and how to review your peers in one section and then the actually assignment has different instructions on what to do than the page prior so you end up unsure of what the assignment actually wants you to do. For example: the final assignment at firsts asks you how to engage with your audience, and then you click next and the SAME question is now asking you how you distribute content. Did they even try?? In Summery: The content in the lectures are a good but shallow overview of journalism, but don't expect to be challenged to do anything but fill in ovals and regurgitate questions. Not too much to learn here. | a quality control. One of the | Quizz | has the answer included right beneath | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | I appreciate the fact that this course doesn't go into the fine detail on how to code everything, I believe there is still more information on the coding and data management practices that could be included in the course content. In addition to that, I feel the course could use the following adjustments to make it better: 1 - Have Python students grade other Python students and SAS students grade other SAS students. While it is nice to get exposure to another language, it is more than enough to learn one at a time. 2 - Add quizes and/or other well formed questions that are graded (automatically, not peer graded) to help enforce the concepts being taught. 3 - Make the assignment instructions/expectations more clear. I feel there are times when the grading criteria don't exactly match the requested assignment. While people follow the spirit of the assignment, the grading questions may ask for slightly different or additional items. 4 - Certain aspects of statistical analysis are glossed over and should be covered in more depth in the training videos. While I like the short videos for brevity, I would prefer to watch 10-15 minutes more content and really feel like the material was well covered. | at a time. 2 - Add | Quizz | and/or other well formed questions that | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | I found the lectures very interesting; but was surprised at how the quizzes / assignments focused so much on facts and figures - surely these aren't nearly as important as understanding the content? | but was surprised at how the | Quizz | / assignments focused so much on | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | It is actually very interesting to listen to lectures and take quizzes. Thanks, Coursera) | to listen to lectures and take | Quizz | Thanks, Coursera) | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Although the form of lecturing is quite limited in this course, I still found it attractive. Just if you are interested in the topic. Information quantity is just enough, and well organized. Tiny quizzes are there for you to recall the things that you just listened to. I like it and hope there're more courses about Nordic culture and social system. | just enough, and well organized. Tiny | Quizz | are there for you to recall | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Although I have passion with film, the quizzes seems to have lots of technical problems. I dropped out right on the first module | I have passion with film, the | Quizz | seems to have lots of technical | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | This is a lousy course. The subject and material could be interesting; however, the lectures are inanimate and the quizzes are a Rubic's cubes of sudden death with no value to assess whether you've understood the key points of the lectures! While this course was a timed release (implying someone at the U of Copenhagen is involved with it week to week, it feels as if it is an archived course with no live administration; the only interaction you seem to have is with other students. This has got to be the worst Coursera course I have taken and I have taken quite a few. | the lectures are inanimate and the | Quizz | are a Rubic's cubes of sudden | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | The course is good but the end of unit quiz are not accessible unless you pay. | good but the end of unit | Quizz | are not accessible unless you pay. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | It was too bad to not permit the students to perform the quizzes! Only if we pay for them! I thought the payment was for the certificate! | permit the students to perform the | Quizz | Only if we pay for them! | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | The course way OK, but it had some flaws. It was very general and could have gone into more detail, but that was intentional, I guess. No big deal. Then again, the difficulty was way too easy and the quiz questions should be tested for test wiseness. What I disliked the most: The way Scrum was introduced and mapped to the role of a "product manager" was very confusing. Still, not a bad course though. | was way too easy and the | Quizz | questions should be tested for test | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Interesting, "agile" and complete. The quizzes are of a good level. | Interesting, " agile" and complete. The | Quizz | are of a good level. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Well taught Software Processes and practices. I liked the way the course was conducted, the quiz and video lectures. | way the course was conducted, the | Quizz | and video lectures. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Want to know about different methodologies, practices and processes in software development? don't miss this one. Clearly explained, thought provoking quiz and memorable graphics. Absolutely topper. | this one. Clearly explained, thought provoking | Quizz | and memorable graphics. Absolutely topper. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Amazing Course. So very enlightening and so very well taught. The quizzes help to reinforce the material learnt in the Lectures. The quiz question made it so that you had to constantly think critically to answer real world problem scenarios. Would recommend it to anyone to gain a good understanding of Software Processes and Agile Practices. | and so very well taught. The | Quizz | help to reinforce the material learnt | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Amazing Course. So very enlightening and so very well taught. The quizzes help to reinforce the material learnt in the Lectures. The quiz question made it so that you had to constantly think critically to answer real world problem scenarios. Would recommend it to anyone to gain a good understanding of Software Processes and Agile Practices. | material learnt in the Lectures. The | Quizz | question made it so that you | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 76FVnKNaEeWHXAr1OpR7HQ | Very engaging instructor plying cogent videos and challenging quizes | instructor plying cogent videos and challenging | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I enjoyed all the sessions, quiz and assignments. Many Many thanks to instructor:). | I enjoyed all the sessions, | Quizz | and assignments. Many Many thanks to | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Basics were explained in a very simplified manner, quizzes and assignments were based on what was taught in the slides/videos. Excellent way to understand concepts | explained in a very simplified manner, | Quizz | and assignments were based on what | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Well paced lectures and assignments . Quiz's at the end of every class keeps you motivated .. | Well paced lectures and assignments . | Quizz | at the end of every class | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excellent beginner course for learning Python. The instructor slowly guides your thinking so that your thought process matches that of a Python programmer. Quizzes and especially assignments are relevant to testing your newly acquired skills. If you have a bit of experience in other languages, I recommend going quickly through the course, as I found a great deal of overlap in language that let me speed ahead. | matches that of a Python programmer. | Quizz | and especially assignments are relevant to | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Prof Chuck is one of the funniest professor I've ever heard. Good sense of humor paired with high experiences in teaching, excellent teaching materials (perfect difficulty for the quizzes and assignment). I would like to be such a good lecturer once! | teaching materials (perfect difficulty for the | Quizz | and assignment). I would like to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is a great class for someone who has no experience with Python at all. Dr. Chuck does an excellent job helping you understand the core concepts in a manner that is easy to learn. The lectures are interesting, easy to follow, and full of great material. The quizzes are simple enough but you do have to pay attention in order to get them correct. The assignments were a lot of fun and made you think of how best to incorporate everything you learned. This was a better experience than I have had in other courses I have been through. I am definitely taking the next class from Dr. Chuck! | and full of great material. The | Quizz | are simple enough but you do | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I had some issues to display some questions in quizzes | issues to display some questions in | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Perfect course to start learning python. I cannot recommend this class and its professor enough. It is simple to follow, and all the quizzes and exercises truly help you learn python quickly! | simple to follow, and all the | Quizz | and exercises truly help you learn | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | a very very nice course made by a funny and good teacher, the course will help you step by step on learning the basics of python by showing you explanations followed by a quiz (not really hard but very useful for the purpouse of helping the user to remember the lessons) and then by a proper exercise, the only thing i would add it would be a specific lesson on punctuation and syntax of the python lenguage becouse a couple of time i've been struggling with exercises and the problem were indentations and some punctuation. Thank you a lot mr. Chuck, coursera and the community! | showing you explanations followed by a | Quizz | (not really hard but very useful | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Amazing course.... but there should be some more assignments and little difficult quiz.... just little not much difficult | some more assignments and little difficult | Quizz | . . . just little not | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | While the videos are a good guide, the quizzes and assignments are way too easy. I find that, whenever I am studying, finding out how to do difficult exercises are the best way to really learn. Good course | videos are a good guide, the | Quizz | and assignments are way too easy. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great course for those who have zero programming experience. The course is very well structured and designed to walk you through the learning process to more advanced material in the future courses. The assessment is done through interactive assignments and quizzes. I'm glad to have a privilege of taking this course and would like to thank Dr. Chuck, University of Michigan and Coursera for this wonderful opportunity! Thank you! | is done through interactive assignments and | Quizz | I'm glad to have a privilege | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Brilliant course, Professor Chuck is awesome. The amount of time he takes explaining the concepts is remarkable and the assignments and quizzes makes great sense. | is remarkable and the assignments and | Quizz | makes great sense. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course is a very good one for beginners in both programming and Python. The teacher is engaging and easily understood, and the material is good. The course could do with a more systematized "homework" system in addition to the quizzes and assessments, but a well-organized student has all the elements to do additional work by himself if needed. | homework" system in addition to the | Quizz | and assessments, but a well-organized student | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I'm sure this is a fantastic introduction for those with no prior programming experience, but as someone with even just a little bit of prior scripting experience, I found it extremely slow-paced. Rather than suffer through the lectures, I did DataCamp's Intro. to Python and then did all the quizzes & assignments for this class as extra practice. | Python and then did all the | Quizz | & assignments for this class as | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The method of teaching, quizzes and assignments helped me to learn as much as possible from this course. Thankyou for providing this course! | The method of teaching, | Quizz | and assignments helped me to learn | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Loved the assignments and the quizzes. | Loved the assignments and the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I do not have any background in computer science and this course was easy to follow along and learn the basics. I thoroughly enjoyed Dr.Severance's way of explaining abstract concepts and how we repeatedly go over concepts. The quizzes and assignments were a great way to review ideas in the book while giving us the opportunity to use our newly acquired knowledge. | we repeatedly go over concepts. The | Quizz | and assignments were a great way | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoyed this course and felt like I actually learned the material. The only reason I didn't give this course 5 stars, is that due to the issue of giving away the answers to quiz questions, there were a couple of quiz questions that I couldn't understand and unfortunately still don't. I think this is an area that could be improved. | of giving away the answers to | Quizz | questions, there were a couple of | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoyed this course and felt like I actually learned the material. The only reason I didn't give this course 5 stars, is that due to the issue of giving away the answers to quiz questions, there were a couple of quiz questions that I couldn't understand and unfortunately still don't. I think this is an area that could be improved. | questions, there were a couple of | Quizz | questions that I couldn't understand and | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | i am really in love by the way they teach the method for teaching is so perfect by taking quiz ,assinments and all that helps students to know about himself/herself. and the bonus videos of interviews of great founders and CEO's inspire students to do something more creative for the next time and most important student's saturated notes. they helped you out to clear your concepts more precise so my advice to all newcomers is to take a brief look on notes. and also Dr. Charles Severance and his team deserves a hats-off for his hard-work. love this course....thanks | teaching is so perfect by taking | Quizz | , assinments and all that helps | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | There is some good material but the presentation seems a bit uneven; some parts are repeated many times at very slow speed while other parts, equally important, barely rate a word. The quizzes can be very searching and you really need to have paid close attention to every word (however quickly or slowly it passed by). I would have liked more practical exercises. The accompanying book is good and I am still looking forward to the other courses in the sequence which move further away from my limited knowledge of Python. | important, barely rate a word. The | Quizz | can be very searching and you | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is a perfect one for people who are beginning to take their first steps in the world of Python (and programming, in general).. All the lectures, assignments, and the course materials offer quite good insight to basic and fundamental programming concepts.. And, considering the syntactical ease of Python, it makes programming easy to learn and understand, removing the extra clutter found in the more traditional languages like C/C++ or Java,, And, finally, the instructor, Prof. Charles Severance, who is more affectionately called Dr. Chuck just mixes fun and learning to create quite an exciting and memorable teaching environment, But, while all of this good, I felt that this course lacked the bite for a more advanced learner or someone who has spent sometime in the world of programming.. The complexity of the quizzes or the assignments are at beginner level... Best for complete beginners.. But, like i mentioned earlier, it is very easy to rush the whole course in a couple of days time or at most, one week for an advanced learner. This course lays the foundation for the more advanced courses in Python.. Technically, it is the first part of the Programming for Everybody specialization, which consists of 5 courses, revolving around the world of Python.. So, my final advice to all beginners is to take their sweet time understanding and grasping these fundamental concepts,, These form the foundation stone for any programming language as well as Computer Science world. Don't worry about the assignments, you will get more than ample time to complete them and succeed in them.. Plus, I feel that you will also enjoy some of the bonus interviews.. They could be quite motivating or thought-provoking.. And, for advanced beginners, you can rush through this course and brush up on some basic concepts to move into more advanced courses, which will not only be a lot more challenging and catering more advanced and diverse concepts and topics.. And, in my opinion, this specialization package could be, at this current moment, the best possible experience when compared to learning the basics of Python online.. And, could be the closest thing to a face-to-face learning experience.. | programming. . The complexity of the | Quizz | or the assignments are at beginner | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very good course for anyone who has struggled to understand how to program, especially in a self-directed/self-motivated way. This course taught by Dr. Chuck was broken down into concise simple sections that kept me interested, and I could follow along easily, with just the right amount of complexity in the quizzes and chapter exercises, so as not to discourage me. I've tried to learn computer programming using Java (inside & outside of a tertiary environment) with very limited success, but switched to learning python because it seemed more intuitive. So while i'm not a complete "novice" to programming, this course had the "Goldilocks Effect" for me. "Just right" :D | right amount of complexity in the | Quizz | and chapter exercises, so as not | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I enjoy that a very known author wrote this course. More than anything, I enjoy that the textbook is free and that the course materials are here for me to consume and learn at my pace. I also like the quizzes and the interactive checker we have for checking our code. Sometime I'm working off my phone and can't access a python interactive environment until I get home from work.z | my pace. I also like the | Quizz | and the interactive checker we have | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great fundamental course! Its a bit remedial of you already know the basics of python though. I recommend just doing all the assignments and quizzes in a day for a refresher if you do. | just doing all the assignments and | Quizz | in a day for a refresher | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is THE best course for beginners. I love the way Dr. Chuck has taught Python programming. His lectures are very interesting and easy to understand and the entire course has been a lot of fun with all its quizzes and programming assignments. His book is as great as are his lectures. I am looking forward to learning more about python through his courses. This is just the type of course that I was wanting to do for some time and I am lucky I found this through Coursera! Thank you Dr. Chuck! | lot of fun with all its | Quizz | and programming assignments. His book is | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr. Chuck is entertaining and makes this course so lively. Exercises and quizzes are good; not too easy and not too hard either. Feels like I started getting Python! | this course so lively. Exercises and | Quizz | are good; not too easy and | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good primer to Python. Quizzes were spot on and the assignments were clear. Highly recommended for a beginner. | Good primer to Python. | Quizz | were spot on and the assignments | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very Good Beginner Course for Python. Pretty short in material length but if you are looking to start programming I would strongly recommend it. Very good examples and quizes at the end of each section make sure you know your stuff. | recommend it. Very good examples and | Quizz | at the end of each section | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I am very disappointed with this programming course. The course lacks detail and deepth and could be taught in 45 to 60 minutes instead of 7 weeks. The quizzes and assignments were to easy and basic (solved in less than 5 minutes) and definitely not enough. Annoying was the overuse of colours in almost every video (almost everything was coloured - highlighting everything is just as usefull as highlighting nothing, green box with white text inside - did you try to read that on a different monitor than yours?), the pointless and useless doodles, smilies and whatsoever, wasting my time by watching you dispose your teabag/drinking tea or coffee/talking about your mug/etc., why do you even need to drink in a 20 minute-or-less video. The Tutor tried to loosen a dry topic. Mostly it wasn't my humor but I can live with that. I had hoped for more :( | minutes instead of 7 weeks. The | Quizz | and assignments were to easy and | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course was very basic. It was nicely taught and the examples and the lectures were really enjoyable. However, some shortcomings I felt were that the colors in the slides could have been a bit clearer. Another thing was that some concepts were introduced in the lectures which were not explained completely. A real beginner would not be able to understand them which would in some parts defeat the purpose of the course. Other than that, I felt the course was really structured well. The assignments were easy and the quizzes did test the knowledge about the subject taught so far. It was such that any new person would not feel discouraged. Keep up the good job people. | The assignments were easy and the | Quizz | did test the knowledge about the | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is indicated to anyone looking for an overview of Python programming. All Assignments and Quizzes are quite simple problems. To be honest, I expected more of this course. | of Python programming. All Assignments and | Quizz | are quite simple problems. To be | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | this course is great in concept. but the reality was disappointing and will have to improve. the professor gave lots of links to interesting external materials. but his prepared lectures were much briefer and consisted mostly of presenting bullet-point lists. as a result, i found myself studying just to pass the quizes and not to actually enhance my knowledge. :( given the high standard of the other courses in this specialization, i'm sure it will be better next time.... | myself studying just to pass the | Quizz | and not to actually enhance my | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Content of the course is very good, useful and interesting, I greatly appreciate the knowledge delivered. But assignments could improve: -All module assignments seems mostly focalize on using Microstrategy tool. In assignments, i would like to see more exercises so that students learn through practice of business cases. For example, I prefer the way modules are organized in courses 1,2, and 3: concepts with examples, practice exercise, then assignment through similar exercise + a quiz. -In last assignment, there was no suggested solution(s) for the last question, i think this is missing for a good understanding. | assignment through similar exercise + a | Quizz | -In last assignment, there was no | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | Love the downloadable videos, slides & transcript files. Suggestion: better to add "answer model' file after every quiz as a downloadable one. | " answer model' file after every | Quizz | as a downloadable one. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | Excellent course. I suggest that in a few quizzes you were asking to get the numbers off the slides in the video. It is very difficult to read the numbers off the video. Can you instead add the slides in the quiz PDF file? All the information required to answer the quizzes should be in the PDF file. The course material was very good. The problem sets were very good too because of real life data. The rigor of courses was average. I can understand why you do not want to make the course more rigorous. However, it would help advanced engineering students to go through a more rigorous course. | I suggest that in a few | Quizz | you were asking to get the | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | Excellent course. I suggest that in a few quizzes you were asking to get the numbers off the slides in the video. It is very difficult to read the numbers off the video. Can you instead add the slides in the quiz PDF file? All the information required to answer the quizzes should be in the PDF file. The course material was very good. The problem sets were very good too because of real life data. The rigor of courses was average. I can understand why you do not want to make the course more rigorous. However, it would help advanced engineering students to go through a more rigorous course. | instead add the slides in the | Quizz | PDF file? All the information required | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | Excellent course. I suggest that in a few quizzes you were asking to get the numbers off the slides in the video. It is very difficult to read the numbers off the video. Can you instead add the slides in the quiz PDF file? All the information required to answer the quizzes should be in the PDF file. The course material was very good. The problem sets were very good too because of real life data. The rigor of courses was average. I can understand why you do not want to make the course more rigorous. However, it would help advanced engineering students to go through a more rigorous course. | the information required to answer the | Quizz | should be in the PDF file. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 7pzdAYE3EeWb1w5ZMj87pw | Positive: Readings and references allow for an additional study of related course concepts. Negative: Course is excessively short - both in number of modules and also in resources per module. Quizzes are excessively easy. This course is basically a small part of a previous course in International Marketing in Asia. I think a new set of courses should have been presented and not this. Some of the concepts are excessively focused in Asia... Also the LG interview videos seem excessivelly of 'free' publicity. It should be avoided. Overall - in my opinion, to be relevant in the online you have to upscale your game. Yonsei presents very short courses, as it can be seen in the specialization emerging technologies. Hope you can change your approach in the future or I don't think your courses will have traction. Please review your next courses in the specialization not to be parts of your previous course but to have new materials... I don't think is very credible to slice a course and offering it in 6 parts and call it a specialzation. I wish you luck. | and also in resources per module. | Quizz | are excessively easy. This course is | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| 7Sx79iWNEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | This course doesn't have any writing assignments. I appreciated it because it truly did help me understand the ins and outs of citations, which I needed to know in order to continue on with this course. I tend to get lazy and cute incorrectly because I never had the chance to learn how to do it in school. This professor is very understanding and straight to the point. It's what I need for this type of course. If you listen to the professor, it's no problem to pass the assignments and quizzes. | problem to pass the assignments and | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7Sx79iWNEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | This class setting is interesting. You cannot participate in assignments and quizzes unless pay for certificate. | You cannot participate in assignments and | Quizz | unless pay for certificate. | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| 7TpL2X3IEeWfrQ7ngHMGEQ | There is no feedback on quizzes. and no the moderators evidently do not monitor traffic in the dis. | There is no feedback on | Quizz | and no the moderators evidently do | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7vasMEd_EeW8cBKtDAegYw | This iteration of the course (August-September 2016) fizzled because so few students were actively participating. Early in the course, I worked diligently on my written contributions to the discussion forums, but then there was so little peer response that I gradually came to understand that I was mostly just talking to myself. Halfway through the course, I gave up on the forums. But I read all the poems, viewed the videos and took the quizzes. The quizzes are lame, the poetry selection is great, and the video lectures are all worthwhile. I had initial misgivings about some of the videos. The improvised round-table discussions of meta-poems by Dickinson, Stevens and Mullen (module 4, lesson 4) initially seemed too colloquial and not incisive, but then I realized they had value as models for how to grope into an initial understanding of a strange poem. The lecture on Hart Crane (module 1, lesson 4) was too difficult for me to follow in real-time spoken form, but then I found I could understand some of it by frequently stopping and starting the video, re-reading the lecture text in transcript, and taking long breaks for careful review of Crane's verse and for research about some of its allusions and associations. That lecture might have made more sense in purely written form, and I wonder if it was so daunting that it scared off some of the students who started the course. As a whole, the course managed a satisfying balance between discussion of the poetry itself and discussion of the social and economic contexts in which the poetry was created and consumed. I especially appreciated the clarity of Karen Ford's many lectures and Tim Newcomb's lively and enthusiastic investigation of the role of little magazines in the 1910s & 1920s. | viewed the videos and took the | Quizz | The quizzes are lame, the poetry | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 7vasMEd_EeW8cBKtDAegYw | This iteration of the course (August-September 2016) fizzled because so few students were actively participating. Early in the course, I worked diligently on my written contributions to the discussion forums, but then there was so little peer response that I gradually came to understand that I was mostly just talking to myself. Halfway through the course, I gave up on the forums. But I read all the poems, viewed the videos and took the quizzes. The quizzes are lame, the poetry selection is great, and the video lectures are all worthwhile. I had initial misgivings about some of the videos. The improvised round-table discussions of meta-poems by Dickinson, Stevens and Mullen (module 4, lesson 4) initially seemed too colloquial and not incisive, but then I realized they had value as models for how to grope into an initial understanding of a strange poem. The lecture on Hart Crane (module 1, lesson 4) was too difficult for me to follow in real-time spoken form, but then I found I could understand some of it by frequently stopping and starting the video, re-reading the lecture text in transcript, and taking long breaks for careful review of Crane's verse and for research about some of its allusions and associations. That lecture might have made more sense in purely written form, and I wonder if it was so daunting that it scared off some of the students who started the course. As a whole, the course managed a satisfying balance between discussion of the poetry itself and discussion of the social and economic contexts in which the poetry was created and consumed. I especially appreciated the clarity of Karen Ford's many lectures and Tim Newcomb's lively and enthusiastic investigation of the role of little magazines in the 1910s & 1920s. | videos and took the quizzes. The | Quizz | are lame, the poetry selection is | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 84pGjiPgEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | It was a great primer if you are not familiar with this area. Especially topics like the DCF and different PE vehicles from a legal perspective can be hard to summarize into something tangible and short. The only recommendation I would make is a bit of brushing up on the wording, as it is sometimes hard in the quizzes to understand what exactly the question is (does the question relate to the previous question vs overall, etc) | it is sometimes hard in the | Quizz | to understand what exactly the question | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| 893hvnH8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | There are some incorrect answers in quizes and some instructions for the ssigments are qiute unclear... | There are some incorrect answers in | Quizz | and some instructions for the ssigments | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 8cCaMoJkEeWXJRLCDq5sWw | This course is wonderful, and does not seem biased. My one complaint is that for so so much information, there are only two quizzes. I would prefer to have a test at the end of each weekly lesson, especially since the quizzes are so short. The material and videos themselves are wonderful! I learned a lot :) | much information, there are only two | Quizz | I would prefer to have a | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 8cCaMoJkEeWXJRLCDq5sWw | This course is wonderful, and does not seem biased. My one complaint is that for so so much information, there are only two quizzes. I would prefer to have a test at the end of each weekly lesson, especially since the quizzes are so short. The material and videos themselves are wonderful! I learned a lot :) | each weekly lesson, especially since the | Quizz | are so short. The material and | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | This is a rather pleasant course with a mix of advantages and disadvantages. For me, the advantages outweigh the negative sides. It slides on the surface of things, though, so don't expect to get too much 'in the know' after it. What I liked (and you might too) -> Short, visually engaging, clear in their purpose videos -> Interesting recommended/required literature/video content to solidify the concepts presented in the videos -> Comfortable layout of the transcripts so you can DL them and check them out as PDFs -> The course is focused on a very interesting, dynamic topic -- and lives up with a dynamic, fun and engaging approach What I didn't like that much -> Quizzes had some rather easy questions and as a whole weren't that serious. You can retake them -- you need to rely on your honesty to assess how much you've learned. -> The brisk nature of the videos is nice, but sometimes the narrative would jump from one point to another too abruptly. I still recommend the course for those who want to get their feet a little bit wet when it comes to innovation, digital affairs and basic entrepreneurship concepts. | I didn't like that much -> | Quizz | had some rather easy questions and | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | My suggestions: ** videos: pace is way too fast, and without much visuals and a clear structure/plan, hard to fully grab in one view. I don't think your 5mn max duration really makes sense. When the content is of interest, better to make it longer to improve clarity. Positive: you provide written/text versions of your videos. ** support documents: way too many and not always relevant ** quizzes: i don't think that asking us the name of a founder etc. really test anything about our understanding of our lesson. Too many irrelevant questions. All in all, it seems you applied one of the rules you discuss in this course: release fast, and adjust later on based on customers' feedback.. Unsure this is the right approach when it comes to online learning. I had higher expectations vs. Mines Telecom. | many and not always relevant ** | Quizz | i don't think that asking us | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | The course does a great job of curating very relevant videos and articles to understand digital from a 360 degree perspective. While all of us are exposed to digital from a consumer perspective, looking at it from an entrepreneur's and investors' perspectives completed the picture in my head. I liked the short video format, it is engaging and easier to schedule into our lives. Some of the readings were called "not mandatory" but were needed for answering the quiz! I would request not to have really long readings - some of them were very intensive papers written as part of an academic exercise and I will be surprised if any of the students, who are looking for many small and engaging materials would be interested in tackling really long non-man | but were needed for answering the | Quizz | I would request not to have | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 8H8wFp3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course is much more informative than the previous two in my opinion. I liked the sample spreadsheets provided. I still however feel the price is a bit steep compared to other similar courses you can find online. The quizzes aren't that challenging and it may be nicer to expand the assignments to practice more. | courses you can find online. The | Quizz | aren't that challenging and it may | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | There could be more work in the assignments in this course. The Quizzes are very simple. | the assignments in this course. The | Quizz | are very simple. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This is a great course and a daring venture for what is really an art form, beyond it's scientific requirements. This part of the specialization needs a little refinement. I posted this in the discussion forum. · 7 days ago · Edited First of all.....these guys running this data science department have their hands full. They are teaching live classes for students who have spent OODLES (lots) of money to attend this prestigious college . Johns Hopkins is about as good as it gets for a medical degree. Then they are doing experiments and other data science for the research division of Johns Hopkins which is also as good as it gets........THEN they are doing these MOOC courses on top of all their other responsibilities......Dr. Leek is a University of Washington Alumni, which is also top notch for Data Science. The video lesson is flawed, there is no denying it. But I must say these teachers are very open to improvement in the course and your comments on what could be better done are received and acted upon, so I would include them in your thank you letter to the teachers. ALSO I think these MOOC courses are best done by all members of the department contributing. Truly this field IS a team sport. I feel this course was good, but the videos need to be edited and scripted, so unnecessary language, which dilutes the core knowledge, that must be learned, is not diluted where questions are left in the students head about content when being tested. I learned long ago in a college calculus class that if your mark isn't perfect, it's OK, so long as you pass with a high score......even if it is the teachers fault. The course could use better video production with teleprompter scripting......maybe some AV students at Johns Hopkins could get on board. it will happen eventually I'm sure. You want to take a course that is absolutely one of the best courses I've taken anywhere and truly the best online. Try the number one business course on Coursera: GROW TO GREATNESS, either part 1 or 2, University of Virginia, Darden School Of Business...........A team created course with one helluva a teacher who is a business person, researcher and award-winning writer. I would recommend this course to ANY student and especially E-Teachers. The problem with this course is that there is a lot of information that can be included but may not be absolutely necessary as a "core concept". Needless to say, the more technical skills any employee has, the more insight they will have into their teammate's skills, as well, as the overall mission of the data department and the business it serves. I'm more of a tech and infrastructure person, I'm not real passionate about coding. I find it tedious. The more I learn about it, the more I enjoy it, albeit, from a distance. I can't see myself creating great blocks of scripts, but the more I know about how they are created AND what rules the code in a project must abide by, the better my skills will be as a data center manager. So I'm trying to learn as much as possible about R, Python, and companion programs like ggvis for creating visualizations. I'd say visualizations are an essential skill for a data manager, since you have to present results and projects, questions, and answers to higher ups and other departments. this link comes from the resource section of this course: https://www.datacamp.com/courses/ggvis-data-visualization-r-tutorial This link or URL is of much more value to me, than a flawed test question and a reduction in my 100 percent average in the specialization. Without this lesson, in this course, I would not have this valuable resource. Another great link, which has a great FREE print publication as well: http://www.processor.com/ ...these people have been advising data center managers longer than just about anybody ! Verbally and in the transcript are some nebulous statements that point toward the main idea, that concept being: the more any employee, on any data science or technical team member IS, a "jack of all trades", the better. So that could have been included in some more general way on the quiz, because really that is pretty much a general rule, I've found, working in ANY capacity in the tech industry. I have done a great deal of audio editing, working at numerous radio stations, with Adobe Audition. With others like: Pro Tools, or any other really good quality AV digital editor the result is streamlined, near seamless, audio-video, or one or the other. You just learn how to read and edit wave forms of all kinds. Years ago, in Dallas, Texas, attending Richland College. I learned a valuable lesson. I was taking a college level Calc-Trig math class being taught by the regular professor's WIFE. I don't know if the professor was sick, but this woman, who was teaching the class for the whole semester, frankly, was not qualified. I had always been considered an illiterate by my high school math teachers, a married couple who, frankly, were highly abnormal even on the geekiest scale. These people were acting like they were a world above most people in the class. Needless to say, I assumed, by their "adult" opinions, they were sent by God Himself, to educate me thru denigration. I was amazed, how 10 years later, in College math how well I was doing. I was carrying a 100 percent average ! So midterm this faux professor declares, "I'll be prefiguring all the arithmetic to be easy, so you won't have to bring your calculators !" SO I DIDN'T.......and of course the teacher's wife proclaims....."I didn't have time to make the arithmetic easy so you'd better use your calculators !" I literally had pages and pages of figuring in handwriting accompanying my 3 page test. The result was a C plus on the test. I angrily told the sub teacher "I did not bring a calculator to this test because you said it wouldn't be necessary, therefore I must be allowed to redo this test with a calculator !" She of course relented, "No that won't be possible...that's not a bad grade...." she continued, "what are you worried about ?"........ I was so peeved, I was going to drop the class. It was too late in the semester, and I was so disgusted with this woman's cavalier dismissal of my perfect grade that I just stopped going to class. The result was a failing final grade. Who ultimately suffered from this dilemma ? That, albeit, unfairly was me.....who created this "academic" tragedy, by the aggravation of a deeply flawed situation. Once again, that would be me. | some more general way on the | Quizz | because really that is pretty much | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This class had hard quiz. Sometimes it seemed very basic, but some are hard unless you read and learn really well. Great class/knowledge. Practical real-life examples help. | This class had hard | Quizz | Sometimes it seemed very basic, but | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | I really enjoyed this course and I have found a lot of similarities with issues and challenges that I face every day at work. This has been very useful to me bot as a way to get inspired on new ideas and techniques, and as a way to confirm what I am already doing. However, there were few occasions where I found the quizzes not to be clear enough. In some instances this was due to the fact that the question asked required some extra knowledge that couldn't possibly be achieved only by reading the course material or listening to the class. I was lucky I new the answers because of my personal experience but it seemed quite unfair in my opinion. Also lectures materials are very short and don;t provide any extra information. In other cases, the answers, especially when there were multiple answers didn't seem to be clear enough and sometimes contradicting what I had listened in the class. I don't remember specific cases at the moment, however I have left feedbacks throughout the course. You should have my feedbacks where I mentioned specific questions that in my opinion were confusing. Hope this helps, Giacomo | few occasions where I found the | Quizz | not to be clear enough. In | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Good interesting material but the quizzes were badly designed and did not test concepts well. | Good interesting material but the | Quizz | were badly designed and did not | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 8TKORJrSEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Course was ok. However, some of questions were not clear based on excerpt from support video. For example, quiz #1 question 7. Course was "general" overview of very important subject matter of Cyber Conflicts. Looking forward to a more specific and detailed course structure. PS: A course concerning Cyberwar in Space would be quite interesting. | excerpt from support video. For example, | Quizz | #1 question 7. Course was " | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 8TKORJrSEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | On the positive side I emphasise the importance of bringing this topic to a Coursera course. Also the readings were important and added value to the learning experience. On the other hand there are - in my opinion some aspects that made this course a not so rich experience. First, there are some audio issues in the videos. Second, the quizzes are excessively easy and the in video quizzes should not appear in the weekly assignments. If there are required readings, some of the quiz questions should relate to those readings. This way students had an incentive to go over those readings. But the most salient thing that made my experience very limited was the fact that one of the instructors - the one that presented most of the videos, was excessively nervous and all that he did was read the slides, in most cases not doing so naturally and committing errors, rephrasing, stopping, changing speed. I found it very, very difficult to follow along what he was saying. I had to focus only on the slides, otherwise I would get distracted. I think it is ok to be nervous or at ease, but the team should alerted him to this, and shoot the videos again and again until they had acceptable and balanced quality. A minor thing, I would like to had available the weekly slides to further reflection. I think the video issues that I've mentioned should been carefully planned before this course made it mainstream. This is my opinion. Hope it will help you for future improvements of the course and/or other offerings. Ricardo Oliveira | issues in the videos. Second, the | Quizz | are excessively easy and the in | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 8TKORJrSEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | On the positive side I emphasise the importance of bringing this topic to a Coursera course. Also the readings were important and added value to the learning experience. On the other hand there are - in my opinion some aspects that made this course a not so rich experience. First, there are some audio issues in the videos. Second, the quizzes are excessively easy and the in video quizzes should not appear in the weekly assignments. If there are required readings, some of the quiz questions should relate to those readings. This way students had an incentive to go over those readings. But the most salient thing that made my experience very limited was the fact that one of the instructors - the one that presented most of the videos, was excessively nervous and all that he did was read the slides, in most cases not doing so naturally and committing errors, rephrasing, stopping, changing speed. I found it very, very difficult to follow along what he was saying. I had to focus only on the slides, otherwise I would get distracted. I think it is ok to be nervous or at ease, but the team should alerted him to this, and shoot the videos again and again until they had acceptable and balanced quality. A minor thing, I would like to had available the weekly slides to further reflection. I think the video issues that I've mentioned should been carefully planned before this course made it mainstream. This is my opinion. Hope it will help you for future improvements of the course and/or other offerings. Ricardo Oliveira | excessively easy and the in video | Quizz | should not appear in the weekly | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 8TKORJrSEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | On the positive side I emphasise the importance of bringing this topic to a Coursera course. Also the readings were important and added value to the learning experience. On the other hand there are - in my opinion some aspects that made this course a not so rich experience. First, there are some audio issues in the videos. Second, the quizzes are excessively easy and the in video quizzes should not appear in the weekly assignments. If there are required readings, some of the quiz questions should relate to those readings. This way students had an incentive to go over those readings. But the most salient thing that made my experience very limited was the fact that one of the instructors - the one that presented most of the videos, was excessively nervous and all that he did was read the slides, in most cases not doing so naturally and committing errors, rephrasing, stopping, changing speed. I found it very, very difficult to follow along what he was saying. I had to focus only on the slides, otherwise I would get distracted. I think it is ok to be nervous or at ease, but the team should alerted him to this, and shoot the videos again and again until they had acceptable and balanced quality. A minor thing, I would like to had available the weekly slides to further reflection. I think the video issues that I've mentioned should been carefully planned before this course made it mainstream. This is my opinion. Hope it will help you for future improvements of the course and/or other offerings. Ricardo Oliveira | are required readings, some of the | Quizz | questions should relate to those readings. | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | It is told that to take this course, basic computer skills like sending emails and downloading files are necessary-this is a beginning level course. Then, in the first module, instructors talk about polymorphism, inheritance and abstraction. For someone who have no prior programming experience, these are definitely not suitable topics to start with. Moreover, students are supposed to learn these concepts to get a good grade from first quiz, although they know nothing about programming. I had some programming experience, so I was already familiar with these subjects. But the lectures were too boring to keep watching. I watched like 10 videos and learned nothing about the course subject. I think I won't be spending my time for this course, which seems to me like reading some reference files. | get a good grade from first | Quizz | although they know nothing about programming. | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | The course doesn't allow access to the quizzes unless you pay for it. I consider this to be contradictory with the statement that the free version of the course gives you access to all the material. Also, not being able to take the quizzes makes the course meaningless. | course doesn't allow access to the | Quizz | unless you pay for it. I | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | The course doesn't allow access to the quizzes unless you pay for it. I consider this to be contradictory with the statement that the free version of the course gives you access to all the material. Also, not being able to take the quizzes makes the course meaningless. | not being able to take the | Quizz | makes the course meaningless. | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | how I think it was. 1. | Quizz | are horrible. The fact we get | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | very helpful. There are only 3 | Quizz | where I missed just one question | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | something. Also while some of the | Quizz | answers are obvious from watching the | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | background and out of all the | Quizz | I just missed 1 question on | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | there was feedback after taking a | Quizz | I'm sure it would of helped. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | would of helped. For those 3 | Quizz | I took them so many times | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | I feel this course was severely misrepresented. This clearly not a beginner level class by any measurement. And the "4-6 hours" of expected student involvement is ridiculous. A beginner (NO programming experience) should expect to spend 15 to 20 hours on the first week alone and at least 10 hours for each of the remaining weeks. I have over 25 years of programming experience in Assembly language, Visual Basic, C and C++. I am clearly NOT at the beginner level yet I spent more than 11 hours on the first week, mostly due to trying to download and setup properly for the course. Also, there are over 3 hours of videos in the 1st week plus 3 quizzes and a programming assignment. If anyone spent less than 6 hours on week 1, then that was NOT the first time they took this class. I also am keenly disappointed in the restrictive nature of the assignments/quizzes. Having to type "-1*1+11" instead of "-i+11" (and you better not have any leading or lagging spaces!!) for instance. Bottom line, I would not recommend this course for anyone wanting to Learn Java for Android Programming unless you already know Java and just want some intro on Android development with Android Studio. And if you are indeed at the beginner level, do yourself a favor and start with introductory courses in Computer Science. | in the 1st week plus 3 | Quizz | and a programming assignment. If anyone | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course. First time enrolled course in Coursera. I really enjoyed it. Lots of quiz and weekly assignment kept me busy for 4 weeks. And because of these ( assignment due date), i really learned by forcing myself to complete all in time. Quite tough on week 3, and i watched the videos multiple times and google the subject in order to understand the contents. Take this course, and struggle for 4 weeks. Will not regret. | I really enjoyed it. Lots of | Quizz | and weekly assignment kept me busy | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course!!. the approach is well-balanced (no superficial and at the same time not too much professional). The quiz are done very well. | time not too much professional). The | Quizz | are done very well. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | It's about 4.4 actually. Not enough to give 5 though. First about positive sides. I think course is well structured (except for a few minor drawbacks), quizzes fit to the material. An assignments truly buck up the material. And I think material give a grounding in future Android Development. But I think it can be problem with the learning process, mostly with programming assignment. I think it's common that when course come out for the first time it's almost inevitably that there are some issues with autograder. It' s just common. But these issue are usually easy to spot, because the output of autograder contains test cases. So one can easily find out what the problem is, if it's with autograder. As for this course, the autograder output is very minimalistic, and if the problem is with autograder it's rather hard to spot. I myself spent entire evening, trying to find what is wrong with my code, and it was pure luck that I finely spotted the problem (and, yes, it was autograder issue). Such thing could be very frustrating, really. Another problem with programming assignments is about Peer Review. The students actually get access to assessment criteria, after they have submitted they code. And their code not necessary fit these criteria. I think it could spoil the learning process as well. I actually aware that these drawbacks can be corrected in release course, and if they will be, I will be glad to change the rating. | (except for a few minor drawbacks), | Quizz | fit to the material. An assignments | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | This class was very enlightening. I liked how the videos went along with the quizzes and it was easy to articulate what everyone was saying. | the videos went along with the | Quizz | and it was easy to articulate | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | This is a great course. Some challenging but interesting coursework at the beginning, but all very useful. Interesting interviews with experts in the field so not the same person over and over again. Some creative ways to present data using soft toys! Really up-to-date research. Quizzes set at the right level. Overall I am really glad I chose to do this course. | using soft toys! Really up-to-date research. | Quizz | set at the right level. Overall | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| 9h_j5XEiEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | This was by far the worst course in the series. There is a lot of good content in this course that needs to be shared, but I just felt the delivery failed in a lot of ways. Here are some issues 1) Often, concepts are thrown out but aren't explained clearly. Speaker glosses over them without giving concrete examples 2) The structure of the course is poorly configured. On several occasions, inline quizzes test you on concepts that haven't been introduced until later in the video, forcing you to guess at answers. Also, the assignment portion of the course asks you to submit a word or pdf with images, but it wasn't configured to allow uploads. You could only submit text in a text box. I realized I wasn't the only person with the issue when I graded assignments from others who had trouble submitting their assignment. In some cases, I believe students failed that portion of the course because they could not figure out how to submit. I have some IT background and was able to share my homework through my shared drive fortunately. 3) The speaker should re-record his lecture. It was obvious (or at least seemed as if) he was reading a teleprompter. There were many awkward pauses between sentences that made it hard to listen to. Often times, the audio presentation were inconsistent with the words in the slide, making it confusing because I didn't know which I should be following. | poorly configured. On several occasions, inline | Quizz | test you on concepts that haven't | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | The course is very complete on it's subjects and points, but should have more slides and some times be more grafic about some examples, this makes the lessons boring and harder to follow because there is a massive amount of informations. Also have too much questions on the quizzes. | have too much questions on the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Very well designed and implemented course. Practical and pragmatic. Videos interesting and easy to watch. Smart questions and quizzes that promote learning. The work load is not too demanding, but leaves you feeling like you earned the passing scores. Just right. Highly recommended. | easy to watch. Smart questions and | Quizz | that promote learning. The work load | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Great, informative class but way too many quizzes. | informative class but way too many | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This is a good course and I can get a brief idea what the position is the earth is. Also, I can remember some key figures about the environment situation. The difficulties of the quizs are designed suitability for student memorizing key point and concepts | environment situation. The difficulties of the | Quizz | are designed suitability for student memorizing | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Great course, very interesting material. I found that the course material did not match the quiz material, though I was not seriously bothered by it. I learnt a lot and will continue to follow the theory of terrorism and the practice of counterterrorism. | course material did not match the | Quizz | material, though I was not seriously | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | A most interesting and insightful course. The quizzes challenge the student, and give opportunity for individual thinking. | most interesting and insightful course. The | Quizz | challenge the student, and give opportunity | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | This is a really interesting course with current information about the state of terrorism and counterterrorism studies today and with an updated module on ISIS and what is happening in Syria at the moment. The history is an important aspect ,so having finished the course I feel I have a good overview of where we are and where we are coming from with an acknowledgement of the future. I wasn't sure that I would finish since one of the quizzes was so tricky but I got through it and learnt to revise well for the final exam. The videos are very well presented by Dr. Bakker and guests and the essential and supplementary readings very pertinent and enlarging.I wish I still had access to those materials as I didn't read everything I would have liked to but know I can at least refer to Perspectives on Terrorism online whenever I want to for current articles. | would finish since one of the | Quizz | was so tricky but I got | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Excellent course, Kimberley provides interesting and action-oriented material while giving us a sense of her own branding and personality. The quizzes are not hard, what counts most is that you apply her advice! | her own branding and personality. The | Quizz | are not hard, what counts most | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Thank you very much for this course - by far the best part for me was Week 2 when we were helped to really identify who we are and how we project ourselves to ourselves and to others. Thank you Kimberley for keeping the videos short and interesting (I find this vital to the success of MOOCs). I do however feel like the Quiz's could have been a little bit more challenging ;) | I do however feel like the | Quizz | could have been a little bit | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | The backbone of the course was useful, but I thought the lectures were lacking depth. The quizzes were way too easy, you didn't even need to follow the course to be able to pass it. The extra articles and links were one of the highlights. | the lectures were lacking depth. The | Quizz | were way too easy, you didn't | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| a3f86i8hEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | It covered all the concepts with examples and the quiz content further improved the understanding. | the concepts with examples and the | Quizz | content further improved the understanding. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I have to admit that the professors know the topic and are conducting amazing research, but the course was dry and terribly designed. The videos are too long, without quizzes or activities to break the long dry monologues. They also talk like robots and one gets lost really fast. I have taken many courses in coursera with long and short videos, with boring and engaging teachers but this is by far the worse. They are trying to show off so much information and in such a high level language (to most), that it makes it incredibly boring. I should add that I have studied Buddhism, and there are so many better ways to provide people an opportunity to come into contact with this beautiful topic. | The videos are too long, without | Quizz | or activities to break the long | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | After being bored to death by his first highly complex and involved analytical/historical lectures, I skipped over every video that Prof. Germano lectured in. I'm not sure if his later videos were great or not, and they were supposed to be "foundational/historical," but the rest of the course was extremely educative and enjoyable for a beginner like me, and Prof. Germano's lectures were not needed for the graded quizzes. | were not needed for the graded | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | I'm several months into this specialization. It seems to practice little of what it preaches in its design and pedagogy. I've paused repeatedly because I find the whole experience needlessly clunky and frustrating, and I rarely feel like I've learned much at the end of the assignments. I often wonder if anyone on the UCSD/Coursera side ever actually tries to complete the assignments. The quiz is missing key links and the questions read as if they were written by someone who's first language is not English. Pretty sloppy effort. | tries to complete the assignments. The | Quizz | is missing key links and the | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| afDgOoSTEeSA1yIAC1EHSw | Good content but the Chinese translation is bad, which makes quiz quite obscure in meaning | Chinese translation is bad, which makes | Quizz | quite obscure in meaning | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | The entire course lacks a "flow". It looks like concepts that are taught are picked at random and stuffed into the course. The quizzes really do not complement the material taught. The instructor wants the students to focus on specific wordings of his lecture rather than the concepts, in order to pass the quizzes. | and stuffed into the course. The | Quizz | really do not complement the material | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | The entire course lacks a "flow". It looks like concepts that are taught are picked at random and stuffed into the course. The quizzes really do not complement the material taught. The instructor wants the students to focus on specific wordings of his lecture rather than the concepts, in order to pass the quizzes. | concepts, in order to pass the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| aPM0Nx7iEea8agoSdQeRvQ | A good continuation of Think Again I. However, final quiz had lots of bugs in it. | of Think Again I. However, final | Quizz | had lots of bugs in it. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| aPM0Nx7iEea8agoSdQeRvQ | The material in this course is well presented, though scarce at times. However it has its share of problems : -little to no interaction from TA's or mentors in the forums -the quizzes are often out of sync with the lectures -the final exam has severe problems with questions (form not content). In more detail, on the final exam, some of the questions don't even contain all the content to answer them. They can request multiple answers but have single question boxes and/or the reverse. | or mentors in the forums -the | Quizz | are often out of sync with | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | Course assignment requires knowledge that is not discussed in the course. Various inconsistencies throughout the course. Week 4's material is not really helpful and I had a feeling that the instructior just wanted to "wrap up" the course and didn't really care if the material is appropriate. Poorly written quizzes. | the material is appropriate. Poorly written | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | The lectures were very informative and clear. I had no problem giving the quizzes with the lectures. The project I had no clue where to begin. There has to be extra lectures included to guide the project. I hope they add some lectures as whatever lectures are currently available are | I had no problem giving the | Quizz | with the lectures. The project I | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| At1XBOAAEeWoTg63tTECEQ | Lessons were pretty concise, engaging and well arranged. Quizzes were relevant and stimulating. Would love to take an advanced version. Thanks to the team. | pretty concise, engaging and well arranged. | Quizz | were relevant and stimulating. Would love | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Probably I am biased by just having followed edX's Minds and Machines. Compared to that course, the lectures here are superficial and not very engaging. This becomes especially striking for overlapping topics between the two courses. Also the quizzes are way too easy and you can try until you get it right. This makes the certificate virtually worthless, although you can pay for it. | between the two courses. Also the | Quizz | are way too easy and you | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Really good course! Very much enjoyed it! Thank you for an amazing month! The only thing I would mention, was that at times the computer would sometime move the selected answer on the quiz, which made it frustrating on the last week's quiz and on week 2 (or 3 I think, can't remember it correctly) when it occurred, but apart from that everything else was fine! Thank you! | move the selected answer on the | Quizz | which made it frustrating on the | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Really good course! Very much enjoyed it! Thank you for an amazing month! The only thing I would mention, was that at times the computer would sometime move the selected answer on the quiz, which made it frustrating on the last week's quiz and on week 2 (or 3 I think, can't remember it correctly) when it occurred, but apart from that everything else was fine! Thank you! | it frustrating on the last week's | Quizz | and on week 2 (or 3 | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice | Quizz | are just the same questions from | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | very little prep for the actual | Quizz | which are painfully pedantic for a | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | section has a different style of | Quizz | which is hard to prepare for. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | a slightly longer time and the | Quizz | could be more uniform, the lectures | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I gave this course 5 stars because the content does match the description, a general overview of the topic of Philosophy. It introduces the student to the concepts involved with the study of and the approach to Philosophy from various topics. It does not go into any specific philosophers very deeply, and instead focuses on the general study or overview of what is going on in the "philosophical world" as of 2013. The course has not been updated, from what I can tell from that time. The Forums are "there" and the class is "supposed" to be live, but it did not have that feel to it. It was more of a "study on your own" experience and yes, we have a forum area. i found it not to be very active after the first week, (introductions were encouraged) but perhaps taking this course over the Christmas holiday (that fell in the middle of the course) was not the best time. I am near the end of the course and have put a lot of time effort and extra reading into it, but it does not seem this will be rewarded i.e by a certificate with distinction, at least there does not seem to be active involvement to that extent. 2-3 of the lectures had "extra"videos" of the professors addressing forum questions, but I do think these were outdated or from the first run of the course (?) as they seems to be talking about topics that were not necessarily in the forums at the time. I cannot determine that for certain, but, it was my impression. I would HIGHLY suggest purchase of the book that goes with this course, due to week 6, when clearly the topic is not entirely covered in the notes nor the lecture (my opinion only) and the book was needed to get thru the quiz. The professor that week had an accent and spoke very fast, and even listening in a slower speed did not seem to help much. The book is a worthy purchase, look for it on EBAY, or Amazon or a Used Book website. The book does go deeper on all topics and again, especially for week 6 and it is looking like possibly week 7 as well are best studied with the book as well as notes provided by the course. Again, this is an overview course, and it is interesting. If you are looking to study specific philosophers in depth - this is not the course. It is the course however to take before taking others or to review or learn what is going on in the area this area of study and it did hold my interest. As others have commented the final week touches upon time travel and the professor has introduced interesting aspects that involve the philosophical in this unit. Each week a different instructor presents information so you are switching learning styles weekly which is, I think made a more smooth transition if you actually have the book and the chapter that the instructor wrote. I would recommend it for at least another 6 mo to a year - after that (say 2017 perhaps the lectures should be freshened up, as new information may be out there, or at least they should tape something that says, "yes this was originally taped in 2013, however the info is still on target" or if not then add a lecture that updates the course to the latest in that area of philosophy. Overall, this being my second Coursera class I have found it to be of high quality, and worthy of my investment to obtain the certificate that is offered. And I do thank all of the professors who participated in this collaboration, it is again, a very interesting course that I think is a "must take" course if one is to really understand what is "going on" with Philosophy. | was needed to get thru the | Quizz | The professor that week had an | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I really enjoyed this course because contents were very interesting and contemporaneous. Reading about travelling time was a real pleasure. Teachers nice, quizzes and texts supported well my development. Congratulations. | was a real pleasure. Teachers nice, | Quizz | and texts supported well my development. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | While the indidivual lectureres did have a breadth of knowledge, a manditory discusion should be held with the homeworks instead of just the quizzes for completion. Perhaps a page on each week should be good enough. Just to understand each lecturer's main points. | the homeworks instead of just the | Quizz | for completion. Perhaps a page on | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Great explanations that is broken down with examples for understanding. Quizzes test for your understanding of the topic rather than just the textbook explanations. Challenging and thought revoking. | broken down with examples for understanding. | Quizz | test for your understanding of the | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | This course can only be taken who have good knowledge in programming.Although there is a assessment quiz at the start of the course It needs to kept in mind that since this course is part of specialization,most people would take it and not all of them are programmers.This course needs a revamp to suit all sorts of security enthusiasts. | programming. Although there is a assessment | Quizz | at the start of the course | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | Great course, but not reasonable amount of time between quizzes attempts. 49 Days is too long time to wait if you fail in the quiz. | not reasonable amount of time between | Quizz | attempts. 49 Days is too long | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | Great course, but not reasonable amount of time between quizzes attempts. 49 Days is too long time to wait if you fail in the quiz. | wait if you fail in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | The course of this kind was extremely needed, still in it's current state it contains lots of inaccuracies in lectures and quizes. I hope they will be fixed up to the future sessions. | lots of inaccuracies in lectures and | Quizz | I hope they will be fixed | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I had a lot of fun in this course. The exercises in the text and quizzes help me understand the concepts | The exercises in the text and | Quizz | help me understand the concepts | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | Content and quizz are not aligned. Mentors answer to 0% of the forum posts. Poor student community. Do not pay for this course, just follow the swirl and/or get some tuto about regressions. | Content and | Quizz | are not aligned. Mentors answer to | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | Very little depth. I don't recommend this if you don't already have background in statistics or R. I really didn't learn anything. I mostly just gamed the quizzes and projects. | anything. I mostly just gamed the | Quizz | and projects. | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The material presented was of course useful, but I never really felt like I understood how it all tied together, or what the big picture was. I think that some case studies that show how all of the concepts relate to one another, or how they are used in the bigger picture would be helpful. Also, as a suggestion, I feel that if something is important enough to be included in the quiz, it merits more than the briefest of mentions in the lecture. | enough to be included in the | Quizz | it merits more than the briefest | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The flows of courses instructed by Caffo(Statistical Inference and Regression Models) are too long to concentrate it and the quiz is not quite related in lecture. However, Contents of the book is really good, as well as homework in the book. | long to concentrate it and the | Quizz | is not quite related in lecture. | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I just realized that you have to upgrade(pay $49) in order to submit the quiz and receive the feedback. That's depressing since my purpose is to watch the video and check out what I learned so far without getting any certificate. The policy here bring huge inconvenience for people like me. | $49) in order to submit the | Quizz | and receive the feedback. That's depressing | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | Better than Stat Inference, and gave some reasonable intuition, but could be improved I think by focussing on more understanding and less maths and formulas. Some of it did seem to be - here' s a formula, plug the numbers in to get the quiz question right, whereas in reality (in the world of work) that question is completely unrealistic - you have raw data and you need to do the regression and understand what it means. | the numbers in to get the | Quizz | question right, whereas in reality (in | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| b75Wh7MYEeWKaQ6n__gsuQ | I liked this course but I wish the free part included the Quiz!!! | wish the free part included the | Quizz | ! ! | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | Great course with useful tips and organized materials. However, some of the materials (recommended tools, hyperlinks, etc) are outdated so it would be great if they can refresh them. Also, the in-course quizzes are too easy to the point it seemed quite stupid - please include more meaningful questions in the in-video quizzes. | can refresh them. Also, the in-course | Quizz | are too easy to the point | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | Great course with useful tips and organized materials. However, some of the materials (recommended tools, hyperlinks, etc) are outdated so it would be great if they can refresh them. Also, the in-course quizzes are too easy to the point it seemed quite stupid - please include more meaningful questions in the in-video quizzes. | more meaningful questions in the in-video | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | I am not impressed with this course so far. The quizzes and assignments are out of order with the materials being presented - the questions on each come from readings and lecture content that have not been introduced to the audience at that particular point in the course. The first module was a very, very basic outline of a generic analysis process, and really has nothing to do with digital marketing analytics in particular. | with this course so far. The | Quizz | and assignments are out of order | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| BJXF0TLTEeSasiIACxClrQ | Super course, clear in the theoretical analysis, good practice quizzes and interesting virtual lab exercises. | in the theoretical analysis, good practice | Quizz | and interesting virtual lab exercises. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| BJXF0TLTEeSasiIACxClrQ | Very well organised, specially the lab work + assignments + Quiz. | the lab work + assignments + | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | Interesting course - good topics and novel angles used in approaching the topics. Plus intellectually engaging way of discussing over management issues. However - really annoying quiz questions. And good portion of the right and wrong answers were highly debatable - you had to know exactly what was the angle during this specific course. I still graded with 5 stars, hoping they will make some changes in grading. | management issues. However - really annoying | Quizz | questions. And good portion of the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | questionable is the architecture of the | Quizz | On one hand it goes way | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | the other hand after doing the | Quizz | some times and observing the considered | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | by any means saying that the | Quizz | are hard or simple, I am | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | evaluations should be challeging, but these | Quizz | are a bit esoteric, they lack | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | Great basics, challenging quizzes to ensure you truly understand concepts. TA is great on message boards. | Great basics, challenging | Quizz | to ensure you truly understand concepts. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | I think the challenging quizzes force you to understand the material. I really appreciate this | I think the challenging | Quizz | force you to understand the material. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | Great course. Truly enjoy the intellectual challenge from the well designed quiz. Great effort for the entire team. Keep up the good work. The world need educators like you to make learning fun and challenging. | intellectual challenge from the well designed | Quizz | Great effort for the entire team. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | The Worst Course EVER on Coursera: It is important to realize at the outset that I am a very avid learner and always give everything a chance to be completely tried out before giving a judgement, and unfortunately, this course is by far, the only bad course I've encountered on Coursera for the following reasons: 1- The professor wastes a whole week's module on explaining something trivial like the interest rate and compound interest rate without naming the necessary terminology that is commonly used. 2- To make things worse, he has a condescending perspective on students and wastes so much time glorifying himself in an upsetting manner that patronizes learners. 3- His demeanour is unprofessional and quite disturbing when he gives mentions at the end of the week that 'I can feel you. I can feel each one of you now' to the degree that even the camera-person filming him cuts his nonsense out. 4- After putting up with all his boring nonsense that I already know, despite being a linguist not a finance person, I gave him a chance and started doing his first 10-question Quiz, which was completely isolated from reality and unrelated to his course material or teaching. 5- All questions were boring and calculation-intensive, and I still gave him and a chance and went through the whole boring set of 10 questions just to tell me that it needs upgrading for such a banal and facile course. Now, I have an idea about the level of Teaching at Michigan University and I will recommend all my friends not to attend such a university due to the previously-mentioned reasons. A complete waste of space. | and started doing his first 10-question | Quizz | which was completely isolated from reality | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Tremendous course. Explanations can be terse at times, especially after going over quizzes (where you may only follow what is going along if you successfully solved the quiz, otherwise you may miss important insight), but on the whole, lectures are very strong and help you gain a working understanding of functional programming. The assignments are carefully crafted and really give you an opportunity to try the stuff from the lecture. Definitely felt like I learned a lot during the assignments. I found that the last two assignments took more than the recommended 3 hours (closer to 5-6 for me), so plan accordingly. Personally, I found that this course is even better if you read through the first 4 chapters of Functional Programming in Scala (https://www.manning.com/books/functional-programming-in-scala) before doing this course. By getting two separate, excellent explanations for the same topics, I was able to understand the material much better than just from one. | at times, especially after going over | Quizz | (where you may only follow what | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Tremendous course. Explanations can be terse at times, especially after going over quizzes (where you may only follow what is going along if you successfully solved the quiz, otherwise you may miss important insight), but on the whole, lectures are very strong and help you gain a working understanding of functional programming. The assignments are carefully crafted and really give you an opportunity to try the stuff from the lecture. Definitely felt like I learned a lot during the assignments. I found that the last two assignments took more than the recommended 3 hours (closer to 5-6 for me), so plan accordingly. Personally, I found that this course is even better if you read through the first 4 chapters of Functional Programming in Scala (https://www.manning.com/books/functional-programming-in-scala) before doing this course. By getting two separate, excellent explanations for the same topics, I was able to understand the material much better than just from one. | along if you successfully solved the | Quizz | otherwise you may miss important insight), | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | The course is logical and thorough, flawlessly delivered (well, except maybe the audio quality at times), and challenging just enough to make a seasoned imperative programmer scream in frustration, but not quit. 😀 The only thing standing between this course and perfection are the pop quiz bugs. But even they contribute to the message of the course in a way: if Coursera's platform were written in Scala, there probably would be fewer of them. 🕷 | course and perfection are the pop | Quizz | bugs. But even they contribute to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Great course ! Easy, well structured, I also enjoyed different reading tasks for intermediate and advanced levels. Short videos, various types of tasks to complete - readings, quizzes, audios and videos etc. | of tasks to complete - readings, | Quizz | audios and videos etc. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Actualmente estoy en este curso y me ha parecido muy bueno. Me gustan los quizzes y los juegos para repasar el material. | parecido muy bueno. Me gustan los | Quizz | y los juegos para repasar el | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Great idea but unprofessional design and programming. Looks like nobody double-checked it before starts to offer it, especially for money. Almost every Quiz and separate questions has programming bugs. Waiting for ver 2 ASAP. | it, especially for money. Almost every | Quizz | and separate questions has programming bugs. | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Great courses , well designed , explanations are clear and Exercices and quizzes helps to have a better understanding . I'm really delighted and grateful to have acess to that course | explanations are clear and Exercices and | Quizz | helps to have a better understanding | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| bu-bs9_HEeSNQCIAC2-J5Q | The course material itself is enjoyable, but the quizzes don't work properly. The feedback given to the same responses between retakes is contradictory. | material itself is enjoyable, but the | Quizz | don't work properly. The feedback given | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | Very complex topic and also the one of most curious one too. A very good amount of knowledge one can gain about the big bang and our universe. Straight forward lectures through images and animations. but I feel that some of the explanations were very twisted in the 3rd week although I understand that the subject itself is one of the most complex topic of the research and these are scientists and not teacher but there is this room for the improvement. Also the quizzes were too easy and very straight forward and don't test the understanding of the topic very much. I am a very big supporter of the Coursera, I have stared many courses but due to some reasons couldn't complete any, this is the 1st course that I followed till the end. Thank you Coursera for this wonderful opportunity. | room for the improvement. Also the | Quizz | were too easy and very straight | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | This was one of the best courses I have taken on Coursera. The professor was articulate, the material was organized, and the graphics were clear and helpful. I completed all the quizzes and completed the course. I do not want a certificate as I am well past the employment phase of my life. I enjoy the courses to help keep my brain's neurons connected. I would enjoy any other courses that Prof. Marayama teaches. Joem D. Phillips | and helpful. I completed all the | Quizz | and completed the course. I do | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | Nice course. It has touched week every topic, but the quizzes are badly done. | touched week every topic, but the | Quizz | are badly done. | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| bVgqTevEEeWvGQrWsIkLlw | You need to pay to participate in the quizzes. Stay clear, there are free alternatives out there | to pay to participate in the | Quizz | Stay clear, there are free alternatives | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| bzhAuJ9sEeWJORITtzkPnQ | The course is very practically-oriented and the quizzes are actually designed so that the learner can make a strong emphasis on the weekly content. | course is very practically-oriented and the | Quizz | are actually designed so that the | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | While the course materials themselves were very useful, the quizzes didn't feel like an effective test of the material and consisted of very few questions, which didn't leave room for error (especially problematic because some questions were subjective). | materials themselves were very useful, the | Quizz | didn't feel like an effective test | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The extra/outside content provided is great. As others have stated, but clearly not adjusted, some of the quiz questions aren't clear items covered in the material (which is frustrating). | clearly not adjusted, some of the | Quizz | questions aren't clear items covered in | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Margaret Meloni was constantly looking down to read directly from a poorly-rehearsed script while trying to stumble through phrasing and lecture points. Considering this is a course about communication, this was very disappointing. The quizzes were vague and either didn't have clear correct answers or didn't feel applicable to the module to which it was assigned. After reviewing the material, I had to complete the quizzes by trial-and-error since the answers were not reflected in the lectures. | communication, this was very disappointing. The | Quizz | were vague and either didn't have | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Margaret Meloni was constantly looking down to read directly from a poorly-rehearsed script while trying to stumble through phrasing and lecture points. Considering this is a course about communication, this was very disappointing. The quizzes were vague and either didn't have clear correct answers or didn't feel applicable to the module to which it was assigned. After reviewing the material, I had to complete the quizzes by trial-and-error since the answers were not reflected in the lectures. | material, I had to complete the | Quizz | by trial-and-error since the answers were | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Overly-remedial information, but that is not what earns this course such a poor evaluation from me. The poor evaluation comes from the composition of the review quizzes: The end-of-section quizzes ask questions to which there can be more than one correct answer, yet only a single response will receive credit. Example: "A recommended solution to a problem is valued by an executive because..." Followed by four possible answers: One of which is clearly incorrect while one makes an awful assumption. These two choices can be eliminated easily. However, the final two options are BOTH UNARGUABLY CORRECT, but only one was briefly mentioned in the material (reading or video), and thus only that one receives credit. Unfortunately, this demonstrates the course creators' desire to value a student's memorization of the instructor's own unique words over the student's assimilation of the course content and ideas. Course-takers beware, this course seems more tailored to stroking Ms. Bravo's ego than to you actually learning anything of commercial value. | from the composition of the review | Quizz | The end-of-section quizzes ask questions to | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Overly-remedial information, but that is not what earns this course such a poor evaluation from me. The poor evaluation comes from the composition of the review quizzes: The end-of-section quizzes ask questions to which there can be more than one correct answer, yet only a single response will receive credit. Example: "A recommended solution to a problem is valued by an executive because..." Followed by four possible answers: One of which is clearly incorrect while one makes an awful assumption. These two choices can be eliminated easily. However, the final two options are BOTH UNARGUABLY CORRECT, but only one was briefly mentioned in the material (reading or video), and thus only that one receives credit. Unfortunately, this demonstrates the course creators' desire to value a student's memorization of the instructor's own unique words over the student's assimilation of the course content and ideas. Course-takers beware, this course seems more tailored to stroking Ms. Bravo's ego than to you actually learning anything of commercial value. | of the review quizzes: The end-of-section | Quizz | ask questions to which there can | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | I thought it was going to be good. Did the first week videos and Lectures. But I feel cheated because it will not let me take the quiz to move on without paying for the course. No where did I ever see anything that said ahead you had to pay -- if you didn't want a certificate or to do the whole specialization. Coursera used to be a platform I used and recommended. No more. | will not let me take the | Quizz | to move on without paying for | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | I think the teacher was very welcoming, but the content was less than enough to answer the quizzes. In the quizzes, every answer choice was correct and there wasn't any possible way to discern. What the teacher said and complemented with the lectures didn't match with the question answers. So, my score is "2". | less than enough to answer the | Quizz | In the quizzes, every answer choice | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | I think the teacher was very welcoming, but the content was less than enough to answer the quizzes. In the quizzes, every answer choice was correct and there wasn't any possible way to discern. What the teacher said and complemented with the lectures didn't match with the question answers. So, my score is "2". | to answer the quizzes. In the | Quizz | every answer choice was correct and | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The teacher of this course talks toooo fast ! I`m for example a french educated student, so I prefer to take courses with a teacher who talks in a comprehensive way in which I can understand everything he says in order to proceed in my work and then to benefit everything in this course. Concerning the quiz, in the all of the quiz there is questions not related to what already said from the teacher or in the articles required to read. I red the articles coupes of time but in a specific questions, the answers, it seems, that we should answer from our own memory because badly it`s not mentioned in any article or in the video of the teacher. Thanks | everything in this course. Concerning the | Quizz | in the all of the quiz | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The teacher of this course talks toooo fast ! I`m for example a french educated student, so I prefer to take courses with a teacher who talks in a comprehensive way in which I can understand everything he says in order to proceed in my work and then to benefit everything in this course. Concerning the quiz, in the all of the quiz there is questions not related to what already said from the teacher or in the articles required to read. I red the articles coupes of time but in a specific questions, the answers, it seems, that we should answer from our own memory because badly it`s not mentioned in any article or in the video of the teacher. Thanks | quiz, in the all of the | Quizz | there is questions not related to | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Less required reading and more targeted lectures would make it great. It often seemed that the questions in the quiz weren't properly covered in the material provided. | seemed that the questions in the | Quizz | weren't properly covered in the material | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | a nice "entry level" course lacking a forum discussion... was not even able to report some issue with videos and no explanation provided with quizzes results :/ | videos and no explanation provided with | Quizz | results :/ | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | It's a bit hard to answer the quiz since the presentation is not speaking about the qu | a bit hard to answer the | Quizz | since the presentation is not speaking | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | A lot of reading, but the course is pretty thorough. The quizzes are mostly just regurgitating information from the readings. | the course is pretty thorough. The | Quizz | are mostly just regurgitating information from | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| C-Eq4BUkEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Beautiful description of the life, times, ideas, and love of Socrates that Kierkegaard embodied. A real joy to run through. I literally watched all the lectures in the span of three days, there is something simple and earnest about the course that I really like. I like that the quizzes never took away from the lesson, they only check understanding at the end of the lecture. | really like. I like that the | Quizz | never took away from the lesson, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | The course is really helpful but I think it would have been much better if there were answers to all the practice quizzes since some of them are really challenging. | were answers to all the practice | Quizz | since some of them are really | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | The best course about mathematics that I've ever taken. The course is very interesant, the videos are very well done, the activities and quizzes are very challenging. I had seen sequences and series a time ago and I didn't like them at all, but now it is a complete different story. I really enjoyed this course and I recommend it. | very well done, the activities and | Quizz | are very challenging. I had seen | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | I appreciate the free course, but it seems that this course is not comprehensively prepared like the first course. 1) There are no solution, and sometimes nothing at all, provided under the wrong answer of each task in practice quizs. And 2), the tasks are not 100% related with previous radios, which could be frastrating for people like me who want to solve all tasks before entering into the next session. 3) Some important points are missing in the video whereas less significant points are overdressed in excessive details. | answer of each task in practice | Quizz | And 2), the tasks are not | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | I give four stars rather than five because I felt that the course seemed less well executed than Calculus One by the same author. He set a high bar for himself. Still, I learned a lot and do appreciate it. I felt the practice quizzes could have been more helpful in the explanation of wrong answers as was the case in Calculus One. | appreciate it. I felt the practice | Quizz | could have been more helpful in | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Very slow beginning and quite few gaps between videos and quiz but very nice to go back to basics and practice calculus again | quite few gaps between videos and | Quizz | but very nice to go back | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Thank you, Jim! Very well prepared course. Well chosen examples and problems, but that's just my opinion. Nevertheless, problems and quizzes really helped me understand the materials better in this course and in Calculus 1 (MOOCulus). Oh, and it follows a free (open) textbook! What!? | just my opinion. Nevertheless, problems and | Quizz | really helped me understand the materials | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Great explanation, challenging quizzes. May be very difficult for those who aren't used to grasping concept in maths. | Great explanation, challenging | Quizz | May be very difficult for those | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | I've completed numerous MOOCs but this teacher is simply the best. Very passionate and explains things extremely well. All the lectures look extremely thought out, topics are presented in somewhat funny, but really professional way, quizes are sometimes challenging, but that's great!. If you struggle with Calculus, you should definitely take this course. But it's also great for people that like Math in general - I've passed my Calculus stuff long ago, but wanted to recover that knowledge to enter different programming areas and that was one of the best thing I did last year. Jim, please add more courses!! | somewhat funny, but really professional way, | Quizz | are sometimes challenging, but that's great! | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Organized like the ideal textbook, but I would have preferred that there be more practice problems on quizzes. | there be more practice problems on | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | This course has been in overall complete, I feel there should be more practice, If you do this course don't expect practicing, only learning and having quizzes. | expect practicing, only learning and having | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Course address some elementary issues about IoT, but the instructor at times seems like he does not have a good grasp of the lecture materials. No access to quizzes or evaluations as auditing participant, which is a shame since most of the Coursera MOOCs allow access to evaluation material under the auditing modality. | the lecture materials. No access to | Quizz | or evaluations as auditing participant, which | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | It is a really cool course, and i'm starting to really enjoy it, especially because of the explanations brought by the professor and also the difficulty on the quizzes wich doesn't show where you were wrong. wich means you'll review almost everything if you are unsure about your answers. thank you for giving us this great opportunity ! | and also the difficulty on the | Quizz | wich doesn't show where you were | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | complaint is that on the last | Quizz | the information given in the lesson | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | given in the lesson and the | Quizz | questions do not match up, making | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | but then possible answers on the | Quizz | might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | You get many chances on the | Quizz | though, so it's really not a | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | a brief list of summaries on historical events of veterinarian and Dick college would help in learning the 5th session. Putting questions like those in the final quiz doesn't make as much sense... other quizes are wonderfully set. great entry course to be a veterinarian. | questions like those in the final | Quizz | doesn't make as much sense. . | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | a brief list of summaries on historical events of veterinarian and Dick college would help in learning the 5th session. Putting questions like those in the final quiz doesn't make as much sense... other quizes are wonderfully set. great entry course to be a veterinarian. | as much sense. . . other | Quizz | are wonderfully set. great entry course | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | This class has the quizzes to help with the final test witch actually helps to learn the materials and the materials given at the end to print out is a nice additive and helps to memorize the information with out the computer | This class has the | Quizz | to help with the final test | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Cn3HgzTdEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Many thanks to our professor for taking the time to patiently explain and describe PR's key elements, giving numerous examples and giving a rich overview. As I strongly enjoyed the course I will be continue with followup lessons. However, regarding improvements I would have preferred written assignments instead of Quizzes as they were too 'easy' to pass. Also, PR being a field which requires strong written skills, I would have liked to improve this. | have preferred written assignments instead of | Quizz | as they were too 'easy' to | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Great learning, easily defined concepts. Quiz section really helps you to retrieve core concepts. Thanks a lot Coursera. | Great learning, easily defined concepts. | Quizz | section really helps you to retrieve | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Really disappointed you have to pay to be able to do the quizzes. I thought the whole point of Coursera is to enhance our skills for free and chose to pay for a certificate if we wanted to. | to be able to do the | Quizz | I thought the whole point of | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | The class itself is quite good. However you can not submit the Module Quiz without purchasing the certificate, which is quite annoying. | you can not submit the Module | Quizz | without purchasing the certificate, which is | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very helpful course. I liked a lot. Although I would prefer for some quizzes not to be locked unless paid. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. E. | Although I would prefer for some | Quizz | not to be locked unless paid. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | You should tell people before they enroll that, to take the quizzes, they must pay. It was a waste of time... | they enroll that, to take the | Quizz | they must pay. It was a | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This is a good refresher on one's grammar and punctuation. It's an absolute bummer that the quizzes are behind a paywall. | It's an absolute bummer that the | Quizz | are behind a paywall. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | thanks so much for this useful course i only hope to not make the final quiz with upgrade or with payment i need to see how much i achieve in this course. waiting for new courses, and thanks for your advanced for help, Dalia | hope to not make the final | Quizz | with upgrade or with payment i | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | material was good but it doesn't tell you to pay for the course until you take the quiz | the course until you take the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This course was very helpful to me. My grammar and writing style has definitely benefited from taking this course. The modules were clear and well-paced, and the practice quizzes were relevant. | clear and well-paced, and the practice | Quizz | were relevant. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I find this course quite interesting and useful! In this course you can learn not only by video and quizzes, but also play games and do interesting tasks. The education goes in an easy way and without any difficulties! Thank you! | learn not only by video and | Quizz | but also play games and do | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I would love to take the quizzes without an upgrade to see how I have done in my classes. | I would love to take the | Quizz | without an upgrade to see how | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | i dont know why, but it's so frustrating that i have problem with this course. i can't start every quiz in week 4. | this course. i can't start every | Quizz | in week 4. | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Absolutely brilliant. I really recommend this course if you need to brush up on your grammar and punctuation. I didn't study grammar at school, (many years ago) as it wasn't in the curriculum, however, this is an informative and yet interesting way to learn. The course provides you with videos, quizzes, and tests which help to embed the learning at your own pace. | The course provides you with videos, | Quizz | and tests which help to embed | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | A great way to recap on your grammar and punctuation. Helps all writers on sentence structure and sentence variety. The quizzes and exercises are a great way to practice. | sentence structure and sentence variety. The | Quizz | and exercises are a great way | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Simple and accurate. The quizzes are not easy, but definitely inherent to the course. In other words, if you study and practice, you will be able to pass them. | Simple and accurate. The | Quizz | are not easy, but definitely inherent | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Some types of assignments and quizes are not comfortable to use. But thas is just about technical issues. Educational part of this course in great. | Some types of assignments and | Quizz | are not comfortable to use. But | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I feel this course has been specially designed for people like me who need to revive their knowledge of Grammar within little available time. Presentation of the course is concise and well-structured. Short quiz are taken at right time to reinforce the concepts. Discussions with peers are engaging. | course is concise and well-structured. Short | Quizz | are taken at right time to | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I simply loved the methodology of this course. Being my first self-paced course with lots of quizzes and assignments and participation, I thoroughly enjoyed the challenges it posed to learn new skills. I have recommended lots of friends to join this. | first self-paced course with lots of | Quizz | and assignments and participation, I thoroughly | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Well designed and neatly structured. Lots of useful information in short time. Mixture of videos, exercises and quizzes was fun, and peers interaction was invigorating. | time. Mixture of videos, exercises and | Quizz | was fun, and peers interaction was | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | A good course for starter. Lectures are good, but the quizzes are too easy. | starter. Lectures are good, but the | Quizz | are too easy. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| ct7G8DVLEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | This is one of the best CS courses I've taken so far. It's great to see how easy it is to build a simple yet powerful computer on your own, and it has given me for the first time the feeling of really understanding what's going on at the low level. The complete course is centered about the project of building a computer, so there are no quizzes and only few theoretical background lectures here. If you want a hands-on introduction to computer engineering, this is the way to go. | a computer, so there are no | Quizz | and only few theoretical background lectures | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| CuQpLnQ9EeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Thanks for bringing us an excellent program and valuable tools for managers! Coaching is a key element in the organizations for handling the human resource and lead them to better performance and results that will set the path for the organizational achievement of goals integrating its employees. I´m glad to say that your course is very complete as it is an assorted set of enriching learning elements: video-lessons, quizzes, readings, peer-review assesments, and the suggested activities like interviewing an actual coach - which is a very fulfilling experience in the learning process and one of my favorite activities for it leads you to interact with a real coach. Please keep delivering and developing quality education. I express my sincere and grateful: Thanks! | set of enriching learning elements: video-lessons, | Quizz | readings, peer-review assesments, and the suggested | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| CVrclTu_EeW0tw4knrMo3Q | Considero que es necesario videos mas extensos 10-15 min aprox. , donde se explique, por ejemplo mas materiales de relleno, no solo 1; mas métodos y más ejemplos en general. Los quiz demasiado simples, mínimo 10 preguntas por video. | y más ejemplos en general. Los | Quizz | demasiado simples, mínimo 10 preguntas por | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great videos, interesting content. Quizzes were good, assignments were clearly stated. There could have probably been more coding work involved, but it is definitely a good first course as an introduction to programming in general. | Great videos, interesting content. | Quizz | were good, assignments were clearly stated. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The most terrible course I have ever seen in my life and on this site. For some of quiz questions, you feel like you are dumb because you can not make connection between lectures and quizzes. I really wanted to learn java on coursera but It seems impossible to me. Focusing on rbg values and image thingies too much and making me feel uncomfortable at quizzes after watching all those lectures are the main reasons of giving 1 star. | on this site. For some of | Quizz | questions, you feel like you are | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The most terrible course I have ever seen in my life and on this site. For some of quiz questions, you feel like you are dumb because you can not make connection between lectures and quizzes. I really wanted to learn java on coursera but It seems impossible to me. Focusing on rbg values and image thingies too much and making me feel uncomfortable at quizzes after watching all those lectures are the main reasons of giving 1 star. | not make connection between lectures and | Quizz | I really wanted to learn java | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The most terrible course I have ever seen in my life and on this site. For some of quiz questions, you feel like you are dumb because you can not make connection between lectures and quizzes. I really wanted to learn java on coursera but It seems impossible to me. Focusing on rbg values and image thingies too much and making me feel uncomfortable at quizzes after watching all those lectures are the main reasons of giving 1 star. | and making me feel uncomfortable at | Quizz | after watching all those lectures are | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | No consistency, from very easy web design fundamentals to advanced Javascript with no explanation videos to help over a series of quizzes and assignments in week 3 lesson 3. | to help over a series of | Quizz | and assignments in week 3 lesson | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It is pretty fast paced, I wish there was more studymaterial to help prepare you for the quizzes. | to help prepare you for the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | HTML, CSS and JS materials were covered and were made easy to understand. CodePen and the Write Your Own websites cooperate great with the course. The quizzes are simple while I found he coding practice challenging and yet not too difficult. My only concern is whether the materials covered would help to build a realistic website, say, the homepage of Facebook or Google. It seems though I've finished the course, I still have no idea of how those webpages I see everyday works, let alone code them myself. The following courses in this series focus on Java, so ... By the way, spending 2-3 hours for a week to finish it as soon may help against forgetting. HTML, CSS and JS seem disconnected before you make them cooperate. Cheers! | cooperate great with the course. The | Quizz | are simple while I found he | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The instructors overly explain simple concepts and talk about programming inbetween makes the course confusing then you get lost and quiz you on stuff that was not properly explaiuned | confusing then you get lost and | Quizz | you on stuff that was not | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was an amazing Course. High quality videos, good practice quiz and interesting assignments. also the idea of final mini-project is very good. Thanks all of you for preparing this course | Course. High quality videos, good practice | Quizz | and interesting assignments. also the idea | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course is misleading in a lot of ways. It is not for beginners at all. The quizzes in the course are beyond impossible. The lecture videos give an introduction to some concepts, but you are left on your own to figure everything out. They do not provide the proper tools to enable students to understand or pass. Reading through a lot of the discussion boards, there are two types of students: 1. those like me, who have never programmed in their life, and cannot figure any of this out, and 2. Those who have all sorts of experience and write things that are way advanced for a "Beginners" course. Do yourself a favor, and seriously do some research on appropriate programs before signing up for this one. It needs to be structured way better than what it is now. | not for beginners at all. The | Quizz | in the course are beyond impossible. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Everything apart from Steganography was well explained with examples. I liked that the quizzes were fairly engaging and required programming exercises to familiarize you with the content. | with examples. I liked that the | Quizz | were fairly engaging and required programming | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very very basic course. Learned about HTML ,CSS in initial classes. Then it was completely JavaScript. But there was no details about how to use JavaScript for web programming. Projects and Quizzes are kind of ok difficulty. I will recommend this course for the people who are not aware of programming. | JavaScript for web programming. Projects and | Quizz | are kind of ok difficulty. I | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | some of the quizzes felt haphazard and too specific, but overall, the material was timely and well presented. | some of the | Quizz | felt haphazard and too specific, but | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is a pretty handy introduction to the Web and programming. It contains pretty useful hands-on sessions. The instructors are very clear in their presentations and the quizzes emphasize on comprehension of the course material. I certainly recommend this course for anyone with no or little prior web programming experience. | clear in their presentations and the | Quizz | emphasize on comprehension of the course | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Actually it's rather hard to understand how JavaScript works if you'd never learnt it before this course. And all this comments like "write a programm before start the quiz" hold me up to ridicule, because as a beginner I don't understand logic of writing. HTML & CSS are simple, so there's no problem here. | write a programm before start the | Quizz | hold me up to ridicule, because | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | I really enjoyed this course. An interesting mix of history, philosophy and psychology. I enjoyed the written assignments as it made me think harder about the course material than just passing the quizzes. Reviewing others' work was fascinating too, as it made me consider things from different points of view (though I do think the reviewing criteria would've benefitted from being just a little bit more detailed, to better reflect the huge variation in standard between submissions). I'm very much looking forward to the next module! | course material than just passing the | Quizz | Reviewing others' work was fascinating too, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| d0bq5PkAEeSBSSIAC7JSBQ | This class is far too theoretical and abstract. You only have to get 50% to pass the quizzes, which indicates how difficult it is to understand the material. | to get 50% to pass the | Quizz | which indicates how difficult it is | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| d1WkxNf4EeSFEiIAC0CpYw | Great music but quizzes seem to come from footnotes to the lessons! | Great music but | Quizz | seem to come from footnotes to | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Please show the quiz answers for verification purpose since we have to buy the course to submit answers | Please show the | Quizz | answers for verification purpose since we | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | It is an excellent course for those who intend to know different design constructs in java. The course material, practice quizes and tests are designed to help the student apppreciate and be reasonably proficient in these aspects. My sincere gratitude to the professors and their team for this successful program. | in java. The course material, practice | Quizz | and tests are designed to help | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Very good course. I hope there can be automated grader or feedbacks on codes or hints on quizzes to make the programming assignments more manageable. | feedbacks on codes or hints on | Quizz | to make the programming assignments more | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | i liked everything except some of the quizzes since some questions were unclear or wrong (but still, I was a beta tester, so all great) - thank you! | liked everything except some of the | Quizz | since some questions were unclear or | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | thanks for the course, but -your quizzes is real pain, some random variable could cause wrong result -your should follow how it is implemented in lectures in stupid way, like "efficient" way when you build hash map N^2 instead of N -bluej sucks you make a lot of clicks to run method, use some decent IDE like eclipse or idea | thanks for the course, but -your | Quizz | is real pain, some random variable | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Good class, except for quizzes were complicated at times. User input instructions was not clear. | Good class, except for | Quizz | were complicated at times. User input | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | The course is really good. It helps in understanding what HCI deals with, specially to a person who has very little background in this area. The assignments are really fun. The only issue is in the quiz evaluations, specially where there are multiple answers. Its a bug that can be resolved. | The only issue is in the | Quizz | evaluations, specially where there are multiple | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Ddn-hlfcEeWTbwotamPtlQ | This course should retrieved from Coursera. It is plenty of mistakes. One of the quiz is repeated. Questions do not have relation with lectures. | plenty of mistakes. One of the | Quizz | is repeated. Questions do not have | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| dh3wTQZNEeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | There is some good content on creativity in this course, thoug it barely addresses problem solving. "Do something different" assingments were an interesting idea. Some content material is missing, including the link to a text that is needed to answer a quizz which will influence your final grade. Grading standards are weird: maximum grades are to be given to assignments performed in public, as if things done in private aren't creative; there are better ways to have someone get out of their comfort zone. Assingments request that you be photographed or filmed, and there is no disclaimer that your photos or your privacy will be protected. If you are an introvert or simply a person who values privacy, this is not the course for you. | that is needed to answer a | Quizz | which will influence your final grade. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| DJfupMVPEeWLqBIulHpzDw | Course has not been updated. Wrong answers in quiz (eg week 3 quiz on progressivity), videos getting blocked at review question point, etc. I am checking out. | not been updated. Wrong answers in | Quizz | (eg week 3 quiz on progressivity), | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| DJfupMVPEeWLqBIulHpzDw | Course has not been updated. Wrong answers in quiz (eg week 3 quiz on progressivity), videos getting blocked at review question point, etc. I am checking out. | answers in quiz (eg week 3 | Quizz | on progressivity), videos getting blocked at | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | This course was very boring and very frustrating. Long long slow lectures with lots, and lots, and lots of questions, and no answers. The briefest of comments on potentially interesting people or topics, but no links to enable those to be followed up. Quizzes on concepts not covered in the material. Conflicting descriptions of assessment requirements. Discussion moderators who continually referred you back to the course material which did not contain the information that people were looking for. Before taking this course I could find only one negative review, which I dismissed as probably being a minority. Having taken the course, I agree with that review wholeheartedly. I did learn a couple of things, despite everything, but I would not recommend this course. Please upgrade it substantially. | enable those to be followed up. | Quizz | on concepts not covered in the | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | This was really disappointing. There is almost no connection between the experience of the lectures (and that's all the videos are - lectures that track a PowerPoint presentation) and the assignments, quizzes, etc. Reference and source materials are frequently mentioned in passing, but there is no comprehensive list of works cited anywhere. The assignments are often vaguely described and, in more than one case, were described entirely differently in different places. I have nothing good to say about this experience. You're watching a fundamentally disconnected series of mostly ad-hoc discussions of vague concepts. A simple list of books to read would be much more valuable. This is by far the worst MOOC I've taken, from any source, in any discipline. The fact that it actually costs money simply adds to the pain. | a PowerPoint presentation) and the assignments, | Quizz | etc. Reference and source materials are | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | Many great thought-provoking concepts of learning theory introduced here. The course is easy to follow, although the the quizzes sometimes contained questions that didn't seem connected to anything discussed in the videos - but I could have missed something, I suppose. I recommend listening at x1.25 speed because the professor has a very ponderous style of speaking. | easy to follow, although the the | Quizz | sometimes contained questions that didn't seem | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Was a better course than the other reviewers tended to complain about. Taking the examples literally might not be the best actionable route to completing a lot of the quizzes and final exam, its mostly theory on how to build sustainable and efficient systems while at the same time ensuring the security of them has the least effect on the usability of the information system or applications in mind. Some of the videos were somewhat off topic and seemed to not actually be related to what was on the quizzes at the end of the weeks topic. Some questions on quizzes weren't explained or only hinted at in the videos only to be the main topic in the next week. Other than that, a solid course. | to completing a lot of the | Quizz | and final exam, its mostly theory | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Was a better course than the other reviewers tended to complain about. Taking the examples literally might not be the best actionable route to completing a lot of the quizzes and final exam, its mostly theory on how to build sustainable and efficient systems while at the same time ensuring the security of them has the least effect on the usability of the information system or applications in mind. Some of the videos were somewhat off topic and seemed to not actually be related to what was on the quizzes at the end of the weeks topic. Some questions on quizzes weren't explained or only hinted at in the videos only to be the main topic in the next week. Other than that, a solid course. | related to what was on the | Quizz | at the end of the weeks | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Was a better course than the other reviewers tended to complain about. Taking the examples literally might not be the best actionable route to completing a lot of the quizzes and final exam, its mostly theory on how to build sustainable and efficient systems while at the same time ensuring the security of them has the least effect on the usability of the information system or applications in mind. Some of the videos were somewhat off topic and seemed to not actually be related to what was on the quizzes at the end of the weeks topic. Some questions on quizzes weren't explained or only hinted at in the videos only to be the main topic in the next week. Other than that, a solid course. | the weeks topic. Some questions on | Quizz | weren't explained or only hinted at | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | I think this was a very well-thought out course. In my opinion, it was well presented, contained very useful information, was accessible to someone with a limited background in cybersecurity, and used plenty of real examples to back-up its claims. An area that could use improvement is testing: some of the quizzes provided questions that seemed hard to follow, particularly the "choose | improvement is testing: some of the | Quizz | provided questions that seemed hard to | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Videos with guest speakers were unhelpful. Also, quizzes were not accurate and poorly written questions. | with guest speakers were unhelpful. Also, | Quizz | were not accurate and poorly written | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | This is a course for students with little or no work experience. I've been in the industry for twenty years and found some good information, but the quizes aren't designed for experienced adult learners. Not being able to discuss with the professor why an answer is incorrect or even knowing exactly what about an answer makes it incorrect further distances the students from learning. Given that one essentially spends an extra work day each week on the course, I expected more value for my precious time. This week I decided the value isn't there. I might recommend the course for undergrad students but not for working adults. | found some good information, but the | Quizz | aren't designed for experienced adult learners. | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| dqhF7SBQEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | Es un buen curso de matemáticas, tiene un tiempo prudencial de desarrollo, no muy complejo pero los quizes son muy buenos y retadores....te explica lo básico para el aprendizaje del cálculo y da excelente tips para el pensamiento matemático que pueden sernos muy útiles y la profesora explica bien...para mi gusto se extiende un poco pero no le demerita nada al curso. Saludos | desarrollo, no muy complejo pero los | Quizz | son muy buenos y retadores. . | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | This course was a nice introduction to the topic of being a software product manager. Unfortunately the quiz is not always working properly. | a software product manager. Unfortunately the | Quizz | is not always working properly. | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | This course gave me good introduction to software management. The lectures were clear and simple and quizzes were on point. | lectures were clear and simple and | Quizz | were on point. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | The Presenters are great. The compilation of whole video with graphics and quiz makes learning so effective and fun. | of whole video with graphics and | Quizz | makes learning so effective and fun. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | Dry principles without real life examples and exercises. You can passed the quiz by just reading online or have basic project management experience. Disappointed. | and exercises. You can passed the | Quizz | by just reading online or have | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | A bit too basic and quiz questions did not reflect the real value of what was being learnt but was just poised at encouraging us to memorize sequences of facts more than anything. | A bit too basic and | Quizz | questions did not reflect the real | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | The course content is amazing and very informative. I am not from hospitality sector but I understood all the concepts and because of all the quizzes and assignments, now I feel more confident in finding a job in hospitality sector. | concepts and because of all the | Quizz | and assignments, now I feel more | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | Great course for introducing the fundamentals of hotel management and hotel distribution. This course enables us to learn important concepts related to hotel distribution and apply them in real-life situations through the course assignments. As well as this it is not necessary any relevant background to understand the concepts presented however it may be recommended basic financial/economics knowledge. I think that adding some quizzes during the videos would be interesting and productive as it would allow students to assure that all the concepts were understood. | knowledge. I think that adding some | Quizz | during the videos would be interesting | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | Before attending this course, I was really "lost" in the online travel distribution world with the feeling of falling behind in knowledge. Once I started the course, I got a very clear, structured and practical way of understanding what's happening in hotel distribution, apply acquired skills in quizzes, exercises and real-life examples and assignments and be prepared to assist or consult hotel managers on how to handle such issues. | hotel distribution, apply acquired skills in | Quizz | exercises and real-life examples and assignments | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | The content of the course is basically on how hotels distribute their contents (their rooms to sale). The different channels are explained, such as the OTA, brand.com, meta search, and direct channels. The course also includes a very interesting point of view from OTA where Expedia and Booking.com explains their offers to hotels. I would love to have the views from hotel too, which are missing here. The suggested readings are quite a lot, basically from the online sites, many from the hotel and travel industry (skift, for example). Those readings are very useful in digging deeper on the subject. The assignments, are, on the other hand, quite weak. It consists of 4 peer review assignments. The first week contains a pretty quantitative analysis, but the other 3 assignments are basically conversational and just repeating what you have learnt in the class. The non-noted quizzes were pretty easy, you almost no need to think deeper to answer those questions. | learnt in the class. The non-noted | Quizz | were pretty easy, you almost no | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | Amount of content: Adding the video, | Quizz | and analysis, are about 30 content. | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | decrease the amount of video and | Quizz | relocating to another week course or | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| d_71NKdPEeSOWCIAC2iDyw | Weekly quizzes would be great! | Weekly | Quizz | would be great! | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| d_71NKdPEeSOWCIAC2iDyw | Excellent course. I really enjoyed it! My most recent educational experience (I am 72 and a vet of the vietnam era) has been with the Great Courses from the Learning Company. This rates with the best of those many courses I have taken. I really appreciate the quizzes at the end of every lesson since they help to reinforce the key points (they also remind me of my college experience and the philosophy that every cadet will be graded in every class, everyday!) Kudos to the Prof! | have taken. I really appreciate the | Quizz | at the end of every lesson | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| e4SzF9c1EeS-LCIAC3icWw | The instructor kept referring to different authors and books as if she wasn't sure what she was saying was true. She was just reading off a screen and not actually teaching. Might have been easier, and a bit more beneficial, to just read a well prepared set of slides on my own. The first set of quiz questions also weren't really relevant to what was in the actual lesson. Quite disappointed in this part of the specialization as the other sections had in depth presentations, clear information, lots of examples and great slides. | my own. The first set of | Quizz | questions also weren't really relevant to | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| EA0hyTUGEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Best course in the specialization so far. Well thought out and explained. The course still has the same problem with quiz questions being at times obtuse, but overall it's a really good course. | still has the same problem with | Quizz | questions being at times obtuse, but | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| eBEnnYkqEeWGBwqGAoUFww | Quite confusing if you do not have a background already in accounting. The information in the course content does not match up with the quizzes. Great experience but a little lacking on the details needed to pass the quizzes each week....especially week | does not match up with the | Quizz | Great experience but a little lacking | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| eBEnnYkqEeWGBwqGAoUFww | Quite confusing if you do not have a background already in accounting. The information in the course content does not match up with the quizzes. Great experience but a little lacking on the details needed to pass the quizzes each week....especially week | the details needed to pass the | Quizz | each week. . . . especially | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| eBEnnYkqEeWGBwqGAoUFww | I would highly recommend this course to anyone interested in getting a thorough (albeit, rapid) introduction to financial accounting. Professor Marc Badia has a gift for deconstructing dense material into digestible bits through concise weekly videos. The quizzes and final project are all very applied in nature---while we all learn differently, I can't stress enough the importance of taking meticulous notes each week! | bits through concise weekly videos. The | Quizz | and final project are all very | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Incredibly frustrated by the peer grading system. I've been able to work on the course at relatively fast pace and have now completed all of the lectures, readings, quizzes and test but can't go on to the next course because not enough people have submitted the homework for me to grade. I understand the advantage of being able to "learn from others" but it doesn't outweigh the disadvantage of not being able to work at one's own pace . | completed all of the lectures, readings, | Quizz | and test but can't go on | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | It is pretty solid. I can see that issues with quiz question ambiguity and under-checking of learning criteria are getting better. Problems were not serious, they are better in this course than in the last, and they are better in the next one, and they are better in the next one than this one. | I can see that issues with | Quizz | question ambiguity and under-checking of learning | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I really like tasks and quizzes in the course. It makes in much more transparent. Thanks! | I really like tasks and | Quizz | in the course. It makes in | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | As a seasoned developer, I enjoyed taking this course. I think this is a fantastic course for beginners as well as more advanced learners. The presenters are great, quizzes are as well and perfect handouts. Just take it. | advanced learners. The presenters are great, | Quizz | are as well and perfect handouts. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | An excellent, practically oriented course with great use of quizzes and assignments to re-enforce learning. | oriented course with great use of | Quizz | and assignments to re-enforce learning. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Eeb34jesEeWXuQopUhAqaw | The course design is really good. It is very hands-on. We get to build our own applications and test our applications in the quiz. However I really hope if there can be more content. The course is rather short. The quality is good but the quantity is a bit insufficient. I hope this course can be longer. Additional weeks can teach us how to convert BlueJ projects or Eclipse projects into EXE or host it in the cloud. I also hope this course, in the future, teaches us to make graphical user interface, which would be a nice conclusion to whatever program that we make I love the course. I really want to see more coming out of the Capstone project. I love the idea of the capstone building a recommender engine. However, to make it a complete package, I suggest a few things: ---Teach learners to use main() to create apps and convert to exe ---Teach learners, after the entire project codings, how to create an Applet out of the source codes ---Teach learners how to implement graphical user interface (make buttons, input field for movie queries) ---Teach learners how to, instead of getting data from a file in the folder, reads the data from a live-feed instead. That would enhance the learning experience of the course. Thank you for all those. I'm a hungry guy so I suggest lots of things. However I'm very happy with the course designs. Very engaging and fruitful course series. | and test our applications in the | Quizz | However I really hope if there | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| eEsmqKAMEeSI0SIAC2iJgw | A great course, a big variety of fascinating topics, interesting and lively explanation of prof. Spergel, great interviews with specialists on many of the topics. Just one thing I miss in the course, it would be nice to check my understanding of the explanation in quizes. Nonetheless, great thanks for the course! | my understanding of the explanation in | Quizz | Nonetheless, great thanks for the course! | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| eGUHRneUEeWtpg5GoAM5Iw | Este curso foi minha primeira experiência com o Coursera e posso afirmar que foi muito boa. Liberdade para assistir aulas quando puder, Quiz e Testes de conhecimento On-Line, Hands On e provas práticas e tudo isto com ótimos professores respaudados por uma instituição conceituada como ITA. Recomendo e tenho recomendado o curso a vários colegas!!! | Liberdade para assistir aulas quando puder, | Quizz | e Testes de conhecimento On-Line, Hands | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | Overall a great beginning to the course. It does comes across as a systematic dive into the rather complex world of health care in US. My only concern is related to some of the questions in the quizzes. Sometimes they are too literal, like year of XYZ etc, which comes across as test of memory rather than an evaluation of knowledge. Else I am enjoying. Am on speed. And keen to continue. | some of the questions in the | Quizz | Sometimes they are too literal, like | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| EKfyaEtaEeW4rRLEP0z9Bw | Five stars: wonderful content, I was engaged. No matter what ,I give a perfect score. However, I wish the instructors were less "I'm reading a script" and sounded more natural. I also missed video summary for some modules and module quiz to refresh knowledge. Thank you Ellen, Claire and ASU for making affordable this course and specialization. My gratitude with all of you! | summary for some modules and module | Quizz | to refresh knowledge. Thank you Ellen, | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| eL9HZ2ItEeWpHwqwM9Gg0w | Very bad course. No videos, just an interactive textbook. The course states all you need is "high school level biology" yet you require coding knowledge for the very first quiz. there are side questions on the first week like does this algorithm runs in O(k * l * x^2) or O(xllogk) without ANY explanation. I guess you can find much much better book about bioinformatics, and as this course is nothing more then a book i recommend a better one. | coding knowledge for the very first | Quizz | there are side questions on the | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eLzp7w-NEeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | Not the best one on coursera. Included many details that are not really relevant and quizes just checked if you memorized it. | that are not really relevant and | Quizz | just checked if you memorized it. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| eLzp7w-NEeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | very high level syllabuses, limited application description of BD, poor quiz and questions designed | limited application description of BD, poor | Quizz | and questions designed | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| eLzp7w-NEeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | It is a good short course to get an idea about Cloud Computing, Big Data and CDN. 2 Points to the gentle instructor, Please try to elaborate more outside what is written in the slides. and the other point, please revise the Cloud Computing quiz as it focused on dates and history rather than focusing on the core of the subject. | point, please revise the Cloud Computing | Quizz | as it focused on dates and | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| emCu12atEeW2DA58V0Z6GQ | This course is not for me. Principal concepts seem very difficult from the first lesson. Professor hesitates, quiz is incomprehensible. So, Good Bye ! I do like blues and listen it very often, but this doesn't help me. | from the first lesson. Professor hesitates, | Quizz | is incomprehensible. So, Good Bye ! | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| emCu12atEeW2DA58V0Z6GQ | At first I though it was a very poor course but certain parts of it were gold for me and I got a lot out of it. I particularly appreciated the advice on how to improvise through out the course. I was less keen on the parts on modes and pentatonics but on the other hand for someone further along in their musical journey it may be just the thing. Although the course is ostensibly on the blues it also covers a lot of material relevant to Jazz. Pedagogically there were some problems.I think the course has way too much material and could be split into 2 parts each part maybe a bit slower.The presenter need to sharpen up his game a little as regards presentation skills, reading material of an IPad is not very inspiring. His English is not very idiomatic but that's not really a big problem. Written sheets with the changes and summarizing the lectures would have made the course better. Finally there are no peer reviews and all quizzes are theoretical - rather disappointing. I prefer a hands on approach with peer based reviews as in Gary Burton's course also on Coursera. | are no peer reviews and all | Quizz | are theoretical - rather disappointing. I | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| eo6NBCQPEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | I did this course as a parent of a dyslexic child. I thought it was brilliant and I made pages and pages of notes. It is well organised, engaging, and informative. I really liked the two presenters as well. They both seemed passionate about the topic and modeled good teaching in their explanations and advice. That said, I thought the assessment part of the course simply didn't work. It was far too narrow for anyone besides primary teachers and therefore excluded those who might be doing the course for other reasons. It doesn't matter to me, I don't need the certificate and I got a lot out of the course but for others it would be frustrating, I imagine. The quizzes too, for the most part, were a disaster. They were poorly written, confusing, and dishearteningly obscure. Otherwise, I loved this course and hope you will offer a follow up soon. | would be frustrating, I imagine. The | Quizz | too, for the most part, were | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| eo6NBCQPEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | Interesting and useful to a degree, but I was looking for something a little more challenging. In addition, the quizzes were far too easy. | little more challenging. In addition, the | Quizz | were far too easy. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| eo6NBCQPEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | A very very helpful course that gives practical solutions in a classroom and school-wide setting. It was structured well and easy to follow. If I had one comment, it would be that some of the quizzes did not line up with the course so well (you had to study ahead to answer questions). Other than this, really worth the amount of time spent studying! | would be that some of the | Quizz | did not line up with the | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| ERjY4rTHEeSK3SIACw8Xnw | En general es bueno, la UNAM es garantía y hacen buen trabajo, pero creo q deben trabajar mucho con el potencial en cuanto a la "producción", estos cursos deben explotar el potencial interfacultades. Es la primera vez que hago un ensayo donde la revisión de pares es de 5, creo que deben flexibilizar eso 3 son suficientes y es lo que me ha tocado revisar en otros cursos, y dejar abierta la puerta para los que tienen mas tiempo y la decisión de revisar más de 3 con o sin incentivo (por cierto en los últimos 2 bloques la firma no corresponde con el formato de evaluación, lo reporté pero sigue igual, echenle un ojo). Y por ultimo hacen falta mas quizes en las lecciones, pero incentiven la imaginación no solo la memoria, saludos! | Y por ultimo hacen falta mas | Quizz | en las lecciones, pero incentiven la | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An ok introduction to Swift Programming, but I can see people who do not have previous development experience struggling with this course. Also lecturers were virtually nonexistent on the forums to help with questions which is disappointing since it is a paid course which implies you are paying for their time and effort not just the certificate. Best advice for people taking this course is to get through the material as early as possible and give yourself as much time as possible to work on the project, don't wait till the last week to work on it. Would also suggest the following changes to improve the course and help people understand the material better: 1. Have a programming exercise to complete at the end of every week to prove you have understood the material taught, a quiz alone with 10 or less questions is not enough. The course ramps up way to quickly with the project if all you have been doing is following the videos, students should be practicing and proving they know the work far more often. 2. Provide a clearer project brief since it was clear many people did not understand all the requirements. 3. Provide a video of what the final project should do in general to make it even clearer. Overall I didn't have a bad experience with the course, just disappointed that it was really bear bones, there were too few opportunities to prove your understanding, it was poorly managed and the lack of interaction from the lecturers a massive problem when they are being paid to help out, not just provide videos and forget about the students. | have understood the material taught, a | Quizz | alone with 10 or less questions | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very disappointed. Having coding assignments weekly would have been very helpful. The quizzes often asked for information that was never presented in the lessons. The instructors were never present in the forums to answer questions. The final project asked us to do things that hadn't even been mentioned in the course materials. I would not recommend this course to anyone. The only reason it got 2 stars instead of 1 was because I did learn some Swift. | would have been very helpful. The | Quizz | often asked for information that was | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | At first the presentations are really on a semi professional level (copy & paste codes, making errors without knowing the cause). They show a lot what can be done with swift but the never show/mention what it's really usefull for (no "real life" usage just snippets after snippets). To few practical doings (mostly only quiz stuff) | To few practical doings (mostly only | Quizz | stuff) | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | In my honest opinion, the quality of this course is not that high. You can expect to learn some basic syntax of Swift, and that's about it. There are very little material each week, and then you get a quiz, which is not the best form of examination nor for learning. I do not recommend this course. | week, and then you get a | Quizz | which is not the best form | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | very nice course, not difficult quizs | very nice course, not difficult | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | code? ? (2) Some of the | Quizz | questions I don't find useful. For | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | lots of time to complete the | Quizz | in contrast to other coursera courses | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | documentation in order to answer the | Quizz | questions since they are really in | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | In this way, to do the | Quizz | is actually the way to learn. | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | I find the video and the | Quizz | very abstract. that it's very difficult | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The format and structure of this class needs some improvement. Having to write some code each weak would be better than answering quizzes and doing the first lines of Swift at the end of the class. | weak would be better than answering | Quizz | and doing the first lines of | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Nice course but a but a bit hard when you have no programming skills. In fact I do have some programming skill and found it hard to follow. I would also add more exercise to do than Quizzes. | add more exercise to do than | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Unfortunately the course is not very well thought out. The lecture videos are poorly organized, concepts are not presented in the proper context and lack sufficient detail/depth, little thought or effort was put into designing the examples in the videos, there are no actual coding exercises until the last week, there are no examples of elegant code, nor thoughtful examples of good vs. bad code, the quizzes contain questions that are poorly worded and ambiguous (and I think some actually have the wrong answers and are contradicted by other online resources). It's very high level, and they hand-wave important concepts. I really don't see how this class can actually teach you to build a robust high-quality app. You're probably better off just reading some of the official documentation online. | of good vs. bad code, the | Quizz | contain questions that are poorly worded | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Basically a couple of guys have an unorganized discussion about swift. Little to no organization with poor coordination between lectures and quizzes.. Appears that there is no TA or course staff monitoring discussion boards... I am glad I didn't pay for the class... Disappointed though because I really wanted to learn Swift. | with poor coordination between lectures and | Quizz | . Appears that there is no | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Impossible to follow. Quizzes do not relate to lessons. | Impossible to follow. | Quizz | do not relate to lessons. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is not as polished as most other courses on coursera. They occasionally give examples that are too small to see in the video. Most of the quizes dealt with syntax. I don't feel like any new skill was developed in taking it. If you are interested in iOS programming take the University of California, Irvine versions of this class. | in the video. Most of the | Quizz | dealt with syntax. I don't feel | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm giving just a single star. I started this course with high hopes, bailed after the third quiz as I wasn't learning anything except how to pass the quiz. Sorry, but this was a major letdown to myself and two other colleagues who all signed up to take it together. We all bailed. | high hopes, bailed after the third | Quizz | as I wasn't learning anything except | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm giving just a single star. I started this course with high hopes, bailed after the third quiz as I wasn't learning anything except how to pass the quiz. Sorry, but this was a major letdown to myself and two other colleagues who all signed up to take it together. We all bailed. | anything except how to pass the | Quizz | Sorry, but this was a major | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The lectures for this course seem unorganized and often had poor audio. The content covered in many lectures seemed off topic. Quiz questions would then focus on the off topic information making it confusing with regard to what material to focus on during a lecture. Do I focus on the proposed subject of the video or the many tangents about other topics. This combined with the unorganized nature of videos(just winging it) made the lectures distracting. The lecture videos are full of code that simply does not work in the real world and help from staff takes literally days to get(and not just over the weekend). | in many lectures seemed off topic. | Quizz | questions would then focus on the | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is poorly designed. What course on a programming language jumps first into how to use the debugger and what went wrong with a program? You are not introducing Swift, you are introducing xcode (and doing a terrible job of it). Also, I have been using xcode and Swift for 8 months now and producing some really good work, but I could only get 3/7 on your quiz because you have written questions with the purpose of tricking people instead of reinforcing or checking knowledge of the content. When you teach a new application, consider introducing the interface first. Explain what the various areas are, what they are needed for, and how to control them. This orients the user in the application and helps them to find their way around when they are trying to reinforce your teachings later. The presentation for this course is so unprofessional. It's like a running commentary on a movie instead of an educational presentation. I felt like I was listening to two geeks stuffing around and having a good time, instead of people who are professional teachers! I'm so incredibly disappointed with this course. Back to the wonderful work of Paul Hegarty from Stanford University on iTunes University and YouTube for me. University of Toronto - you should really consider what your teaching staff are doing before you unleash them on the world. | could only get 3/7 on your | Quizz | because you have written questions with | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm sorry but the presentations were very poor and unprepared. The first quiz focused on rather unimportant and stuff which was NOT PRESENTED in videos, like keyboard shortcuts etc. Do not recommend. | very poor and unprepared. The first | Quizz | focused on rather unimportant and stuff | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Great professor. Simple to understand and made me love astrology... Quizzes are a bit challenging though... | made me love astrology. . . | Quizz | are a bit challenging though. . | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Very interesting course, isn't too geeky and mathematical, unlike many other astronomy courses. The only thing bothering me was the inability to learn the correct answers and explanations to quiz questions. Some of those were rather mindboggling. | the correct answers and explanations to | Quizz | questions. Some of those were rather | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Not for beginners in the slightest. Enjoyed the videos. But the quiz just made me feel stupid as I didn't have a clue on any of the equations and simulators I was supposed to use. It got me thinking of how ignorant clever people continue to be! Every time a smart person comes up with a new theory it's taken as fact. Give it a couple of decades and someone will prove it wrong. The sun orbiting us proving wrong, easth is flat, gas giants only orbit outside the habitable zone etc etc etc. So when will we learn that just because something happens on this planet doesn't mean it will, has happened elsewhere. The deepest depths of the ocean have life forms, yet we'd perish. So who's to say life forms can't exact on a planet, moon that is nothing like the earth! The world is still at the centre of the universe to these academics! | slightest. Enjoyed the videos. But the | Quizz | just made me feel stupid as | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Great introduction to Astronomy! I learnt a lot about the current state and the unsolved challenges in this field. I liked that I could play with various simulators and develop detailed understanding. As a beginner in Astronomy, I had a little difficulty finishing the first and last week's quizzes. Apart from that, I was able to easily follow the content in the course. | finishing the first and last week's | Quizz | Apart from that, I was able | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Too much time required. The first Quiz had almost nothing covered in the video lectures. I saved all transcripts and was unable to answer the questions. The Sim's... I have never seen anything like that and again - it most certainly wasn't covered in the lectures. Disappointed in this course. It took 3 hours for each segment of the first week... not 3 to 4 as was stated. Leaving this course. | Too much time required. The first | Quizz | had almost nothing covered in the | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | This is a great course! I know every enroller says that, but I still need to repeat that fact. In this course, Professor Wright forwards his in-depth knowledges in both classical and modern music to us students in a very charming and inspiring way. He brings us some very fascinating stories about the composers, music pieces, culture, history and even architecture. I wish him all the best in life, such an amazing man! The quizzes are definitely not intended for the hush and neglect buddies. You should watch the videos attentively and look out for every single detail that would challenge you in the quizze. So, just be alert. And, start! | life, such an amazing man! The | Quizz | are definitely not intended for the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | This is a great course! I know every enroller says that, but I still need to repeat that fact. In this course, Professor Wright forwards his in-depth knowledges in both classical and modern music to us students in a very charming and inspiring way. He brings us some very fascinating stories about the composers, music pieces, culture, history and even architecture. I wish him all the best in life, such an amazing man! The quizzes are definitely not intended for the hush and neglect buddies. You should watch the videos attentively and look out for every single detail that would challenge you in the quizze. So, just be alert. And, start! | that would challenge you in the | Quizz | So, just be alert. And, start! | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| eWC74yvREeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Introduction course to other courses, not much to learn here. And also some quizzes question were never addressed on the content. | to learn here. And also some | Quizz | question were never addressed on the | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| eWC74yvREeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Purely theoretical, I doesnt go deep enough, there arent any assignments, only a quiz at the end of the week. Poor material per week. | there arent any assignments, only a | Quizz | at the end of the week. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Totally enjoyable. The videos are professional, varied and so informative. Comparing the quiz to some others , I found they were better formulated and less ambiguous. Personally I feel I learned an amazing amount in a short time span and bother the content and pace were stimulating! so bravo! This is the type of general knowledge everyone should have but probably 90 % only have a rough, inaccurate or no awareness whatsoever. This could be run even at the school level, it could stimulate future scientists. | varied and so informative. Comparing the | Quizz | to some others , I found | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | I find the week 6 of this course completely irrelevant. Also, I'm attending courses on Coursera to learn and quizzes are IMO an essential part of that process, but definitely not essays. For me personally, essays are just waste of time and there's nothing beneficial about them. Another thing that bugs me is how questionably and often misleadingly are thermodynamical laws interpreted by the professors in this course. | courses on Coursera to learn and | Quizz | are IMO an essential part of | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Looks and sounds like a great course. Can't wait until the 28th March 2016 to start week 2. A bit annoyed with myself rushing quiz 1. I think one has to really pick all the meat off the bones of the information to get 100% (unless one is a Cosmologist - anyone got Stephen Hawking's phone number?) Just finished week 2 and I am already giving this course five stars. A really-really-really top course, a sit up all night job. Still haven't found Stephen Hawking's phone number yet. He probably realises I'm looking for it, clever bloke and honorary Python that he is, and gone ex-directory. Can't say I blame him, I'd do the same if I found out I was looking for my number! | A bit annoyed with myself rushing | Quizz | 1. I think one has to | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| F0J_-3LWEeWxvQr3acyajw | Very good review, especially the atomic structure unit. The stoichiometry unit was also very comprehensive. I hope there could be more on gaseous state and solution/acid-base chemistry. Quizzes are very good. | on gaseous state and solution/acid-base chemistry. | Quizz | are very good. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| F0J_-3LWEeWxvQr3acyajw | I have never been good at math nor chemistry but the professor explains the various processes in such a simplistic way that so far I passed the quizzes with a perfect score and I have a pretty good grasp of everything she's saying. Granted, I had to watch some explanations more than once but that's just my pace of learning. I'm thankful for this online course and waiting for the certification to become available! | that so far I passed the | Quizz | with a perfect score and I | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | Interesting course, provides a good insight for beginners. Wish there were more assignments and multi choice quizzes. | were more assignments and multi choice | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | Content is good. I found the information in the videos valuable, albeit short and leaving me wanting more. I suppose that's what research is for. In general great and short course to get one on track with research methods.Take this course, as it is good. So why three stars? I know it is a long review, and feel free to remove it from the list, if you deem it appropriate. I have learned a lot in the course, and it is a valuable experience still. My problem lies with the design of the course, that seems to have started with great vigour at then lost the steam at the end. I would like to suggest few pointers. Especially since the presenters have another courses in the catalogue with similar issues. 1. Help learners to focus - Body language, and position in the room. Standing in front of windows with the traffic outside may seem a minor thing, but it detracts form you and the content. As a course designer it is a responsibility to set it right. Same applies for hands in back pockets, posture when sat down, lens flare etc. 2 - As instructors you have offered very little teaching. All was left to the guest speakers. All very good and knowledgeable. Some graphic and own mini lecture would help to establish you as experts (not that you are not, but we would not know that from the videos), rather than mere interviewers. (Summary of what was said). 3 - match the video and e-tivity focus. And think about the accessibility of the material to your learners, especially if no previous knowledge is required. Week three was about managing research and planning. The reading, was surprisingly different (week 4 activity would be more suitable here) and really hard to access to someone, who hasn't done much reading in theories of knowledge etc. This would be more accessible as a guided lecture and quiz, rather than 400 words response. I hope I was not offensive to anyone. I was trying to help you to help us learn better, if that makes sense. M | accessible as a guided lecture and | Quizz | rather than 400 words response. I | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I am very satisfied with this course! I'm not a native english speaker, though it was very clear and comfortable to deal with the course and to understand the material. I feel that I gained relevant and important knowledge. The only "weakness" I see in this course is that it's not challenging enough. The requirements are a bit too low, the quiz level is too easy and it can be retaken with no limit. Thus, It feels that everyone can get the certification without putting too much effort - and that lowers the course value. | are a bit too low, the | Quizz | level is too easy and it | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Great Course! Prof. Aric has done a marvelous job. From lectures, quizzes and assignments all were well structured from learning and testing the knowledge as well. I completed the course covering digitization of markets and learning how digital tools are changing the landscape of businesses globally. I would highly recommend this course to anyone who is interested to learn digital marketing. I thank Prof. Aric for his hard work and Julie for assisting him. | done a marvelous job. From lectures, | Quizz | and assignments all were well structured | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I think this is one of the best learning experiences I have had as a professional (adult). It's academically founded, but I don't get confounded. Its mix of short video lectures, pop quizzes, real life case studies and assignments is perfect for keeping my attention while ensuring that I actually learn and retain that learning. | mix of short video lectures, pop | Quizz | real life case studies and assignments | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I undertook this marketing course as a marketer keen to make sure I was up to date and thinking about new ideas. It was a shame redlaser.com is no longer active, however I'm sure there are other tools, the course content just needs to be updated. I liked the Quad elements but found the Quizzes a bit frustrating particularly when they asked questions for which the answer was covered in the next topic. Overall however, time well spend. Thanks to Aric and team. | the Quad elements but found the | Quizz | a bit frustrating particularly when they | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Exceptional course. Not only was Prof Rindfleisch an engaging host, the course materials were laid out in such a way as to prevent video-learner's fatigue. Each set of videos was interrupted by a graded assignment or practice quiz. The questions drew on the course materials but encouraged us to look deeper. I recommend this course highly. Great course and great community with it. | by a graded assignment or practice | Quizz | The questions drew on the course | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | The course content was comprehensive, thorough and required note taking with preparation for quizzes. Solid academically. Some of the assignments required use of third party applications and websites that did function as anticipated or are no longer supported. Peer grading was very poor. It frequently seemed students did not read submissions, off handedly grading. At times comments did not match the scores, such as "nice work," or "good job," while giving only 3 stars. | required note taking with preparation for | Quizz | Solid academically. Some of the assignments | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Excellent course, the videos were very useful to make the success of the course plus the quizzes ... Thanks for this great experience to update our knowledge! | success of the course plus the | Quizz | . . . Thanks for this | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Excellent, interactive course! I enjoyed the assignments (both writing and reviewing of peers work). The quizzes were not obvious and did not require simple regurgitation of info but actual thinking! I found the lessons on DBI, PWYW and Choice Engines very interesting. Well done Aric and crew, your passion for marketing comes through in the lectures. | and reviewing of peers work). The | Quizz | were not obvious and did not | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I would like to express my gratitude to the Coursera and LMU .The course is done perfectly : not boring , interactive , quizes and excellent explanation in details by professor Tobias. I acquire a lot of knowledge from this course and I strongly believe that this course will expand not only by skills but also career perspective. | : not boring , interactive , | Quizz | and excellent explanation in details by | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Ff6HyFZrEeWsGQ6fKrurvQ | Pienso que la explicación a través de vídeos debería ser más extensa, ya que muchos temas de las preguntas presentes en los quizzes no se tocan. La información de esos temas debe buscarse en libros como el PMBOK, el cual representa un costo adicional que no se tiene contemplado. | de las preguntas presentes en los | Quizz | no se tocan. La información de | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | LAS PREGUNTAS DE LOS QUIZ SON MUY COMPLEJAS Y NO TE DA UN RESULTADO PARCIAL DE 5 OPCIONES SI PONES MAL UNA, NO TE SUMA PUNTOS | LAS PREGUNTAS DE LOS | Quizz | SON MUY COMPLEJAS Y NO TE | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Very informative and liked the mini quizzes in between and the visuals as well. Made the learning experience smooth. | Very informative and liked the mini | Quizz | in between and the visuals as | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Course content was pretty detailed. I did not like that I had to write down pretty much every single word from each slide and that was said in order to make sure I could answer the quiz questions. Either the quiz questions were bad or it was taught in a confusing manner. I would go with the former. | make sure I could answer the | Quizz | questions. Either the quiz questions were | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Course content was pretty detailed. I did not like that I had to write down pretty much every single word from each slide and that was said in order to make sure I could answer the quiz questions. Either the quiz questions were bad or it was taught in a confusing manner. I would go with the former. | answer the quiz questions. Either the | Quizz | questions were bad or it was | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Thank you for encouraging me to continue the courses and quiz! I was moved by the motivational emails of the course for the first time since I started Coursera. Now I'm considering to apply to NC's online degree programs of public health, and change my career path. | me to continue the courses and | Quizz | I was moved by the motivational | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The course provides a good introduction to epidemiology. Both teachers are relaxed and speak very well, which is important for foreign students. I would add more intermediate ,practice exercises before quizzes, intermingling them with lectures. Absorbing too much material before the quiz is not always easy. Especially formulas should be practiced repeatedly with some real life problems, although not too difficult ones, in line with the purpose of the course. | more intermediate , practice exercises before | Quizz | intermingling them with lectures. Absorbing too | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The course provides a good introduction to epidemiology. Both teachers are relaxed and speak very well, which is important for foreign students. I would add more intermediate ,practice exercises before quizzes, intermingling them with lectures. Absorbing too much material before the quiz is not always easy. Especially formulas should be practiced repeatedly with some real life problems, although not too difficult ones, in line with the purpose of the course. | Absorbing too much material before the | Quizz | is not always easy. Especially formulas | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I enjoyed hearing about epidemiology, but didn't find the quizzes very useful. I was expecting more practice doing computation or examining case studies. The lectures also had no time in between slides to pause, write notes, and make sure I understood what was just said. I liked that the lectures were well organized and the review questions in between the topics of discussion. | about epidemiology, but didn't find the | Quizz | very useful. I was expecting more | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | This course is well-organized and it is challenging to complete the quizzes | it is challenging to complete the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I liked that the quizzes were not easy, it made me feel the class was worth it. It is a good intro to study design and basic statistics. Definitely a gateway course. | I liked that the | Quizz | were not easy, it made me | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I thought this was a good basic level introduction course. One suggestion is to update the quiz section to be able to click on the questions that were answered incorrectly and see the correct answer with explanation (after passing). | One suggestion is to update the | Quizz | section to be able to click | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | time spent on that and more | Quizz | questions on that. The reason I | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | stars is that I felt the | Quizz | were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 | Quizz | I had to take multiple times | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | are by far the most difficult | Quizz | I have encountered. | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Tough quizzes but its well said "you need to heat and beat the iron to re-shape". its totally worth your effort. | Tough | Quizz | but its well said " you | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Very nice work on the various fields of Linguistics, high level interviews, but rather laborious and time consuming quizzes. | but rather laborious and time consuming | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Firstly, I'd like to thank the professor for bringing us such a great class on linguistics! The course gives a general introduction on what linguistics is about in quite a balanced depth, not too deep to scare people away while not too shallow that you may feel boring. The missing star is due to some vague instructions of quizzes. | due to some vague instructions of | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | A great course, it contains very broad discussion of the problems of linguistics. Quite demanding quizes force students to watch videos carefully and to read the required reading. This leads to better understanding of the matter. The videos in the course are great too, the explanation of prof. Oostendorp is very lively and entertaining. The interviews with specialists are unique. | the problems of linguistics. Quite demanding | Quizz | force students to watch videos carefully | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | I really liked it ! It was a challenge for me personally ! Getting the questions wrong on quizes really discouraged me but then I would keep going and not give up ! Awesome !!! | ! Getting the questions wrong on | Quizz | really discouraged me but then I | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Interesting content, but issues with broken links needed to complete quizzes while they were due. Needs better explanation of how to use other resources. Many of the quiz questions are arbitrary, rather than really testing knowledge gained in the class. The lectures are still useful, and would recommend doing this as a free course, but see no use in paying for a certificate on completion of the course. | with broken links needed to complete | Quizz | while they were due. Needs better | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Interesting content, but issues with broken links needed to complete quizzes while they were due. Needs better explanation of how to use other resources. Many of the quiz questions are arbitrary, rather than really testing knowledge gained in the class. The lectures are still useful, and would recommend doing this as a free course, but see no use in paying for a certificate on completion of the course. | use other resources. Many of the | Quizz | questions are arbitrary, rather than really | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course is a lightweight introduction to Linguistics. If you are absolutely new to linguistics, it will provide you with enough information for further research and self-development. There are some really interesting facts provided by the required reading of the course. What I mostly liked about the course is the list of additional literature. What I mostly didn't like are quizzes - I little bit too reliant on the question formulation. The only quiz that I really liked was about syntactic analysis of informants' sentences. | What I mostly didn't like are | Quizz | - I little bit too reliant | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course is a lightweight introduction to Linguistics. If you are absolutely new to linguistics, it will provide you with enough information for further research and self-development. There are some really interesting facts provided by the required reading of the course. What I mostly liked about the course is the list of additional literature. What I mostly didn't like are quizzes - I little bit too reliant on the question formulation. The only quiz that I really liked was about syntactic analysis of informants' sentences. | on the question formulation. The only | Quizz | that I really liked was about | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | VERY good content and classes! Some questions in the quizzes are confusing, and there was the trouble with the required reading for Week 3. The first Honors assignment is confusing - specially its very last input question. | and classes! Some questions in the | Quizz | are confusing, and there was the | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Some of the material could be a bit more analytical, and there were a few problems with the quiz questions. Other than that, perfect! Great introduction to linguistics. Thank you for your hard work! | were a few problems with the | Quizz | questions. Other than that, perfect! Great | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | some problems in quiz part are confusing... but nice course in general | some problems in | Quizz | part are confusing. . . but | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Despite some technical difficulties with the forum and the quiz, the actual course was so AMAZINGLY interesting that it has motivated me to take up linguistics in the future. I didn't lose interest even once for the entirety of the six weeks I spent on this course! | difficulties with the forum and the | Quizz | the actual course was so AMAZINGLY | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Excellent and most enjoyable course! The videos of the professor and his students are clear and fluent and even the quiz are not too hard. And the best part are the informants in various languages one does not encounter every day. The course is mostly recommended to all. | clear and fluent and even the | Quizz | are not too hard. And the | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course was often confusing and the quizzes came down to a question of trial and error. I found this very frustrating. Although the topics were interesting, I didn't find them very well presented in spite of the enthusiasm of the lecturer. But there was a lot of ambiguity and bias and the inability to discuss except through the forums was off-putting. It wouild be good to know why answers were wrong in the quizzes particulalry when you had put a lot of effort into studying them. In the final exam, there are questions which are evidently wrong, both in their wording and in their marking and nothing has been done to remedy this in spite of the complaints in the discussion page. | course was often confusing and the | Quizz | came down to a question of | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course was often confusing and the quizzes came down to a question of trial and error. I found this very frustrating. Although the topics were interesting, I didn't find them very well presented in spite of the enthusiasm of the lecturer. But there was a lot of ambiguity and bias and the inability to discuss except through the forums was off-putting. It wouild be good to know why answers were wrong in the quizzes particulalry when you had put a lot of effort into studying them. In the final exam, there are questions which are evidently wrong, both in their wording and in their marking and nothing has been done to remedy this in spite of the complaints in the discussion page. | why answers were wrong in the | Quizz | particulalry when you had put a | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course itself is fine. The quizzes, however, are so frustrating as to lower the enjoyment of the whole thing. Numerous answers are just factually wrong. You end up retaking the quiz time and again and then selecting random answers just to pass. | The course itself is fine. The | Quizz | however, are so frustrating as to | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course itself is fine. The quizzes, however, are so frustrating as to lower the enjoyment of the whole thing. Numerous answers are just factually wrong. You end up retaking the quiz time and again and then selecting random answers just to pass. | wrong. You end up retaking the | Quizz | time and again and then selecting | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| FnZcU7lhEeW6YA7MjVrgzw | Excellent course syllabus and high standard quiz questions | Excellent course syllabus and high standard | Quizz | questions | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Fo72zMekEeWrYA6c7hw6vQ | This course SEEMS to be a great course. But personally I think it's not. It talks about so many things but none of them are explained clearly. I can't get the picture of this field clearly. The assignment looks nice. But it's not. First, it's not well-organized. Sometimes you need to look at next week's course to do this week's quiz. The programming assignment is VERY VERY unsatisfying. It's not explained clearly; there's no helpful instruction; and it is very confusing. You need to spend hours and hours just UNDERSTANDING what you need to do. And some algorithms are not even told in the course and you need to implement them! I know this could be a good exercise but I would hope it at least provide some useful resources. Generally, I am very disappointed. I feel like I'm spending hours and hours but learning nothing. Just confusion. Please consider reformat the homework; make it more doable for new learners in this field. | week's course to do this week's | Quizz | The programming assignment is VERY VERY | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| FOGKYF0gEeWK1woL5P9cGQ | Very interesting course, that covers the broad fundamentals of Urban Infrastructures. I liked how the content was made relevant by case-studies and quizzes that focus on your city. | was made relevant by case-studies and | Quizz | that focus on your city. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| FOGKYF0gEeWK1woL5P9cGQ | Videos and quizes are too long and too large | Videos and | Quizz | are too long and too large | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| FOGKYF0gEeWK1woL5P9cGQ | Good balance between presentations and interviews. The quality of the reading materials was well above my previous Coursera courses (great handouts from Iglus!). The scope could be extended to other urban infrastructure systems. Appropriate quizzes. Final exam could be slightly more demanding (less straightforward). Overall very good. | to other urban infrastructure systems. Appropriate | Quizz | Final exam could be slightly more | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The name of this course is misleading to me (and if it's misunderstood by one, you can assume there are other people affected as well) - it would be more clear what's expecting you if the course would be called something similar to the last assignment name "Creating a data-driven website". The responsive part that I was interested in, was basically done with "use bootstrap" - that's pretty poor. Of course the course isn't responsible for this, but an appropriate name would fix that. Throughout the course, the quizzes were entertaining - but the quality of the questions is questionable. Sometimes the answer is obvious because the other answers are ridiculous, sometimes you don't know what to click, even though you just watched the video carefully. Reason for this is that there are questions being asked, which weren't even touched in the lesson. It's basically the same with the last assignment - you can watch and do all the lessons before, you've got no idea how to start and what to do as there's simply no explanation of what affects what - which seems to be extremely important in javascript. Yes, it's often told in an overview-style explanation what a function is doing, but something in depth that tells you how to write working javascript functions is lacking. The quality of the explanations also varied in their quality. Some things that were pretty easy to understand, were explained over 10 very boring minutes, other things that were far more complex and tricky, were handled in half a minute. This made watching the videos frustrating at times. I'm not sure which kind of audience this course is supposed for, but the style varies way too much. Furthermore it's great that coursera is offering an iPad-app, but I'd like to be able to use and do everything that the app is offering me (and in the best case: everything that's necessary for the course). I can't even review classmates, as they're uploading .rar or .zip-files, which can't be accessed via iPad, and also javascript is a problem for ipads. Unpacking such files and running them on your servers would be an option, maybe. | fix that. Throughout the course, the | Quizz | were entertaining - but the quality | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very theoretical course they should add some hands on. Its like mugging things for quiz. | on. Its like mugging things for | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Practice makes perfect! This course built on knowledge from the previous course, and solidified my understanding of the subject matter. The instructors are great, and the practice quizzes and peer reviewed assignments really help. | instructors are great, and the practice | Quizz | and peer reviewed assignments really help. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I like how this specialisation evolves... as in the previous block, it does not give you all details, but merely sets the direction. The homework assignments are quite good and, if executed properly, will teach you a lot. The only complaint - frequent ambiguity of multiple choice quiz questions. | - frequent ambiguity of multiple choice | Quizz | questions. | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | I like Mr Balch but to be honest I learned next to nothing. Maybe this is a good course for somebody who has no background in finance. As for myself I felt that I was wasting time and money. The book associated with this course was just like the course itself: shallow and doesn't go in any depth to explain the matter fully and rigorously. If you want to know WHAT computational investing is, you can take this class. Googling a bit will have roughly the same effect, though. If you want to learn how to actually DO computational investing, do not take this course - its just not serious enough. As the name of this course implies, you probably expected to find part II somewhere, which was promised to be a course about using machine learning in investing. 3 or 4 years after part I went live, part II is still missing and probably will never come out. The software used in this course, QSTK, is buggy and has been so for 3+ years. Its not maintained by anyone, and the people taking this course had to find ways to overcome QSTK bugs to be able to complete their assignments. And lastly: the exercises. There are none. All you get is a lame quiz for every week which basically asks to change some variables in the scripts provided. I did some coding for week 3 but that was it. No coding practice after that. | All you get is a lame | Quizz | for every week which basically asks | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | Highly appealing subject matter but this was not the course I should have chosen to learn it from. The topics discussed are relevant, but there were some major drawbacks to this course: Limited academic rigour applied to the actual topics; instead they are discussed in a somewhat wordy and vague manner. Very slow progression beyond the most basic topics. At the beginning and end of each video there are some odd sound effects, and during the course itself the microphone the instructor is using seems to be very temperamental - sometimes I can't hear him at all, sometimes it's way too loud The software that is meant to be used has not been updated in 3 years (Jul13), and you notice it: A bug results in the software 'failing' during one of the homework assignments - students in this course had to fix it ad hoc themselves by changing the source code installed on their machine. Further, the assignments were not quite instructive but more a method of 'rote learning' -- amend the existing code, and then change 1-3 inputs and copy-paste the output into the 'quiz'. I didn't feel I was gaining much insight into the theory + subject matter during homeworks + quiz. The course videos also seem to be much more ad-hoc than I was expecting: There are many examples of 'Uhms...' 'Err's and pauses - there only seems to be a vague description of what is meant to be taught in the individual videos, where a set of points and theories to be discussed in a organized rigid manner may have been more appropriate. To conclude, there is no doubt that the instructor knows what he is talking about, but I can't help but feel that this course was put together quite hurriedly without much quality testing and preparation. It also lacks the depth and breadth of other courses available here and elsewhere. I signed up to this course under the 'Verified Track' and am likely not going to complete it despite having paid $$ to sign up. Having said all that I would definitely sign up to Computational Investing , Part II, as I would expect the team behind this course to be doing things differently (ie a lot better) 3-4 years after this course was made! | and copy-paste the output into the | Quizz | I didn't feel I was gaining | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | Highly appealing subject matter but this was not the course I should have chosen to learn it from. The topics discussed are relevant, but there were some major drawbacks to this course: Limited academic rigour applied to the actual topics; instead they are discussed in a somewhat wordy and vague manner. Very slow progression beyond the most basic topics. At the beginning and end of each video there are some odd sound effects, and during the course itself the microphone the instructor is using seems to be very temperamental - sometimes I can't hear him at all, sometimes it's way too loud The software that is meant to be used has not been updated in 3 years (Jul13), and you notice it: A bug results in the software 'failing' during one of the homework assignments - students in this course had to fix it ad hoc themselves by changing the source code installed on their machine. Further, the assignments were not quite instructive but more a method of 'rote learning' -- amend the existing code, and then change 1-3 inputs and copy-paste the output into the 'quiz'. I didn't feel I was gaining much insight into the theory + subject matter during homeworks + quiz. The course videos also seem to be much more ad-hoc than I was expecting: There are many examples of 'Uhms...' 'Err's and pauses - there only seems to be a vague description of what is meant to be taught in the individual videos, where a set of points and theories to be discussed in a organized rigid manner may have been more appropriate. To conclude, there is no doubt that the instructor knows what he is talking about, but I can't help but feel that this course was put together quite hurriedly without much quality testing and preparation. It also lacks the depth and breadth of other courses available here and elsewhere. I signed up to this course under the 'Verified Track' and am likely not going to complete it despite having paid $$ to sign up. Having said all that I would definitely sign up to Computational Investing , Part II, as I would expect the team behind this course to be doing things differently (ie a lot better) 3-4 years after this course was made! | + subject matter during homeworks + | Quizz | The course videos also seem to | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| g9KhGjk_EeWXuQopUhAqaw | I audited all the courses in this specialization and found them all to be informative and enjoyable. The workload is low, the quizzes are fairly comprehensive, and the projects are interesting and relevant. | enjoyable. The workload is low, the | Quizz | are fairly comprehensive, and the projects | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| g9KhGjk_EeWXuQopUhAqaw | I understand peer review is a bit difficult, but being quiz only made this course a bit too easy. Colleen is a great teacher though and I like her unique teaching style and viewpoint. | is a bit difficult, but being | Quizz | only made this course a bit | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | Lecture material is well presented with green screen. Lectures are very clear and engaging. Topics are recent and appropriate for this fast moving field. Quiz are at the end of the week and not immediately after each video to promote review and retention. Overall, a very informative, broad coverage of this field. Thank you | appropriate for this fast moving field. | Quizz | are at the end of the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | The lectures weren't always easy to follow but the quizzes were really useful as they meant it was necessary to understand the material. Definitely a useful course, I will be interested to see how it relates to the real world of derivatives pricing. | always easy to follow but the | Quizz | were really useful as they meant | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent course for students with some finance background. Content is nicely paced and well illustrated through models and examples. The quizzes range from straight forward application to challenging (given there is no feedback on where you got a question incorrect). | illustrated through models and examples. The | Quizz | range from straight forward application to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent material with high quality quizzes. Highly recommended. | Excellent material with high quality | Quizz | Highly recommended. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | I wish it could be harder and have more challenging quizzes than simply arithmetic and multiple choice. | be harder and have more challenging | Quizz | than simply arithmetic and multiple choice. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Good course. Personally I think it is almost the perfect level for those who have some basic understandings about finance and look forward to go deep(such as me). This course requires some understanding about using Excel, which is quite useful when doing the quiz. Mastering Excel well would save a lot time. Some material might be a little hard but with patience and hardworking, it can still be solved. Highly recommended! | is quite useful when doing the | Quizz | Mastering Excel well would save a | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent approach, robust presentation, demanding but rewarding quizzes, overall a valuable course. A slight drawback is of technical nature and is responsibility of the host platform: a couple of module videos contain wrong subtitles. Nevertheless, both teacher speak clear English, and it wouldn't be hard for most participants to follow. | approach, robust presentation, demanding but rewarding | Quizz | overall a valuable course. A slight | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | The material covered in the course is highly relevant to the current job market. Professors Haugh & Iyengar were great at explaining the material and the quizzes were reasonably difficult. The learning spreadsheets were very good as well. Overall, it was a great learning experience and I will enthusiastically recommend it to my colleagues. | at explaining the material and the | Quizz | were reasonably difficult. The learning spreadsheets | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | It is a little sad that the materials taught were not matching test materials well in the quiz. | matching test materials well in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Very well presented, structured and selected material, easy to follow, relevant and interesting. Quizz problems are well thought through and have a reasonable degree of difficulty and length. | easy to follow, relevant and interesting. | Quizz | problems are well thought through and | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | This course is rigourous, the quizzes are challenging. I hope they provide more practice quizzes | This course is rigourous, the | Quizz | are challenging. I hope they provide | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | This course is rigourous, the quizzes are challenging. I hope they provide more practice quizzes | I hope they provide more practice | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | The course provides a very thorough introduction on the basic models and mechanisms by which various financial products are priced. One issue I had, was that the quiz questions sometimes used terminology or jargon for which the link with the material covered in the videos was not always immediately obvious. Also, the course, especially the later modules, heavily relies on Microsoft Excel, which some people might not be willing to pay hard cash for. It is possible to pass by doing the assignments with e.g. Python, but it's a lot of work, and not for the faint of heart. | issue I had, was that the | Quizz | questions sometimes used terminology or jargon | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | course needs problems with explanations and/or better feedback on quizzes. there is no way to tell what error one has made - it could even be rounding. a student forum might be helpful, too. application of some formulas is not clear, leading to errors on quizzes. in some cases I have used external resources to give me a way to achieve the correct result | with explanations and/or better feedback on | Quizz | there is no way to tell | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | course needs problems with explanations and/or better feedback on quizzes. there is no way to tell what error one has made - it could even be rounding. a student forum might be helpful, too. application of some formulas is not clear, leading to errors on quizzes. in some cases I have used external resources to give me a way to achieve the correct result | not clear, leading to errors on | Quizz | in some cases I have used | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Very interesting. The quizzes after each model compels me to learn and research more. | Very interesting. The | Quizz | after each model compels me to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | I would like to see the discussion forum back. That will help debugging the answers to the quiz. | help debugging the answers to the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Im really fascinated with this course. By the way, i think some quiz have few mistakes as the module about pricing swaptions in the calibration model. The answer the professor gave is not 13300 or 19400, but 1330 or 1940 respectively. The quiz#6, the answer for the question 1 and 2 is multiple, its between a range and i cant complete it, please check the parameters again. | By the way, i think some | Quizz | have few mistakes as the module | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gh3sMTAAEeW-zwq84wShFQ | This introductory course is fairly detailed and with depth. I have used Python for a while, but still I feel this course is a nice review to revisit basics in Python. It is a pity that it's only in Chinese and there aren't hands on programming projects but only quiz. | hands on programming projects but only | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | Needs more than 4 weeks worth of material. Assignments and quizzes should be free. | weeks worth of material. Assignments and | Quizz | should be free. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | If I am auditing this class why can't the quizzes be free also? What happened to free Coursera? | auditing this class why can't the | Quizz | be free also? What happened to | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | this course is great for those who want to learn the basics of the micro controller ( arduino ) The assignments and quizes are very well designed. | ( arduino ) The assignments and | Quizz | are very well designed. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GixeETxVEeW0tw4knrMo3Q | please try and make easier but not too easy to pass. meaning less assignments and more quizzes, which i find fun to do. | pass. meaning less assignments and more | Quizz | which i find fun to do. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| GNr7-GFfEeW5iQpSR8Sfhw | OK introduction to material properties, but not rigorous (leaves out definitions, motivation and conclusions/consequences) and skips some things that come up on the quizzes. No worked examples. | things that come up on the | Quizz | No worked examples. | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| goJ9vXd_EeWtpg5GoAM5Iw | Very good! There's room for improvement in the assignments, especially the quizzes that have simple questions and some have only one. | improvement in the assignments, especially the | Quizz | that have simple questions and some | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | Simple and yet well detailed, although the one thing that I didn't like is the french translations in the quizzes, make them a little bit confusing | is the french translations in the | Quizz | make them a little bit confusing | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is an excellent course indeed. Access to real world data is a huge +. Some of the questions in the quizzes were difficult though. And also the witty jokes by the Prof... :):) | Some of the questions in the | Quizz | were difficult though. And also the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Really useful and practical course. The exercises and quizes are the best in all the courses I've taken. | and practical course. The exercises and | Quizz | are the best in all the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Amazing course and the quizzes are challenging. Learned a lot. Gives hands on experience on mysql and Teradata. | Amazing course and the | Quizz | are challenging. Learned a lot. Gives | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great Course, especially since it's using real (and messy) data. Week 5 quiz gets quite challenging. Some more video lectures would be great. | real (and messy) data. Week 5 | Quizz | gets quite challenging. Some more video | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I found the first 4 weeks of the course amazing: just really well structured, thought-out, and delivered in a way that positions the student for success. Jana breaks the material down into digestible bits, gives you sufficient practice, and even if you don't get it, you can look at the answers to the practice questions and figure out where your thinking was incorrect. The 5th week wasn't as well broken down, especially the last set of Teradata exercises. New concepts or ways of structuring queries were being introduced in those exercises, but there was no way to check for a correct solution if I couldn't come with one on my own (which was unfortunately half of the time). I still got a good grade on my last quiz, but I can't say that I really truly learned how to write the more complicated queries. I would suggest that the last Teradata exercise set has more explanation or perhaps just answers that the student can refer to in order to understand why his/her line of thinking isn't working. Otherwise, a truly fantastic course. I 100% recommend it. | a good grade on my last | Quizz | but I can't say that I | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The exercises , quizzes and videos are well planned and help understand the course material. | The exercises , | Quizz | and videos are well planned and | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I liked it, but couldnt even submit quizzes if you don't pay ! | liked it, but couldnt even submit | Quizz | if you don't pay ! | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The video instruction are not as helpful as I wished. They were too brief, and all the learning end up with doing the exercises. The regular exercises and the quizzes use different database system, and it sometimes hard to transfer what you learn to the quizzes. The pre-quiz exercises are more helpful imo, but no answer key is provided. Sometimes I am still confused even after passing the quiz. | exercises. The regular exercises and the | Quizz | use different database system, and it | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The video instruction are not as helpful as I wished. They were too brief, and all the learning end up with doing the exercises. The regular exercises and the quizzes use different database system, and it sometimes hard to transfer what you learn to the quizzes. The pre-quiz exercises are more helpful imo, but no answer key is provided. Sometimes I am still confused even after passing the quiz. | transfer what you learn to the | Quizz | The pre-quiz exercises are more helpful | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The video instruction are not as helpful as I wished. They were too brief, and all the learning end up with doing the exercises. The regular exercises and the quizzes use different database system, and it sometimes hard to transfer what you learn to the quizzes. The pre-quiz exercises are more helpful imo, but no answer key is provided. Sometimes I am still confused even after passing the quiz. | still confused even after passing the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I have a theoretical background in relational algebra and SQL. This course did a great job of actually applying that theory in practice in the form of business situations. By using real life data, it also accurately presented raw data as not perfectly organized or "clean". Filtering with subqueries, IN, WHERE, and OUTER JOIN statements are absolutely crucial in cleaning data in real life situations; this course did an excellent job of demonstrating that importance. I have 2 interrelated critiques however: The usage of 2 different platforms (MySQL for the exercises and Teradata for the quizzes) was very confusing given their distinct syntaxes. I think it would have been more powerful to have the exercises and quizzes on the same platform. Furthermore, the Teradata platform was oftentimes overwhelmed by the number of users and frequently crashed. Going forward I would recommend either ensuring that the servers can handle the amount of user-load, or switching over to the MySQL platform entirely. | the exercises and Teradata for the | Quizz | was very confusing given their distinct | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I have a theoretical background in relational algebra and SQL. This course did a great job of actually applying that theory in practice in the form of business situations. By using real life data, it also accurately presented raw data as not perfectly organized or "clean". Filtering with subqueries, IN, WHERE, and OUTER JOIN statements are absolutely crucial in cleaning data in real life situations; this course did an excellent job of demonstrating that importance. I have 2 interrelated critiques however: The usage of 2 different platforms (MySQL for the exercises and Teradata for the quizzes) was very confusing given their distinct syntaxes. I think it would have been more powerful to have the exercises and quizzes on the same platform. Furthermore, the Teradata platform was oftentimes overwhelmed by the number of users and frequently crashed. Going forward I would recommend either ensuring that the servers can handle the amount of user-load, or switching over to the MySQL platform entirely. | powerful to have the exercises and | Quizz | on the same platform. Furthermore, the | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | great course. great example databases. i would suggest renaming the course Managing Big Data with MySQL and TeraData. The Teradata component of the course was very heavy, and all graded pieces of the course used Teradata. I would also make the assignments graded --- they can be peer reviewed. I think doing the assignments really help, not just completing the quizzes. those are my thoughts. | really help, not just completing the | Quizz | those are my thoughts. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| gSfwG3HcEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Course lectures are good, but many quiz questions are out of syllabus. Sorry, I am not satisfied. | Course lectures are good, but many | Quizz | questions are out of syllabus. Sorry, | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| gSfwG3HcEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Overall good course. Clean and elegant style of presentation. Some videos had some echo problems with the sound. Also there were some english typos in some slides and in video quizzes that should be corrected. I would like to seen the slides for the presentations. Also if this is going to be a series of courses wouldn't it make sense to bundle it in a specialization? Nonetheless, congratulations and thank you for presenting this course in Coursera. | in some slides and in video | Quizz | that should be corrected. I would | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| gttJnUtZEeW4rRLEP0z9Bw | The course can be informative, but the presentation needs some work. All of the instructional videos were merely a person reading a Power Point presentation to the viewer. The "in class" examples appeared to be completely hypothetical and were also read to the viewer without any video demonstration of how the presented information works in an actual class. In addition, the written information in the videos was confusingly organized and had not been fully edited. In multiple videos, there were typos. In at least one video, the instructors had not fully deleted the sentences from a previous version of a slide. When the revised slide was presented to the viewer, a word from a previous version was in the middle of the sentence. In addition, the previous version was obviously about a different subject. I was disappointed and continually frustrated with this course, especially since the instructors required me to pay fifty dollars in order to take the module quizzes and the final assessment. I have no problem paying for a good product. However, the professionalism displayed in the course was incredibly lacking. | in order to take the module | Quizz | and the final assessment. I have | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course developed by Andrew Ng is quite interesting, going to the essentials in order student get the big picture and the essential tools for building the backbone of future ML applications. Of course, being confident with mathematics principles and notations will be helpful but most of the time, it's not an issue if you have the minimal knowledge. What it lacks on Coursera is the next stage of this course where we could investigate further the technologies presented but in more technical way. Maybe we might see that in the future... Regarding course supports (videos, forums ...), they are of good quality and the fact Andrew used them by drawing on slides helps to have a better understanding. We could notice that there are few minor errors (eg: a "j" index which becomes "i" in J(theta) writing) and I think the technical slides on Back propagation could be improved if a dedicated slide to used mathematical notations / definitions. Sometimes, there are some errors which could induce some confusions. But these minors errors don't hide the impressive work done by Andrew. Regarding assessments, quizzes could be tricky if you don't got the "spirit" (not an exam habit in France) and coding exercises are well structured in order the student will focus on the core modules of the lesson and not on information flow. These exercises are inspiring if you're interesting in teaching and inspiring for Data Scientist Apprentices if you investigate the utils functions developed to support the exercise. Many thanks for this great course and I hope my two cents will help other people to attend it Bruno | work done by Andrew. Regarding assessments, | Quizz | could be tricky if you don't | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | About me: I studied computer science in Dortmund, Germany in the 90ies. I recommend this course to everyone who wants to have a very good understanding of machine learning. A little bit of advice, if you have never learned linear algebra on a university level, you should at least try to get a basic understanding of it before starting this course. I was happy that I remembered stuff, learning it from scratch in 1 or 2 weeks would be difficult, I assume. +: * Mathematical basics of machine learning are very well explained * Andrew Ng is a very good professor, he explains the topic very well and thoroughly * It is not limited by using a special framework or language * The support in the forums, and the transcription of the talks, and all the material that is given to you is really excellent. -: * I would be happy if the programming exercises would be a bit more fun, currently it feels like translating / transforming math formulas into octave, which is fine, but not very fun. Having said that I am only in week 4, perhaps this will happen later * some text questions in the multiple choice quizzes require a precise understanding of the english language, especially in regards to math, I am not a native speaker, so these questions feel especially hard for me | text questions in the multiple choice | Quizz | require a precise understanding of the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's very helpful to build a knowledge of ML. The video and quiz are all challenging to complete if you want to get the full score. Appreciate it, Pro Andrew | knowledge of ML. The video and | Quizz | are all challenging to complete if | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | great course, and thanks Andrew Ng for excellent teaching. You know, so many courses on Coursera now need us to pay to access to all the quizzes and assignments, which may prevent us from effective learning. Machine learning class is, personally, the best course on Coursera. And again, thanks, Andrew. | pay to access to all the | Quizz | and assignments, which may prevent us | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very interesting introduction to Machine Learning. All lecture notes are beautifully presented by Andrew Ng. I have truly enjoyed his style. Quizzes and programming exercises are good | I have truly enjoyed his style. | Quizz | and programming exercises are good | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you Prof. Ng and Mentors that your effort to educate - well designed course, teaching, quizzes and exercises to help us understand essence of ML. I am not a computer scientist graduate student / graduate but I am interested in data. This course will start my new direction of research and work. Good luck to all of you who encounter this course! | educate - well designed course, teaching, | Quizz | and exercises to help us understand | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Incredible... complex subject ... taught in a simplified way without trivialising the subject matter... practical examples and tips help a lot... beautifully relates the mathematics behind the algorithms to real-life scenarios. Hands-on programming assignments and quizzes are thoughtfully crafted and organised.. Great Learning. Thank you very much. | real-life scenarios. Hands-on programming assignments and | Quizz | are thoughtfully crafted and organised. . | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | One of the best mooc that I have taken till date. Thanks a lot for Andrew Ng and team to make this high quality class accessible to everyone. Learnt a great deal from the lecture videos, assignments, quiz, tutorials & test cases. I highly recommend to people who are just starting to explore ML for learning or to make a career out of it. Thanks again Andrew Ng, Team and Coursera | deal from the lecture videos, assignments, | Quizz | tutorials & test cases. I highly | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Professor didn't do a good job on explaining the theory. He moves too fast. This should improve so that student who has less/weak knowledge of Math can pass the quiz. If you are not a Math student, don't take this class. I was hoping to learn about how to program to control the machine/robot but it turns out that this is more focusing on the theory instead. I would recommend to take another course of ML/Big Data from UCI instead. | knowledge of Math can pass the | Quizz | If you are not a Math | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course presents in a very accessible way a variety of ML techniques. It is definitely a good introductory course. The programming assignments could have been harder and the quizes could have required some harder calculations in hand. | could have been harder and the | Quizz | could have required some harder calculations | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great course. The instructor Andrew Ng carries you through the material in easy to understand lectures that are divided by topic in perfectly timed video sessions with individual quizzes during each video that help you gauge how well you have understood and grasped the topic discussed in the lesson. This prepares you to take the graded quizzes and complete the programming projects. The programming projects have great documentation that enhance the learning experience and illustrate applications of the material just learned. I greatly recommend this course! | perfectly timed video sessions with individual | Quizz | during each video that help you | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great course. The instructor Andrew Ng carries you through the material in easy to understand lectures that are divided by topic in perfectly timed video sessions with individual quizzes during each video that help you gauge how well you have understood and grasped the topic discussed in the lesson. This prepares you to take the graded quizzes and complete the programming projects. The programming projects have great documentation that enhance the learning experience and illustrate applications of the material just learned. I greatly recommend this course! | prepares you to take the graded | Quizz | and complete the programming projects. The | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The videos are of a helpful length and they are organized into lessons with constructive quiz questions and assignments interspersed to make a student progress logically and incrementally through the course. I found the mentors' guidance helpful to bridge the gap between video lectures and programming assignments. | are organized into lessons with constructive | Quizz | questions and assignments interspersed to make | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a very fundamental introduction of machine learning. The course materials are suitable for beginners who are interested in machine learning. Going through all the quiz and programming assignments is not easy but they are really helpful for understanding the learning materials. | machine learning. Going through all the | Quizz | and programming assignments is not easy | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very easy to understand, with little math needed. I enjoy the fact that he allows access to all quizzes and assignments without having to pay. | that he allows access to all | Quizz | and assignments without having to pay. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | great lectures, and great quiz and assignment to help me learn more. | great lectures, and great | Quizz | and assignment to help me learn | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good materials, matlab programs and quizzes and faculty members. This subject is key to understand the basics of neural networks | Very good materials, matlab programs and | Quizz | and faculty members. This subject is | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The best online course I have ever taken!! The Instructor Mr. Andrew teaches really great. I just love the way he teaches. The pace of the course is also good and not that hard to keep up. The assignments and quizzes are also simple and effective. One can learn a lot from this course. Thank you. :) | to keep up. The assignments and | Quizz | are also simple and effective. One | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent for the machine learning beginners. Courser prepares the surroundings for each topics before going into deep. Intermediate quiz and assignments for each covered topics are very good idea to check learned concepts with practical. Thanks a lot. | topics before going into deep. Intermediate | Quizz | and assignments for each covered topics | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course, all the concepts are explained in a structured and clear way. The quizes reinforce the lessons, and the assignments focus on building understanding of the concepts and give practical examples of applications. | a structured and clear way. The | Quizz | reinforce the lessons, and the assignments | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Some of the most advanced learning taught in amazing simplicity and choice of real world examples to make learners understand the fundamentals. The quizzes were awesome and same were the assignments. | make learners understand the fundamentals. The | Quizz | were awesome and same were the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Exceptionally good course material, Prof Ng's good job, great quizzes and well-guided assignments. | material, Prof Ng's good job, great | Quizz | and well-guided assignments. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course, great teacher. very useful material, quizzes, assignments, review questions and intutions throughout the course | course, great teacher. very useful material, | Quizz | assignments, review questions and intutions throughout | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course, great quizes and programming exercises | Awesome course, great | Quizz | and programming exercises | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Professor Andrew is great, and about discussions Tom es another great guy, he was a big help for us, was an amazing course. Quizzes sometimes are a little bit tricky and if you understand very well the classes you can do easily the matlab challenges. | for us, was an amazing course. | Quizz | sometimes are a little bit tricky | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you Prof Ng. Your course was very clear and well designed. The quizzes and the programming assignments were perfect to test my understanding of each lecture. It was very understandable even without a deep background in computer science and mathematics thanks to your ability to simplify complex concepts. | very clear and well designed. The | Quizz | and the programming assignments were perfect | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew explains things in a very clear way. Some of the quizes seems redundant, ie., ask very basic questions which can be answered with common sense w/o knowing the content, but all in all give good intro. I gained enough knowledge to challenge PhDs specializing in ML when we brainstorm stuff. | very clear way. Some of the | Quizz | seems redundant, ie. , ask very | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course: rather slow-paced but quite in-depth, great pedagogy, various quizzes and little questions in the videos that maintain interest and rhythm throughout the course. The programming assignments are also very well built, allowing people to focus on the core aspects of machine learning by taking care of all the language-specific environment. | but quite in-depth, great pedagogy, various | Quizz | and little questions in the videos | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Since this is my very first online course, I don't have too much to compare it to, but I thought the lectures and the quizzes / programming problems were very focused. Especially the coding where a lot of the "grunt work" was done for you, allowing you to focus on the actual machine learning algorithm which was helpful in grasping the application of these complicated concepts. I especially liked the later part of the course where emphasis was made on understanding how to make educated decisions about where to spend time enhancing the performance of the ML code & training set. This will save the potential ML student hours and hours of work. Thanks to the professor, producer, and moderator(s). | I thought the lectures and the | Quizz | / programming problems were very focused. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Just after starting the course and properly doing programming assignments and quizzes, i was able to get a grip on machine learning. | and properly doing programming assignments and | Quizz | i was able to get a | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is really informative. And we can learn a lot by solving the quizzes and assignments sincerely. | learn a lot by solving the | Quizz | and assignments sincerely. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | There are a number of issues with this course, and more generally Coursera. While the course does cover the material, it uses non-standard mathematical notation. This can be very confusing and seems as if it is purposefully so. There are several mathematical abstractions used that perhaps have a purpose in later machine learning applications but seem unnecessary here. Another issue is that the course assumes the use of Octave which is not available for Windows users apparently. It also allows the use of MatLab but the quiz questions are in Octave which means the quiz is not necessarily testing understanding of the course material as it is Octave. Generally, the opportunities for feedback to Coursera are highly limited. A colleague once took a course online (through another platform). Some of the course material was objectively wrong. However, there was no ability to submit feedback. I have the sense that this could easily happen with the Coursera material. It totally undercuts the apparent validity of the platform. | the use of MatLab but the | Quizz | questions are in Octave which means | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | There are a number of issues with this course, and more generally Coursera. While the course does cover the material, it uses non-standard mathematical notation. This can be very confusing and seems as if it is purposefully so. There are several mathematical abstractions used that perhaps have a purpose in later machine learning applications but seem unnecessary here. Another issue is that the course assumes the use of Octave which is not available for Windows users apparently. It also allows the use of MatLab but the quiz questions are in Octave which means the quiz is not necessarily testing understanding of the course material as it is Octave. Generally, the opportunities for feedback to Coursera are highly limited. A colleague once took a course online (through another platform). Some of the course material was objectively wrong. However, there was no ability to submit feedback. I have the sense that this could easily happen with the Coursera material. It totally undercuts the apparent validity of the platform. | are in Octave which means the | Quizz | is not necessarily testing understanding of | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good course for beginners. This course has completed satisfied my initial requirements. Quizzes and exercises are very include and ofcourse Mr Andrew is perfect at what he does. | has completed satisfied my initial requirements. | Quizz | and exercises are very include and | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I have seen other machine learning courses but it cannot get any simpler than this. Most of the other courses will directly dive you into complex formulas and theorems. But Mr. Andrew Ng made it so easy for me to understand the basic concepts with his real world examples that now I can apply them in my own projects with ease. The evaluation system is also pretty good with hands on assignments. The quizzes were a little bit tough at times, but they forced me to go back to the corresponding topic and review it so that my concepts become clear. The assignments were also realistic and at times challenging for people using Matlab or Octave for first time. Thank you very much for this course. I hope this will help a lot in my career as a researcher. | good with hands on assignments. The | Quizz | were a little bit tough at | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course teaches the fundamentals of various machine learning algorithms. Andrew's teaching/coaching style is excellent as he explains even the hardest concepts in simple ways that everyone can understand. If you go through his class videos twice the subject materials will be very clear and you can pass the quiz easily. After taking this course, I am motivated to learn more about machine learning. | clear and you can pass the | Quizz | easily. After taking this course, I | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very Good course. Good examples Excellent quiz and exercises Slides are also very clear and easy-understanding | Very Good course. Good examples Excellent | Quizz | and exercises Slides are also very | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The material is clearly presented and the quizes and homework assignments re-inforce the learning. This class left me hungry to learn more. | material is clearly presented and the | Quizz | and homework assignments re-inforce the learning. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The first course ever on the Coursera platform, it is a very clear and comprehensive introduction to machine learning, with awesome explanations by professor Andrew Ng and fun and useful quizzes and programming excercises that help assimilate and understand the material. I would give 5 stars if a final exam and final bigger programming project was included, to really help students master the concepts and apply them to tougher problems. But overall it is a really great course! Highly recommended! | Andrew Ng and fun and useful | Quizz | and programming excercises that help assimilate | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | "All you need to know about Machine Learning but didn't know whom to ask". Wonderful course! The quizzes and exercises are very well put together. | to ask" . Wonderful course! The | Quizz | and exercises are very well put | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am half way through this course and I feel this is the best online course available today. The content is superb, the subject is interesting and the instructor/the professor explains the topic in a very easy way. One more thing which makes this course great is the tools - the quizes and assignment framework (including the submission process) is very well designed. I aim to pursue career in Machine Learning at some point in time in (near) future. I am sure I am on right track. Anyone new to ML must start with this course. | great is the tools - the | Quizz | and assignment framework (including the submission | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | is not correspond with level of | Quizz | In lectures they are talking about | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | about simple stuff and then in | Quizz | they ask you about details they | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | problem with this course - for | Quizz | you should deduct and learn by | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This was my first class on Coursera and I couldn't have been more happier about it. Content is very well presented, mathematics standing behind various ML models is served to the listener with just enough details to understand it, but not to add any confusion. Assignments are great and really help you to understand how algorithms works. The only thing I'd change is questions about Octave in Quizes. Octave is very nice tool, no doubt, but I personally want to stick to R language and I really didn't want to memorize certain functions or syntax that Octave is using. Great job! I can recommend this class to anyone with a clean conscious. | change is questions about Octave in | Quizz | Octave is very nice tool, no | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | good videos. reasonable quiz questions. good programming assignments. | good videos. reasonable | Quizz | questions. good programming assignments. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course, better than any course I had at university; it's very well structured, Prof Ng is a perfect didact and the assignments and quizzes are well chosen and informative. I can just recommend to anyone, who is interested in machine learning, to enroll this course and enjoy it! | perfect didact and the assignments and | Quizz | are well chosen and informative. I | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is great course. The content is very focussed and is apt for professionals who wants a quick peek into the fundamentals but mostly focus on application of the theory. The delivery is awesome. The quizzes, assignments are very helpful. I ended up learning a very deep and complex subject with much ease. Kudos to the professor for making it look so simple. | theory. The delivery is awesome. The | Quizz | assignments are very helpful. I ended | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My CS friend recommended me to take this course to learn more about how to use data in business, after he heard that I wanted to program an app for food. he warned me about the great deal of math involved (mainly linear algebra). me being a physics/engineering major I naturally got even more excited (it turned out that he was right, and it would also be a huge plus to know multivariate calculus, and I can see myself struggle with the concepts had I not studied both these topics to bits in school). incidentally, this was my first online coursera experience. I can tell you it will be life changing experience. No longer do I have to physically travel somewhere to listen to lectures or hand in assignments, nor download lecture notes off of the school server. This is a 24/7 always on always available service, with the best TA's to answer your questions if you get stuck on homework assignments and quizzes. Everything in the coding assignments tests your knowledge of the course lectures and is designed such that you can complete it in the shortest possible amount of time while reaping the maximum amount of benefit. It is "easy" sense does not require you to grind through mundane things like looking for your own training set data or writing code to plot and visualise the data, but it is "hard" in the sense that very often it takes an hour (or more) of studying the lectures and thinking to figure out how to solve the problem in the most efficient way as possible which often involves writing a single line of vectored matlab/octave code. It is more of an overview of the most important topics in machine learning, but will be a great springboard to go in depth into each aspect of it. Lastly, Andrew often offers wonderful insights into the day to day of machine learning professionals in his lecture videos, so I would advise watching every single minute of them to get the most out of the course instead of aiming to race over the finish line (which can be tempting at times when the deadline approaches) | get stuck on homework assignments and | Quizz | Everything in the coding assignments tests | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The lectures are great, and they are reinforced with the quizzes and programming exercises. The quizzes need critical thinking to get all of them correctly. The programming assignments are there to cover the basic concepts. The way the course it taught is suited for online courses. The topics are well-divided in short chunks, making it easier to watch the lectures at different times of the day. There are some mistakes on the English subtitles, but it doesn't hinder the learning. Overall, a well-taught course. | and they are reinforced with the | Quizz | and programming exercises. The quizzes need | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The lectures are great, and they are reinforced with the quizzes and programming exercises. The quizzes need critical thinking to get all of them correctly. The programming assignments are there to cover the basic concepts. The way the course it taught is suited for online courses. The topics are well-divided in short chunks, making it easier to watch the lectures at different times of the day. There are some mistakes on the English subtitles, but it doesn't hinder the learning. Overall, a well-taught course. | the quizzes and programming exercises. The | Quizz | need critical thinking to get all | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Lots of things to learn. Quizzes and assignments are really great. | Lots of things to learn. | Quizz | and assignments are really great. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course offers informative lectures with good explanations, a set of quizzes with well-posed questions and even programming exercises that are evaluated online using Octave. Highly recommended! | with good explanations, a set of | Quizz | with well-posed questions and even programming | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course provides an excellent overview of the Machine learning . However, the programming assignments are quite basic once OCTAVE/MATLAB is well understood. The quizzes are interesting. Could include a capstone project with guidance. | once OCTAVE/MATLAB is well understood. The | Quizz | are interesting. Could include a capstone | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I really enjoyed the course. It was a very good introduction to a lot of topics in machine learning. The quizes and assignments were manageable but not too easy. However, there were no written course materials to print out. Thats the reason I only rate the course 4 stars. | of topics in machine learning. The | Quizz | and assignments were manageable but not | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great class, wonderfully taught! Complex topics have been explained very well for anyone to understand. Perfect if you want to get into developing Machine Learning applications on your own or if you just want to know more about them. The quizzes and programming assignments provided great opportunities to try out and better understand the topics covered in the lecture videos. Would definitely recommend! | to know more about them. The | Quizz | and programming assignments provided great opportunities | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course that holds one's hand through the field of ML and provides a hands on guide through the in-video questions, quizes & assignment tutorials. A great confidence builder. | on guide through the in-video questions, | Quizz | & assignment tutorials. A great confidence | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is pretty fast paced as well in depth course on Machine Learning. First five weeks are hard and mainly focused on building foundation while rest of the weeks teaches very useful technique to broaden the knowledge. Professor Ng has done awesome job as well as all the mentors. There is so much information on the group discussion, I hardly had to post anything as most of the answers to my questions are already there. wiki page is great and I did read it before taking any quiz. Some quizzes are super hard and I had to attempt few times to pass those. | did read it before taking any | Quizz | Some quizzes are super hard and | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is pretty fast paced as well in depth course on Machine Learning. First five weeks are hard and mainly focused on building foundation while rest of the weeks teaches very useful technique to broaden the knowledge. Professor Ng has done awesome job as well as all the mentors. There is so much information on the group discussion, I hardly had to post anything as most of the answers to my questions are already there. wiki page is great and I did read it before taking any quiz. Some quizzes are super hard and I had to attempt few times to pass those. | it before taking any quiz. Some | Quizz | are super hard and I had | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent Course and Well detailed lectures. For a beginner in Machine learning, i am able to understand the concepts clearly. Quiz and Assignments are really good and interesting. I am hoping to complete this certification by new year | able to understand the concepts clearly. | Quizz | and Assignments are really good and | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course is very well planned and made the experience very productive. A great learning opportunity through completing the course's quizzes and programming assignments. | learning opportunity through completing the course's | Quizz | and programming assignments. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was great! Andrew Ng did a wonderful job of explaining the material and keeping it engaging. The questions on the quizzes were relevant and provoked thought, not just recall. The programming assignments were interesting and have you implement actual ML algorithms. If Andrew offered another class, I'd take it! | it engaging. The questions on the | Quizz | were relevant and provoked thought, not | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | At the beginning, I thought it would be hard for a starter in ML; however, during the process, I found the course setting is easy to follow, especially the quiz, which help me master the key point of each class. And the programming exercises give me the intuition in applying each individual ML skills. I think the course settings are convenient and practical. So after finishing the course, I have excuse to recommend other ML beginners to join the course, which will help to build a skeleton of the knowledge about the concept, algorithm, and skills in ML. AND thank Andrew and Coursera for giving such an practical guidance. The suggestion at last what I want to append is providing some further courses or future direction after this course. However, maybe I can get them from the course forum. | is easy to follow, especially the | Quizz | which help me master the key | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I believe this is the most enjoyable nine weeks course that I ever had. Prof. Andrew has his way explaining a complex mathematical concept in an easy and non-intimidating way. I used to be afraid & dislike when it comes to statistics, machine learning related field. After following this course, I've gained a bit more courage to learn more complex and exciting field. The Quiz and programming works are challenging but enjoyable to do. It gives me more understanding about the topic while having fun applying the concept to real problems in my field of work. The course itself is really interesting and relevant if you are in the software engineering field. There are a lot of concepts that you can apply to your work. I highly recommended to follow the course and do the assignment. | more complex and exciting field. The | Quizz | and programming works are challenging but | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course provides a sizeable amount of pretty cohesive material, which can still be understood by non-CS students. It's very practical and it includes a very nice mix of quiz tests and great MATLAB/Octave programming assignments. After going through the assignments I started wondering about other problems which data sets I can plug with small modifications into the completed solutions. Andrew Ng keeps a great balance between explaining important details and skipping over parts that require straying too much from the main topic of the lecture. I still don't have very deep or broad knowledge in the Machine Learning domain, but it feels like the course doesn't miss anything of the fundamentals. Overall, I'd definitely recommend the course to CS students, high-school students with interests in the computer science area and even specialists in other areas with some knowledge in linear algebra with interest in the AI and ML domains. | includes a very nice mix of | Quizz | tests and great MATLAB/Octave programming assignments. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is how an online course should be! Quizzes, Programming assignments, Questions change when you retake quizzes! Would've been better if a reference textbook was suggested that one can grasp more information from. I couldn't rate the course below 5 though. Recommended! | how an online course should be! | Quizz | Programming assignments, Questions change when you | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is how an online course should be! Quizzes, Programming assignments, Questions change when you retake quizzes! Would've been better if a reference textbook was suggested that one can grasp more information from. I couldn't rate the course below 5 though. Recommended! | assignments, Questions change when you retake | Quizz | Would've been better if a reference | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course, the teacher did a very good job explaining a very difficult subject to a group of students with signifficantly different backgrounds. The quizzes were easy to solve once you took the time to see all the related videos. There was a little bit of handholding in the programming assignmentes, but that may be due to the aforementioned backgrounds the student came up with. I'm a spanish speaking mechanical engineer with just a programming hobby and I was able to finish with a 99% grade. If I could do it, anyone can | students with signifficantly different backgrounds. The | Quizz | were easy to solve once you | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a very good introduction to machine learning. It covers a very broad set of material, and the lectures are very clear. The quizzes and programming assignments are based directly on the course material, making it easy to complete the assignments if you understand the lecture material (in contrast with some other courses I have taken where the assignments require lots of extra material not taught in the course). It is very helpful to have some programming experience, and some knowledge of linear algebra, probability, and calculus. The course is very topical, so it does not go very deep into the material, but it does offer some practical advice for using machine learning algorithms in daily applications. | the lectures are very clear. The | Quizz | and programming assignments are based directly | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I like the way this course is designed. The lectures are very articulate. The thing that impressed me most about the Professor is; Students who doesn't have sound calculus and vector algebra understanding also can complete this course easily. Assignments are application oriented and some are challenging too. The Questions in Quiz assignments are in such a way that they test your understanding of that particular lecture and the summary of it. | are challenging too. The Questions in | Quizz | assignments are in such a way | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This was a pretty great course. With a focus on understanding and coding regression algorithms, I was engaged throughout the course. I'm a programmer with a physics B.Sc trying to make a shift away from product development and in to analytical problem solving. I found the lectures useful, the wiki useful when I didn't have time to watch the lectures, and the quizzes and assignments very practical. | to watch the lectures, and the | Quizz | and assignments very practical. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Concepts are explained clearly and without getting distracted by too much math. The quizzes and assignments are useful too. | distracted by too much math. The | Quizz | and assignments are useful too. | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Prof Andrew seems to be very passionate about Machine Learning. The way he teaches is simply awesome, beyond I can express in words. Quizzes and assignments are challenging. Course offers a good blend of theory and hands on. overall I am really enjoying attending this course and encourage everyone to make best use of it ! | beyond I can express in words. | Quizz | and assignments are challenging. Course offers | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course that lives up to its reputation as a great introduction to Machine Learning. You'll learn a lot of the relevant concepts via lectures and apply them through the quizzes and programming exercises. Basic programming knowledge would be helpful, but no deep statistical / computer science / linear algebra background is required to fully enjoy the course. I've taken formal Machine Learning / Artificial Intelligence classes as a CS undergrad and still found this course to be very useful in both refreshing and learning concepts. Thank you Dr. Ng! | lectures and apply them through the | Quizz | and programming exercises. Basic programming knowledge | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Lots of great condensed content. I miss a written summary of the videos though. Furthermore, the quality of sound is awful. Well designed quizzes and assignments. Good: In-video quizzes. | of sound is awful. Well designed | Quizz | and assignments. Good: In-video quizzes. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Lots of great condensed content. I miss a written summary of the videos though. Furthermore, the quality of sound is awful. Well designed quizzes and assignments. Good: In-video quizzes. | designed quizzes and assignments. Good: In-video | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very well designed course covering all the topics on the subject. The quizzes and matlab exercises ensure that you know and understand the details of each step. Full of practical suggestions during implementation and provides a guided approach to check/improve your model. | the topics on the subject. The | Quizz | and matlab exercises ensure that you | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome comprehensive course. Highly recommended for anyone trying to get started with Machine Learning. The quizzes and assignments really test your knowledge and understanding. This course needed a lot of time and effort, but it was all worth it. | get started with Machine Learning. The | Quizz | and assignments really test your knowledge | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | An extremely useful course designed very beautifully and presented in a very lucid manner. The assignments help in bringing out the technicalities of the course very efficiently. And the quiz questions help a lot in gaining intuition. However, it MUST have a sequel.. another course that takes students deeper into Machine Learning concepts and tools of the trade. | the course very efficiently. And the | Quizz | questions help a lot in gaining | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great professor and teaching style, the quiz helps to understand the fundamental concepts, and coding projects also provide hands-on experience and knowledge to gain deeper learning of this subject. | Great professor and teaching style, the | Quizz | helps to understand the fundamental concepts, | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The programming exercises aren't really all that challenging...just implement the formulas provided in the course or in the assignment itself, and you're mostly done. I hate the questions on the quizzes that are "Select all the following that are true..." The only questions I ever got wrong on quizzes were of that sort. | I hate the questions on the | Quizz | that are " Select all the | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The programming exercises aren't really all that challenging...just implement the formulas provided in the course or in the assignment itself, and you're mostly done. I hate the questions on the quizzes that are "Select all the following that are true..." The only questions I ever got wrong on quizzes were of that sort. | questions I ever got wrong on | Quizz | were of that sort. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is simply amazing, all the content from the video lessons, through the quizzes and the programming exercises are really well done, and also, there are really good mentors helping on the Discussion areas. If one with the will to really dive into these complex things to extract knowledge, I assure you, you will. The course is well made, but doesn't mean it's easy. I questioned myself through a lot of times in the beginning if I really was capable of learning all of this stuff. But I didn't give up, and well, this might be one of the most important decisions I've made in my life. This course aroused in me the passion to carry this knowledge, and keep improving it through my career. | from the video lessons, through the | Quizz | and the programming exercises are really | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Interesting course format (quizes in videos, programming homeworks graded via provided unit testing mechanism) and the fact that prof. Ng explains complicated stuff clearly and really well makes this course one of the best courses I've seen so far. It is a pleasure to learn things this way :) | Interesting course format | Quizz | in videos, programming homeworks graded via | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | +: Great deal of useful knowledge conveyed, explanations step by step, quizzes during videos, assignments challenging but doable, awesome assignment submission tool via Octave (makes fun seeing it work :) ) -: Videoquality | knowledge conveyed, explanations step by step, | Quizz | during videos, assignments challenging but doable, | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent place to begin learning on machine learning. The course's quizzes as well as coding exercise are challenging enough to keep oneself going. It covers a variety of topics with an amazing lucidness and depth. I really enjoyed the course. | learning on machine learning. The course's | Quizz | as well as coding exercise are | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really great course. The lectures were instructive and detailed without wasting time. The quizes tested well that you understood the material, and the assignments made you learn not just how to do machine learning but how to do it well and intelligently. I can't imagine a better way to learn Machine Learning than with this course. The only potential negative is that those of us like me who started this course being terrible at matlab/octave have to become competent in it to succeed. I highly recommend this course to anybody who wants to learn Machine Learning. There isn't a better resource out there. | and detailed without wasting time. The | Quizz | tested well that you understood the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was very nicely done. Dr Ng's videos and narrative were excellent. They were long enough to convey the material properly and short enough not to loose my attention. Assignments were very good as they left you just enough room to fail, learn and ultimately succeed. The quizzes were thought provoking. On the questions that stated "choose all that apply," I would suggest that some form of feedback be provided so that the test taker could know which ones were incorrectly selected/not selected. Perhaps partial credit would be good instead of 0/20 with one wrong selection. Feedback, perhaps an explanation, would be appropriate on all questions incorrectly answered. I would also suggest a pdf document that showed how to do the various matrix operations in octave with an example or two. This would include basic and advanced operations. I know linear algebra, I just didn't know the syntax in octave and this cost me 3-5 hours over the whole course. Now off to do some simple applications here at work like spam filter and anomaly detection to start. Thanks for an excellent course. | fail, learn and ultimately succeed. The | Quizz | were thought provoking. On the questions | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course! Content is easy to follow. Material that seems daunting on first inspection is dissected and presented in a very intuitive way. The quizzes and especially the Octave/Matlab practice problems are extremely helpful to check your understanding. The scripts are organized very clearly and provides insight on how all the modelling steps should be structured. Mentors for the course are exceptionally helpful. I cannot think of a single criticism. It is hard for me to imagine anyone who is interested in machine learning and is new to the subject walking away disappointed. Thank you Andrew Ng! | in a very intuitive way. The | Quizz | and especially the Octave/Matlab practice problems | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It was a really great course. the lectures given by prof. andraw ng were good and very clear. he explained everything in the best way possible. the quizes weren't very difficult but the programing excercizes were good and taught me a lot. I'm about to finish my Msc in physics after getting Bsc in electrical engineering nd physics and I think that this is one of the courses in which I've learned the most. thank you. | in the best way possible. the | Quizz | weren't very difficult but the programing | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course for a beginner in Machine Learning. Nice explanation of concepts with good examples followed by programming assignments. I like the way of using an intuition to understand a new learning theory. Questions in quizzes will help check/improve basic concept of the learning algorithms with real world problems. | a new learning theory. Questions in | Quizz | will help check/improve basic concept of | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I liked this course very much: The lectures follow up in a logical, natural way and the topics are very well explained. Personally, I had more problems with the quizzes (5 questions each) than with the programming assignments. The examples were interesting and the instructions so clear and detailed that I found it rather easy to do the programming. Another point that is worth to mention: The instructor, Andrew Ng, has not only an agreeable voice and speaks an easy-to-understand english (important for me as a non-english speaker) - He "transports" in addition his own passion for the subject and gives a lot of applicable advices. | I had more problems with the | Quizz | (5 questions each) than with the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | a. very good coverage of standard algorithmic approaches. b. good suggestive guidelines on specifics of algorithms like issues / details one need to be careful, need not to bother etc.. c. broad coverage of examples.. d. tricky questions...good to experience... Overall I liked this course content and the breadth of coverage. Based on the difficulty i experienced let me place some points of improvements that would help every student.... e. could have dealt some specific examples in full (from definition to implementation) as part of video lecture which would helped better understanding of the problems, algorithms, impact of specifics, implementation issues, analysis methods, inferences that could be derived, final expected solution. f. expecting feedback on exercises.... not only correct or incorrect but reasoning for the responses could be of great help in better understanding.... g. downloadable videos could contain in video quiz... h. Octave content could be increased..... i. audio of the lectures needs fine tuning, hissing sounds could be filtered. For some of the lectures subtitles does not match at all... Thank you very much for coursera.... Thank you very much Prof. Andrew Ng..... Looking forward for mor courses related to ML by you.... | downloadable videos could contain in video | Quizz | . . h. Octave content could | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course for getting started on machine learning. Answers and explanations of the quiz after it has been answered would have been a little more helpful. All in all an awesome course! :) | learning. Answers and explanations of the | Quizz | after it has been answered would | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent course. I'm only part way through, but I feel like I am learning a lot. It is covering the material that it promised in the outline. The pacing is right on. And I've found the quizzes and assignments have really helped me understand the material better. I only have a few minor quibbles. For one, the audio, especially in the early lectures, is rather muffled. This might make the lectures difficult to view in a noisy environment (eg. in a crowded subway car), but it is fine --though a bit of a nuisance-- in a quiet one. Another problem I've noticed is that some of the assignments are ordered in the course listing ahead of the lectures that cover the material (eg. regularization). At worst, this is a nuisance and is easy to work around -- just proceed with the lectures. Overall, I'm very glad to be taking the course and am very satisfied with it so far. | right on. And I've found the | Quizz | and assignments have really helped me | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew Ng is an excellent tutor and has a real talent for exposition. I find I'm getting the depth, rigor and keen interest that this subject commands, but not at the expense of clarity. I also find the quizzes to be conducive to my learning. In a modest number of questions, the most important points are covered completely. | of clarity. I also find the | Quizz | to be conducive to my learning. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent explanations in the video lecture, quizzes that test your understanding of the course material and programming assignments to see how you can actually apply what you've learned. Great course! | Excellent explanations in the video lecture, | Quizz | that test your understanding of the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very interesting content, very well explained. Minor issues: some quizzes or questions appear a little early sometimes regarding the order of the videos though, and subtitles are not always correct. | very well explained. Minor issues: some | Quizz | or questions appear a little early | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I really enjoyed learning this course! All the course material, including the slides, quizzes, programming problem descriptions, are so well prepared. I like those subtle animations used in those examples in the teaching slides. They just simply help! | the course material, including the slides, | Quizz | programming problem descriptions, are so well | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is absolute garbage. You get no feedback on your quizzes or assignments and the professor is one of the most boring I've ever seen. It's absurdly frustrating to repeatedly fail without any feedback as to why you're failing. The lectures are clearly from a math perspective, as the prof simply draws what he's talking about on the slides. His hand writing is poor, and he does a lackluster job of explaining what exactly he's doing. Finally, pure lecture with no notes is almost impossible to learn, as there's nothing to read and study. I'd rate this course a 1/10, take the course on iTunes from Caltech instead. | You get no feedback on your | Quizz | or assignments and the professor is | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course. Contents, videos, quizzes and programming exercises are very well contrived and conducted. I learnt a lot. | Excellent course. Contents, videos, | Quizz | and programming exercises are very well | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The best Machine learning course ever. Provides intuition to every concept in this course. Prof. Andrew Ng makes things easier for beginners. Best lectures with fine balance of quiz and assignments. Thanks to Stanford University and prof. Andrew Ng. | Best lectures with fine balance of | Quizz | and assignments. Thanks to Stanford University | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | One of the best course I did with Coursera. Everything is just perfect : video, quiz and programming examples. | Everything is just perfect : video, | Quizz | and programming examples. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The subject of the course concerns how to estimate parameters to make predictions about data and to classify data. The lectures are very clear and the examples are well chosen. The mentor, Tom Mosher, is also diligent, clear, and patient. In addition to the subject matter itself, it is interesting to learn that these are some of the key methods used in Silicon Valley. If you have a strong mathematical background, some of the early lectures are too slow. (On the flip side, for someone with less background, the course is self-contained.) However, by about lecture 3, I was glad I stuck with it. Instructors might consider adding some no-credit quizzes to help people "place out" of certain videos. If you can get past the assignment on backprojection for neural networks, you're home free! | Instructors might consider adding some no-credit | Quizz | to help people " place out" | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Before starting this course, I had no previous knowledge of machine learning and I had never programmed in Octave and I have little/no programming skills. This is a 11-week course and so I was not sure if I would make it to the end (or even get through the first week) but I was keen to learn something new. Positive Aspects: The course is extremely well structured, with short videos (and test questions to help us verify if we have understood the concepts), quizzes and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents the concepts (some very difficult) in a clear and almost intuitive manner without going too much into detail with mathematical proofs, making the course accessible to anyone. The mentors were fantastic and provided prompt responses, links to tutorials and test cases, which all helped me get through the course. Negative Aspects: Searching the Discussion Board for something specific was no easy task. I would have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions in the quizzes that I got wrong. What I loved about this course: Learning how powerful vectorization is, it allows us to write several lines of code in one single line and can be much faster than using for-loops. I was wowed several times. Prof. Andrew Ng is a great teacher. He is also extremely humble and very encouraging. During the course he often said, "It's ok if you don't understand this completely now. It also took me time to figure this out." This helped me a lot. He also said, "if you got through the assignments, you should consider yourself an expert!" and I laughed silly. By no means do I feel like an expert but now I have a basic understanding of the different types of learning algorithms, what they could be used for and more importantly this course has generated a spark in me to use this tool for things that I find interesting and for that I am very grateful. I don't think a teacher has ever thanked me for assisting a class. This is a first-time! So thank you Prof. Andrew Ng and everyone who worked to put this course together. Also, special thanks to Tom Mosher (mentor). My best MOOC so far! | if we have understood the concepts), | Quizz | and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Before starting this course, I had no previous knowledge of machine learning and I had never programmed in Octave and I have little/no programming skills. This is a 11-week course and so I was not sure if I would make it to the end (or even get through the first week) but I was keen to learn something new. Positive Aspects: The course is extremely well structured, with short videos (and test questions to help us verify if we have understood the concepts), quizzes and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents the concepts (some very difficult) in a clear and almost intuitive manner without going too much into detail with mathematical proofs, making the course accessible to anyone. The mentors were fantastic and provided prompt responses, links to tutorials and test cases, which all helped me get through the course. Negative Aspects: Searching the Discussion Board for something specific was no easy task. I would have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions in the quizzes that I got wrong. What I loved about this course: Learning how powerful vectorization is, it allows us to write several lines of code in one single line and can be much faster than using for-loops. I was wowed several times. Prof. Andrew Ng is a great teacher. He is also extremely humble and very encouraging. During the course he often said, "It's ok if you don't understand this completely now. It also took me time to figure this out." This helped me a lot. He also said, "if you got through the assignments, you should consider yourself an expert!" and I laughed silly. By no means do I feel like an expert but now I have a basic understanding of the different types of learning algorithms, what they could be used for and more importantly this course has generated a spark in me to use this tool for things that I find interesting and for that I am very grateful. I don't think a teacher has ever thanked me for assisting a class. This is a first-time! So thank you Prof. Andrew Ng and everyone who worked to put this course together. Also, special thanks to Tom Mosher (mentor). My best MOOC so far! | some of the questions in the | Quizz | that I got wrong. What I | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This was by far the best class I have had so far on Coursera. I feel that I now have a really good understanding of linear and logistic regression and neural networks as well as the other learning methods that we touched upon. I thought that the quizzes and assignments were very appropriate and helped me to further cement my understanding that I gained through watching the video. Professor Ang explains the material very clearly. I always walked away feeling that any questions I might have were answered completely in the videos or in the discussions. I would highly recommend this class to anyone who wants to have a good understanding of Machine Learning. | touched upon. I thought that the | Quizz | and assignments were very appropriate and | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I would say this is the best coarse on machine learning for the beginners. Sir Andrew Ng, he's the best teacher I have I ever seen. The way he shaped the lectures, quizes and assignments is really matchless. Its free of cost above all. If someone wanna be expert at machine learning but he has no background knowledge, taking this coarse is the best way to get started. | The way he shaped the lectures, | Quizz | and assignments is really matchless. Its | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is very instructive and detailed, easy to follow with enough quizes and programming assignments. The support in the discussions forum is excelent | detailed, easy to follow with enough | Quizz | and programming assignments. The support in | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | detailed explanation and the quizzes are good practice to strengthen the memory. | detailed explanation and the | Quizz | are good practice to strengthen the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A fantastic course. The content is informative and clearly outlined by the professor in the excellent set of video lectures. The quizzes and weekly projects are also an excellent learning tool. I greatly enjoyed this course and learned a lot that I will use in my career moving forward. Highly recommended. | excellent set of video lectures. The | Quizz | and weekly projects are also an | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This class is excellent on its own, but I'm taking it after having taken the 9-course sequence on Data Science from Johns Hopkins, which gave me a good foundation upon which to better understand this deeper dive into Machine Learning than what is presented in the 4-week course from JH on the same topic. Andrew Ng is presenting the material beautifully and understandably. The quizzes and the exercises complement the class lecture material quite well and both help cement the concepts presented. | the material beautifully and understandably. The | Quizz | and the exercises complement the class | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course gives great insights into the internals of machine learning. I recommend this course to any one who wants to secure a future in machine learning. Andrew Ng is a great instructor and the quizes and assignments are thought provoking. Learning a tool such as R can help you do the stuff, but knowing the internals can help you do the stuff better. | is a great instructor and the | Quizz | and assignments are thought provoking. Learning | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very well put together course. The lectures are logically structured and well presented with lots of meaningful and current examples. The Matlab programming assignments have been well thought out to incrementally step the student up through the different capabilities. 'Select All that Apply' quiz questions will likely drive you crazy as there is no feedback on no feedback on failed questions to understand where your mistake(s) was/were which means you spend hours more pouring over the videos/notes to try and better understand possible options for a subsequent attempt. | different capabilities. 'Select All that Apply' | Quizz | questions will likely drive you crazy | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| GukyRC_jEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Even the quizzes make you think. | Even the | Quizz | make you think. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| gZ6cbKKkEeW1Bw7HN8tFsw | Professor Meyer gave exemplary lectures while explaining a variety of different philosophical schools. I found the course interesting and enriching primarily due to the high quality of the lectures given by Professor Meyer. The questions during the lectures were helpful and the quizzes were short and effective in testing learning. May Professor Meyer live long and continue to teach! | the lectures were helpful and the | Quizz | were short and effective in testing | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| gZ6cbKKkEeW1Bw7HN8tFsw | I like the quiz between subjects in every video courses. It is really interesting. | I like the | Quizz | between subjects in every video courses. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| gZ6cbKKkEeW1Bw7HN8tFsw | Formatted like the the preceding course. This one goes in depth with the later philosophers. The lectures are very detailed and in-video quizzes are engaging. | lectures are very detailed and in-video | Quizz | are engaging. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Quizzes are useful exercises but need to do a lot of self studying. | | Quizz | are useful exercises but need to | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Unlike the rest of the modules in this specialisation, this one was well taught, a good blend of theory and practice and well paced. There were still a few issues with wording in quizzes (and some where there seemed to be two identical answers to one question, where one would be considered right and the other wrong - purely chance). In addition, the lack of consistency in how to submit assignments across the specialisation is frustrating, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a way to show how to use github or something like that, but it shouldn't be the case. | a few issues with wording in | Quizz | (and some where there seemed to | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | It's very cookbook driven - it's not a deep dive into the topics. This can be dangerous: a little knowledge and all that. However references for more are provided. If you can imitate the coding examples, you should be OK for the assignments. Fair warning: the quizzes are hard to replicate unless you set up your environment to mirror exactly the version of the packages used in the course. | for the assignments. Fair warning: the | Quizz | are hard to replicate unless you | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I learned a lot in this class. There are slight gaps from the depth of material covered in the lectures to the quizzes and assignment. If you're good at researching online, you'll be fine. | covered in the lectures to the | Quizz | and assignment. If you're good at | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very little depth. I don't recommend this if you don't already have background in statistics or R. I really didn't learn anything. I mostly just gamed the quizzes and projects. | anything. I mostly just gamed the | Quizz | and projects. | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The quizes do not match a 100% with the lecture videos. There are some weird questions. My algorithms' outputs deviate from answers some times, which is due to different software versions. Quizes are not very educating this time. Courses by Brian Caffo were much better. | The | Quizz | do not match a 100% with | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The quizes do not match a 100% with the lecture videos. There are some weird questions. My algorithms' outputs deviate from answers some times, which is due to different software versions. Quizes are not very educating this time. Courses by Brian Caffo were much better. | is due to different software versions. | Quizz | are not very educating this time. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Material is very high level. No ppt's are given, so all links presented in the video's cannot be viewed. Quizzes are based upon old packages, so incorrect answers are provided. No replies at discussion board from TA"s or instructors. | in the video's cannot be viewed. | Quizz | are based upon old packages, so | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Had big expectations for this one... really one of the ones to look forward to after working through the beginning of the specialization, but for some reason, it seemed any prof or even TA interaction was absent this time around like in none of the other specialization coursed to date. Bugs in the new interface and quizzes weren't really addressed. Couldn't even get an official response about the apparent removal of Distinction-level now (which I'd been working to get in all specialization courses and now seems no longer an option). Still interesting content. As a "free" course, it's still really valuable. As one of the people that paid for this and all others in this specialization, this is the one I felt didn't return as much value to justify the payment with no "official" course staff seeming to be involved this round. | Bugs in the new interface and | Quizz | weren't really addressed. Couldn't even get | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | more needs to be taught in class. what is taught is not sufficient for quizzes. | is taught is not sufficient for | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | lecture can be really unclear sometimes because lecturer breezes through the actual implementation of training/predicting: "use x, y, and z [underlines some stuff on screen]" and you're done Also lots of mistakes/typos in lecture and quizzes | lots of mistakes/typos in lecture and | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | Coursera web pages. The video lectures, | Quizz | and assignment are the same as | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | " data scientist? " 2. The | Quizz | I think these items are good | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | you to the answers to these | Quizz | posted online. I recommend that you | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A good introductory course for people who has an interest in knowing the principles of machine learning and want to make a step forward. Sufficient details covered throughout the course and additional resources were provided which are very useful. Quizzes were well designed with minor improvements in the accidental mismatch of the answers due to package version issues. Overall the study experience was enjoyable and would definitely recommend to someone who wants to start knowing data science. | were provided which are very useful. | Quizz | were well designed with minor improvements | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | Very informative with plenty of real-life (or credible fictional) examples to better understand the concepts that were introduced. The pace was agreeable and the subjects diverse. Special mention should go to the instructor (Prof. Tobias Kretschmer), who did a terrific job! I liked the question format as well, though it could have been more challenging by not giving away the answers after an end-of-module quiz even if you didn't pass. That being said, the course is well worth 5 stars! | away the answers after an end-of-module | Quizz | even if you didn't pass. That | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | Varied and well-explained that held my interest throughout. My only criticism is the English in some of the written quizzes, especially in the final exam, needs reviewing by native speaker as some of the answers are ambiguous when they do not properly explain the context of the situation. | English in some of the written | Quizz | especially in the final exam, needs | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | It was a great course, however some of the quiz answers are debatable | great course, however some of the | Quizz | answers are debatable | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | While the course was overall well developed, there are certain language challenges to overcome especially with understanding the wording of quizzes. I got a number of questions wrong simply because I could not understand the phrasing, and lack of explanations on quizzes makes for a lot of difficulty to evaluate progress. And I get the reason for not including answer explanations, at the same time I'm literally comparing answers to the module transcripts and could not possibly infer multiple choice answers based off how the topic was explained. I would suggest more definitive questions and reduce multiple choice questions or at least define the question in a more narrow, specified manner to minimize confusion. I'm taking this course for fun, I have an MBA and love strategy, so the topics are not new by any means, but if I can't understand what you're trying to say I would imagine non-business backgrounds would find the questions very difficult. | especially with understanding the wording of | Quizz | I got a number of questions | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | While the course was overall well developed, there are certain language challenges to overcome especially with understanding the wording of quizzes. I got a number of questions wrong simply because I could not understand the phrasing, and lack of explanations on quizzes makes for a lot of difficulty to evaluate progress. And I get the reason for not including answer explanations, at the same time I'm literally comparing answers to the module transcripts and could not possibly infer multiple choice answers based off how the topic was explained. I would suggest more definitive questions and reduce multiple choice questions or at least define the question in a more narrow, specified manner to minimize confusion. I'm taking this course for fun, I have an MBA and love strategy, so the topics are not new by any means, but if I can't understand what you're trying to say I would imagine non-business backgrounds would find the questions very difficult. | phrasing, and lack of explanations on | Quizz | makes for a lot of difficulty | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| hbvvfJLaEeWBSw79YYA_8Q | The course teaches ways to help victims in a disaster situation. Professor Everly's course materials were easy to understand and enjoyable. The quizzes always related directly to the course material, and I feel that I learned what the course set out to teach me. Thank you Prof. Everly! | easy to understand and enjoyable. The | Quizz | always related directly to the course | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | So far so good! I like the way the lectures and quizzes are presented. I am loving the instructor and his style. However, I have to go through the whole course before I could say how productive the course will be. Anyway, thanks a lot for the team! Thanks a lot Nick Sanots, Coursera, UC Davis and all fellow learners. I was a week late and could not complete the final assignment in time. However, the course is great! The course is medium paced, and best even for newcomers and intermediates alike. The chapters presented in the course are very productive and vivid. I simply love the course. I don't feel there is any room for improvement. Its just perfect! I love this course. Looking forward for next session of this course and next course. | like the way the lectures and | Quizz | are presented. I am loving the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am an Architect-Planner by profession. Was looking for this course for quite sometime. I finally found it on Coursera. I had a great time learning Fundamentals of GIS. I had never before worked in Gis though I had a very little theoretical idea. But, at the end of this course, I was able to analyse and make my own map, something I had never done before with GIS. The lectures were to the point, with most of the details covered. The assignments for practice were very helpful too. This course comes with a very helpful reading materiaI and a year long licensed version of ArcGIS too. I had a great time in taking up the quizes, and the peer reviewed final assignment. I highly recommend this course. Last but not the least, thank you Nick Santos for teaching so well! got back to class almost after 8 years and had a great time! I am sure that this will help me taking up further studies in my field. | great time in taking up the | Quizz | and the peer reviewed final assignment. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | This was a fantastic class. The instructor and those that constructed the lectures, exercises, quizzes and projects managed to put so much into very efficient, but complete packages that are really well organized. I was able to watch some on my phone, some on my tablet and many on my PC. Instruction was very clear and valuable. The exercises were great. The project at the end was challenging and interesting. I look forward to the next class in this specialization. | those that constructed the lectures, exercises, | Quizz | and projects managed to put so | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Thank you Nick! Yes I watched all your lectures and did all the quizzes and the assignments just for fun :) | your lectures and did all the | Quizz | and the assignments just for fun | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| hgw1Nkd5EeW8cBKtDAegYw | I don't like to tie quiz to the paid course | I don't like to tie | Quizz | to the paid course | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| hhFDsQ72EeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | Excellent introduction to game theory, high on concepts and practical applications, low on math. TA's are active in the forums. Quizzes usually have 4-5 very easy questions from lectures, 2-3 which require a little thought. | TA's are active in the forums. | Quizz | usually have 4-5 very easy questions | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Nice introduction. I wasn't following the lectures that close, because the material was not that new to me, but the assignments and quizzes are amazing | to me, but the assignments and | Quizz | are amazing | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It's an incredible course with detail explanations and interactive quizzes. | course with detail explanations and interactive | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Good class, easy if you've already studied the subject before. But, it does provide you a simple way to get started on some projects. Could use some proofreading on some of it's quizzes (possibly the British English influencing the syntax of the written language). | some proofreading on some of it's | Quizz | (possibly the British English influencing the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Suitable neither for absolute beginners nor as a stand-alone course. For example, there are things that the quiz questions refer to that haven't been covered in the course, but you can't even look them up because they haven't given you the necessary terminology to find relevant information about them on google. This means that you'll be left looking through a minefield of resources that include the code in the quiz question but are actually about something else. I have now started using Lynda instead, and am seeing all the bad habits I've picked up and the holes left in my knowledge. Normally I prefer Lynda to Coursera for the assignments and the quizzes, but not in this case... | example, there are things that the | Quizz | questions refer to that haven't been | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Suitable neither for absolute beginners nor as a stand-alone course. For example, there are things that the quiz questions refer to that haven't been covered in the course, but you can't even look them up because they haven't given you the necessary terminology to find relevant information about them on google. This means that you'll be left looking through a minefield of resources that include the code in the quiz question but are actually about something else. I have now started using Lynda instead, and am seeing all the bad habits I've picked up and the holes left in my knowledge. Normally I prefer Lynda to Coursera for the assignments and the quizzes, but not in this case... | that include the code in the | Quizz | question but are actually about something | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Suitable neither for absolute beginners nor as a stand-alone course. For example, there are things that the quiz questions refer to that haven't been covered in the course, but you can't even look them up because they haven't given you the necessary terminology to find relevant information about them on google. This means that you'll be left looking through a minefield of resources that include the code in the quiz question but are actually about something else. I have now started using Lynda instead, and am seeing all the bad habits I've picked up and the holes left in my knowledge. Normally I prefer Lynda to Coursera for the assignments and the quizzes, but not in this case... | Coursera for the assignments and the | Quizz | but not in this case. . | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Many MCQ in the quiz were out of the course we studied. | Many MCQ in the | Quizz | were out of the course we | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I think it the course goes extremely fast, I do not agree with its tittle of basic nor the instructors provide sufficient information to achieve the final quiz goal, I am not sure about completing the entire course. Thanks anyway. | sufficient information to achieve the final | Quizz | goal, I am not sure about | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Great way the info is presented. When we get the summary quizzes we sometimes get questions on subject matter that we did not cover and need to research the answers. I do like the assignment so far as it puts into practice what we have learned during the module | presented. When we get the summary | Quizz | we sometimes get questions on subject | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Very good start to front-end programming. The instructors engaged the audience well and explained the concepts clearly and in detail. There was a exponental jump between week 3 lectures and week 3 quiz. I had to do much additional research on the web to pass that. | week 3 lectures and week 3 | Quizz | I had to do much additional | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Bright instructors delivering succinct and interesting content, with quick-paced videos and quizzes make a great learning experience. I am really impressed! Thank you, University of London people! | interesting content, with quick-paced videos and | Quizz | make a great learning experience. I | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The instructors are very knowledgeable, but the course seems to have the , "we just threw this together at the last minute feel". Many of the Quizzes are very poorly worded. The final project is a bit of a disaster as some of the reviewers are unable to unzip a generic '.gz' file and you can end up getting 0 points from those particular incompetent types. | minute feel" . Many of the | Quizz | are very poorly worded. The final | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Everything is so clear and well structured, and activities and quizzes are well designed. I really enjoy watching the videos. Thanks for a great course! | and well structured, and activities and | Quizz | are well designed. I really enjoy | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Html and CSS were excellent! I'm sure this is a great course for people with some coding background, but as a complete beginner to Javascript and coding, I found it nearly impossible to comprehend the 3rd and 4th weeks because we jumped in to Jquery without first getting to know Javascript. Yes - the quizzes were too easy - I passed all of them even when I wasn't understanding most of the material. I went over to CodeAcademy and Microsoft Virtual Academy to get a better foundation in JS, then came back and was able to understand a bit better. As for me, I am going to spend more time learning and practicing JS/JQ before moving on to the next course in this specialization. | to know Javascript. Yes - the | Quizz | were too easy - I passed | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Very good introduction to these different languages. However Javascript is a very tough one to begin with variables, if statements and loops, imho better look for a single course on Javascript. Very useful material and quizzes. | on Javascript. Very useful material and | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | other than the quiz.. everything else was good.. quiz was not challenging enough.. | other than the | Quizz | . everything else was good. . | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | other than the quiz.. everything else was good.. quiz was not challenging enough.. | . everything else was good. . | Quizz | was not challenging enough. . | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | All three parts (html css and javascript) covered by this course are well taught. It is targets beginners very well. I especially like the way how javascript is introduced -- in contrast to normal programming language courses which start with grammar, here it starts with examples. This way one can very fast already start programming something, which is much more interesting. Also the quizzes, exercises and projects are well thought through and help a lot with understanding and learning. Finally, about the examples used in this course, many of them are simple and nice, but some of them are maybe too simple to convey the message, such that it doesn't help much with understanding... | is much more interesting. Also the | Quizz | exercises and projects are well thought | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Esta bien para comenzar, pero muchos de los contenidos que se necesitan saber para completar tareas y quizes no aparecen en los videos y al investigar cada tema el tiempo real que en el que se termina el curso se extiende, quiza sea de lento aprendizaje, pero lo ideal seria incluir los contenidos necesarios para llevar a cabo las tareas. Pero aun asi le doy cuatro estrellas porque aprendi bastante aunque tuve que ajustar las fechas limites 2 veces seguidas. | necesitan saber para completar tareas y | Quizz | no aparecen en los videos y | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This was a fantastic course! I really enjoyed the quizes after every video. It helped me stay focused during videos and provided a good mental break at times. | fantastic course! I really enjoyed the | Quizz | after every video. It helped me | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | many question in the quiz wasn't covered in the video lectures. I enrolled in this course looking for refreshing my info about the 3 subjects and hopefully gaining new in-depth info about them but the information presented during the course was very trivial and only covered few parts about the main 3 subjects | many question in the | Quizz | wasn't covered in the video lectures. | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course needs an overhaul. There are mistakes in some code examples and quiz questions are sometimes ambiguous. While I appreciate the work that has gone into making this MOOC, there are better courses available on Coursera to learn this material. | mistakes in some code examples and | Quizz | questions are sometimes ambiguous. While I | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Great class. Challenging and exciting. Great explanations, knowledgeable professors, high quality videos and challenging quizzes that force you to really understand the covered material. | professors, high quality videos and challenging | Quizz | that force you to really understand | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | Actually, this course is a great one to take. Professors have explained these concepts and main ideas very clearly, therefore students can understand it very easily, even if they do not have previous knowledge about game theory. I want to say “thank you” to all the three professors for making such a concise and intelligible course. However, I would like to give some suggestions about this course. There is an obvious gap between the quizzes and graded assignments. Sometimes the quiz is very easy and it just requires you to have a basic understanding of the concept, while the assignment is even more difficult than the examples included in the videos. I think this course would be better if the staff can improve the difficulty gap between quizzes and assignments. And for people who want to enroll this course, an exercise book with detailed solution would be helpful for you to learn it better. As for the content of this course, there are lots of formulas from Week 5 to the end, which are a little difficult to understand. I fully understand this because math is always abstract, and formulation is an essential part of it. I think this problem can be solved by providing more ungraded quizzes for students to practice. They can have a better comprehension of the content through practicing. Anyway, this course is worth taking. Through learning it you will gain not only the knowledge about game theory, but also a new way to understand relationships around you. Happy learning! | is an obvious gap between the | Quizz | and graded assignments. Sometimes the quiz | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | Actually, this course is a great one to take. Professors have explained these concepts and main ideas very clearly, therefore students can understand it very easily, even if they do not have previous knowledge about game theory. I want to say “thank you” to all the three professors for making such a concise and intelligible course. However, I would like to give some suggestions about this course. There is an obvious gap between the quizzes and graded assignments. Sometimes the quiz is very easy and it just requires you to have a basic understanding of the concept, while the assignment is even more difficult than the examples included in the videos. I think this course would be better if the staff can improve the difficulty gap between quizzes and assignments. And for people who want to enroll this course, an exercise book with detailed solution would be helpful for you to learn it better. As for the content of this course, there are lots of formulas from Week 5 to the end, which are a little difficult to understand. I fully understand this because math is always abstract, and formulation is an essential part of it. I think this problem can be solved by providing more ungraded quizzes for students to practice. They can have a better comprehension of the content through practicing. Anyway, this course is worth taking. Through learning it you will gain not only the knowledge about game theory, but also a new way to understand relationships around you. Happy learning! | quizzes and graded assignments. Sometimes the | Quizz | is very easy and it just | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | Actually, this course is a great one to take. Professors have explained these concepts and main ideas very clearly, therefore students can understand it very easily, even if they do not have previous knowledge about game theory. I want to say “thank you” to all the three professors for making such a concise and intelligible course. However, I would like to give some suggestions about this course. There is an obvious gap between the quizzes and graded assignments. Sometimes the quiz is very easy and it just requires you to have a basic understanding of the concept, while the assignment is even more difficult than the examples included in the videos. I think this course would be better if the staff can improve the difficulty gap between quizzes and assignments. And for people who want to enroll this course, an exercise book with detailed solution would be helpful for you to learn it better. As for the content of this course, there are lots of formulas from Week 5 to the end, which are a little difficult to understand. I fully understand this because math is always abstract, and formulation is an essential part of it. I think this problem can be solved by providing more ungraded quizzes for students to practice. They can have a better comprehension of the content through practicing. Anyway, this course is worth taking. Through learning it you will gain not only the knowledge about game theory, but also a new way to understand relationships around you. Happy learning! | can improve the difficulty gap between | Quizz | and assignments. And for people who | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | Actually, this course is a great one to take. Professors have explained these concepts and main ideas very clearly, therefore students can understand it very easily, even if they do not have previous knowledge about game theory. I want to say “thank you” to all the three professors for making such a concise and intelligible course. However, I would like to give some suggestions about this course. There is an obvious gap between the quizzes and graded assignments. Sometimes the quiz is very easy and it just requires you to have a basic understanding of the concept, while the assignment is even more difficult than the examples included in the videos. I think this course would be better if the staff can improve the difficulty gap between quizzes and assignments. And for people who want to enroll this course, an exercise book with detailed solution would be helpful for you to learn it better. As for the content of this course, there are lots of formulas from Week 5 to the end, which are a little difficult to understand. I fully understand this because math is always abstract, and formulation is an essential part of it. I think this problem can be solved by providing more ungraded quizzes for students to practice. They can have a better comprehension of the content through practicing. Anyway, this course is worth taking. Through learning it you will gain not only the knowledge about game theory, but also a new way to understand relationships around you. Happy learning! | be solved by providing more ungraded | Quizz | for students to practice. They can | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | I liked this course, but sometimes examples showed in the lectures were much easier than those you needed to solve in a quiz. | you needed to solve in a | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Hm73dlDLEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Pésima traducción! no coincide el lenguaje de los subtítulos y es muy difícil entender si explica con canciones en inglés! el curso debe ser impartido por un profesor de habla hispana así como las canciones utilizadas como ejemplo. Mucha confusion por la mala traducción al español en los quiz! | mala traducción al español en los | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| Hm73dlDLEeWeiwqPB940Pw | This course is just AMAZING! I am a composer and I found myself astonished of how much I was lacking, yet, the quizzes translations, man, are so bad, must of the time those where "Straight trough" translations that are complete meaningless on Spanish, it's like they simply used Google translate. You might think "it is not THAT bad", well there are sections that ask you to determine stability based on the length of the line... good luck with that (Spanish usually takes more words to write the same idea) | much I was lacking, yet, the | Quizz | translations, man, are so bad, must | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| hmUA37FKEeS5liIACye34Q | I really enjoyed this course. It was full of resources, analysis, and history that together fueled my interest in international public health. I was especially grateful for Dr Perry's personal insights - taken from his longstanding work in public health around the world. I had to prep for the quizzes - they weren't easy and I had to put in time on my papers but my return on investment has been great. I'm very glad I took the course and I just signed up for my next public health Johns Hopkins U course through Coursera. | I had to prep for the | Quizz | - they weren't easy and I | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| hmUA37FKEeS5liIACye34Q | I thinks it only happens to me. I found things are a little unorganized for me who doesn't speak English as mother tongue. But the videos and quizzes help me a lot to understand. | mother tongue. But the videos and | Quizz | help me a lot to understand. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Lecture videos are good. Assessment of knowledge (quizzes) are weak. | videos are good. Assessment of knowledge | Quizz | are weak. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The teacher is very passionate; therefore I enjoyed the topics that were taught very differently than when I took AP Calculus AB in high school. The answer input sections for the tests and quizzes were rather frustrating because I had to type very specific keys on the keyboard just to input a constant or a polynomial. And one typo caused me to fail some assignments. Also the decimal approximations were very specific to the point where if I didn't type an extra number in the tenths, hundredths, or thousandths place then I would get the answer wrong even if I did the problem correctly. | input sections for the tests and | Quizz | were rather frustrating because I had | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | problem with the course is the | Quizz | CPU. It does not recognize correct | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | is something really wrong with the | Quizz | review code. That can be a | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | on the same questions in earlier | Quizz | So take the coruse - enjoy | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | problem with this course is the | Quizz | On several occasions I have submitted | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | They could not understand why the | Quizz | were returned that way. On certain | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | On certain occasions, questions on one | Quizz | were graded correct - and then | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | same type of question on another | Quizz | was graded incorrect. In some cases, | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | form is required. On a recent | Quizz | it turned out the answers were | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Course seems fundamentally sound. Prof is enthusiatic and obvioulsy highly qualified. Really appreciate the proofs he provides such as the geometric development of the trig derivatives, the chain rule, and the fundamental theorem. I'd give it 5 stars for content and clarity. I am disappointed that some of the lectures were out of sequence with the quizzes and I really found that entering the answers to quizz questions was difficult. In some cases the tool misled me i.e. when the question indicated E should be entered for Euler's constant but the grading tool required e. Also in one instance the grading tool didn't recognize the right answer and I believe the correct answer wasn't even available as one of the choices. | were out of sequence with the | Quizz | and I really found that entering | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Course seems fundamentally sound. Prof is enthusiatic and obvioulsy highly qualified. Really appreciate the proofs he provides such as the geometric development of the trig derivatives, the chain rule, and the fundamental theorem. I'd give it 5 stars for content and clarity. I am disappointed that some of the lectures were out of sequence with the quizzes and I really found that entering the answers to quizz questions was difficult. In some cases the tool misled me i.e. when the question indicated E should be entered for Euler's constant but the grading tool required e. Also in one instance the grading tool didn't recognize the right answer and I believe the correct answer wasn't even available as one of the choices. | found that entering the answers to | Quizz | questions was difficult. In some cases | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | teacher doesn't teach what is on the quizzes. -_- | doesn't teach what is on the | Quizz | -_- | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I think this course is great, I like everything about it, but I can't say the same about the quiz format, it is rigid and non-standard I gave up on the course many times because of this How do write Sqrt(5) for instance ? 5x must be 5*x or it is not acceptable. I am sorry, this is pretty bad | can't say the same about the | Quizz | format, it is rigid and non-standard | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | An awesome course! The teacher is good, and the calendar is well organized. However, as to me, there are some points that have not been explained clearly and the some quizzes are just terrible. Hope to see the improvements. | been explained clearly and the some | Quizz | are just terrible. Hope to see | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very well presented course. Jim Fowler is a fantastic teacher; he makes it enjoyable and relevant. It would be nice if Coursera could review the quiz addenda and update the quizzes. It is very demoralizing to take and retake a quiz due to an incorrect answer, only to find out that the automatic grader is wrong! I'd gladly take more courses with this presenter. | nice if Coursera could review the | Quizz | addenda and update the quizzes. It | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very well presented course. Jim Fowler is a fantastic teacher; he makes it enjoyable and relevant. It would be nice if Coursera could review the quiz addenda and update the quizzes. It is very demoralizing to take and retake a quiz due to an incorrect answer, only to find out that the automatic grader is wrong! I'd gladly take more courses with this presenter. | the quiz addenda and update the | Quizz | It is very demoralizing to take | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very well presented course. Jim Fowler is a fantastic teacher; he makes it enjoyable and relevant. It would be nice if Coursera could review the quiz addenda and update the quizzes. It is very demoralizing to take and retake a quiz due to an incorrect answer, only to find out that the automatic grader is wrong! I'd gladly take more courses with this presenter. | demoralizing to take and retake a | Quizz | due to an incorrect answer, only | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Solid course. Good instructor. The quizzes, however, often were inconsistent on how to input Euler's number so that it could be read by the computer. 1 quiz had an item that did not contain a question (Thank god it was multiple choice) , and the last exam asked you to select between two answers which identical except for the fact that one added zero from x and one subtracted zero from x. | Solid course. Good instructor. The | Quizz | however, often were inconsistent on how | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Solid course. Good instructor. The quizzes, however, often were inconsistent on how to input Euler's number so that it could be read by the computer. 1 quiz had an item that did not contain a question (Thank god it was multiple choice) , and the last exam asked you to select between two answers which identical except for the fact that one added zero from x and one subtracted zero from x. | be read by the computer. 1 | Quizz | had an item that did not | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | excellent course just let down by the frustrations of the inconsistencies of the marking of quizzes | the inconsistencies of the marking of | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Professor Fowler is great! He spends some time explaining the theory behind the topic, and makes everything pretty easy to visualize. I would love if there were a few more resources with example problems. The quizzes can be pretty challenging, if you haven't done any practice problems first. My favorite thing about this MOOC and Prof. Fowler is his excitement--which makes it feel, less like a lecture and more, like a fun conversation about calculus. | more resources with example problems. The | Quizz | can be pretty challenging, if you | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The content of this course is fantastic, if you read the textbook with it. It would be 5 stars, but there are a number of glitches in the quizzes and exams. Information about the textbook and quiz issues can be found in the first post on the discussion board. | a number of glitches in the | Quizz | and exams. Information about the textbook | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The content of this course is fantastic, if you read the textbook with it. It would be 5 stars, but there are a number of glitches in the quizzes and exams. Information about the textbook and quiz issues can be found in the first post on the discussion board. | exams. Information about the textbook and | Quizz | issues can be found in the | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent course and very motivating teacher. I think more real life examples could be used, especialy in quizzes. Very compelling for begginers! | examples could be used, especialy in | Quizz | Very compelling for begginers! | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Dr Fowler is very enthusiastic, which is one of the most notable and best things about this course. Although some reviews complain that he over-explains things, I personally found this really helpful - you are taught not just how to do the calculations, but how they work fundamentally, which for me is a pretty important thing if I am to fully understand. The course is slightly above my level in some aspects, but I managed to pass with 100%, which I am very proud of! I'd say some basic knowledge of Calculus helps, but even if you are only just learning, I'd say this is set out in such a way that one could pick it up alright from this course. Only complaint is the sometimes glitchy quizzes, although the forums often say if there are any and how to get around them. Overall, I do recommend this course! | Only complaint is the sometimes glitchy | Quizz | although the forums often say if | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Great course! Everything is explained extremely clearly. The only 'missing star' here is that some of the final quizzes reject the correct answer due to a technical issue. | is that some of the final | Quizz | reject the correct answer due to | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have officially hit the halfway point of the course and am three weeks ahead of schedule. The last time I took a Calculus class was 17 years ago, during my Senior year of high school. It was the first time I ever got a B in Math, and ruined my love for the subject. Since then, I had all but abandoned my love for the subject because I thought I had a learning deficiency for Calculus. It turns out that my teacher was just sub-par, or leagues below Dr. Fowler. As someone who is strong with numbers, he is the perfect professor to bring out the conceptual learning student in me. The most impressive thing though is how he has delivered rules to me in an almost photographic format. After each lesson, which are all theoretical then provide graphical and numericalnexamples,I do one practice problem with what I absorbed and check the answer. It is normally incorrect, but after reading the correct answer and explanation I fly through the next five. Although I am sure that not having closed book graded quizes and more practice problems may subtract from his classroom course a bit, this is an amazing confidence booster and has propelled me nback on track! | that not having closed book graded | Quizz | and more practice problems may subtract | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I wanted the preview function on the quiz to be like "scratch paper". | wanted the preview function on the | Quizz | to be like " scratch paper" | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have never seen anybody who taught like Prof. Jim Fowler !!!!.Only he tells the "WHY" hidden behind every question. -Videos were FUN. -Practice Quizzes were making our understanding more clear about each topic. -End quizzes were extremely helpful. -Taking notes from his videos is "WORTH". THANK YOU | every question. -Videos were FUN. -Practice | Quizz | were making our understanding more clear | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have never seen anybody who taught like Prof. Jim Fowler !!!!.Only he tells the "WHY" hidden behind every question. -Videos were FUN. -Practice Quizzes were making our understanding more clear about each topic. -End quizzes were extremely helpful. -Taking notes from his videos is "WORTH". THANK YOU | more clear about each topic. -End | Quizz | were extremely helpful. -Taking notes from | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent lecture videos and quizzes. Got a lot of help. | Excellent lecture videos and | Quizz | Got a lot of help. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I thought this was a well presented course with good coverage of the material. Only thing holding me back from giving it a five start rating is a few errors in the quizzes need to be fixed. | is a few errors in the | Quizz | need to be fixed. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very interesting course. I hadn't done any calculus for 40 years and it was wonderful to get back to it. I really enjoyed Jim's enthusiasm and the explanation of the fundamentals of calculus. . It would have been helpful to have the errors in the marking of quizzes corrected as they had been pointed out and acknowledged months ago. | the errors in the marking of | Quizz | corrected as they had been pointed | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The teacher is great The course is fun The way I have to enter answers in quizes is boring, but doable. | I have to enter answers in | Quizz | is boring, but doable. | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The classes are very didactic, however the professor sometimes meanders too much and doesn't get to the point. Also, some of the the quizzes have little or nothing to do with the video lessons. | point. Also, some of the the | Quizz | have little or nothing to do | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This course is not good in giving lessons with examples that will help a with studying for the quizzes. | help a with studying for the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Five stars, even though there were some errors in the quizes and inconsistencies of parsing E/e. But that's a minor issue when you have such an amazing lectures in the course. I've praised Jim for Calculus Two and I praise him again for this course. Superb instructor, the best I've seen thus far after working on tens of Math/CS MOOCs. I wish there were more courses from him, a really gifted teacher and amazing mathematician. | there were some errors in the | Quizz | and inconsistencies of parsing E/e. But | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This is actually good. the tutor is very fun and it makes me feel clearly about calculus. But, it will be more excellent if this course give a short quiz for each topic in end of the section. And for the final test, can this course give more test? I mean like more question in number or kind of test. | if this course give a short | Quizz | for each topic in end of | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Some of the contents just seem overly complex, especially the videos. If they would do a few problems similar to those in the quizzes, it would be much more better. | problems similar to those in the | Quizz | it would be much more better. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Awesome, in depth, just the quizzes seem a bit difficult to comprehend. | Awesome, in depth, just the | Quizz | seem a bit difficult to comprehend. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | always correspond closely enough with the | Quizz | and with the text. There are | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | times when one can take a | Quizz | and think, " How exactly does | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Did not go over determining a point on a graph of g from two functions but had it on the first quiz | but had it on the first | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I thought the professor was really great about explaining things in a clear, concise manner. I think some of the quiz problems were more complicated than they needed to be, especially considering that typing in a long string you're very likely to have a typo which results in missing a question you knew how to do. | manner. I think some of the | Quizz | problems were more complicated than they | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Nothing is making sense. None of the videos are related to the quiz. None of the examples are remotely related to the quiz to even give you a suggestion on how to solve them. | the videos are related to the | Quizz | None of the examples are remotely | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Nothing is making sense. None of the videos are related to the quiz. None of the examples are remotely related to the quiz to even give you a suggestion on how to solve them. | examples are remotely related to the | Quizz | to even give you a suggestion | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Some parts of the course were either not well explained or too rudimentary in relation to the quizzes. | too rudimentary in relation to the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent lectures, and funny, too! I enjoyed this course. There is some problem with some quiz answers that should be fixed. | There is some problem with some | Quizz | answers that should be fixed. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | get new material - new videos these videos for all your classes are years old - the quizes dont relate to the material taught and it seems you guys got this set up years ago and just forgot about it | classes are years old - the | Quizz | dont relate to the material taught | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This course has been a great source to revise and learn calculus. The textbook and the course quizzes have added great value to the course. Thanks to Dr. Fowler and his team for providing a very good course. It would be great if they could come back with a course for multi-variable calculus. | calculus. The textbook and the course | Quizz | have added great value to the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I enjoyed it. Jim Fowler does well, his enthusiasm and the time and effort he (and whatever filming and editing team he has) have put into the presentation is impressive. Difficult for me to rate it as a maths course - how would I know whether it covers what it needs and have anything meaningful to stay about the standard of it. I felt I understood what was going on, I passed the quizzes. Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug in the quizes - nothing you can't work around (eg totally blank question but four answers to choose from.) The mathematical symbol rendering doesn't work on the mobile app at all. | was going on, I passed the | Quizz | Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I enjoyed it. Jim Fowler does well, his enthusiasm and the time and effort he (and whatever filming and editing team he has) have put into the presentation is impressive. Difficult for me to rate it as a maths course - how would I know whether it covers what it needs and have anything meaningful to stay about the standard of it. I felt I understood what was going on, I passed the quizzes. Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug in the quizes - nothing you can't work around (eg totally blank question but four answers to choose from.) The mathematical symbol rendering doesn't work on the mobile app at all. | all good? Occasional bug in the | Quizz | - nothing you can't work around | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Fun refresher for someone that took Calculus 30 years ago. Great lectures and examples. Quiz answers don't always use the proper "upper case E" for e correctly, so be prepared to be marked down for correct answers sometimes (but you can "correct" your answers on retake). It would be great to get this fixed! | years ago. Great lectures and examples. | Quizz | answers don't always use the proper | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| HUJ11BnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | I enjoyed this course and found the information on constructive work related feedback and suggestions useful. I did not pay, therefore I was not allowed to take the quizzes to complete the course. I am very grateful for the opportunity I had to view and learn from the provided lessons. Thank you :) | was not allowed to take the | Quizz | to complete the course. I am | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HUJ11BnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Useful but a little bit fluffy (but i guess so is the topic). The material is good, the presentation (the speaker) is awesome: clear spoken and at a good pace. i found the questions in the quiz to be a bit vague. | i found the questions in the | Quizz | to be a bit vague. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | Good course, but the SWIRL exercises (and a few quiz questions) needed to be updated for the latest version of ggplot2. | the SWIRL exercises (and a few | Quizz | questions) needed to be updated for | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | The final project did not require use of the material in the course beyond the first week and a half. I did not take any quizzes or otherwise have my knowledge tested on the material in the second half of the course. | half. I did not take any | Quizz | or otherwise have my knowledge tested | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | My congratulations to all those people who worked to create this course although I have to pick up something I've found a bit annoying: 1- there were two video where the audio were nearly unintelligible 2- I would link the link proposed by the video to be possible to be clicked 3- Some exposition imperfection (even if they make these video more "real and human") 4- Since quiz are not so difficult to be evaluated automatically I found it a bit annoying to notice them locked by not-purchsing, even if I understand there have to be something which would make the customer to purchase. I've found the swirl experience great although a bit annoying sometimes but I've no clue on how to possibly improve it so. Keep up with this great work! Bye | real and human" ) 4- Since | Quizz | are not so difficult to be | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | A quiz or project question on k-means clustering or PCA would be nice. Overall the course provided solid coverage of the three main plotting systems in R. | A | Quizz | or project question on k-means clustering | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | Excellent class with easy-to-understand videos. The quizzes and homework really help me master the topics. | Excellent class with easy-to-understand videos. The | Quizz | and homework really help me master | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | I have taken the course earlier, so am somewhat familiar with the layout and the materials. Overall it is a very good course and covers a wide range of subject matters. Roger has done a very good job explaining the concepts. I certainly would recommend this course to all who's interested in the subject. I realize that there's limitation on the time people suppose to spend each week, however, I would like to suggest adding homework, in addition to quizzes. Several video clips have some audio issues, not sure if that's fixable. | suggest adding homework, in addition to | Quizz | Several video clips have some audio | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | It's Ok, but it feels like it was put together in a rush. There are no assignments, no forums, and there are many typos in the quizzes. I enjoyed the first course of this specialization much more than this one. | there are many typos in the | Quizz | I enjoyed the first course of | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | This course is a bit repetitive and provides only a few real life examples. As well as this, the evaluation of this course is based on the result of a single quiz of 15 questions, which is not enough to prove any knowledge at all. I think it should focus on a more practice oriented course in order to master the price optimization process and see how it fluctuates in real life examples. However, this course gives great insights and useful concepts that are of huge importance to the application of the revenue management activities. | on the result of a single | Quizz | of 15 questions, which is not | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | A very interesting course outlining the important of good revenue management and flexible pricing to maximize hotel revenue and profits. I would welcome a few more practical exercises DURING the course and not only on the final quiz. Also, it would be good to have the tables and presentations on .pdf or . jpg format as details are not readable behind the presenter. Looking forward to the next course in this specialization, namely Demand Management. | and not only on the final | Quizz | Also, it would be good to | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Tests and quizzes don't really ask the right things and the answers given are hard to understand. Bad quizzes but lectures informative. | Tests and | Quizz | don't really ask the right things | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Tests and quizzes don't really ask the right things and the answers given are hard to understand. Bad quizzes but lectures informative. | given are hard to understand. Bad | Quizz | but lectures informative. | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I enjoyed the combination of hands on creative exercises and quizzes. I will forever remember " You learn to be a designer by designing" | of hands on creative exercises and | Quizz | I will forever remember " You | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I think this course was great- it really got you exploring and experimenting. I do think that there should be more REQUIRED briefs. Two of the modules out of the four were quiz's which was a little disappointing. I also think there needs to be some online help. In the last brief there was a large discussion as a lot of students were confused about the task and nobody stepped up to help clear the air- this is the reason I gave this course 4 not 5 stars. | modules out of the four were | Quizz | which was a little disappointing. I | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | very good introduction but as i go through the videos and then do the quiz i feel like the material doesn't highlight exactly what is needed for the quiz. Maybe i'm not taking the video lecture as seriously as i should. Something else to reinforce the material cause it seems a bit condensed. thanks for a wonderful course! | the videos and then do the | Quizz | i feel like the material doesn't | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | very good introduction but as i go through the videos and then do the quiz i feel like the material doesn't highlight exactly what is needed for the quiz. Maybe i'm not taking the video lecture as seriously as i should. Something else to reinforce the material cause it seems a bit condensed. thanks for a wonderful course! | exactly what is needed for the | Quizz | Maybe i'm not taking the video | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | Thanks for overview of experimental methods and references to relevant articles! "Complete the essay" quizzes looks like a joke | relevant articles! " Complete the essay" | Quizz | looks like a joke | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | On the bright side, "Lab based" videos are excellent for visualize the techniques. Nevertheless "Choose all that apply" questions in the quizzes are very ambiguous, these questions should contain an explanation for prevent confusion at the end of every unit. | all that apply" questions in the | Quizz | are very ambiguous, these questions should | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | There are serious issues with the quizzes. Other than grading correct/incorrect, there is no feedback afterwards. | There are serious issues with the | Quizz | Other than grading correct/incorrect, there is | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | WOOO .. This course is great ,, with the quiz in between the video lectures makes learning fun. the home work problems are also great to work. More emphasis laid on the simulations results to be read correctly and reflecting those results onto the solution for the home work problems... still looking forward more to learn and simulate..... | is great , , with the | Quizz | in between the video lectures makes | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Ijr8rurHEeSb-yIACwuKNg | Great course! This is the first MOOC that I've completed and I had a great experience overall. The CDS system is what drew me toward this particular chemistry course and it seems like an effective and natural way to have concepts stick in your head. Very clear and easy to understand explanations are also given in the lecture videos. My only complaints are that there are some significant typos in the quizzes, and all of the course material seems to refer to a different version of the online textbook than the one that is currently provided. If the quality of the quizzes was better and if the course was more in sync with the most up-to-date reading material I would have easily given this course 5 stars. | are some significant typos in the | Quizz | and all of the course material | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Ijr8rurHEeSb-yIACwuKNg | Great course! This is the first MOOC that I've completed and I had a great experience overall. The CDS system is what drew me toward this particular chemistry course and it seems like an effective and natural way to have concepts stick in your head. Very clear and easy to understand explanations are also given in the lecture videos. My only complaints are that there are some significant typos in the quizzes, and all of the course material seems to refer to a different version of the online textbook than the one that is currently provided. If the quality of the quizzes was better and if the course was more in sync with the most up-to-date reading material I would have easily given this course 5 stars. | provided. If the quality of the | Quizz | was better and if the course | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Ijr8rurHEeSb-yIACwuKNg | This course should be a 5 Star course. It is challenging and requires effort. The lectures are well done but not up to the level of the quizzes. The book looks like an abandoned project. The errors and missed references to tables and equations from part one of the book to the other are too many. Having said that, I have never learned so much about a topic. I attempted the problems in the book before I took the quiz. That makes a huge difference. A week covers 2-3 chapters in the book. I started to doing the each chapter's problems before moving on in the week. This made taking the quizzes a lot easier. Overall I am very happy for having taken this course. | up to the level of the | Quizz | The book looks like an abandoned | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Ijr8rurHEeSb-yIACwuKNg | This course should be a 5 Star course. It is challenging and requires effort. The lectures are well done but not up to the level of the quizzes. The book looks like an abandoned project. The errors and missed references to tables and equations from part one of the book to the other are too many. Having said that, I have never learned so much about a topic. I attempted the problems in the book before I took the quiz. That makes a huge difference. A week covers 2-3 chapters in the book. I started to doing the each chapter's problems before moving on in the week. This made taking the quizzes a lot easier. Overall I am very happy for having taken this course. | the book before I took the | Quizz | That makes a huge difference. A | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| Ijr8rurHEeSb-yIACwuKNg | This course should be a 5 Star course. It is challenging and requires effort. The lectures are well done but not up to the level of the quizzes. The book looks like an abandoned project. The errors and missed references to tables and equations from part one of the book to the other are too many. Having said that, I have never learned so much about a topic. I attempted the problems in the book before I took the quiz. That makes a huge difference. A week covers 2-3 chapters in the book. I started to doing the each chapter's problems before moving on in the week. This made taking the quizzes a lot easier. Overall I am very happy for having taken this course. | the week. This made taking the | Quizz | a lot easier. Overall I am | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | making shoping and cooking easier, not difficult, quizzes are great; it helped me a lot when shaping my new diet | shoping and cooking easier, not difficult, | Quizz | are great; it helped me a | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I loved the course! I loved the way that the different issues are explained, I like the graphics, the videos, the quizzes - everything! I just tried for the Passover the almond cake recepie and it was fantastic! I really recommend this course not only for child nutrition but also for 'picky' and stubborn adults. Thanks!! | like the graphics, the videos, the | Quizz | - everything! I just tried for | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | The course is very basic, videos contain a lot of repetitions and quiz questions are too easy (in addition, I believe that there are too much negative questions). I believe that this course should be called an Introduction to the basics of Nutrition and it's only for complete newbies. There are no insights in specifics of child nutrition besides general concepts of balanced diet and some tips how to make your kids be more enthusiastic in eating vegetables. | contain a lot of repetitions and | Quizz | questions are too easy (in addition, | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I am really disappointed with the content of this course. If what you're looking for is the most basic of information on making better choices and remembering to wash your cutting board after handling raw meat, maybe this course is for you. If, however, you come to this course wanting specific information about how to build great meals for babies, toddlers, and young children, or you'd like to know how their needs change over time, this course is not for you. I was hoping for information like how to teach your toddler to chew/eat difficult things (ex: whole apples). I wanted to know at what age/weight you switch to 2% milk. I wanted to know how many calories a meal should be based on height and weight and how that changes over time. I wanted to know medically verified tips on getting the right amount of each nutrient into a toddler's diet and what, if any, extra vitamins should be added. I wanted tips on weaning if you're still nursing a toddler... I guess I just wanted more. In addition, the quizzes are so easy as to be silly. Actual quiz question and correct answer: Which is NOT a good way to approach grocery shopping if healthy choices are desired? Answer: Visit the supermarket hungry and walk through the candy aisle first. COME ON! Did I need a Stanford University course to tell me that one?!?!? While the instructor is knowledgeable, this course is geared toward someone with NO knowledge, not someone who wants to gain a deeper understanding. The videos are painfully slow (am I waiting for a doodle here???) and I could read the entire course worth of transcripts in under a half hour rather than go through all of the videos. And the recipes... good god! I don't think that someone interested in learning more about child nutrition is needing a slow tutorial on how to make basic oatmeal on the stove top. If she'd upped the game- showed basics and then talked about the benefits of adding, say, chia seeds, different fruits, flax, etc. and how best to make a basic bowl of oatmeal into a complete breakfast, that would have been a useful topic. I'm just hugely disappointed. This course is best suited to perhaps a health department; not to someone seeking college level information about a topic that matters to their children's lives. | just wanted more. In addition, the | Quizz | are so easy as to be | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I am really disappointed with the content of this course. If what you're looking for is the most basic of information on making better choices and remembering to wash your cutting board after handling raw meat, maybe this course is for you. If, however, you come to this course wanting specific information about how to build great meals for babies, toddlers, and young children, or you'd like to know how their needs change over time, this course is not for you. I was hoping for information like how to teach your toddler to chew/eat difficult things (ex: whole apples). I wanted to know at what age/weight you switch to 2% milk. I wanted to know how many calories a meal should be based on height and weight and how that changes over time. I wanted to know medically verified tips on getting the right amount of each nutrient into a toddler's diet and what, if any, extra vitamins should be added. I wanted tips on weaning if you're still nursing a toddler... I guess I just wanted more. In addition, the quizzes are so easy as to be silly. Actual quiz question and correct answer: Which is NOT a good way to approach grocery shopping if healthy choices are desired? Answer: Visit the supermarket hungry and walk through the candy aisle first. COME ON! Did I need a Stanford University course to tell me that one?!?!? While the instructor is knowledgeable, this course is geared toward someone with NO knowledge, not someone who wants to gain a deeper understanding. The videos are painfully slow (am I waiting for a doodle here???) and I could read the entire course worth of transcripts in under a half hour rather than go through all of the videos. And the recipes... good god! I don't think that someone interested in learning more about child nutrition is needing a slow tutorial on how to make basic oatmeal on the stove top. If she'd upped the game- showed basics and then talked about the benefits of adding, say, chia seeds, different fruits, flax, etc. and how best to make a basic bowl of oatmeal into a complete breakfast, that would have been a useful topic. I'm just hugely disappointed. This course is best suited to perhaps a health department; not to someone seeking college level information about a topic that matters to their children's lives. | easy as to be silly. Actual | Quizz | question and correct answer: Which is | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Great and easy explained with video's and drawings. Loved the cooking demo's for some fresh and homemade meals. Also great for families with no children since there are basic food facts everyone should know about. Quizzes are fun and informative and the time needed to follow up was enough even with deadlines. | food facts everyone should know about. | Quizz | are fun and informative and the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Course content is balanced with demonstrations and charts, along with quizzes. Enjoyed it. | with demonstrations and charts, along with | Quizz | Enjoyed it. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | This was a good introduction to Coursera for me. Some of the information I already knew, but it was good to learn the "why" behind some of it. There were a few of the quizzes that contained questions from videos that hadn't been covered yet. Her information about food allergies was good, I would like to see her offer a class on just that topic. | There were a few of the | Quizz | that contained questions from videos that | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Great Class! Wish that the quizzes were more difficult -- they were very straight forward and common sense. The cooking videos inspired me to cook with more variety in my own meals. | Great Class! Wish that the | Quizz | were more difficult -- they were | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Well-structured lessons, comprehensively covers planning & initiation stages of project management. The quizzes felt a little easy at times! | initiation stages of project management. The | Quizz | felt a little easy at times! | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Could be in much greater depth. Loved the video lectures: more please! Perhaps a second video lecture per week that delves into greater detail, so that the level of discussion is more in line with the PMBOK. The quizzes were simplistic, which is fine, but the final was literally just questions from the quizzes pasted together (all were repeats!) This sad fact undermines the integrity of the final as an actual test of ability and comprehension. | in line with the PMBOK. The | Quizz | were simplistic, which is fine, but | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Could be in much greater depth. Loved the video lectures: more please! Perhaps a second video lecture per week that delves into greater detail, so that the level of discussion is more in line with the PMBOK. The quizzes were simplistic, which is fine, but the final was literally just questions from the quizzes pasted together (all were repeats!) This sad fact undermines the integrity of the final as an actual test of ability and comprehension. | was literally just questions from the | Quizz | pasted together (all were repeats! ) | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I like the materials, but I don't like that you need to pay to take the quizzes. I think that it is against the spirit of Coursera because it limits the experience of user who are willing to learn but don't have enough money to pay for the course. Many other courses allow you to take quizzes and do projects whitout paying | need to pay to take the | Quizz | I think that it is against | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I like the materials, but I don't like that you need to pay to take the quizzes. I think that it is against the spirit of Coursera because it limits the experience of user who are willing to learn but don't have enough money to pay for the course. Many other courses allow you to take quizzes and do projects whitout paying | other courses allow you to take | Quizz | and do projects whitout paying | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | The content is good but the quiz and final exam are way too easy... | The content is good but the | Quizz | and final exam are way too | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I liked everything about this course except that some of the lesson materials couldn't be viewed on my iPad as they were flash based. Other than that, the videos were good - not too long, not too short - and the quizzes were suitably based on what was discussed beforehand in the lectures and lessons. I also picked up one of the recommended readings "Fast Forward MBA in Project Management" which I also liked. | not too short - and the | Quizz | were suitably based on what was | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | This was a great mix of videos, reading material, and quizzes to keep me engaged. | mix of videos, reading material, and | Quizz | to keep me engaged. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | This course packed a lot in and was very direct and efficient, giving helpful examples to illustrate the points. The project management tools learned can be applied in so many situations even for those of us who will never have the official title of "project manager". Videos are supplemented by flash lessons that go over the information, which was great for learners who may not learn as well by video alone. I would have liked one or two written assignments, but quizzes were relevant to the information provided and it was nice not to have to wait on peer-reviews. Overall, a great course. | one or two written assignments, but | Quizz | were relevant to the information provided | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Material is very detailed which is both a positive and negative. It gets a little redundant and some things are just common sense. You can tell the instructor is trying to be upbeat but is very clearly reading off of "cue cards" so it's a little flat. For a free course you get a lot of information and it is very easy to get a 100 on every quiz. | to get a 100 on every | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Doing this course 'Initiating and Planning Projects' gives learners, practical skills on Project management based on PMBOK methodology which is framed by PMI based on contributions from experienced professionals in the field. Prof Margaret Meloni is a great teacher. Students will enjoy her crisp, clear and lucid style of communicating ideas. Slides are well designed. Video quality and sound quality is also great. You will encounter lots of good quality reading materials. Quizzes will help you to test your knowledge as you progress. Overall, an excellent course fit for project managers and project team members who work for construction projects. Also good for the aspiring project managers. Thanks to Prof Margaret and UC Irvine for the great course. | lots of good quality reading materials. | Quizz | will help you to test your | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | Clear explanations for using Node-RED tool. The intro to IoT is a bit too verbose, and 1st quiz has like a "gotcha" question. | a bit too verbose, and 1st | Quizz | has like a " gotcha" question. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course sets the stage for the rest of the Data Science specialisation. You get a lot of textbooks for free and they cover a lot of material. The quizzes are a little bit underwhelming, especially the first week. Too few questions, testing some questionable knowledge (eg, what other courses there are in the specialisation -- hardly a required tool in the data scientist's box). Overall, it's a good preparation for what is to come. It managed to whet my appetite for more , however I'm not sure the course is very useful on its own. | cover a lot of material. The | Quizz | are a little bit underwhelming, especially | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Great course! well paced and timing appropriate. Quizes reflected taught lessons. | course! well paced and timing appropriate. | Quizz | reflected taught lessons. | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very basic even for people with no DS background. Issues with quiz having passed and results showing as failed. Inability to speed up and move on to next module | with no DS background. Issues with | Quizz | having passed and results showing as | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | All excellent and a very good introduction. I wish I was able to get my quiz graded without having to pay just to see if I was learning. For the rest, I recommended for a great intro. | I was able to get my | Quizz | graded without having to pay just | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It's a good first step into getting the right programs, learning key vocabulary, and interacting with important websites/programs at a very introductory level. If you are not from a math/statistics background you can still complete the course but you will not understand the previews for later courses completely, that is ok! But consider getting the eBook with this course. My only complaint is the quizzes, it often feels impossible to get a 5/5 based on only what you get from the lectures, there's always 1 question that is completely over the top compared to the other 4, but you can do the quizzes 3 times every 8 hours and just trial and error the 1 gotcha question on each quiz. | course. My only complaint is the | Quizz | it often feels impossible to get | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It's a good first step into getting the right programs, learning key vocabulary, and interacting with important websites/programs at a very introductory level. If you are not from a math/statistics background you can still complete the course but you will not understand the previews for later courses completely, that is ok! But consider getting the eBook with this course. My only complaint is the quizzes, it often feels impossible to get a 5/5 based on only what you get from the lectures, there's always 1 question that is completely over the top compared to the other 4, but you can do the quizzes 3 times every 8 hours and just trial and error the 1 gotcha question on each quiz. | 4, but you can do the | Quizz | 3 times every 8 hours and | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It's a good first step into getting the right programs, learning key vocabulary, and interacting with important websites/programs at a very introductory level. If you are not from a math/statistics background you can still complete the course but you will not understand the previews for later courses completely, that is ok! But consider getting the eBook with this course. My only complaint is the quizzes, it often feels impossible to get a 5/5 based on only what you get from the lectures, there's always 1 question that is completely over the top compared to the other 4, but you can do the quizzes 3 times every 8 hours and just trial and error the 1 gotcha question on each quiz. | the 1 gotcha question on each | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Course teaches how to acquire the tools necessary to complete the Data Science specialization. Explanations were clear, and quizzes and assignments were straightforward to complete. | Science specialization. Explanations were clear, and | Quizz | and assignments were straightforward to complete. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Great intro. Too bad you need to pay in order to get quiz answer or statement of accomplishment. | to pay in order to get | Quizz | answer or statement of accomplishment. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course is a good first into to the topic. I think that the additional reading from the book and the Git manual will supplement it very well. My only complain is that in the first quiz, there was a question regarding some R packages used in Machine Learning that were not covered in the slides. It took me a while to find those so I had to take the first quiz 3 times. I think this question should be revised to guide the student as to how to find these packages. Another alternative would be that in the slides there some guidance in this matter. Otherwise, I liked to course and the final assignments. | complain is that in the first | Quizz | there was a question regarding some | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course is a good first into to the topic. I think that the additional reading from the book and the Git manual will supplement it very well. My only complain is that in the first quiz, there was a question regarding some R packages used in Machine Learning that were not covered in the slides. It took me a while to find those so I had to take the first quiz 3 times. I think this question should be revised to guide the student as to how to find these packages. Another alternative would be that in the slides there some guidance in this matter. Otherwise, I liked to course and the final assignments. | I had to take the first | Quizz | 3 times. I think this question | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | There were lectures about how to install R and RStudio on Mac and Windows. And the quiz asked about information on these lectures. You must pay attention to them even if you have previously installed them. | on Mac and Windows. And the | Quizz | asked about information on these lectures. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Quizzes were based off of extremely high level overview videos not covering anything specifically or deep diving into anything. When applying the git commands covered, numerous errors arose. Overwhelmingly academic course with very little hands on. This is not for anyone actually looking to work in this field, but for someone looking to be able to talk about this field. | | Quizz | were based off of extremely high | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | 4.5 Stars. Decent introduction. Good reading material and quizzes. Would like to have more hands-on assignments. | Decent introduction. Good reading material and | Quizz | Would like to have more hands-on | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It is a nice introduction, but the material is barely worth a one week orientation lesson (I have completed it in about 4 hours with watching all the videos, taking detailed notes, and completing the quizzes for 100%) . Why should we pay for a specialization preview, we can read info about the separate courses on our own? I am really looking forward the next courses in the specialization since I really need a good course in statistics and this seems to be one, but the first course should be eliminated. The installation of R and github account videos should be added to the next course as an introduction. | taking detailed notes, and completing the | Quizz | for 100%) . Why should we | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | A good introduction to the course. Opening up quizzes to help feedback what we'd learned (for free learners) would have made the course much better! | introduction to the course. Opening up | Quizz | to help feedback what we'd learned | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The first week's quiz is really difficult and I had to go through the lecture material several times. Because of the great number of very short lectures it is difficult to find an asnwer to sought question. | The first week's | Quizz | is really difficult and I had | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The course is in fact an overall intro to the full data science specialization. Some of the content are useful; but some of the quiz questions are not very informative, and don't really test on stats... | are useful; but some of the | Quizz | questions are not very informative, and | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Basically if you take this course you are paying money to create an account on a website and download some software (both of which you can do for free). The rest of it is a preview of the other courses in the series. The quiz questions don't correspond to the information on the slides. I successfully passed the course, but I didn't really learn anything. Now I am debating on whether or not to continue to the R programming course after reading through the reviews of that course. | other courses in the series. The | Quizz | questions don't correspond to the information | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Certainly not worth paying for this course, only talks about how to install the tools. Not able to take quizzes when you try to take the course for free. | the tools. Not able to take | Quizz | when you try to take the | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Videos provide a useful overview. The week quiz kept me accountable to finish my work. The final assignment was straightforward. | provide a useful overview. The week | Quizz | kept me accountable to finish my | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | I have completed the Data Scientist's Toolbox. I enjoyed learning this course. I learned a lot of new concepts, installation of R, R Studio, hands-on with these and GITHUB. The lessons are well balanced and help me learn the concepts and the tool usage in a cool way. I liked the Quizzes, Assignments as these help me evaluate myself and instill confidence within me. Now, I've the confidence in work on any of these with certain amount of instructions. However, I feel that certain guidance on progressing further with respect to R, RStudio, GITHUB could be provided as additional study material. Thanks to Coursera for providing such a wonderful course and to Prof. Roger D. Peng, Jeff Leek and Brian D. Caffo for their meticulous effort in designing this course and helping in my learning. Wishing my Professors and Coursera all the Success. | a cool way. I liked the | Quizz | Assignments as these help me evaluate | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very good course materials, videos and quizzes. Learnt a lot. :D | Very good course materials, videos and | Quizz | Learnt a lot. :D | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Useful couple of modules for helping you get set up with R and Git/GitHub. Really doesn't require a full month to do. The quizzes were pointless. | a full month to do. The | Quizz | were pointless. | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very informative course. The Quiz questions however may not be necessarily be in the course content. | Very informative course. The | Quizz | questions however may not be necessarily | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | First experience got me hooked. I love coursera. This course, even though an introduction taught me a lot and showed me an error of my ways in everyday life. One question in the 3rd Quiz was very confusing to answer. But that's about it. I hope the rest of the specialization carries on forward in a similar maybe even better pattern. | life. One question in the 3rd | Quizz | was very confusing to answer. But | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | I'm doing this training for the second time, now as a beta-tester. Particular comments about lecture content, problems, etc. have been put in every lecture. General comments, in short: 1) Related to the new platform and UI design: _ It is cleaner and simpler than the previous one. I like it, BUT... _ It lacks of some useful features: saving intermediate results in quizzes before submit them; calendar; limited number of subforums. _ The most relevant flaw: there are not downloadable versions of lecture slides. Unacceptable! No way to check most of the links we saw in slides (URLs not visible). _ Description and steps in course project appear "too packed" together. I prefer the former design. 2) Related to content: _ The course is mainly for preparing students for the rest of data science specialization program. When you said "toolbox" you mean the concrete toolbox you will need to do the program. Some people expect to have a general introduction to data science but that is only a half of the content. I think this is clear enough in the presentation but for some reasons there are people in forums who protest the content, so maybe you should insist more in this fact. _ I would like to suggest some kind of reorder of material: week 2 is all about installing a running tools and week 3 about key aspects of data analysis. Maybe you can split both types of content between wk2 and wk3 to make wk2 more appealing for not technical oriented students. _ Git is a source of problems for a good portion of people. See my comments in lectures about how Git is explained. | useful features: saving intermediate results in | Quizz | before submit them; calendar; limited number | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The new graphic is really nice and helpful. Even the fact that you can retake the quizzes after 8 hours is really nice. I have noticed that there wasn't any possibility to download pdf files of the lessons (or I didn't see it), the last time I took the course there was this possibility and I found it so helpful. | fact that you can retake the | Quizz | after 8 hours is really nice. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Material was very good and well structured. I think that one main issue is the assignment. We would need much more info/hard facts to make it much more interesting (i.e. less theoritical). Moreover, assignments are reviewed by people 1/ who did not necessarily went through the 2 previous courses 2/ did not see our previous documents ie for course 1 and 2 3/ did not necessarily understand the question (one person complained because I did not answer the question "edgy vs. conservative" => I guess she was misled by the support info which were the same as for the first course). This problem could be avoided by offering a distinct case for each assignment, so that there is no confusion/mis-match. In any case, "mange tak" for all your courses. I went through 3 so far, and the ones from CBS are clearly the best I had (videos - content and speed - slides/ support documents, quizzes). | and speed - slides/ support documents, | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Shame that the format was changed and the quizzes and assignments were not open. Teaching was as great as the first 2 courses, and slides were useful. | the format was changed and the | Quizz | and assignments were not open. Teaching | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| J0igZhzvEeSGAiIACxMEjA | Fantastic course by Dr. Onuf! I learned much and he helped correct misconceptions I harbored regarding Thomas Jefferson. Great videos and selected readings. The quizzes were relatively challenging. | Great videos and selected readings. The | Quizz | were relatively challenging. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| JBCvTm03EeWEewoyD2Bc5Q | Great content! This definitely challenges the mindset of what it takes to be a business owner or entrepreneur. One opportunity I see for the course is to better link the quiz language to what's taught in the videos and the articles, especially for the open ended questions. Those specific points can get lost in all of the ideas shared. | course is to better link the | Quizz | language to what's taught in the | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | I cannot take the quizzes, because of money. The other courses let us take the quizzes without paying money. I dislike you paying policy. Please, let us take the tests without money payment. Sincerely, Garik | I cannot take the | Quizz | because of money. The other courses | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | I cannot take the quizzes, because of money. The other courses let us take the quizzes without paying money. I dislike you paying policy. Please, let us take the tests without money payment. Sincerely, Garik | other courses let us take the | Quizz | without paying money. I dislike you | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | Positive: Approach to the topics is solid, readings are very valuable. Negative: Some videos in week 3 and 4 have audio issues. Course should had a template with the course objectives, learning outcomes and grading scheme. 4 out of 6 quizzes didn't allow to see which questions were right or wrong. Social media resources such as a linkedin group for the specialization would add value. But the most negative aspect was not having the slides. A lot of the topics covered were presented very fast and not having the slides to review the materials made my experience in learning very frustrating. I note that also the course Critical Perspectives on Management had the same problems with the quizzes and also did not provide slides. what was somewhat frustrating also. Also, if IE is making an effort to become more relevant in this online space, it should allocate human resources to monitor and interact in the discussion forums. In my opinion there are a lot of opportunities to improve the student experience. What I found somewhat because being this a series of courses in marketing, a lot of these issues had to been fixed/addressed before the course started... Nonetheless my critics - which I expect to be considered as constructive critics, it is important to thank IE and Coursera for continuing providing online courses. I wish you luck. Ricardo J. Oliveira | grading scheme. 4 out of 6 | Quizz | didn't allow to see which questions | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | Positive: Approach to the topics is solid, readings are very valuable. Negative: Some videos in week 3 and 4 have audio issues. Course should had a template with the course objectives, learning outcomes and grading scheme. 4 out of 6 quizzes didn't allow to see which questions were right or wrong. Social media resources such as a linkedin group for the specialization would add value. But the most negative aspect was not having the slides. A lot of the topics covered were presented very fast and not having the slides to review the materials made my experience in learning very frustrating. I note that also the course Critical Perspectives on Management had the same problems with the quizzes and also did not provide slides. what was somewhat frustrating also. Also, if IE is making an effort to become more relevant in this online space, it should allocate human resources to monitor and interact in the discussion forums. In my opinion there are a lot of opportunities to improve the student experience. What I found somewhat because being this a series of courses in marketing, a lot of these issues had to been fixed/addressed before the course started... Nonetheless my critics - which I expect to be considered as constructive critics, it is important to thank IE and Coursera for continuing providing online courses. I wish you luck. Ricardo J. Oliveira | had the same problems with the | Quizz | and also did not provide slides. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| jeelkkLEEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | La qualité du cours et la pertinence des exercices sont irréprochables. En revanche, ce que je peux recommander c'est de donner des instructions plus claires quant a la codification des réponses. Il m'arrive a chaque fois d'échouer le quiz car je n'avais pas bien compris comment est ce que vous vouliez que la réponse soit rédigée. | m'arrive a chaque fois d'échouer le | Quizz | car je n'avais pas bien compris | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The only thing I think that put this course on the back foot is the absence of mentors and TAs. They should be pretty active enough to clear the doubts that pops up while clearing quizzes or programming assignments. Its just the people on the forum that comes handy but even when they are not sure about the concept then the going becomes tough. Apart from that, the course is one of the best of its kind and trust me you will never regret doing this certification !!! Good job team UPenn !!! | doubts that pops up while clearing | Quizz | or programming assignments. Its just the | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The video lectures provide an introduction to quadrotor flight dynamics and path planning. The lectures are ok. Unfortunately: At least one of the coding assignments has a significant bug in the termination condition. The mentors will ignore any help requests that deal with the bug in their code. The assignments involve a lot of hand tuning of PD controllers. That's a reasonable task to perform once or twice, but it rapidly becomes extremely tedious and detracts from the other materials that are being taught. The final assignment doesn't do a particularly good job evaluating the required test condition. If you do take the course I'd want you to know: You should expect to modify the provided code to fix their bugs. There are no "gotcha" quiz questions. If you are confused by getting a question wrong you might want to re-try your answer. There seems to be a bug in the way at least one quiz question is set up. On the final assignment you can modify the simulation step where it makes things run in "real time". Removing that step makes the simulation run much more quickly and allows for faster iteration. To conclude: This is a course with a lot of potential, but unless Coursera makes an effort to improve the course I would not recommend it. | bugs. There are no " gotcha" | Quizz | questions. If you are confused by | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The video lectures provide an introduction to quadrotor flight dynamics and path planning. The lectures are ok. Unfortunately: At least one of the coding assignments has a significant bug in the termination condition. The mentors will ignore any help requests that deal with the bug in their code. The assignments involve a lot of hand tuning of PD controllers. That's a reasonable task to perform once or twice, but it rapidly becomes extremely tedious and detracts from the other materials that are being taught. The final assignment doesn't do a particularly good job evaluating the required test condition. If you do take the course I'd want you to know: You should expect to modify the provided code to fix their bugs. There are no "gotcha" quiz questions. If you are confused by getting a question wrong you might want to re-try your answer. There seems to be a bug in the way at least one quiz question is set up. On the final assignment you can modify the simulation step where it makes things run in "real time". Removing that step makes the simulation run much more quickly and allows for faster iteration. To conclude: This is a course with a lot of potential, but unless Coursera makes an effort to improve the course I would not recommend it. | in the way at least one | Quizz | question is set up. On the | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I really enjoyed this course and it really hooked me onto this topic, definitely this will not be the last robotics course I am going to follow. That being said there are some points of improvement. The main parts necessary to program the simulation assignments are covered in the materials, but there are still some of them that need to be pursued independently. Some assumptions have to be made that are not so obvious, I do not know whether it is the intention of this course to do so or not, but since they are minor footnotes that may hinder completely your results, I think they should be made explicit. The Matlab files available for the course work as intended, what is not so obvious though is how they are intended to work, that is because there is very little documentation about them, it would be great if there was more documentation available, especially for people who have never used such tools before. Finally, even though I personally enjoyed this course and I think it had an achievable level of challenge for me, I would definitely not recommend this course for total beginners, or people who do not have followed a math, physics or engineering degrees. The way the course is laid out, even if you do not understand the concepts behind each topic you will still manage to answer the quizzes and get the simulations to work eventually, however to truly understand what they mean and be able to replicate them in other environments requires some prior knowledge that cannot be taught in just a few hours. | will still manage to answer the | Quizz | and get the simulations to work | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A good overview on various fields of Robotics, especially control. Quizzes seemed a little ambiguous but lectures and assignments were very informative! | various fields of Robotics, especially control. | Quizz | seemed a little ambiguous but lectures | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The quiz and assignment are poorly designed. Important issues are overlooked or just briefly discussed in lecture. The assignment focuses on matlab coding, which only emphasizes the coding technique. Do not recommend to audience with | The | Quizz | and assignment are poorly designed. Important | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was not a beginning level course as advertised. Test cases for assignments were neither document nor otherwise explained within the course materials. Quizzes during the lecture were often unrelated to the material just presented or were given before the relevant material was taught. The course creators obviously put a lot of time and effort into this course. So it is difficult for me to write such a critical review. However, they missed the mark with this one enough that I can't recommend the course. Unfortunately I will not be completing this course only due to the fact that I have run out of time and patience to complete the last assignment. | otherwise explained within the course materials. | Quizz | during the lecture were often unrelated | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Quizzes and Assignments are poorly designed. You will spend most of your time tuning parameters and deriving matrices that were never discussed in the course. Unfortunate. | | Quizz | and Assignments are poorly designed. You | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Good course overall, since I took it the first time it was offered it was still not quite polished. I liked the focus on quadrocopter simulation and creating controllers. I think it would benefit from more specific discussion forums for quizzes/assignments, being able to view past quiz attempts, and cleaning up typos/errors in the material. | quizzes/assignments, being able to view past | Quizz | attempts, and cleaning up typos/errors in | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Overall good course that would definitely make you spend more time reading and learning on the side. Would recommend it those who have good background in college level math like Linear Algebra and a little bit of Robotics Background from a Math perspective - like working with translations, rotations, transformation matrices of that sort to make the transition easier. (There are basic robotic courses online to help with that, like Peter Corke's course). But overall this course requires some significant effort to explore the material from an external perspective. Some issues however - 1. Lack of added resources like reading material to support the course and help advanced students go beyond the course themselves. 2. Severe lack of activity from TA(s) on the forums. It's good that students get to interact among themselves and learn on their own, but every single post should be either answered by a TA to clarify doubts or they should acknowledge that another student's explanation was good enough to answer a particular question. 3. The in-video quizzes weren't up-to-the-mark as per me. One question asked "why" and the answer was literally "because that's how that algorithm is". 4. This is a trend in MOOCs and I don't think it can be helped, but perhaps more assignments that help understand the concepts better with examples would help students go beyond. If this course had such optional assignments that would be great for understanding the concepts with a more hands-on approach. But this is probably not the best platform to do so. Overall would recommend future iterations of this course, especially if the first two points above are improved upon. | a particular question. 3. The in-video | Quizz | weren't up-to-the-mark as per me. One | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | There were minor errors in the quizzes but I loved the course, would be nice to use some open source tool besides matlab. Best regards. | There were minor errors in the | Quizz | but I loved the course, would | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Although not specifically stated as a requisite this course does rely heavily on mathematics (especially matrix calculations). I did not understand all of the mathematics but was still able to complete the course succesfully. The general idea behind the math was well enough explained. The example videos, excercises and quizes were great fun and inspiring. | explained. The example videos, excercises and | Quizz | were great fun and inspiring. | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course feels like a bad news anchorman reading the teleprompter. It gives a lot of formulae without proper explanations. A lot of quiz answers do not come from the video lectures. The course is really just spitting formulae from the dissertation "Trajectory Generation and Control for Quadrotors" by Daniel Warren Mellinger (easily found using search engines). Reading the dissertation before doing the course would probably help understand the formulae they say out of context without the proper explanations. Sorry for the bad review, it's the first time I leave one like that, although I've completed many MOOCs. I hope it will help to improve the course. | without proper explanations. A lot of | Quizz | answers do not come from the | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Very interesting course. Lectures were very informative however some test questions, especially in first quiz, where not covered directly in course materials. | some test questions, especially in first | Quizz | where not covered directly in course | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Quizzes are generally not related to topic but course is great. Thanks.. | | Quizz | are generally not related to topic | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The material this course provided is sufficient for a beginner in robotics. But I have to say that the material the coursed presented is not well prepared. The lectures are not well organized. Some necessary prerequisite should be at least provided as reading materials. Quizs ask some questions that is not clearly mentioned in the lecture and some are with a little ambiguity. | at least provided as reading materials. | Quizz | ask some questions that is not | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Really bad course. They don't explain the concepts clearly, the quizzes ambiguously ask things not seen in the videos and the instructor introduces equations without further explanation. The course Autonomous Navigation for Flying Robots (edX) is much better. | don't explain the concepts clearly, the | Quizz | ambiguously ask things not seen in | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The content is awesome and the quizzes and assignments are challenging. What I would incorporate is a little bit more of examples to tackle all the problems new people might encounter (more sample numerical results, and probably samples on how to develop in Matlab, not just reserved words). | The content is awesome and the | Quizz | and assignments are challenging. What I | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | could me much better , if the questions in the quiz can actually related to the lecture | , if the questions in the | Quizz | can actually related to the lecture | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| jlxKwZz9EeWIXgpWJNgyEw | Excellent course! Very well taught. Dr Gregory Northcraft is very well spoken and engaging. This course is nicely structured with Readings, Videos, Cases, Essays, and Quizzes. About 6 hours per week for 4 weeks. Nicely paced. I did not take this with the for credit iMBA classes, but am considering doing so and might thus repeat these courses to take the iMBA classes. I like that you can get certificates and a Specialization in the Leadership and can even grow this into the iMBA which is a fully accredited world class MBA program from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. I highly recommend this course! | with Readings, Videos, Cases, Essays, and | Quizz | About 6 hours per week for | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| jnoxprrzEeW2iwpbOuagWQ | Very intersting. Very enjoyable to learn. Great teacher and teaching methods. Fair quizzes. | Great teacher and teaching methods. Fair | Quizz | | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| k8B9WjxkEeW7GArkqhNhJw | The presenter is fabulous! He is very clear and repeats important information to help you remember things well. I had to retake a few of the quizzes twice because they were challenging, but it helped me notice when I hadn't learned something well enough and had to go back and review it. I learned SO MUCH!!! Thank you!!! | to retake a few of the | Quizz | twice because they were challenging, but | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Great introduction-- not a single lesson was lacking. Professor Noor is engaging, feels approachable (even behind a screen), and I found the class appropriately challenging. There were times I felt I completely grasped the "important" parts of lectures only to begin a quiz and realize that I didn't. The quizzes really helped me to see that I had to understand much more about how to apply the messages to other situations, or compound scenarios. Good lesson in logic. Computation also matters in this course, which can be tough for someone more used to reading pop-science analyses. I appreciated being held accountable and learned far more than I would if I'd just read a book. | of lectures only to begin a | Quizz | and realize that I didn't. The | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Great introduction-- not a single lesson was lacking. Professor Noor is engaging, feels approachable (even behind a screen), and I found the class appropriately challenging. There were times I felt I completely grasped the "important" parts of lectures only to begin a quiz and realize that I didn't. The quizzes really helped me to see that I had to understand much more about how to apply the messages to other situations, or compound scenarios. Good lesson in logic. Computation also matters in this course, which can be tough for someone more used to reading pop-science analyses. I appreciated being held accountable and learned far more than I would if I'd just read a book. | and realize that I didn't. The | Quizz | really helped me to see that | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Although this class was challenging, Professor Noor's happy personality made going to virtual school fun! His quizzes are somewhat challenging but if you work at it enough you will pass the course. I look forward to any future classes he may have! | going to virtual school fun! His | Quizz | are somewhat challenging but if you | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Professor Noor is very friendly and clear in his lectures. He also answers questions in the discussion foruns with speed and detail. I was able to learn a lot from this course and challenged myself to a heavier load of lectures than I had expected because they were not boring at all. My only caveat is that the questions in his quizzes can sometimes be unnecessarily confusing because of wording or tricks. | is that the questions in his | Quizz | can sometimes be unnecessarily confusing because | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | The lecture materials are interesting and informative. And the quizzes require an understanding of the material. I really enjoyed this course and learned a lot about genetics and evolution. Thank you again. | are interesting and informative. And the | Quizz | require an understanding of the material. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| kbmiwPT-EeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | Excellent course, wide scale application, highly recommend. Also : -clear presentation -no technical issues with quizzes or content issues | -clear presentation -no technical issues with | Quizz | or content issues | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| KinX8iwGEeaA3A6P4rV07Q | Very concise lectures, but sometimes the content of the videos does not fully explain the topics that are covered on the quizzes. | topics that are covered on the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | you cannot do the quizes unless you pay | you cannot do the | Quizz | unless you pay | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | This course is very helpful. I have kept learning this course and completed the quiz. It helps me understand the mechanism of the addiction, what is dopamine and how it works, the class of the illicit drugs, the animal self-administration model and what can I learn from the animal experiment, the vulnerability for addiction, and risk and protective factors of addiction, neuroimaging studies of addiction. Most of all, I have a better understanding of addiction. The pronunciation of the Professor is so clear and helps me to improve my English. Thanks very much. I enjoy it. | learning this course and completed the | Quizz | It helps me understand the mechanism | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | Really disappointing course. Content is shallow, despite the impressive credentials of the Professor. Quizzes are ridiculously easy. | the impressive credentials of the Professor. | Quizz | are ridiculously easy. | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | The individual course topics were evenly distributed and presented in a meticulous, thorough, as well as elaborate manner. The lecturer was inviting and encouraging, whereas the technical specifications of the video lectures and quizzes were exceptionally good. In overall, the ''Addicted Brain'' course positively predisposes me towards opting for more courses provided and sponsored by the Emory University. | specifications of the video lectures and | Quizz | were exceptionally good. In overall, the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| KoJTHEpJEeWJHwqqqPAooQ | As it is, unfortunetly I can only rate it as a 2/5. The lectures are presented in a reasonable way, but this is a somewhat technical course, for wich additional materials would need to be mandatory. There are no slides for the lectures, the instructor mentions chapters of a book and does not provide the materials to students pursue a more effective way of studying the materials. Also, the quizzes are excessively challeging taking into consideration that the only resource availble to students are the videos. In my opinion, presenting a course that only has videos is not an effective way of learning. To make this course more effective and to allow students to learn more effectivelly and get some learning objectives, more material besides the videos must be made available. As it is, no more than a 2/5 is possible to rate this course. | of studying the materials. Also, the | Quizz | are excessively challeging taking into consideration | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| koPOOn1dEeWKYwric11Hpw | Definitely the most comprehensive and practical course about advertising and promotion among coursera's courses. If you want to get as much as possible, read all suggestion reading and take quizzes as well. | read all suggestion reading and take | Quizz | as well. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| KQ7XaDaaEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Thank you, it's a good course. I only wish I could take quiz without purchase a course. I don't need a certificate but I'd like to check my knowledge. That is what quiz for. | I only wish I could take | Quizz | without purchase a course. I don't | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| KQ7XaDaaEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Thank you, it's a good course. I only wish I could take quiz without purchase a course. I don't need a certificate but I'd like to check my knowledge. That is what quiz for. | check my knowledge. That is what | Quizz | for. | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| KQ7XaDaaEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Structured beginner course for those who have no background in PR/Social Media. For those currently working in the domain, you'll find yourself skipping through parts of the course as you most likely have already known the stuff. Nonetheless, it provides a framework and examples to take a leaf from! Unfortunately, I didn't purchase the course hence unable to submit the quizzes + graded assignment. | course hence unable to submit the | Quizz | + graded assignment. | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The content in this course was invaluable and I learned a lot from the instructor videos, guest lectures and assignments. It's already changed the way I am doing business. My one complaint is with the grading system - and this is on Coursera and not on the course. I can't understand first why a peer graded assignment is considered late when I submitted it on time, and it's not my fault that others hadn't reviewed it yet. Similarly on a quiz, there were points given for answers that were supposed to be skipped if you had done the assignment. Therefore, the highest grade you could get on that quiz was a 57%. While passing was a 1%, it's still averaged into my final grade as a 57%. That doesn't make any sense at all. | reviewed it yet. Similarly on a | Quizz | there were points given for answers | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The content in this course was invaluable and I learned a lot from the instructor videos, guest lectures and assignments. It's already changed the way I am doing business. My one complaint is with the grading system - and this is on Coursera and not on the course. I can't understand first why a peer graded assignment is considered late when I submitted it on time, and it's not my fault that others hadn't reviewed it yet. Similarly on a quiz, there were points given for answers that were supposed to be skipped if you had done the assignment. Therefore, the highest grade you could get on that quiz was a 57%. While passing was a 1%, it's still averaged into my final grade as a 57%. That doesn't make any sense at all. | grade you could get on that | Quizz | was a 57%. While passing was | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| KRl9hpiaEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | It's fine to charge for certificate, but submit the quiz is also locked if u try to learn for free, i do think that is a violation to the learning process. | charge for certificate, but submit the | Quizz | is also locked if u try | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| KRl9hpiaEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Quizes are getting better with every course. Lectures are good. I like the idea of assignments - to show your work and to see works of others. Only one thing: I'd like to get review not only from other students, buy from at least one professional. It's nice to get opinion from "masses", but I'd like to know professional opinion and directions where I could move to be better photographer. | | Quizz | are getting better with every course. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| KuL4QMbGEeWQSAqHNmfP4Q | This specialization has been nothing short of awesome. This exam really caps it off on a high note. Not only the quizzes were challenging and interesting, they are also very relevant to all the concepts learnt throughout the specialization. The exam consists of a good mix of conceptual, algorithmic, debugging, optimization problems, graph modelling and mathematical computation problems. The very tight time frame of only a few weeks with only 1 single attempt each week forced me to be very careful with my solutions and double check my work carefully before submitting. The only thing that I wish to see is that this exam should be 2 exams instead of just 1 exam. I sort of still hunger for more challenging exercises like this exam. I really hope that this capstone exam course sets a good example for other Coursera courses because challenging mini-exams like this are incredibly valuable tools to validate our knowledge. | a high note. Not only the | Quizz | were challenging and interesting, they are | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| KzTkolCEEeWxCwowHhzTpQ | Objective. Very good material and good practices to help you better build a bibliography for research purpose. Sometimes the multiple answers quiz can be tricky. | research purpose. Sometimes the multiple answers | Quizz | can be tricky. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| l-VzSGYDEeWq4RLQvtY_lQ | The most challenging course of the specialisation, as the concepts are fairly technical and the quizzes demand a bit more "thinking around the corner". Sean Pinder's videos and slides are excellent. The quality of the exam materials was not quite up to par (several issues were reported by users and fixed later on). | concepts are fairly technical and the | Quizz | demand a bit more " thinking | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The course content is quite elaborate and very detailed. Assignments and explanation,quiz was all excellent. | and very detailed. Assignments and explanation, | Quizz | was all excellent. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | Excellent course! Extremely well organized and definitely provides a lot of great information. The quiz questions are too easy, which is why it's not 5 stars. | a lot of great information. The | Quizz | questions are too easy, which is | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The answer choices for the quiz are so obvious and can be easily guessed. It can be improved to make the student really think. Also the final quiz is just a repetition of questions we see in the module quiz. It can be different to test the effectiveness of the student. | The answer choices for the | Quizz | are so obvious and can be | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The answer choices for the quiz are so obvious and can be easily guessed. It can be improved to make the student really think. Also the final quiz is just a repetition of questions we see in the module quiz. It can be different to test the effectiveness of the student. | student really think. Also the final | Quizz | is just a repetition of questions | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The answer choices for the quiz are so obvious and can be easily guessed. It can be improved to make the student really think. Also the final quiz is just a repetition of questions we see in the module quiz. It can be different to test the effectiveness of the student. | questions we see in the module | Quizz | It can be different to test | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Well done. Focuses mainly on videos to teach the content with an assignment at the end of the week that uses everything you learned. I would rate 5 stars if it had more quizzes or exercises to do before the week's assignment. At any rate you learn a lot about Html, css, and JS and it's a worthy class in this specialization. | 5 stars if it had more | Quizz | or exercises to do before the | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good lectures, interesting quizes, good assessments. Perfect! | Good lectures, interesting | Quizz | good assessments. Perfect! | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good one. Going from Basics to little bit advance. Nice assignments and Quiz added in course. | little bit advance. Nice assignments and | Quizz | added in course. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Excellent material, Knowledgeable trainer, Nice short quiz and exercises, hands-on assignments with clues and study materials. Last but not the least, reviewing others assignments and learning from others. Really enjoyed learning HTML, CSS and JavaScript. | Excellent material, Knowledgeable trainer, Nice short | Quizz | and exercises, hands-on assignments with clues | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very detailed and great, clear lectures. Very good quizzes and hands-on assignments. Highly recommended for absolutely beginner. | and great, clear lectures. Very good | Quizz | and hands-on assignments. Highly recommended for | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Pros: A basic introduction to the 3 core front-end technologies. The Professor has structured the course in a logical and easy to follow progressive format. The presentations are professionally done with quality audio and HD video. (The Professor speaks with a clear proper British accent). If watching online, there are helpful short quizzes built into the videos to make sure people are not skipping ahead. (Not sure if these 'video quizzes are graded, but I think they are helpful) Cons: The projects are helpful to reinforce logic and programming concepts, however, they are not real world and may be too simple to be of real value. One will need supplemental resources to fill in the gaps for the projects. I would have liked a real world example, even if it was beyond the scope of the course. | watching online, there are helpful short | Quizz | built into the videos to make | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Pros: A basic introduction to the 3 core front-end technologies. The Professor has structured the course in a logical and easy to follow progressive format. The presentations are professionally done with quality audio and HD video. (The Professor speaks with a clear proper British accent). If watching online, there are helpful short quizzes built into the videos to make sure people are not skipping ahead. (Not sure if these 'video quizzes are graded, but I think they are helpful) Cons: The projects are helpful to reinforce logic and programming concepts, however, they are not real world and may be too simple to be of real value. One will need supplemental resources to fill in the gaps for the projects. I would have liked a real world example, even if it was beyond the scope of the course. | ahead. (Not sure if these 'video | Quizz | are graded, but I think they | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Hi, I got promoted as a beta tester only 4 days ago, which was too short to review the whole course. So, here's my review for the first two weeks. The course is nice and easy to follow. It looks like beginner level. However, since it seems aimed at beginners, I think the teacher should put more emphasis on - good practices (i.e. when there are several ways to do something, always indicate which one is recommended). - accessibility for people with disabilities, which should be a priority when creating new website Also, I think that 3 weeks is a bit too short. The first week should at least be split in two so that students get more time to practice HTML/CSS coding. Lastly, there should be many more practice quizzes and (why not?) optional projects. Thank you for having me as a beta tester. | there should be many more practice | Quizz | and (why not? ) optional projects. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I really enjoyed this course. Although I wish there had been more practices to instill the firm knowledge of what the content was. Computer flashcards, or even extra little quizzes in each lesson would have been nice. Other than that, great course, great teacher, and great content! Thank you! | Computer flashcards, or even extra little | Quizz | in each lesson would have been | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | fantastic course - only slight issues are quizzes that seek to trick you on the way they are worded rather than actual knowledge, and slight america-centric-ness of the material used (although all material was still fantastic, an example or two from non western poets might have been interesting to add) | course - only slight issues are | Quizz | that seek to trick you on | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| LMkb_1b9EeWsGQ6fKrurvQ | pesimo el quiz 1 si todos los quiz son asi, no hay forma | pesimo el | Quizz | 1 si todos los quiz son | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| LMkb_1b9EeWsGQ6fKrurvQ | pesimo el quiz 1 si todos los quiz son asi, no hay forma | el quiz 1 si todos los | Quizz | son asi, no hay forma | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| loAmvxJgEea8fxLSgUgxeQ | The lectures did not explain the concepts clearly and were way too specific and technical in my opinion. The assignment instructions were so unclear and did not test what I believe was covered in the lesson, or the other way - they did not prepare for what they wanted to test us on. Both the format of the quizzes (true/false) and the programming assignments (just calling it that for simplicity) do not allow us to generalise what was taught to other contexts...that is, if I even understood the lectures at all. | on. Both the format of the | Quizz | (true/false) and the programming assignments (just | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| LWzwe3KxEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Learned so much. Great course - good mix of video instruction, mini quizzes & questions, graded quizzes etc. to keep your attention. Also, the information is current and practical. Definitely recommend. | good mix of video instruction, mini | Quizz | & questions, graded quizzes etc. to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| LWzwe3KxEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Learned so much. Great course - good mix of video instruction, mini quizzes & questions, graded quizzes etc. to keep your attention. Also, the information is current and practical. Definitely recommend. | instruction, mini quizzes & questions, graded | Quizz | etc. to keep your attention. Also, | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| LWzwe3KxEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | need to pay to submit quiz. | need to pay to submit | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Very informative beginner course. Perfect for someone who needs to understand the basics. Prof Boneh's instructions were excellent and the quizzes were tough but valuable. | Boneh's instructions were excellent and the | Quizz | were tough but valuable. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I had to review college algebra and some of the prerequisite, optional material to get by. I found myself thinking I understood until I got to the quiz. There are a lot of spaces where he assumes you know things or that you will figure out that a+b=c (like putting 2 and 2 together). Notes should probably be taken in outline format. After watching a couple weeks you can tell how he organizes it. The teacher is very knowledgeable and explains concepts very well. The material can still be incredibly hard and gets easier as you repeat it. | understood until I got to the | Quizz | There are a lot of spaces | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| m0Du-7_DEeWn-wqIckNy5Q | To lock a quiz for payment is mean. | To lock a | Quizz | for payment is mean. | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| maX993EhEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | This course has amazing breath. Most other specializations are organized chronologically (i.e. Course 1: Learn Ruby, Course 2: learn about databases with rails, Course 3: Learn about HTML,CSS, JS, etc.) But this introductory course describes everything that goes into making web applications, from front end to back end and compares ruby on rails to the other major frameworks. If you're just trying to get started learning WebApps, as I was, this is very useful. The reason I couldn't give it 5 stars was that there weren't very useful assignments. You learn programming best from doing projects. In this course, there were a few quizes (which aren't as nearly as useful as projects) and the only projects that existed were to simply follow the steps exactly as the professor did in his videos. I think that the makers of the course are 90% of the way to a top course, they just need to add in programming assignments for each week, where you don't just follow the professor. I learned a lot from this course, but without getting the programming projects and exercises needed to reinforce the understanding, it may be hard to retain some of the knowledge. | this course, there were a few | Quizz | (which aren't as nearly as useful | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| mbi6rVy-EeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Muy bueno el curso, Doug un excelente profesor, su nivel de español envidiable, me hubiera gustado un poco más de exigencia en las tareas y actividades del curso, solo un quiz sencillo no refleja todo el esfuerzo que un curso de este nivel debe tener, el curso tiene un nivel de contenido excelente, Mil Gracias Guillermo Cuello | y actividades del curso, solo un | Quizz | sencillo no refleja todo el esfuerzo | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Concise but too concise I feel. Maybe it's meant for more foundation/beginner level ? Else, need more details. Not just overview. And, need more involvement/engagement from students, need multiple (randomized per attempt) questions in quizzes, need participation from course producers/TAs for questions and clarifications needed by students (in discussion forums). | multiple (randomized per attempt) questions in | Quizz | need participation from course producers/TAs for | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | In my point of view the course overall is a bit superficial (even though the decision-making part was very interesting indeed). More importantly, the course lacks one of the richest tools in MOOCS: peer interactions - people voicing their opinions and sharing experiences. Besides that: some of the questions in the quiz looked very ambiguous and there are some editing mistakes in the videos. | some of the questions in the | Quizz | looked very ambiguous and there are | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| MEgKOpw3EeWILQ7D3uPEMw | Good course. I did find the quizes not as challenging as the Marketing and Accounting courses I took through Wharton/ Coursera. Sometimes it seems some of the Professors talk very quickly as opposed to the Core MBA offerings. Overall, great content. Thank you! | Good course. I did find the | Quizz | not as challenging as the Marketing | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| mG15ZhQ9EeWCWhKuhISYpw | Good course. I enjoyed watching the lectures, especially from Bocco. The quizzes were also very representative of the course materials. Thanks for a good learning experience. | the lectures, especially from Bocco. The | Quizz | were also very representative of the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I really enjoyed this course. It threw me, at first, that the whole course was only lectures -- no videos or readings -- but so much of this course will be applicable to teaching biology that it's useful no matter what. I also had a small problem with verifying quizzes on my phone. | had a small problem with verifying | Quizz | on my phone. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Excellent! Professor Cockell obviously has a passion for his field and I thoroughly enjoyed his lectures. I learned much more than I expected as the course is fully detailed, well organized and the quizzes were challenging. I found the whole experience a pleasure. Thank you Professor! | fully detailed, well organized and the | Quizz | were challenging. I found the whole | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Wonderful course. I took it just to satisfy my curiosity. I really enjoyed listening to the lectures and doing the quizzes. Many thanks to the professor for taking the time to make it. I would be happy to see a more advanced version. | to the lectures and doing the | Quizz | Many thanks to the professor for | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. I thought the pace was just right, and the quizzes were just challenging enough to make me review the content more thoughtfully. Thank you for making this course accessible! | pace was just right, and the | Quizz | were just challenging enough to make | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I would like to send my thanks to the professor for sharing the course and all the assistants for the efforts you have done. The classes are very interesting and I enjoyed my time while following the classes as well as doing the quiz. | classes as well as doing the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | The material could be exciting but the presentation is dull. The pass mark on the quizzes is around 80%. As these courses are supposed to be for interest why do you need 80% to pass? | dull. The pass mark on the | Quizz | is around 80%. As these courses | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Well spoken professor, fair quizzes, and very interesting material. Will help me understand how to work with patients in a Physical Therapist setting better | Well spoken professor, fair | Quizz | and very interesting material. Will help | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | A great course: well-structured, challenging and enjoyable. I especially appreciated the numeroud descriptions to important studies in the field, and the fact that the teacher managed to balance the economic, neuroscientific and psychological aspects of the topic to provide an appropriate overview for people focussing on either of the three. The quizzes and final exam were also conducive of learning and the length of the course was just right. The only thing that l didn't like was that it seems like no Statement of Accomplishment will be provided to those of us choosing not to study towards a Verified Certificate. | on either of the three. The | Quizz | and final exam were also conducive | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Very interesting, and a well-paced overview. The course could be improved slightly by having another person even more fluent in English copy edit the quizzes. The wording is sometimes confusing and there are numerous typos. | fluent in English copy edit the | Quizz | The wording is sometimes confusing and | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | Build Your First Android App (Project-Centered Course) is a well organised course with good introductory material covering basics of the android development. I recommend this course to anyone who is new to Android development or anyone who wants to brush up their android development basics. You'll need to work through out this 5 week course. The course material is consolidated with Quizzes. By the end of the course you will know how to prototype, design and code an android application with the best practices in mind using a rubric. Instructors of this course are good too in terms of knowing their stuff and being able to convey and explain it in simple terms. | The course material is consolidated with | Quizz | By the end of the course | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | The course if well-organized and the instructors do a very good job. However, three weeks of slides and theory and then only the last two weeks of seeing code hardly makes the course project-centered in my mind. Also, requiring learners to upgrade to run an autograder on a quiz is ridiculous! | to run an autograder on a | Quizz | is ridiculous! | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | This is a very good hands-on course to introduce new students to learning Android programming. I have basic knowledge of Java and found this course easy to understand and follow. Suggestion: Change the graded quiz to practice quiz so that non-paying students can submit and check their answers and learn from it. Or find another alternative to Coursera since it is not 100% free for students. I look forward to another building blocks Android course in the future! Thank you for this course! | and follow. Suggestion: Change the graded | Quizz | to practice quiz so that non-paying | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | This is a very good hands-on course to introduce new students to learning Android programming. I have basic knowledge of Java and found this course easy to understand and follow. Suggestion: Change the graded quiz to practice quiz so that non-paying students can submit and check their answers and learn from it. Or find another alternative to Coursera since it is not 100% free for students. I look forward to another building blocks Android course in the future! Thank you for this course! | Change the graded quiz to practice | Quizz | so that non-paying students can submit | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | Didactique, très peu de raccourcis donc il est aisé de tout reproduire. Certains quiz demandent de courtes recherches en dehors de ce qui est mentionné durant le cours. J'ai beaucoup apprécié le côté "hands on". J'aurais apprécié que le cours soit plus long avec des exemples de tâches courantes : se connecter à une base de données, réaliser une page d'authentification, chiffrer une communication, construire une app avec menu, etc. Bravo encore ! | est aisé de tout reproduire. Certains | Quizz | demandent de courtes recherches en dehors | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I could not finish this course, although I admire the teacher for preparing this difficult material for English speakers. I have studied several Romance and one Semitic language but I was unable to understand the lectures here. I did pass the first few quizzes but I did not feel that I knew what I was doing. I really am motivated to learn some Chinese because it is like a 2nd or at least 3rd language in my city and very much a 1st or 2nd language in my neighborhood. But I needed something a little more tangible with which to get started . I am sure this says more about my inability than the teacher's ability. I know I am not explaining myself well; I simply mean that to learn a language in which the alphabet is different and the meanings are based on emphasis rather than actual words, requires, I think, perhaps a bit more anchoring for the complete novice. For example, i wish we could have learned some simple conversational phrases, early on, just to get started, without worrying right away about all the sounds. Then once we can do that, we could get a bit more technical. Also, it would be helpful to be referred to a relevant text book. However, thank you for the effort. I hope Coursera will offer more languages since I could not find any other languages in the list. | I did pass the first few | Quizz | but I did not feel that | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | This is an excellent introduction to Mandarin. Basic essentials covered regarding pronunciation and grammar. Lessons are clear and quizzes help learning. | and grammar. Lessons are clear and | Quizz | help learning. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Great class! The professor provides great guidance on pronunciation and quizzes are helpful in developing vocabulary. | provides great guidance on pronunciation and | Quizz | are helpful in developing vocabulary. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I loved the course! Xiao Liu is an excellent teacher. She pronounces slowly and clear which makes all lessons easy to understand and follow. The additional material provided in each lesson is very helpful for practicing before answering the quizzes and submitting the | helpful for practicing before answering the | Quizz | and submitting the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | The teacher was very clear and gave information at a nice, comfortable pace. I really liked the format of the class: vocabulary and grammar structures, dialogues, short quiz, and extra practice. The way she made distinctions between correct and incorrect pronunciation of certain pinyin combinations was really helpful, too. Excellent and enjoyable course! | vocabulary and grammar structures, dialogues, short | Quizz | and extra practice. The way she | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Excellent beginners course in Mandarin. The teacher introduces new words using pinyin in each 3-4 minute lesson and the content is reviewed in a quiz. The content is limited to reading and pronouncing pinyin words, which is perfectly acceptable to me since I'm supplementing this course with other in person classes. I love the 4 minute classes 4 times per week, since I never felt like I'm so far behind the deadlines that I can't catch up. | the content is reviewed in a | Quizz | The content is limited to reading | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | This course was effective in testing what was learned and in testing simple, useful expressions, words, and sentences. However, I would have liked to learn Chinese characters along with the pinyin, as in China reading the characters is just as important as speaking. Also, I believe the quizzes were a bit too simple, there should have been more multiple choice answers to chose from, more questions in general, and even some pronunciation practice. | as speaking. Also, I believe the | Quizz | were a bit too simple, there | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | After many technical issues I decided to try the course using my phone.... and it worked! I enjoyed the rest of the course immensely! :-) I have given this course four stars instead of five as I feel there should have been a few more interactive quizzes to really imbed the target language. I actually used what I learned to chat to some Chinese people in my area! What a wonderful feeling. :-) | have been a few more interactive | Quizz | to really imbed the target language. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Quizes got glitchy however, overall content is fantastic!!! (Wouldnt recomend taking for certification... better suited for fun ;) | | Quizz | got glitchy however, overall content is | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I think, for beginners, it's a good job but the quiz is really hard to use !! | it's a good job but the | Quizz | is really hard to use ! | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Terrible. Had to verify multiple times. Audio quiz had no sound (struck-thru speaker icon I couldn't fix.) I'd be disappointed with Cousera for foisting this trash if I hadn't taken "Learning How to Learn," much less buggy. Would disenroll if there was any way to do so. | Had to verify multiple times. Audio | Quizz | had no sound (struck-thru speaker icon | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I enjoyed the course, the videos and quizzes were easy to understand. This was a great start to learning Mandarin Chinese. Will you offer a continuation course, besides the Chinese calligraphy? ;-) | enjoyed the course, the videos and | Quizz | were easy to understand. This was | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Interesting lessons! Quizzes could be improved with sentence translations. Chinese characters could be shown with pinyin in order to be able to recognize them. | Interesting lessons! | Quizz | could be improved with sentence translations. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Full of quizzes and tests to test the newly acquired knowledge. This is the way a language should be taught. | Full of | Quizz | and tests to test the newly | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I am giving it a 2 and am leaving the course because several of the recordings in the second quiz don't work. It is not possible to participate when there are technical difficulties like this. If the recordings worked, I am sure it would be a very fun and interesting class. | of the recordings in the second | Quizz | don't work. It is not possible | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I really liked this course because all the lessons are coherent with each other which helps one understand Chinese better. I hope that the quizzes would be more difficult to fully test the student's competence. | Chinese better. I hope that the | Quizz | would be more difficult to fully | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | short modules, focused quizzes, | short modules, focused | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Focuses on pronunciation and basic pinyin. I think this might be a difficult course to start with, although the quizes themselves are very easy. Vocabulary is very lightly covered. | course to start with, although the | Quizz | themselves are very easy. Vocabulary is | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | The course is a very practical approach to the language. The main goal of it being to help you get by in the country. It's title should be Surviving in China 101. Although misleading for people wanting to learn the language to an extensive level, it's definitely a good base to have and to build on. The material is presented in a very accessible manner and the quizzes help you master the key elements acquired within each session. Overall, great class if you plan visiting the country and want to be able to get by without a translator as we all know that not all Chinese natives speak English. | a very accessible manner and the | Quizz | help you master the key elements | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | It is quite good course for beginners those are Latin-Language-speaking people. You don't need to learn a chinese characters. So, it is very simple. But, I think that these lectures lacks logiccal explanation. Even in beginning, the logical sturucte is undoubtedly important for further learning. And, Quiz are really easy. So, you can finish this course even in a day if you have a sufficient time. I do not think that this course will make someone really spaek Chinee in China. But, this should be recommended for only those are interested in Chinese and do not have a plan to go to china. | undoubtedly important for further learning. And, | Quizz | are really easy. So, you can | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I am having a really good experience. The classes are very easy to understand and the quizzes help me fix the knowledge. I highly recommend this course for people who want to learn the first words in Chinese. | very easy to understand and the | Quizz | help me fix the knowledge. I | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Excellent chunking of the material, while integrating daily conversational dialogues. Review and quizzes at the end of each section is great. However, I would suggest adding the Chinese characters to the bottom of the pinyin for future Chinese students. | integrating daily conversational dialogues. Review and | Quizz | at the end of each section | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | "Chinese for Beginners" is the best online resource I have found for learning a language. Professor Xiaoyu Liu's presentations are clear and easy to follow. Lectures build on content presented previously. The quizzes provide immediate feedback. The features that I found particularly helpful was the ability to pause after hearing a word, phrase, or sentence the professor said so I could repeat it several times before resuming the lecture. I also appreciated being able to repeat the quizzes as one way of reviewing the material. I hope that Peking University offers another online course for those who have completed "Chinese for Beginners." | build on content presented previously. The | Quizz | provide immediate feedback. The features that | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | "Chinese for Beginners" is the best online resource I have found for learning a language. Professor Xiaoyu Liu's presentations are clear and easy to follow. Lectures build on content presented previously. The quizzes provide immediate feedback. The features that I found particularly helpful was the ability to pause after hearing a word, phrase, or sentence the professor said so I could repeat it several times before resuming the lecture. I also appreciated being able to repeat the quizzes as one way of reviewing the material. I hope that Peking University offers another online course for those who have completed "Chinese for Beginners." | appreciated being able to repeat the | Quizz | as one way of reviewing the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I think the quizzes could've been higher quality. Many of the images used in the quizzes were very confusing. Also, i think more character recognition instead of focus on pin yin would've been more beneficial | I think the | Quizz | could've been higher quality. Many of | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I think the quizzes could've been higher quality. Many of the images used in the quizzes were very confusing. Also, i think more character recognition instead of focus on pin yin would've been more beneficial | of the images used in the | Quizz | were very confusing. Also, i think | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Mue2M1z0EeWqJhKypiGv4w | The course is inspiring :-) The topics are interesting, and the learning materials are well designed by questions and answers, I like the part of Pause & Reflect. The part of quiz is sooooo good, when you submit your answers, you can read a detailed analysis of the correct solutions, that is very helpful. | Pause & Reflect. The part of | Quizz | is sooooo good, when you submit | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | In no way is there enough information given to be able to complete this quiz questions. A total frustration to try to figure out. You can't even figure out what datasets you are expected to analyze! You have to pick one from hundreds that are available! UPDATE: Revising my rating to 3. Course and material improved as course progressed. Week1 very discouraging, but I'm glad I stuck with it. Other weeks were very good. | to be able to complete this | Quizz | questions. A total frustration to try | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | after complains in discussion forum about | Quizz | questions. 5) No feedback for solving | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | answers even after the deadline. 6) | Quizz | questions required methods and logical constructs | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One | Quizz | lacked background information of what data | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | previous version of the course). Some | Quizz | questions were biologically inaccurate i. e. | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Discussions in this course are voiceless and dead and the instructor never appears in discussions. I couldn't understand anything from video lectures: cannot understand enunciation not enough detailed, lack of examples related to the assignments. So the only source was repository http://kasperdanielhansen.github.io/genbioconductor/ with html files. And a lot of searching through bioconductor forums. I liked the relevance of quiz questions to real life genomic questions, but all quiz questions were outstandingly difficult, because of both lack of examples in lectures and errors in some packages inside bioconductor. Overall I expected much more from this course and I cannot recommend it to anyone. | forums. I liked the relevance of | Quizz | questions to real life genomic questions, | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Discussions in this course are voiceless and dead and the instructor never appears in discussions. I couldn't understand anything from video lectures: cannot understand enunciation not enough detailed, lack of examples related to the assignments. So the only source was repository http://kasperdanielhansen.github.io/genbioconductor/ with html files. And a lot of searching through bioconductor forums. I liked the relevance of quiz questions to real life genomic questions, but all quiz questions were outstandingly difficult, because of both lack of examples in lectures and errors in some packages inside bioconductor. Overall I expected much more from this course and I cannot recommend it to anyone. | real life genomic questions, but all | Quizz | questions were outstandingly difficult, because of | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | There are two frustrations with this iteration of the series. One: the quiz questions are often opaquely worded. Instead of being tested on the material just learned, it seemed like the objective was to learn to decode test questions. 2 and the most glaring omission, was that when students are asked to provide functions, only some are provided with a follow up test to ensure the function is working properly. If the output is syntactically correct but provides incorrect output then you're moving forward blindly after that. Then add the quiz questions from problem One above, and you're just wasting your time after that and building up frustration. Validating your code as you move along seems like a pretty rudimentary process to impart to students and when the teachers don't practice it themselves, there are bound to be problems. I like the intent of the course, and considering my outsider background to computer science, the mathematics etc, I did learn a fair bit. Not enough to justify the increasing frustration I was feeling toward the end of this course. I have no intention of taking any more at this point, not from these authors. | iteration of the series. One: the | Quizz | questions are often opaquely worded. Instead | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | There are two frustrations with this iteration of the series. One: the quiz questions are often opaquely worded. Instead of being tested on the material just learned, it seemed like the objective was to learn to decode test questions. 2 and the most glaring omission, was that when students are asked to provide functions, only some are provided with a follow up test to ensure the function is working properly. If the output is syntactically correct but provides incorrect output then you're moving forward blindly after that. Then add the quiz questions from problem One above, and you're just wasting your time after that and building up frustration. Validating your code as you move along seems like a pretty rudimentary process to impart to students and when the teachers don't practice it themselves, there are bound to be problems. I like the intent of the course, and considering my outsider background to computer science, the mathematics etc, I did learn a fair bit. Not enough to justify the increasing frustration I was feeling toward the end of this course. I have no intention of taking any more at this point, not from these authors. | blindly after that. Then add the | Quizz | questions from problem One above, and | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent combination of conceptual and practical quizzes. Providing the presentation slides is a great note-taking aid, as well as use of "ride-along" notebooks. The progressive use of the same dataset throughout the modules greatly aided focus on learning the algorithms. | Excellent combination of conceptual and practical | Quizz | Providing the presentation slides is a | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good class, But it would be much better if the quiz is open to those who doesn't pay. | would be much better if the | Quizz | is open to those who doesn't | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course offers great background instruction on Machine Learning and I would give it 5 stars except for the following: First, there doesn't seem to be any moderation of the session discussions except for help from other students. This was worth a -2 star penalty. This and the lack of any review of linear algebra and vectorized solutions, I think, is giving some students the impression that they should be coding loops in their functions to build and solve ML models. Next, I am auditing the course, and this is the first course where I was not able to submit quizzes. Therefore, I can only guess at my solutions. This was worth a -1 star penalty. UPDATE: not being able to submit quizzes is a "feature" of the new Coursera platform. I never did get an answer from the discussion forums, but I see the same problem in other Coursera courses I am taking. However, I still think the course is worth taking, so I added back a star. This is the second ML course I have taken. The first was from Stanford ML course which was very specific to implementation in the Octave language. I got a lot more background information from this course, and I think it is well taught. Just wish there were more moderators that were actively watching the discussion list. | I was not able to submit | Quizz | Therefore, I can only guess at | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course offers great background instruction on Machine Learning and I would give it 5 stars except for the following: First, there doesn't seem to be any moderation of the session discussions except for help from other students. This was worth a -2 star penalty. This and the lack of any review of linear algebra and vectorized solutions, I think, is giving some students the impression that they should be coding loops in their functions to build and solve ML models. Next, I am auditing the course, and this is the first course where I was not able to submit quizzes. Therefore, I can only guess at my solutions. This was worth a -1 star penalty. UPDATE: not being able to submit quizzes is a "feature" of the new Coursera platform. I never did get an answer from the discussion forums, but I see the same problem in other Coursera courses I am taking. However, I still think the course is worth taking, so I added back a star. This is the second ML course I have taken. The first was from Stanford ML course which was very specific to implementation in the Octave language. I got a lot more background information from this course, and I think it is well taught. Just wish there were more moderators that were actively watching the discussion list. | UPDATE: not being able to submit | Quizz | is a " feature" of the | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Really good course. Provides basic theoretical and hands on knowledge in the regression. Step by step programming quiz some times not demonstrate enough best practices or conceptual ideas. For example I would expect that if at step 1 we asked to assess performance based on single feature then at step 2 based on several features and compare results. But in most of the cases such comparison not proposed and results not explained. In addition it is not always clear why prediction accuracy better or worse. | the regression. Step by step programming | Quizz | some times not demonstrate enough best | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This was a deep dive into all things regression and I guess having a background in mathematics helped out a lot with following the material. However, I wish there was a better distribution of quizzes and assignments throughout the weekly lessons because they seemed to all come during the end of the lesson. All in all this was a very good course and I wish that I would have taken a similar course during my undergrad. | there was a better distribution of | Quizz | and assignments throughout the weekly lessons | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent lectures, evenly paced and nicely balanced between theory and practice, and mostly great quizzes and practice problems. However, the complete lack of instructor participation in the forums leaves many student questions unanswered. | theory and practice, and mostly great | Quizz | and practice problems. However, the complete | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This is an amazing and brilliant course for machine learning. If you've done Andrew Ng's course, most of this material will feel familiar, but definitely has a lot more detail. Each sub-topic under regression is taken with a decent level of detail, with sufficient quiz and assignment questions to drill important concepts into your head. The lectures are lucid and concise, even the optional ones that cover more advanced concepts of the underlying math. As an aside, I would like to clarify to any reader that, when they say you can use other tools, they aren't being a 100% honest. After a few assignments of using Scala and R, I quickly realized that using their iPython notebooks is the simplest and most straightforward way of clearing this course. Eventually, the assignments are such that using any other tool can cause a lot of strife. Brilliant course. Looking forward to the next one. | decent level of detail, with sufficient | Quizz | and assignment questions to drill important | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good introduction to linear regression. The quizzes are moderately difficult, and can be somewhat time consuming. There is a lot of depth to this topic, and tho this course touches on a lot of it, it won't be enough to get a very thorough understanding. In general I'm really glad I took this course | Good introduction to linear regression. The | Quizz | are moderately difficult, and can be | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | An excellent and quite extensive foray into regression analyses from single-variable linear regression to nearest-neighbor and kernel regression techniques, including how to use gradient vs. coordinate descent for optimization and proper L1 and L2 regularization methods. The lecture slides have some questionable pedagogical and aesthetic qualities, and they could use some more polish from someone who specializes in teaching presentation methods, but the meat of the course comes from its quizzes and programming assignments, which are well split between practical use (via Graphlab Create and SFrame) and a nuts-and-bolts assignment that have you implement these methods from scratch. An extremely valuable course for someone who wants to use these for a data science application but also wants to understand the mathematics and statistics behind them to an appreciable degree. | of the course comes from its | Quizz | and programming assignments, which are well | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This module is very rich in pratical assignments, as well as quizzes to force you to understand what you are doing. Everything is really well balanced, and all the materials are very complete. Is clear the passion from the tutors and teachers in this course. This really gives you the necessary will to proceed, and don't give up, even when things get pretty hard. | in pratical assignments, as well as | Quizz | to force you to understand what | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Very, very good course, high-quality teaching, and well-developed quizzes and assignments. The course is challenging enough to feel motivated and satisfied when finishing a week's work, but not so challenging as to scare people (or me, at least) away. I hope (and trust) that you keep up the good work in the courses to come. If there was one thing I could change, it would be to include a discussion of statistical significance/inference (as suggested by Emily towards the end). It is unclear now how that can be analyzed in the Graphlab environment, even though it is a very important topic for practical purposes. | good course, high-quality teaching, and well-developed | Quizz | and assignments. The course is challenging | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Can't praise enough! This IS THE COURSE for regression. Cannot believe I didn't stumble upon it earlier enough. Great Specialization, Great Course, Great Professors, Great thought provoking Quizzes and assignments, helpful mentors and more important that any of the above, amazing comprehensive content covering each and every topic from simple linear regression to feature selection and going all the way to kNN Regression. An enjoyable and great learning experience. Hope to carry on the same level of enthusiasm through the rest of the specialization. Thank You Emily, Carlos, Johan (mentor) and rest of my classmates. And of course, Thank You Coursera. | Course, Great Professors, Great thought provoking | Quizz | and assignments, helpful mentors and more | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | great course, I learned a lot. Videos, slides, quiz, programming exercises, a lot of fun. | I learned a lot. Videos, slides, | Quizz | programming exercises, a lot of fun. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Great class (really liked the graphical interpretations of Lasso and Ridge optimizations). Perhaps some quizzes (and especially assignements) could be more challenging? | Lasso and Ridge optimizations). Perhaps some | Quizz | (and especially assignements) could be more | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good course, but could improve the quiz. Currently the quiz are too easy for ML learners. | Good course, but could improve the | Quizz | Currently the quiz are too easy | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good course, but could improve the quiz. Currently the quiz are too easy for ML learners. | could improve the quiz. Currently the | Quizz | are too easy for ML learners. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Missing in-lesson quiz, with all the homeworks being at the end of the week: this make following the pace quite tough | Missing in-lesson | Quizz | with all the homeworks being at | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Some of the quizes and assignments had grading issues but I thought the curriculum was great. All of the optimization techniques learned to solve for regressions seem like they could be useful in other areas of machine learning and other applications. | Some of the | Quizz | and assignments had grading issues but | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course was well structured and well executed. I thoroughly enjoyed and was challenged by the material in the course. I appreciated the assignment/quiz approach to deal with such dense topics. I can see where people who have backgrounds in a number of the topics discussed throughout the course could feel there was too much hand holding, but I found the level of hints/help in the assignments were at the right level for me to work through & gain deeper understanding for the material presented. My one criticism of the course stems from the denseness of the material. I believe there is an opportunity to introduce more quizzes after various sections within each module. It would be best to make these quizzes optional in order not to turn off more advance students, but I believe it would be beneficial for those students who do not have much, or any, experience in these topics to have more opportunities to test and gain deeper understanding in the material just covered. Overall, solid course! | is an opportunity to introduce more | Quizz | after various sections within each module. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course was well structured and well executed. I thoroughly enjoyed and was challenged by the material in the course. I appreciated the assignment/quiz approach to deal with such dense topics. I can see where people who have backgrounds in a number of the topics discussed throughout the course could feel there was too much hand holding, but I found the level of hints/help in the assignments were at the right level for me to work through & gain deeper understanding for the material presented. My one criticism of the course stems from the denseness of the material. I believe there is an opportunity to introduce more quizzes after various sections within each module. It would be best to make these quizzes optional in order not to turn off more advance students, but I believe it would be beneficial for those students who do not have much, or any, experience in these topics to have more opportunities to test and gain deeper understanding in the material just covered. Overall, solid course! | would be best to make these | Quizz | optional in order not to turn | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This gives a nice survey of the techniques and approaches of Linear Regression. Lectures are structured well, and mathematical derivations are provided as optional lectures. Each week has a quiz that goes over the material, as well as programming assignments that are meant to provide a higher level understanding via Dato's GraphLab Create, as well as lower level understanding with Numpy. I am dropping a star because some portions of the programming exercises seemed to be contrived. | optional lectures. Each week has a | Quizz | that goes over the material, as | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Wonderful lectures and good assignments. Very, very clear presentations. Minor drawbacks: there's no assistance available for the assignments (which can be quite difficult). The quizzes require sometimes information that is not directly available in the video lectures. Note that it takes more hrs per week than mentioned (but it's worthwhile!). | (which can be quite difficult). The | Quizz | require sometimes information that is not | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Opening the quizes and the internal acreditation for free should be a most for such a good course like this. Its a shame that "non premium" users have access to only the video material. | Opening the | Quizz | and the internal acreditation for free | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Super costly. The course needs to make at least some of the quizes available for the free users | make at least some of the | Quizz | available for the free users | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Great insights, very useful contents. The assignments are a good addition to the lectures & quizzes - it makes it more interactive and "forces" you to think about the content more deeply and in relation to your own experiences. Geoffrey (The Netherlands) | good addition to the lectures & | Quizz | - it makes it more interactive | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | Only able to audit the class, no longer able to take quizzes and tests. I recommend the Python classes from Michigan over these if you are looking to avoid paying for old material. | class, no longer able to take | Quizz | and tests. I recommend the Python | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | Excellent Courst but you have to pay in order to access the quizes and assignments... very dissapointing. | pay in order to access the | Quizz | and assignments. . . very dissapointing. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Excellent quality, loved the quizzes and graded assignments, completely worth the time and money! Highly recommend! | Excellent quality, loved the | Quizz | and graded assignments, completely worth the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Very clear introduction to algorithm basics. Reasonable quizzes and assignments. | clear introduction to algorithm basics. Reasonable | Quizz | and assignments. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Update: As I proceed to wk 5, I know why there are some complaint on Dynamic programming, Reduced to 2 stars. Lectures are totally useless for the assignment, The course is really good until week 4 when it deteriorates very quick. No matter how many times I re-watch the lecture, I can't understand much. I ended up using wikipedia for the quiz instead :P I can't use much of the course forum since there are too many posts there and it keep crashing my chrome. This course gets my 3 stars from the first 3 weeks alone, otherwise it gonna be 0-2 stars. | ended up using wikipedia for the | Quizz | instead :P I can't use much | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| Nap1_eB0EeWHHAokaxVUhQ | Very nice, quick overview. Formulation of equations in Biology leaves a bit to interpretation but this is a systemic issue. The guy is obviously highly proficient and comfortable with the subject matter never falters in his delivery. Assignments are all quizzes and the whole thing can be completed without undue pain. | in his delivery. Assignments are all | Quizz | and the whole thing can be | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| NCNTU5w4EeWNCwqI4rnUgw | Very helpful frameworks delivered in a great way. Could be made better still by more in the way of materials and assignments to engage with. Quizzes are fine but don't allow the thought engagement of case studies one can work through even if ungraded. | materials and assignments to engage with. | Quizz | are fine but don't allow the | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| NCNTU5w4EeWNCwqI4rnUgw | Tons of value in this course for free! My favorite parts: + Consumer psychology principles (in price discrimination lecture) + Public relations lecture (and the talk about the PR "food chain") + Product diffusion and adoption lecture and model (to estimate how quickly a product could spread) + two sided markets (really illustrates and makes this concept more concrete!) I just wish that non-paying students could also take the quizzes to at least see if they fully grasped the concepts being taught. Either way, I'm still thankful to have free access to so many ideas and concepts to improve myself and my business! | non-paying students could also take the | Quizz | to at least see if they | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| NDBJAUWDEeWbNhIvIryYow | This is a fantastic course about the basics of Investment Management. While it is an introductory course, it does not shy away from some basic maths and includes some very interesting and instructive spreadsheet exercises. The quality of the presentations, subtitles and slides is outstanding. The quizzes are challenging but always within the content of the lectures. I strongly recommend this course to anybody interested in investment management who is not afraid of some basic maths. Moreover, I strongly encourage the team, that organised this MOOC, to create more specialized and in depth courses, maybe even a Specialization. | subtitles and slides is outstanding. The | Quizz | are challenging but always within the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| NDBJAUWDEeWbNhIvIryYow | The videos did cover the basic theories behind all the methods for portfolio management however they were just basic theories with no explanation on how to practically implement them and then asking us who only understand the theories from the videos to suddenly try to solve the calculation quizzes especially those excel calculations without any practice on how to implement them beforehand. Besides the videos only showed the formulas with no example at all! Very disappointed with the course... This course is not recommended for those who have zero or little experience in the field.. | suddenly try to solve the calculation | Quizz | especially those excel calculations without any | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course comes with great explanation but the graded assignments sometimes seem pointless as they look irrelevant to the topic, There are unnecessary questions asked in quizzes i.e whether you have completed your assignment or not. These sort of questions never evaluate what we have accomplished | There are unnecessary questions asked in | Quizz | i. e whether you have completed | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great introduction to Java. Gives you an opportunity to play with several different libraries from the start, rather than learning the basics with just text input and output like most courses, which is really cool. No peer review, just quiz questions that can only be answered if the assignment is completed correctly. The assignments are therefore not particularly challenging -- you get out of this class what you put in! | really cool. No peer review, just | Quizz | questions that can only be answered | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Comprehensive, enough amount of quizes and suitable assignment to ensure your understanding and give you enough practice. Nicely planned. I have really benefited from it. | Comprehensive, enough amount of | Quizz | and suitable assignment to ensure your | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course was a really comprehensive package explaining all the basic concepts of Object Oriented Programming . The instructors clearly explains the concepts of inheritance , polymorphism , searching , sorting etc. relating it as much as possible to real world examples. The concept challenge questions clearly helps you to understand the subtle nuances that the instructor wants to explain . The quiz are easy .The only thing that i found hard was to complete was the final assignment as i had minimal programming experience with data structures but if you stick to it , you will definitely make it , just like me :) | instructor wants to explain . The | Quizz | are easy . The only thing | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is definitely one of the best courses I have taken. The presentations, resources, and projects are very creative and well designed. The "what do you want to cover next" quizzes tempt you to try things on your own before looking for help, which is a nice teaser. The only reason I give it 4/5 is that a few of the project instructions were too vague to figure out what they were asking for (i.e. without asking). | do you want to cover next" | Quizz | tempt you to try things on | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good course, ideal for the first half of a second course in computer science. A little java experience is recommended buy you'll probably be ok if you have program in a statically type programming language before because you can pick up java very quickly. The lectures are very good, I think that the teachers are excellent expositors but I feel that they could be more detailed. The project is about representing earthquakes in a map and you are always increasing the complexity. Finally you need to add your own extension which I found an excellent opportunity to test your imagination and your capacity to create new things. The only cons of the course for me is the way assignments are evaluated. I think it has to do with the fact that they are interactive. You have to answers questions in a Quiz related to the week content and the project. But the are not very demanding, therefore they do not reflect how much you really know. In general I recommend taking this course if you are in self study journey in computer science, even more the specialization start to get more interesting and demanding in the follow up courses, more complete and detailed. | have to answers questions in a | Quizz | related to the week content and | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | It needs project based exams, not quizzes. These project exams should be a combination of automated programming tasks, like the kind you find on HackerRank or Codeforces and peer assessment based projects that asks students to evaluate the readability of each others code. As it currently stands, this course is a joke. | It needs project based exams, not | Quizz | These project exams should be a | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very good "introduction" to Java programming. It definitely helps to be familiar with Java already and one should really be able to "read" code and deduce what it does in order to do well on the quizzes. | order to do well on the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Great contents as the rest of the courses in the specialization. I'm afraid I need to be a little bit critical with this one though: 1) The contents are really jammed into 4 weeks - The last week's contents are actually some kind of miscellany between mongoose, https, authentication and BaaS 2) Not a single quiz or self-evaluation of sorts along the course - To be completely fair, the exercises shown along the way might make up for it. Still, I think it's important to spread some quizes around so as to make absorb the concepts more effectively 3) The quality of the presentations is somewhat lower than other courses. There's even a video towards the end of the course where a Linkedin notification springs up on top, which even makes the presenter pause for a few seconds. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this course and definitely appreciate the effort put into it - Given the newly introduced Coursera fees, I'd expect much more quality in place to make it 70 buck-worth, though | and BaaS 2) Not a single | Quizz | or self-evaluation of sorts along the | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Great contents as the rest of the courses in the specialization. I'm afraid I need to be a little bit critical with this one though: 1) The contents are really jammed into 4 weeks - The last week's contents are actually some kind of miscellany between mongoose, https, authentication and BaaS 2) Not a single quiz or self-evaluation of sorts along the course - To be completely fair, the exercises shown along the way might make up for it. Still, I think it's important to spread some quizes around so as to make absorb the concepts more effectively 3) The quality of the presentations is somewhat lower than other courses. There's even a video towards the end of the course where a Linkedin notification springs up on top, which even makes the presenter pause for a few seconds. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this course and definitely appreciate the effort put into it - Given the newly introduced Coursera fees, I'd expect much more quality in place to make it 70 buck-worth, though | think it's important to spread some | Quizz | around so as to make absorb | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| Niihyrb2EeSNXyIAC0mVOQ | The Course material is great and is useful to refresh the concepts underlying dynamics of 3D motion in a short span of time. The course is very well structured and enjoyed thoroughly listening to the lectures by Dr. Whiteman. I have just one complaint though, model answers to the question in quiz are not available. So, it is difficult to compare the approach taken and validate the understanding. | model answers to the question in | Quizz | are not available. So, it is | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| NiK99anHEeS88iIAC1WehA | This class would do well to have supplemental or required readings and much more difficult quizzes. I think it would be possible to have one's wisdom teeth removed and complete this course on a binge-watching spree while on pain killers. That shouldn't be possible. Good lecturers, though. | required readings and much more difficult | Quizz | I think it would be possible | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| NjakpyWaEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Excellent presentation, engaging content, interesting and relevant assignments and quizes. | content, interesting and relevant assignments and | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| NNe5CEW4EeW8ow5lHOiKYQ | Very nice and interesting subject. Updated information materials. Peer reviewing is not sufficient for grading a Capstone Project. A raw case + hands-on quizzes would help frame/evaluate the capstone project, instead of having a dedicated Wharton personnel to grade presentations. | Project. A raw case + hands-on | Quizz | would help frame/evaluate the capstone project, | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| NnouyjuOEeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | Very good course! The teacher was knowledgeable and the material was in consonance with my expectations. My only complaint was about the quizzes which i found to be too short. | My only complaint was about the | Quizz | which i found to be too | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Can't complete last quiz....... | Can't complete last | Quizz | . . . . . . | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I really enjoyed this course, it was very informative. My only complaint is that on quiz questions that included example code, sometimes the ends of lines were cut off. I had to copy and paste them into an editor to read the entire thing. | My only complaint is that on | Quizz | questions that included example code, sometimes | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course was very nicely organized for absolute beginners. I had done Web Development a long time back and was completely new to HTML5. Listening to the Video lectures and referring the suggested textbook "Missing Link An Introduction to Web Development and Programming" was very helpful. The quizzes were tricky. I recommend this course to anyone who is completely new to web development and who likes to learn the concepts and best practices in coding. | and Programming" was very helpful. The | Quizz | were tricky. I recommend this course | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I enjoyed the pace of this class however, I was not too keen on the way code is graded, e.g. for the final project of the 3rd week, although my code validated and the resulting page was identical to the instructor's mockup, it was still marked incorrect in the quiz and there was no way to determine exactly what the issue was. There has to be a better way to grade coding assignments. | was still marked incorrect in the | Quizz | and there was no way to | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is the best course for a complete beginner. The presentation of the course material is very friendly, the instructor was really great and the quizzes were perfect. The only thing I would like to suggest is adding more coding exercises. But as it stands now, it is still fantastic! I see some people have complained about the final project auto-grader of this course. But you should know that the final project now has additional quizzes (related to the project) and even though the auto-grader sometimes makes mistakes, you can compensate that by answering the project quizzes correctly. If you are a beginner in web development, "Introduction to HTML5" is the best start you can possibly have. Most importantly this course will give you the confidence to take more advanced courses in future. | instructor was really great and the | Quizz | were perfect. The only thing I | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is the best course for a complete beginner. The presentation of the course material is very friendly, the instructor was really great and the quizzes were perfect. The only thing I would like to suggest is adding more coding exercises. But as it stands now, it is still fantastic! I see some people have complained about the final project auto-grader of this course. But you should know that the final project now has additional quizzes (related to the project) and even though the auto-grader sometimes makes mistakes, you can compensate that by answering the project quizzes correctly. If you are a beginner in web development, "Introduction to HTML5" is the best start you can possibly have. Most importantly this course will give you the confidence to take more advanced courses in future. | the final project now has additional | Quizz | (related to the project) and even | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is the best course for a complete beginner. The presentation of the course material is very friendly, the instructor was really great and the quizzes were perfect. The only thing I would like to suggest is adding more coding exercises. But as it stands now, it is still fantastic! I see some people have complained about the final project auto-grader of this course. But you should know that the final project now has additional quizzes (related to the project) and even though the auto-grader sometimes makes mistakes, you can compensate that by answering the project quizzes correctly. If you are a beginner in web development, "Introduction to HTML5" is the best start you can possibly have. Most importantly this course will give you the confidence to take more advanced courses in future. | compensate that by answering the project | Quizz | correctly. If you are a beginner | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | A great course. You can learn a lot if you're willing to dive in yourself beyond the lectures. My only fault is that some of the quiz questions didn't really seem relevant to useful material learned in the course (ie, what year html was implemented etc.) | fault is that some of the | Quizz | questions didn't really seem relevant to | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | More interactive assignments using the parser would have been great. As it stands, the quizzes had mostly relevant content, but the lessons were anything but engaging. Having Colleen talk at the camera for 5-12 minutes per video got tedious really quick. | been great. As it stands, the | Quizz | had mostly relevant content, but the | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The caliber of questions in the quizzes is quite advanced. I would be fine with that, as the challenge of writing correct html5 is a good challenge. However much of these questions were not covered in the lectures or the required and optional reading. Learning the correct html tag syntax is not intuitive--one has to be shown examples. If no examples have been covered, how can a quiz-taker be expected to create the proper tags? This strikes me as bad pedagogy. In order to answer the questions and prepare the requested page of html tags, it became necessary for a beginner such as me to research elsewhere in order to answer the questions. In that case, I began wondering why I was taking this course, rather than just reviewing the many free html5 explanations on the Internet. Further the very general response to the submitted page of html gives me no help when I am simply told something isn't right and I should review the lessons--again. I expected better feedback. I found this course to be fascinating from the lecture point of view, but "abusive" in terms of quiz expectations. I was going to take the CSS3 course from the series, but now I plan on looking for this education elsewhere. | The caliber of questions in the | Quizz | is quite advanced. I would be | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The caliber of questions in the quizzes is quite advanced. I would be fine with that, as the challenge of writing correct html5 is a good challenge. However much of these questions were not covered in the lectures or the required and optional reading. Learning the correct html tag syntax is not intuitive--one has to be shown examples. If no examples have been covered, how can a quiz-taker be expected to create the proper tags? This strikes me as bad pedagogy. In order to answer the questions and prepare the requested page of html tags, it became necessary for a beginner such as me to research elsewhere in order to answer the questions. In that case, I began wondering why I was taking this course, rather than just reviewing the many free html5 explanations on the Internet. Further the very general response to the submitted page of html gives me no help when I am simply told something isn't right and I should review the lessons--again. I expected better feedback. I found this course to be fascinating from the lecture point of view, but "abusive" in terms of quiz expectations. I was going to take the CSS3 course from the series, but now I plan on looking for this education elsewhere. | but " abusive" in terms of | Quizz | expectations. I was going to take | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Just finished the final quiz! Feeling so great! I really love this course cause I've learned a lot about HTML. Also, the Instructor put a lot of emphasis on accessibility, which I think is really important. One thing a little bit frustrating, though, the codes in the quizzes look like mess when viewed on my phone and it really gave me a lot of trouble. Perhaps this courser would offer better support for mobile phones? | Just finished the final | Quizz | Feeling so great! I really love | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Just finished the final quiz! Feeling so great! I really love this course cause I've learned a lot about HTML. Also, the Instructor put a lot of emphasis on accessibility, which I think is really important. One thing a little bit frustrating, though, the codes in the quizzes look like mess when viewed on my phone and it really gave me a lot of trouble. Perhaps this courser would offer better support for mobile phones? | frustrating, though, the codes in the | Quizz | look like mess when viewed on | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Good lectures. Relevant quizzes. | Good lectures. Relevant | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The weakest part of this coursera - are quizes - full of question, which check detailed facts from lecture instead of testing skills | part of this coursera - are | Quizz | - full of question, which check | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I'd give it a 3.5, but it's not possible so I'm leaning more towards a 4 than a 3. The most positive thing about the course was Prof. van Lent who really knows her stuff. She also has a calm, soothing manner of explaining things and moves with it at the right pace. The content was easy to follow and quizzes were useful. Final assignment was messed up and they really should fix that, but the additional eight questions were basically a transcript of the code itself, and if you did your own code, you shouldn't have had any problem distinguishing the bad code from the good one. Extra stuff for those who successfully finished the course was a nice touch. The real downside of it all was the 'staff'. I got my question answered nine days after I posted it, when I had already finished. I've also seen some rude and condescending yet sparse answers to other students. Similar (but worse) things happen in CSS3 course as well. I don't know who those people are and how they got their jobs, but they should be replaced. Or sent to professional conduct and time management class. | content was easy to follow and | Quizz | were useful. Final assignment was messed | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Excellent course with in depth explanation and good quizzes! | with in depth explanation and good | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | If there had been a working autograder for the last final project this course would have been worth it somehow. What does that mean? - The lectures provided valuable information. - The quizzes generally made sense (in relation to the lectures). - Learning how to code wasn't really possible. Why is that? - There is only one programming assignment. - The autograder doesn't give any feedback at all why resp. where things go wrong. That's everything but good style (for software as well as for learning). - Code snippets can't be tested individually. That's very bad behavior in programming. - At the end working code that meets the teached rules is marked as wrong. You are lost without any clue. So probably you can learn something. Unfortunately you can't possibly finish the course with a feeling of success. | lectures provided valuable information. - The | Quizz | generally made sense (in relation to | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Clear and very interesting. But I don't think this course is adapted for people who never heard about coding. I liked you speak about accessibility and enjoyed making the quizz. Congrats ! | about accessibility and enjoyed making the | Quizz | Congrats ! | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The good: This course really shows how to code in the 'right' way both syntax and semantics, so the theory is covered better than in other courses. There are good explanations on how to host your site, whch is not less important than learning coding. The bad: More examples and practice are needed, it's hard to get everything so quickly. I had some initial background so i handeld that ok, but for total newbies it might be too frustrating. The final assignment should be changed imo to peer review, the quiz is not the right way to do it imo. Thanks, learned alot. | changed imo to peer review, the | Quizz | is not the right way to | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Nice course. Could focus a little bit more on coding, rather than ask some informational-only question in the quizzes | ask some informational-only question in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Terrible lectures and quizes | Terrible lectures and | Quizz | | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | In the past few years I have taken a number of HTML courses and I know the basics quite well. This is a 'beginner's course' but the final coding project was next to impossible to pass. There was a quiz that would allow you to pass the course without having your code correct. Although my code validated before I submitted it , I got it wrong on the quiz three times and it never did go through correctly!!. I did pass the course with a final grade of 94% but I don't feel confident in my coding ability at all. It would be fine if I had received some feedback showing where the problems were. Without it I have no idea what went wrong. Very frustrating. | impossible to pass. There was a | Quizz | that would allow you to pass | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | In the past few years I have taken a number of HTML courses and I know the basics quite well. This is a 'beginner's course' but the final coding project was next to impossible to pass. There was a quiz that would allow you to pass the course without having your code correct. Although my code validated before I submitted it , I got it wrong on the quiz three times and it never did go through correctly!!. I did pass the course with a final grade of 94% but I don't feel confident in my coding ability at all. It would be fine if I had received some feedback showing where the problems were. Without it I have no idea what went wrong. Very frustrating. | I got it wrong on the | Quizz | three times and it never did | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | It was a very good course. I understood everything. My only complaint is that the tests questions were repetitive and so it would be easy to cheat on a second or third attempt and also the final quiz should have been more about writing your own code. I think what should have been tested was the end product by the autograder rather than the exact code. I'm not sure how that would work but it would result in a more precise grade rather than the 87.5% everyone gets and also help the student write his/her own code rather than proofreading and selecting others. I did thoroughly enjoy the course and am looking forward to Course two of the series on CSS3. | third attempt and also the final | Quizz | should have been more about writing | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | some quizzes would not work on my mobile and the final test was VERY hard. But overall a | some | Quizz | would not work on my mobile | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Great videos. Teacher awesome. But the course needs, in order to be better, more practical activities and i got a little bit upset when I worked hard in final project and later I saw that it´s not necessary at all.....Instead, I should just did a final quiz. | I should just did a final | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Video Lectures are good. Quiz taking method is Great. Liked. Thanks for the course. | Video Lectures are good. | Quizz | taking method is Great. Liked. Thanks | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Lectures are great. Colleen sounds very amiable. She has great tips. Downside: You're only required to do some coding for the final project. I think this course would be better if they'll add an in-browser editor so students could play with code after a lecture. Yes, I do play with code after the lecture to get around it, but I think the way the lectures are presented tempt the students not to. So any additional prompts such as in-browser editor - for in-lecture quizzes - definitely will help. | as in-browser editor - for in-lecture | Quizz | - definitely will help. | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I was expecting more coding exercises and the major task was only the demo page which I completed and validated, but somehow I always failed that answer wrong in the final quiz | that answer wrong in the final | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Overall I learned a lot. The course covered the topic of HTML 5 and the concepts behind the internet (hosting, protocols, DNS, etc.) I like that it was purely quiz/project based and no grading was done as peer review. However, occasionally (about 1/20) some of the quiz problems were just plain wrong. Also, the final project was a bit too strict and needed more fuzzy logic for the parser. One could produce visually identical and 100% valid results and still not get a perfect score. That seems a bit flawed to me. However, if you really want to labor on it, you can just give the quiz what it wants and eventually get a full score. All-in-all, I would recommend the course. | occasionally (about 1/20) some of the | Quizz | problems were just plain wrong. Also, | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Overall I learned a lot. The course covered the topic of HTML 5 and the concepts behind the internet (hosting, protocols, DNS, etc.) I like that it was purely quiz/project based and no grading was done as peer review. However, occasionally (about 1/20) some of the quiz problems were just plain wrong. Also, the final project was a bit too strict and needed more fuzzy logic for the parser. One could produce visually identical and 100% valid results and still not get a perfect score. That seems a bit flawed to me. However, if you really want to labor on it, you can just give the quiz what it wants and eventually get a full score. All-in-all, I would recommend the course. | it, you can just give the | Quizz | what it wants and eventually get | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Great teacher who can explain concepts in easy to digest manner. Retaking some brush-up courses so I played this in the background while I was working, completed a quiz and continued the lessons. This class is also great for giving beginners a background of the web and the history of coding and web design. Really fun to listen to. | while I was working, completed a | Quizz | and continued the lessons. This class | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course is very good. It is not so easy to pass the quizes but it does get you hooked on HTML | not so easy to pass the | Quizz | but it does get you hooked | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | 'Introduction to HTML5' course is a very general introduction to HTML5 for beginners. The professor doesn't assume you know anything about Web development or even how files are uploaded to a host website. The course covers a brief history of the Web, basic HTML5 elements, URL terminology, Accessibility, Semantics, and basic FTP & Web hosting software like C-Panel. Forms and other advanced topics are not covered. The class is presented in a laid back style and uses non-technical language which is easy to understand. The quality of the video and audio are excellent. Supplemental books (pdf) and links to Youtube videos are provided and are useful. The duration of some of the lectures seemed too long, even when using 2X playback speed. With some of the quizzes, the professor expected you to read her mind and were worded in a subjective manner. The Accessibility section seemed a little too preachy for me. Also, the final project was convoluted and the instructions were vague. The final project really ended up being a 9 or 10 question quiz that gave you hints on how to code the final project. In summary, take this course if you are a complete beginner. Otherwise, you won't learn much if you have more than 2 months of experience in front end Web development. | playback speed. With some of the | Quizz | the professor expected you to read | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | 'Introduction to HTML5' course is a very general introduction to HTML5 for beginners. The professor doesn't assume you know anything about Web development or even how files are uploaded to a host website. The course covers a brief history of the Web, basic HTML5 elements, URL terminology, Accessibility, Semantics, and basic FTP & Web hosting software like C-Panel. Forms and other advanced topics are not covered. The class is presented in a laid back style and uses non-technical language which is easy to understand. The quality of the video and audio are excellent. Supplemental books (pdf) and links to Youtube videos are provided and are useful. The duration of some of the lectures seemed too long, even when using 2X playback speed. With some of the quizzes, the professor expected you to read her mind and were worded in a subjective manner. The Accessibility section seemed a little too preachy for me. Also, the final project was convoluted and the instructions were vague. The final project really ended up being a 9 or 10 question quiz that gave you hints on how to code the final project. In summary, take this course if you are a complete beginner. Otherwise, you won't learn much if you have more than 2 months of experience in front end Web development. | being a 9 or 10 question | Quizz | that gave you hints on how | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Very good course but more assignments should be included except the quizzes .... | assignments should be included except the | Quizz | . . . . | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Videos were OK, practice quizzes somewhat helpful. However, the final autograder quiz was extremely temperamental and gave no usable feedback. This resulted in frustration and made what should have been a good experience a very bad one. Updated course to three stars since a change was made to be able to pass the final quiz without needing to pass the autograder submission. | Videos were OK, practice | Quizz | somewhat helpful. However, the final autograder | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Videos were OK, practice quizzes somewhat helpful. However, the final autograder quiz was extremely temperamental and gave no usable feedback. This resulted in frustration and made what should have been a good experience a very bad one. Updated course to three stars since a change was made to be able to pass the final quiz without needing to pass the autograder submission. | somewhat helpful. However, the final autograder | Quizz | was extremely temperamental and gave no | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Videos were OK, practice quizzes somewhat helpful. However, the final autograder quiz was extremely temperamental and gave no usable feedback. This resulted in frustration and made what should have been a good experience a very bad one. Updated course to three stars since a change was made to be able to pass the final quiz without needing to pass the autograder submission. | be able to pass the final | Quizz | without needing to pass the autograder | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Lots of readings! Would have loved a more engaging format. Also found the content slightly ambiguous, you might have to do some trial and error and might be surprised at the answers in the quiz. | surprised at the answers in the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Not a bad course, generally learnt a lot of interesting facts about market crashes. Behavioural biases discussed are not something new that you can't figure them out on your own, but giving names to them makes it quite useful to remember and recall in future situations. The major problem with this course is the fact that many quiz questions are tricky. Most of biases aren't discussed well in lectures, so you need to do a bit of research. But even then, they overlap a lot, so some questions have several answers and it is difficult to choose. However, it makes you think at least. | course is the fact that many | Quizz | questions are tricky. Most of biases | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | another website (and that's in the | Quizz | as well). It seems like very | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | online" course. Even the answers to | Quizz | seemed extremely vague (it often felt | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | -- to me, this is sloppy | Quizz | writing). I honestly expected better from | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| NuH3s9uFEeWoKQ6POrXqdQ | This course was actually quite helpful for learning Chinese, and it provides fascinating information about Chinese culture. Besides learning the language, you'll learn about holidays, foods, and art, and you'll hear Chinese music. Unfortunately, I could not give the course a good rating because I found some quiz questions impossible to complete. This questions required answers to be typed in Pinyin or in Chinese characters. However, the course gave no information on how to type the Pinyin tone marks or Chinese characters into the response boxes. I tried asking about this in a discussion forum, but got no answer. | good rating because I found some | Quizz | questions impossible to complete. This questions | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| NuH3s9uFEeWoKQ6POrXqdQ | The testing in this course is horribly crafted. Not is it only too easy, thus not actually testing students what is learned, the answers for some of the questions are incorrect. On the very last quiz, I was not able to finish the course because the answer for one of the questions was incorrect. In answering how to translate "South," the answer should be "nánbian," but when I selected this option, it was marked wrong. Therefore, I have to wait 7 more hours before selecting an incorrect answer to complete the course. | are incorrect. On the very last | Quizz | I was not able to finish | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Nyq7nXzPEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Thank you very much Mr. White and team. The course is a really jewel. Mr White broadly shows different pathways and amplitudes about our brain and it composition in many aspects: biologic, anatomic, physiologic, cognitive. Indeed it is a complete and unique class. Also Mr White teach all this complex stuff with extraordinary quality in different scenarios: lab, room, his house, in a forest, unfolding new approaches. However the quizzes are very very hard and detailed but they inspire our study. Best regards from Brasil, and thank you again, Mr White, his team and Coursera. | forest, unfolding new approaches. However the | Quizz | are very very hard and detailed | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| O6SzVx2GEeSKwCIACzUCbQ | This is the first MOOC that I've taken and completed and it was very well put-together. Videos were of a reasonable length and interesting, and the quizzes were just challenging enough to test my learning and make me think. For anyone interested in the topic, I would recommend taking this course. | reasonable length and interesting, and the | Quizz | were just challenging enough to test | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| O6SzVx2GEeSKwCIACzUCbQ | While course uses a genie method for presentation the content, Quizzes are just made to accomplish one goal: to make sure you have memorized every small detail haven said in the course. Even if someone memorizes the details like specific names and dates, for how long he/she is going to keep it in mind? 2 days? On week? | genie method for presentation the content, | Quizz | are just made to accomplish one | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| o7P0ctXYEeWFqw71fuUDrw | The was the best course I've taken through Coursera. The material was fascinating. The instructor has a great enthusiasm for the topic and delivers his lectures in an engaging style. The test and quizzes were quite challenging. Can't recommend highly enough. | an engaging style. The test and | Quizz | were quite challenging. Can't recommend highly | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | This class was well done. The material was clearly explained. The quizzes and final project were relevant and served to bring all the material together into a c | The material was clearly explained. The | Quizz | and final project were relevant and | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | I thought the course was really interesting and well taught. I think the quizzes and final assignment could be a little tougher but I understand there is a larger Kapstone project for the specialization. I really liked the additional resources, articles and videos provided and have added many of the articles and books to my reading list. | and well taught. I think the | Quizz | and final assignment could be a | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | I had rated this course 4 star earlier but, I am downgrading it to 2 star now as the course managers - coursera + CBS seem to have abandoned the coursera while the program is still running and being charged upwards of hundreds of dollars. The final peer assignment date has passed by close to 2 weeks and the grading process is not completed, neither there is any communication from course managers about the same. Very disappointing from Coursera and CBS. For free, the course may be still useful as early introduction to strategy but as paid course, refrain for the time being. My earlier review below. ----- Delivery of the course - presentation, videos, sequencing and articles for each video are very well organized and executed. Referring cases studies is good as well. However, the material seems simplified and is very much a basic course and not intermediate or advanced course. Additionally, the quizzes are very simple and have ample room to increase the difficulty level in order to make the course more challenging. | intermediate or advanced course. Additionally, the | Quizz | are very simple and have ample | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Clear types of strategic approach. A good quiz to reinforce the learning Short and sweet with real examples. | types of strategic approach. A good | Quizz | to reinforce the learning Short and | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Well structured and presented (videos) with the right amount of support information. Clear quizzes consistent with each module. | right amount of support information. Clear | Quizz | consistent with each module. | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | A very interesting and useful course. I took it as a supplement to my studies at my B-school. It has helped clarify many concepts and given me applicable tools. Loved the lectures,quizzes and the Capstone project. I highly recommend this course to anyone who wants to learn about Strategy at its core. Thank you Professor Robert Austin! Your teaching methods are very different from what I have here in India, The examples you gave throughout the course were very apt and aided my greatly. | me applicable tools. Loved the lectures, | Quizz | and the Capstone project. I highly | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | The course is very interesting but there is a problem with the quizzes, it doesn't accept correct questions. If needed I can provide a screen shot of the problem in one of the quizzes. Hope that all this will be fixed and I'll be able to take the course again. | there is a problem with the | Quizz | it doesn't accept correct questions. If | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | The course is very interesting but there is a problem with the quizzes, it doesn't accept correct questions. If needed I can provide a screen shot of the problem in one of the quizzes. Hope that all this will be fixed and I'll be able to take the course again. | the problem in one of the | Quizz | Hope that all this will be | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | I absolutely loved the course content and the style of the instructor. The only feedback I'd extend is more variety in the writing assignment prompts, and a little more specificity in the quiz wording. Some of the questions seemed phrased in an unclear way. | a little more specificity in the | Quizz | wording. Some of the questions seemed | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| oFRMKhbHEeWKlgqs7LdhRw | The irony of the fact that a course that was meant to teach how to appropriate evaluate adult learners was full of quizzes that were riddled with "guess what I'm thinking" short answer questions and multiple choice questions with > or < 1 correct answer was not lost on me. I ended up leaving the course during week three after issues with a quiz that was described in the forums as "impossible." It's too bad - the course description was very promising. | evaluate adult learners was full of | Quizz | that were riddled with " guess | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| oFRMKhbHEeWKlgqs7LdhRw | The irony of the fact that a course that was meant to teach how to appropriate evaluate adult learners was full of quizzes that were riddled with "guess what I'm thinking" short answer questions and multiple choice questions with > or < 1 correct answer was not lost on me. I ended up leaving the course during week three after issues with a quiz that was described in the forums as "impossible." It's too bad - the course description was very promising. | week three after issues with a | Quizz | that was described in the forums | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| ofu7SKAEEeSrqiIAC46RtQ | The courses are extremely helpful and Professor Whiteman teaches amiably with great clarity. And I have a personal suggestion: the questions in quiz are great and challenging, but I don't think they should be challenging in calculation. When I did not have my calculator with me, there was nothing I could do to deal with those weird numbers in the questions. Anyway, I really love the mechanical engineering series and hope Professor Whiteman can put on more courses. | a personal suggestion: the questions in | Quizz | are great and challenging, but I | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| ol2EQDE6EeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | l'excellence n'est pas loin, riche en contenu l'auteur nous amène petit à petit à modeler notre pensée. on progresse sans même s'en apercevoir. Plus de cas pratique serait un plus surtout que l'auteur du mooc se fait un malin plaisir de ne pas mettre toutes les données dans les quiz. Il nous faut donc jongler un peu avec les formules. | mettre toutes les données dans les | Quizz | Il nous faut donc jongler un | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| ol2EQDE6EeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | Ce cours est parfait pour comprendre les mécanismes de base de la formation des prix et de l'évaluation dans le domaine de l'immobilier. Les explications sont très claires, les vidéos synthétiques et les supports visuels bien adaptés pour acquérir les notions développées. Les quiz (un peu "basiques", parfois) permettent de vérifier à chaque étape l'acquisition des connaissances nouvelles. De surcroît, le rythme et l'élocution de M. Thalmann sont posés et reposants. C'est un cours que j'ai suivi avec beaucoup de plaisir. Merci et je me réjouis de suivre le prochain module. | pour acquérir les notions développées. Les | Quizz | (un peu " basiques" , parfois) | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ol2EQDE6EeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | Ce cours devrait être obligatoire pour acheteur, vendeur ou promoteur. Présentation, élocution excellente, par contre l'absence de corrigé dans les exercices est un problème qui bloque la progression (ou décourage après le deuxième essai, car il faut tout ressaisir à chaque fois). Un bug au niveau des quiz d'évaluation : semaine 3, note 5/5 et non validé ? | fois). Un bug au niveau des | Quizz | d'évaluation : semaine 3, note 5/5 | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| olJcuUKiEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Course relevancy was excellent to HR Operations. Would have liked additional explanation and detail on assignments. More examples ans cases. Some of the lecture were difficult to understand presenter. Some of the quiz answers did not correspond to course materials or ambiguous. | to understand presenter. Some of the | Quizz | answers did not correspond to course | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This course covered a broad swath of diverse material in an admirably compact form. The instructor was surprisingly passionate! about the topic, but once I got used to his style I could see it was because he was really invested in this type of work and really invested in getting us to understand it. Comprehension quizzes along with the lectures would have been nice to help absorb all the new vocabulary. There was also a creative use of the Coursera system to get us to do actual data gathering and coding (at least at a beginning level) on our own. As for the material, I felt like I was getting to see a secret world that everyone else around me already somehow knew about. As I am new to social science, I wondered how to find out about this secret arsenal of tools for dealing with interview and ethnography data that always seem to be referred to but never explained. Well, here they are! And now I have them too! Much appreciated. | getting us to understand it. Comprehension | Quizz | along with the lectures would have | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Engaging and broad-based course on qualitative research methods. Real world assignments were required, so there was a considerable commitment, which of course led to a sound learning experience. Generally I prefer courses with multiple lecturers, but the lecturer here was entertaining and interesting to watch, and very committed to ensuring that we learnt from the course. Also I noted that when students raised issues about the quizzes or assignments they were dealt with. Thanks Coursera and University of Amsterdam. | when students raised issues about the | Quizz | or assignments they were dealt with. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | I am two weeks into the course and really like it. The ideas and concepts mentioned are quite profound. And hope to apply them soon enough in both my personal and professional life. One additional thing which would really like seeing in the course is use of questions just to ascertain our mastery over concepts. Something like the other course which I am taking concurrently -- Think again: How to understand arguments. Where intermediate quizzes ensures that learners are understanding what the intention is followed by 'Share your thoughts' questions to express your views and discuss specific course material with other learners. I feel this mix of quizzes and sharing really helps in learning the course. | How to understand arguments. Where intermediate | Quizz | ensures that learners are understanding what | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | I am two weeks into the course and really like it. The ideas and concepts mentioned are quite profound. And hope to apply them soon enough in both my personal and professional life. One additional thing which would really like seeing in the course is use of questions just to ascertain our mastery over concepts. Something like the other course which I am taking concurrently -- Think again: How to understand arguments. Where intermediate quizzes ensures that learners are understanding what the intention is followed by 'Share your thoughts' questions to express your views and discuss specific course material with other learners. I feel this mix of quizzes and sharing really helps in learning the course. | learners. I feel this mix of | Quizz | and sharing really helps in learning | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Excellent course for business leaders to get a flavour of this concept with some real-world case studies. I'm actually making it a compulsory course for my management team. Clear presentation style pitched at just the right level with bite sized videos that can be watched offline with the App. Only improvement would be the addition of some quizzes through the course to test understanding. | would be the addition of some | Quizz | through the course to test understanding. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Content is fairly good with weak story line and connection across the various modules. Also the lack of in session quiz modules or weekly quiz module to re-inforce learning is disappointing. It's also possible that i was expecting a lot from a course on design thinking and what it turned out to be was just a scratching of the surface of what the definition of Design Thinking is all about. Having read numerous books on Lean Thinking, Agile development, Minimum Viable Propositions, etc. I was really expecting a solid rigorous approach to the world of design thinking. This course let me down and I just managed to scrape through at the end...almost gave up. | Also the lack of in session | Quizz | modules or weekly quiz module to | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Content is fairly good with weak story line and connection across the various modules. Also the lack of in session quiz modules or weekly quiz module to re-inforce learning is disappointing. It's also possible that i was expecting a lot from a course on design thinking and what it turned out to be was just a scratching of the surface of what the definition of Design Thinking is all about. Having read numerous books on Lean Thinking, Agile development, Minimum Viable Propositions, etc. I was really expecting a solid rigorous approach to the world of design thinking. This course let me down and I just managed to scrape through at the end...almost gave up. | in session quiz modules or weekly | Quizz | module to re-inforce learning is disappointing. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Some quizzes and more than one assignment would have been more challenging. | Some | Quizz | and more than one assignment would | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| op_vMOGiEeWr4g7T_DyXNw | Great, and highly relevant/topical, content. However I found the quiz assignments to be needlessly tedious at times. | relevant/topical, content. However I found the | Quizz | assignments to be needlessly tedious at | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| op_vMOGiEeWr4g7T_DyXNw | a very good course for cloud study. the content is colorful , a lot of examples to support deep understanding of the concepts. The biggest drawback is that maybe there can be some small programming assignment after each week's course. And the standard answers of the Week5 quizz have some bugs. | the standard answers of the Week5 | Quizz | have some bugs. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| op_vMOGiEeWr4g7T_DyXNw | Cloud computing course provides an overview of the concepts of distributed processing. The algorithms behind real world distributed applications are well explained. The video lectures and quiz questions on various distributed protocols provide insights into the working of these systems. Highly recommended. Thanks Prof. Indranil Gupta and the Coursera community!! | well explained. The video lectures and | Quizz | questions on various distributed protocols provide | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Very basic. Tricky quiz questions. There seems to be multiple right answers. | Very basic. Tricky | Quizz | questions. There seems to be multiple | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The course is great. very informative and there are a lot of best practices i can practice in my day to day work. The only area i see improvement is the quiz for week 2. I found it very difficult to pass the the choices are ambiguous. | area i see improvement is the | Quizz | for week 2. I found it | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | This is an amazing opportunity unfortunately I have to catch up. I plan on doing this on the 3 day weekend. I have put time aside specifically for my classes. I have already put it to practice just haven't had a chance to do the quiz on lesson 1 or work on lesson 2. Again this is really a great way to help people out. Hopefully I will be in a position to get some certificates out of it as well. Thank you for this wonderful experience. :) | had a chance to do the | Quizz | on lesson 1 or work on | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Some questions in the quiz for module 2 are unclear and seem unrelated to the course work. | Some questions in the | Quizz | for module 2 are unclear and | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The information was very helpful. I would have benefited from quiz explanations I kept getting the same two questions wrong on quiz 2. | helpful. I would have benefited from | Quizz | explanations I kept getting the same | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The information was very helpful. I would have benefited from quiz explanations I kept getting the same two questions wrong on quiz 2. | the same two questions wrong on | Quizz | 2. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| o_VGekEUEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | To me, it is the best structured course so far. Quiz after every lesson and written assignment after every week. Also, prof. Soren is reproducing it steadily and in comprehending fashion. | the best structured course so far. | Quizz | after every lesson and written assignment | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great Course ! Absolutely covers Python Data Structure, it is really helpful for me. If you want to master on python data structure you can take this course. All the quiz and assignments are really amazing. I am really thankful to the professor Dr-Chuck :) . | can take this course. All the | Quizz | and assignments are really amazing. I | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I really liked the course. I just wish it was more practice heavy and the lectures were broken up more and there were quizzes during the lectures to keep you engaged more and make it more interactive. | broken up more and there were | Quizz | during the lectures to keep you | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Nice job ! However some of the important points have been skipped and focus has been limited at times.The best part of the course were the lab assignments.Hope quizzes were better in standard. | course were the lab assignments. Hope | Quizz | were better in standard. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Lovely professor. Well-chosen, illustrative examples & appropriate assignments & quizzes. I'm continuing on to the next course in this track! | illustrative examples & appropriate assignments & | Quizz | I'm continuing on to the next | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The lectures were good and to the point. I learned all the basics and the differences between data structures. The quizzes were quite good, with some nice traps set in them. The programming assignments supported the lectures well, though I felt there could've been more of them (perhaps just as ungraded bonus problems). | the differences between data structures. The | Quizz | were quite good, with some nice | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very good course to understand about the data structures in Python. Supported by nice quiz and thought provoking assignments. Really enjoyed the course and proud of myself in completing this course successfully. Would strongly recommend this course to aspiring Python programmers. | structures in Python. Supported by nice | Quizz | and thought provoking assignments. Really enjoyed | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | A very clear explanation and perfectly designed quizzes and assignments. | very clear explanation and perfectly designed | Quizz | and assignments. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Again like in Getting Started with Python course, I wish there was a way for us to get explanations for quiz questions after we complete a quiz, so we can fully understand them. I wish we could have something similar for when we complete the coding assignments, the worked exercises are helpful, but it would be helpful after we complete an assignment to have a code to compare ours to, to see the differences and to make sure we understand exactly what Dr. Chuck was getting at. There were several assignments that I completed, but not in the correct way, so the next weeks assignment was more difficult than it should have been. | for us to get explanations for | Quizz | questions after we complete a quiz, | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Again like in Getting Started with Python course, I wish there was a way for us to get explanations for quiz questions after we complete a quiz, so we can fully understand them. I wish we could have something similar for when we complete the coding assignments, the worked exercises are helpful, but it would be helpful after we complete an assignment to have a code to compare ours to, to see the differences and to make sure we understand exactly what Dr. Chuck was getting at. There were several assignments that I completed, but not in the correct way, so the next weeks assignment was more difficult than it should have been. | quiz questions after we complete a | Quizz | so we can fully understand them. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | An excellent course overall. Dr. Chuck is great - very interesting to following during the video lectures. The quizzes and exercises are all challenging but not to the point where you cannot figure out what to do. | following during the video lectures. The | Quizz | and exercises are all challenging but | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The book really gave more details about the individual chapters. Hence it was easy to do the assignments and quizzes without watching the videos. I recommend that specializations should follow this trend, so students who find it difficult to access Internet can use the book as a guide. More examples are needed to understand the concepts especially Tuples and DIctionary | easy to do the assignments and | Quizz | without watching the videos. I recommend | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great experience as a hobbyist. My first Coursera course that I actually managed to complete. Graded Assignments are very good, they test a student in most areas and probe alternate ways of writing code. Professor is great, love the tea toast and the graduation hat :). Thank you Professor Severance for this wonderful course. Only one feedback: The Quizzes are way too easy and in most cases doesn't require any critical thinking on the part of the student. The complexity needs to be increased a bit. | wonderful course. Only one feedback: The | Quizz | are way too easy and in | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent for beginners. Many a thanks to Dr Chuck, boy he really makes it easier to learn. Quiz and Assignment reiterates the slides taking out revision pain. Personally I liked the extra videos and Dr Chuck singing "I got my Mojo.." ya.. | really makes it easier to learn. | Quizz | and Assignment reiterates the slides taking | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | This was a good course, the lecturer is excellent. My only complaint was that the quizzes and assignments were not challenging enough. There should be some more difficult assignments and problems included in this course. | My only complaint was that the | Quizz | and assignments were not challenging enough. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very helpful course and nice assignments and quizzes. Teaching in a very easy to understand way. Thanks Dr. | helpful course and nice assignments and | Quizz | Teaching in a very easy to | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I t is a great, course, quiz are not hard but they provoke an important questioning and are part of the learning process. Assignments are more interesting every week and strike the most important topics of the week while using remembering a lot of the past concepts. It will be great of after the course is finish the student could download the homework. | I t is a great, course, | Quizz | are not hard but they provoke | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Fabulous course. The lectures are good. Quizzes and assignments have started to be, applying what you've "learned", not just regurgitation. Very nice. The bonus material show how the different technologies are related and the genesis of many of them by individuals who participated in then. Very cool. Thanks much. It was most enjoyable. I also like that you can move at your own pace. If you're new to the profession, a quick learner or re-tooling, it's move as fast or as slow as you want. This is been very helpful for myself. I'm retooling and have become a "college" student again. Great fun. Thanks much!! | Fabulous course. The lectures are good. | Quizz | and assignments have started to be, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| pCa5-xauEeWEjBINzvDOWw | Good questions in quizzes and great understanding | Good questions in | Quizz | and great understanding | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| pFHWsjyCEeW7GArkqhNhJw | Fascinating overview but was hoping for a bit more depth. Did learn new things though, particulalry about the not so well publicised Apollo missions and the early Russian efforts. A couple of quiz questions were marking right answers as wrong but course team got them sorted fairly quickly | early Russian efforts. A couple of | Quizz | questions were marking right answers as | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| PGQphxLCEeSD_CIACooXkA | amazing course. all topics about chemistry are here, very good quizes. a good course | about chemistry are here, very good | Quizz | a good course | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| PJg2NGKXEeWpHwqwM9Gg0w | Most interesting to learn more about the leadershipof 3 Roosevelts in a century high economic growth, Great depression and 2 world wars. Excellent tutor, interesting interviews with specialists and quizes and demanding final essay. Many thanks for the opportunity to take the course. Beste Regards Ernst | tutor, interesting interviews with specialists and | Quizz | and demanding final essay. Many thanks | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| pkE92hJhEearKQowajWNkQ | Because I did not purchased the course, I was not able to do the quizzes, however I learned something about the Blues. | was not able to do the | Quizz | however I learned something about the | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | It's a good course. It is very simple. It's just exposition and quizzes. Great for beginners. | very simple. It's just exposition and | Quizz | Great for beginners. | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | This course gives a concise intro to the basics of project management, largely based on PMI PMBOK guide. The course is useful to get acquainted with or refresh knowledge on project management principles. It would be nice if auditing students could also do the quizzes (even if without marks) to self-check and complete the course. As is, I was unable to find a way to "complete" in a way that would move the course from enrolled to completed on my profile. | auditing students could also do the | Quizz | (even if without marks) to self-check | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | I learned a lot with this course. The Teacher is great!! . I don´t know how to see the quiz result, to search my wrong answer . Thank you! | don´t know how to see the | Quizz | result, to search my wrong answer | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Great course in general. Material is not evenly spread in all 4 weeks. 4th week material takes 4 times longer to cover than any of the previous weeks. Last quiz has an error. The right answer is taken as incorrect. | any of the previous weeks. Last | Quizz | has an error. The right answer | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Pretty boring and quite hard to follow. Not all subjects in the quizzes were covered in the study material provided or in the lessons | follow. Not all subjects in the | Quizz | were covered in the study material | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Thank you so much University Of California, Irvine this class has been one of my favorite since I've joined Coursera. In the course I've learn so much about project management & everything related to this subject. One of my favorite part of this course is when I can take the quiz as many times as I want in order for me to get right & pass the course. Thank you so much University Of California, Irvine & Coursera Keep up the good work. | is when I can take the | Quizz | as many times as I want | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | It's a great course but i think that needs more assignments not only quiz. | that needs more assignments not only | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Assignments/ Quiz were a bit easy. | Assignments/ | Quizz | were a bit easy. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Informative course, very well organized, and very useful tools & strategies presented in the course. The presentations are a bit deadpan, and the assignments aren't overly helpful (only quizzes), but the content is good. | the assignments aren't overly helpful (only | Quizz | but the content is good. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| pmf0N9G-EeWB-BI5fjMtHQ | Super cours complétant nos connaissances de base sur la gestion des AP dans nos pays (RDC en ce qui me concerne). La portée continentale de ce cours permet de mieux appréhender les particularités des milieux, des gestions sans oublier de donner vie aux cinq catégories des AP à travers des quiz et des devoirs. En tous cas, ça me permet de mieux poser certaines questions, d'actualiser et élargir mes bases scientifiques. | catégories des AP à travers des | Quizz | et des devoirs. En tous cas, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| prHAajqwEeWXuQopUhAqaw | Some good content. However, text has numerous spelling mistakes and there is no involvement by academic staff. Nor can one see one's answers to quizzes once done., nor standard answers provided. As with so many Coursera MOOC's, little involvement by fellow students in discussion fora. No certificate on completion, which is a pity because the cost of a purchased one is somewhat prohibitive for third world students with our exchange rates. | can one see one's answers to | Quizz | once done. , nor standard answers | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| prHAajqwEeWXuQopUhAqaw | I will give it a 4, but 3.5 would be my review if the 3.5 mark would be available. Strenghts of the course: Solid and elegant presentations, good readings, and the interviews presented with the ICJ judge and the PCA secretary added value. Weakeness and Opportunites: No slides, excessivelly short course in video resources (discounting the interviews, it had about 20-40 minutes of videos, what is clearly insuficient, when benchmarking with other offerings in the MOOC 'arena') and allowing quizzes to be taken on a 2x per hour is not in my opinion adequate. It makes it too easy and fast to finish the course and does not create an incentive to review the materials. Leiden should focus in presenting more specializations in the educational fields that it has reputation - Law, Tax Law, International Studies, in order to capture more value from the current lack of offerings of specializations in that niche markets. Threats: There is a lot of offerings on the MOOC space, with a finite time availability to make choices. By having courses that are very short, there is the risk that people become inclined to chose other offerings that offer more video resources and other materials. Besides my opinion - I am a critic by design, thank you for continuing offering courses in this platform. I wish you luck. Ricardo Oliveira | in the MOOC 'arena') and allowing | Quizz | to be taken on a 2x | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| PZNTj2DEEeWVEg5QpF1H_w | I really like the professor and his narration, quite engaging and interesting course. The only suggestion I have is to improve the quizzes with more analytical rather than fact-based questions. | I have is to improve the | Quizz | with more analytical rather than fact-based | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| PZNTj2DEEeWVEg5QpF1H_w | The information is great and delivered in a way easy to understand. It is clear the presenter is passionate about the topic and presenting. The quizzes capture knowledge that is actually important to know. There are photos, literary sources, and many maps. However, slightly boring to watch. | about the topic and presenting. The | Quizz | capture knowledge that is actually important | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| PZNTj2DEEeWVEg5QpF1H_w | Great course! I would have preferred quizzes at the the end of every lesson, however. | Great course! I would have preferred | Quizz | at the the end of every | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| q3r0bBbMEeafcQ6IJeJ6Vw | The material in this course is well presented, though scarce at times. However it has its share of problems : -little to no interaction from TA's or mentors in the forums -the quizzes are often out of sync with the lectures -the final exam has severe problems with questions (form not content). In more detail, on the final exam, some of the questions don't even contain all the content to answer them. They can request multiple answers but have single question boxes and/or the reverse. | or mentors in the forums -the | Quizz | are often out of sync with | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | The material is very interesting and relevant; however very quickly outdated in this area. There are a few mistakes here and there in the lectures and the quizzes. | there in the lectures and the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Information needs be updated especially with the changes just made in France 2015. It was a little slow and quizzes were often frustrating due to questions and answers not matching up, or info was not given in the lecture. Overall, since it was 101 and basic, I enjoyed learning the new information. | It was a little slow and | Quizz | were often frustrating due to questions | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Covers a lot of ground, but the quizzes don't always line up with the material, the prof speaks painfully slow (needed to speed it up) and the info is getting dated. | a lot of ground, but the | Quizz | don't always line up with the | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | Well-structured course, Dr. Pienta and his fellow team-members are passionate in what they do, and that's evident during the course, but I can't help to think that they have barely scratched the surface here... The lectures are good, they provide a lot of information, but the quizzes offer no challenge whatsoever. That was somewhat disappointing, it felt like I was cheating. All in all, I don't regret buying and completing the course, but I really hope that Dr. Pienta's team will be back soon with a more challenging and advanced course. | a lot of information, but the | Quizz | offer no challenge whatsoever. That was | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | I loved this course as I found the topic fascinating (the 10 hallmarks absolutely blew my mind - those cancer cells are so conniving!). I think the instructors did a fantastic job delivering the material. I am a Product Manager in the software industry, and I took this class for my personal curiosity. I wish we were able to submit the answers to the quiz without officially purchasing the course. I did not purchase the course as it does not pertain to my profession and I do not really need a certification for it. | to submit the answers to the | Quizz | without officially purchasing the course. I | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | This was an interesting cancer basics class -- quick and simple for those with minimal background in oncology. The only disappointment was that the course description mentioned quizzes could be taken for no cost, but that turned out not to be true. Nevertheless, it was a valuable course. | was that the course description mentioned | Quizz | could be taken for no cost, | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | You cannot do the quizes unless you pay. | You cannot do the | Quizz | unless you pay. | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | dont like is the pop up | Quizz | Its not that the quiz is | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | up quiz. Its not that the | Quizz | is bad but the pop up | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | topic. You could have executed the | Quizz | just like the polls where there | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | the Prof and then comes the | Quizz | It would ensure a coherence in | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Good fun & very thought-provoking. Deductions for sometimes lousy sound quality of videos and inane placing of quizzes. | of videos and inane placing of | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | A very good course. My only suggestions would be to extend the course for a week or even two. The time and amount of work needed to complete the last week's assignments were inconsistent with the other weeks. To have done my best with the final quiz and assignment, I should have spent a significant amount of time reviewing material from previous weeks. | done my best with the final | Quizz | and assignment, I should have spent | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Prof Raj is a charismatic and engaging professor. Although at first glance, the content may seem theoretically heavy and dull, he teaches in an entertaining way without jargon, and with lots of anecdotes and metaphors, making it easy to follow, and most of all, fun to learn. I would definitely recommend this course for you! OVERVIEW Each module and the entirety of the course is structured very comprehensively. The lectures incorporate various professors who are experts in their field via video conference, telephone, and quotes. Lecture videos (though sometimes long) have lots of embedded quizzes and relevant external videos. Just like taking a course at university, supplemental (yet an optional) reading list is provided for those who wish to explore further. LECTURE VIDEOS Prof Raj definitely knows what he is talking about and the videos are easy to follow. There are only a few videos where the audio isn't the best, but transcripts can be downloaded on Coursera, and a clean-format of the transcription can be found on the Facebook page. The animations, lighting, audio, in general are all great. THE COMMUNITY The discussion forum is very active. With at least three mentors active during the duration of the course, and at least one responding to a post within a business day, you won't feel like you're taking the course alone. CAUTION ! Although it states that time commitment is 2-3 hours a week, it will most likely take more than that. The total number of minutes spent on watching all lecture videos (for that week) averages to a little over 2 hours. If you're like me and want to take notes or take a break while studying or re-watch a lecture, you'll need more time. Plus on top of that, there are quizzes and assignments. (You can save time by not submitting assignments via the ISB website.) I would allocate minimum 3 hours a week for this course and maximum 5. Bare this in mind for those who are working or studying full-time or are taking other MOOC courses. - Enjoy the course! | sometimes long) have lots of embedded | Quizz | and relevant external videos. Just like | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Prof Raj is a charismatic and engaging professor. Although at first glance, the content may seem theoretically heavy and dull, he teaches in an entertaining way without jargon, and with lots of anecdotes and metaphors, making it easy to follow, and most of all, fun to learn. I would definitely recommend this course for you! OVERVIEW Each module and the entirety of the course is structured very comprehensively. The lectures incorporate various professors who are experts in their field via video conference, telephone, and quotes. Lecture videos (though sometimes long) have lots of embedded quizzes and relevant external videos. Just like taking a course at university, supplemental (yet an optional) reading list is provided for those who wish to explore further. LECTURE VIDEOS Prof Raj definitely knows what he is talking about and the videos are easy to follow. There are only a few videos where the audio isn't the best, but transcripts can be downloaded on Coursera, and a clean-format of the transcription can be found on the Facebook page. The animations, lighting, audio, in general are all great. THE COMMUNITY The discussion forum is very active. With at least three mentors active during the duration of the course, and at least one responding to a post within a business day, you won't feel like you're taking the course alone. CAUTION ! Although it states that time commitment is 2-3 hours a week, it will most likely take more than that. The total number of minutes spent on watching all lecture videos (for that week) averages to a little over 2 hours. If you're like me and want to take notes or take a break while studying or re-watch a lecture, you'll need more time. Plus on top of that, there are quizzes and assignments. (You can save time by not submitting assignments via the ISB website.) I would allocate minimum 3 hours a week for this course and maximum 5. Bare this in mind for those who are working or studying full-time or are taking other MOOC courses. - Enjoy the course! | on top of that, there are | Quizz | and assignments. (You can save time | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | That was very informative and motivating course. I wish the quiz was not that detail oriented and hard.. | and motivating course. I wish the | Quizz | was not that detail oriented and | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | loved the pace and check in quizzes. like a classroom | loved the pace and check in | Quizz | like a classroom | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | This course is one of the best offerings I've taken from Coursera. Due to Raj, Catherine and the team, the content, research, production with graphics, and readings ----- the weeks' lessons far exceeded my expectations. The trick with learning is applying what I have learned, so that is my intent. Hats off to enhancing sometimes hard-to-grasp concepts through video, interviews and quizzes. The online format and technical process worked 100% fine for me without any problems or glitches. I have been happy with everything! Thank you! Learner ID | hard-to-grasp concepts through video, interviews and | Quizz | The online format and technical process | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | it is great, only having problems with finding quizzes and the app. the rest is what I was in need of | great, only having problems with finding | Quizz | and the app. the rest is | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| qHMuzhq9EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | excelente explicación, buenos temas de interes y los ejercicios practicos muy bueno, aunque me quede con algunas dudas en las preguntas de los Quiz | dudas en las preguntas de los | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| qHMuzhq9EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Excelente curso para iniciarte en organizaciones. Los Quiz normalmente no los entendia. | curso para iniciarte en organizaciones. Los | Quizz | normalmente no los entendia. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Pros: Information is perfect for anyone looking at Business Intelligence as a career field, or already in the career field itself. I found the first week to challenge my on-the-job knowledge of a fuller set of concepts and general terminology. Cons: The wording on the quiz questions, in some cases, seems much different than the PPT slides and the instructor's language. UPDATE: The wording is a significant challenge, even when advancing into the more complex topics. I have had many differences of opinions on the solutions based on wording in the requirements. | terminology. Cons: The wording on the | Quizz | questions, in some cases, seems much | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| qogqSFgBEeWBNwpVGuknww | He terribly prepared us for quizes and gave about 4 examples in the entire course. I filled a notebook with about 40 pages of notes, about 3 of which were useful for the quizes. Though content was good, but i found myself looking things up because of his somewhat neive explanations of difficult concept. | He terribly prepared us for | Quizz | and gave about 4 examples in | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| qogqSFgBEeWBNwpVGuknww | He terribly prepared us for quizes and gave about 4 examples in the entire course. I filled a notebook with about 40 pages of notes, about 3 of which were useful for the quizes. Though content was good, but i found myself looking things up because of his somewhat neive explanations of difficult concept. | of which were useful for the | Quizz | Though content was good, but i | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There needs to be more help available, at least for paying students, to answer questions and clear misunderstanding. The quizzes are taking too much time. | answer questions and clear misunderstanding. The | Quizz | are taking too much time. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I will start with you do learn a lot from the videos (and the stuff you learn is very valuable), it's the absence of staff or professor involvement that is a problem and why I am not giving 5 stars. Outside of quizzes which are graded by computers, your "practice" assignments (which aren't practice because you can't check your answers before a test, super awesome when you can't really ask for help), final project and forum questions are graded or answered by other students. If you have any confusion, either it will go unresolved or be worsened by potentially wrong answers from other students which I saw happen many, many times. Maybe I am expecting too much from an online learning platform? In all, I feel like while I did learn, I perhaps learned some wrong practices too. So while the videos are great, the actual teacher involvement is poor. Coursera - I am not sure how you and the university work together, but is it totally strange to desire some input from your professor? | not giving 5 stars. Outside of | Quizz | which are graded by computers, your | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The material is very interesting with well-made videos. Great course to get an introduction to Tableau. The downside for me was that some videos were rushed with as they had too much content, and quizzes could be much better, I found the questions not really up-to-par with the course content. | they had too much content, and | Quizz | could be much better, I found | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent Course! The Quiz is quite challenging but really useful. All the exercises are well designed to guid you step by step to not only learn tableau software but also form an intuition of analyze real business data. I indeed recommend you fellows taking this course! It will be beneficial. | Excellent Course! The | Quizz | is quite challenging but really useful. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Videos fine. Quizes require hours. | Videos fine. | Quizz | require hours. | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There is a gap between the instruction level and the difficulty of quizzes and final projects. | instruction level and the difficulty of | Quizz | and final projects. | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good brush on Tableau. Great that the course included a 6 mo license to Tableau Desktop! However while more complex topics where touched, they were rushed also. An extra week or two at the more advanced stuff would've been beneficial. Some of the quizzes also were a bit silly and focusing on minor things. | would've been beneficial. Some of the | Quizz | also were a bit silly and | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Nice course if anyone wants to learn Tableau. Practise exercises & Quizes are relevant. It would be nice if solutions are provided for both the practise excersies and the quizes. | to learn Tableau. Practise exercises & | Quizz | are relevant. It would be nice | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Nice course if anyone wants to learn Tableau. Practise exercises & Quizes are relevant. It would be nice if solutions are provided for both the practise excersies and the quizes. | both the practise excersies and the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Professor is engaging and I am happy there are so many video lectures, it is really nice and you feel you are genuinely progressing. Quizzes are very tough though and this course requires a lot of dedication and some frequent repeats of the videos to understand the material. | you feel you are genuinely progressing. | Quizz | are very tough though and this | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | There are several things in the course that were able to clear up my understanding. The course instructor responds to more questions than I would have expected as well. The course uses a lot of mathematical notation and it helps to take some time with it but once you get the idea of conjugate priors down you can quickly employ them in your own problems. The course covers conjugate priors for several different likelihoods including the normal distribution and the binomial distribution. Although the derivation of the conjugate priors looks daunting as it is written down, the usage of the priors make Bayesian statistics much easier. This course uses R and Excel but is not a course in either. Most of the computations that are performed for the quizzes are pretty simple and require little skill in R. I am glad that I have taken the course and would take another if provided by this instructor. I plan to reference the materials provided in the future whenever I need a refresher. | computations that are performed for the | Quizz | are pretty simple and require little | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | Out of 15 online courses I have taken over the last 3 years, this is the best. Professor Lee presents rather difficult material in a clear, detailed, style. The lesson quizzes are remarkably useful; it seems real care has been taken in aligning the questions with the key points in the lectures, and in furthering one's understanding of the same. | a clear, detailed, style. The lesson | Quizz | are remarkably useful; it seems real | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | it's very helpful for me to understand the Bayesian statistics. things are clearly stated and the quiz are good. Many thanks! It's better to have a further course on the Monte Carlo. It's better if the regression can be talked more in details. | things are clearly stated and the | Quizz | are good. Many thanks! It's better | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| qqRBbiEREeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | Some content is good and informative but there's a big problem with the teacher accent (adding a "ch" at the end of half the words) and his diction (hesitating on the other half the words). Also it seems that the course was created in a rush and lacks a lot of polishing(*). Sometimes the course assumes a good level in computer science and then 2 minutes later it explains how to do a decimal to binary conversion! This makes many videos boring but the slides are not provided so you really have to view the videos entirely. I've followed much harder courses with pleasure but here it was torture to finish it. Also most of the course is just definitions of some specific terms and not practical explanations. I agree that defining a few words is important but here it's just too much. *: Some videos are in reverse order, some are stopped in the middle of a sentence, some quizzes are bugged and don't give credit properly and there's nobody to help students... | the middle of a sentence, some | Quizz | are bugged and don't give credit | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| QRDjcWLVEeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | I enjoyed this course immensely! I was a bit hesitant due to its length, however, the content was usually manageable and mostly interesting. A couple of the weeks, the lectures are quite lengthy and dense while others were a bit dry. Also, I think the week about bacteria could use a little more explanation. I feel as though I didn't really understand those concepts until watching that week's as well as the next week's lectures. Finally, the quiz questions for the third to last week were a bit confusing and didn't match well to what the instructors actually said. | the next week's lectures. Finally, the | Quizz | questions for the third to last | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| qVetW596EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Having successfully completed 'Getting Started: Agile Meets Design Thinking' I found this module partially confusing. It is also based on Alex Cowans' venture design process but this time on each step you do things that differ from what was taught in the previous course. Things seem to be complementary but you should not expect to go through a structured process over all courses. They are all based on the same process but shed light on different aspects. I also have the imporession that the didactics of this second course still coudl be improved a lot. Quizzes are currently reworked and bugs fixed and the team is very responsive. It still was a good learning experience and doing Design sprints is a great approach. From the review of assignments I can say that a few students seem to adapt better to the structure of the course that I did. But most seemed to be equally if not more confused. Doing reviews wasn't fun because formally most students got enough points but content-wise I perceived it as rather messy assignments to review. :/ | still coudl be improved a lot. | Quizz | are currently reworked and bugs fixed | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Qx-vkAocEeWAYyIACmGIdw | The algorithms presented in this course are interesting. However, the quizzes contain some questions that have no apparent relation to the content of the lectures, and some questions about details of the presented algorithms which are explained in neither the lectures, nor in the papers from which the lectures are derived. Also, most of the sample implementations will not run on a modern computer. They only work on Windows with Java 6 installed. | this course are interesting. However, the | Quizz | contain some questions that have no | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| Qx-vkAocEeWAYyIACmGIdw | The lectures were good but when it came to quizzes and assignments, we do not know what to do? The questions were very complicated and not stated in the Lectures | good but when it came to | Quizz | and assignments, we do not know | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Excellent learning experience. Excellence use of forum (next to Quizzes) for self reflection on new knowledge and interactions with other students. | Excellence use of forum (next to | Quizz | for self reflection on new knowledge | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | This is excellent course, the only reason why I am rating 4 stars because it does not allow you take the quizes | does not allow you take the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | I really enjoyed the Professor's presentation style, and the format of the course (quizzes with one large assignment at the end). It would have been helpful however to have had the slides available for download. | and the format of the course | Quizz | with one large assignment at the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | The course is too shallow - amount of topics discusses is quite small. Practice tasks are boring - implement pseudocode given in lectures. No quizzes. In particular you can see that it is a bad course, if you compare it to the previous 2 courses in the specialization. I'm agree with other people posting in forums about that. Wasted time, could spend that month more productively. Not going to continue passing other future courses. | implement pseudocode given in lectures. No | Quizz | In particular you can see that | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| r32oHRuLEeWxXBLj8jbgsw | I felt it was a good introduction to cryptography. There were quizzes and programming assignments throughout the course to assess knowledge. | good introduction to cryptography. There were | Quizz | and programming assignments throughout the course | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| r74vRmEsEeWQAgqoue9YNw | Excelente curso, lo único negativo es que algunas preguntas en los quizes no podían contestarse solamente con lo dicho en los vídeos. | es que algunas preguntas en los | Quizz | no podían contestarse solamente con lo | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The contents and quality of the video lectures are great. The quality of the supplementary materials (like the quizzes and the Matlab code) provided by TAs for the assignments are very poor. The assignment guides are written with very poor grammar. The Matlab code is written using the worst coding and documenting practices. The automatic evaluation system (the system for grade the submissions), doest't provide useful feedback. As people can read in the course discussion forums, students have been asking for months for improvements to the grading systems. | of the supplementary materials (like the | Quizz | and the Matlab code) provided by | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The course could be 1-week long instead of 4. The material offered is introductory level. Quizes are too easy, programming assignments still have bugs, and grading procedures cause a lot of confusion. | The material offered is introductory level. | Quizz | are too easy, programming assignments still | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The topic is interesting and the lectures itself were good. The explanations of the algorithms and concepts was clear and easy to understand. However, the amount of material covered is very little. I think there should either be more concepts thought or they should be covered in more depth. Quizzes: The quizzes were very weak. They didn't really tell you weather you understood the concept or not. If one of the answers was wrong there was no information which one it was. So you have no idea which lecture you should watch again. Assignments: The assignments were very bad prepared. In some assignments there were bugs in the provided code, we weren't supposed to edit. The assignments itself are rather easy and can be completed quite quickly, if there wasn't the grader. From the grading you got no information what was wrong or which tests passed or failed. Most of the time it wasn't the case that the algorithm failed, instead the output was not as expected by the grader, although it was as described in the assignment. But you never knew. This part has to be improved a lot. Overall I have to say that I expected much more from University of Pennsylvania, especially after taking the first part of the Specialization which was of good quality. | should be covered in more depth. | Quizz | The quizzes were very weak. They | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The topic is interesting and the lectures itself were good. The explanations of the algorithms and concepts was clear and easy to understand. However, the amount of material covered is very little. I think there should either be more concepts thought or they should be covered in more depth. Quizzes: The quizzes were very weak. They didn't really tell you weather you understood the concept or not. If one of the answers was wrong there was no information which one it was. So you have no idea which lecture you should watch again. Assignments: The assignments were very bad prepared. In some assignments there were bugs in the provided code, we weren't supposed to edit. The assignments itself are rather easy and can be completed quite quickly, if there wasn't the grader. From the grading you got no information what was wrong or which tests passed or failed. Most of the time it wasn't the case that the algorithm failed, instead the output was not as expected by the grader, although it was as described in the assignment. But you never knew. This part has to be improved a lot. Overall I have to say that I expected much more from University of Pennsylvania, especially after taking the first part of the Specialization which was of good quality. | covered in more depth. Quizzes: The | Quizz | were very weak. They didn't really | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | assessments were the worst part. The | Quizz | barely tested what I had learnt | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | that you could easily brute-force these | Quizz | if you really wanted to. Compare | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | the Aerial Robotics course where the | Quizz | took time and forced me to | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | Sorry to say that this is not a well prepared course. The course video provided is quite short, the quiz is rather than nothing and the programming assignments are buggy. I don't feel that I learned a lot from this course. UPenn has let me down twice. Hope the 3rd one will be better. | video provided is quite short, the | Quizz | is rather than nothing and the | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | This is part 2 in the robotics specialization. The course content is way too short and basic for the price. There are about 77 minutes of lecture in total, i.e. less than 20 minutes per week. The first week covers BFS, Dijkstra, and A*, something part of most undergrad programs. The rest of the material is ok but very basic. The programming assignments are "implement Dijkstra" in week 1, "implement Dijkstra on a Torus" (and "do triangles intersect?") in week 2, a very simple for loop in week 3, and "implement gradient descent" in week 4. I could complete the course by looking at it on-and-off over one weekend. The material that is presented is presented well, but there's not enough of it. For reference, part 1 of the robotics specialization had over twice as much lecture content (by time) and then lots of supplementary material in addition to that, quizzes that required some thinking, and more relevant and at least slightly harder programming assignments. | supplementary material in addition to that, | Quizz | that required some thinking, and more | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | Lot of considerably complex and dry (accounting and statistics!) subject matter covered at a high level without much discussion! Quiz questions are unnecessarily complex - which (IMHO) will discourage / turn off those who are new to this subject matter in completing this course. The last week is pretty interesting though! I am taking the full business analytic course - and find that the quality and complexity of content is all over the place!! Some are way too simple and some are highly complex. | a high level without much discussion! | Quizz | questions are unnecessarily complex - which | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | It's ok. Bushee is very knowledgeable and a very enthusiastic teacher, but his lessons are too dense compared to the content in the rest of the Wharton BA programs. I actually like all the detail, but I think it's covered too quickly and the course should probably be made longer to deal with it all. There are ratios and balance sheet jargon just flying at you at a breathless pace. It would be better to focus on a few key ones and then walk through the examples a little more slowly. The quizzes were extremely tricky with too many choose more than one answers. It was difficult to find the parts of the video to review missed questions because 1) the transcripts are machine generated and make it difficult to search specific words and 2) it's difficult to remember where the concept was covered because there was so much in each video. The last week felt very disconnected from the first week and like it belonged in a different course almost. It was pretty good, though. I liked how it contained specific examples and charts. | examples a little more slowly. The | Quizz | were extremely tricky with too many | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | missing for me was some in-line | Quizz | Not the “tell me what I | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | said they don’t find the in-line | Quizz | valuable. But, is that a reflection | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | reflection of the value of in-line | Quizz | as a whole or just in-line | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | as a whole or just in-line | Quizz | that simply require “parroting” something said | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | Week 1 Video 1 the in-line | Quizz | might provide some numbers for De-levered | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | the students to have some in-line | Quizz | – this not only breaks up | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | key concepts. I really liked the | Quizz | for Week 1 even though I | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | there are multiple correct responses. The | Quizz | effectively reinforces the information covered very | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | that the questions may change from | Quizz | to quiz. In many of these | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | questions may change from quiz to | Quizz | In many of these on-demand courses, | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | many of these on-demand courses, the | Quizz | questions do not change and students | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | up the lectures – some in-line | Quizz | questions might help. This would also | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | to reinforce the material. Week 4 | Quizz | Question 9 -, the double negative | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | use the ratios. I think in-line | Quizz | or practice questions would be helpful | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This seemed like a somewhat outdated course but did have a lot of basic info for people who want to make a game but haven't given it much thought. I also found the quizzes and review options frustration due to poorly worded questions and rating choices, as well as the lack of a written feedback option besides comments. Some of the videos seem to kind of drag on a bit as well, but overall it was still helpful for developing my game despite feeling like I didn't gain much new information. | much thought. I also found the | Quizz | and review options frustration due to | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I probably have to rate this course 5 stars just for the supplementary reading materials provided. There's a lot of great information provided here. This course helps formalize a process that highly talented people just do intuitively. With the information within, you're able to better understand different aspects of your creative process. At times, the professor's delivery can be a little distracting (he has quite a few awkward pauses in the middle of thoughts, and uses the phrase, "right?" a little too unconsciously). I also found some of the lecture material difficult to connect in a practical sense. Some aspects of the design, play, experience model could use better examples in lecture to make the points more concrete. It is a deep model, and they do in fact point you to a whitepaper published on it so there is that, but just for the sake of the lessons; the examples need better explanation. The quizzes were easy, but challenging in the wrong way. Often, questions are posed that weren't ever directly answered in lecture or the materials, and sometimes they are worded in ways that make it difficult to pinpoint what they are looking for. It would be nice to see student responses to the free-response questions make a comeback in future lessons or at least know that they could possibly carry into the material used to teach the next incoming class. The assignments follow a logical progression, and again are supplemented with great materials. The review system is a little wonky. I've posted in the boards about this. They need to make the criteria more clear. The community activity is pretty low. I'm not sure how this can be addressed, but overall this is a great course and perfect second stop on the journey towards the Game Design and Development specialization. | the examples need better explanation. The | Quizz | were easy, but challenging in the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The quizzes were too short to be effective, and without requiring written feedback from peer review, the process doesn't seem very useful. The best information was from the articles and books he recommends. | The | Quizz | were too short to be effective, | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course was a little stressful, but it seriously pays off. The instructor was excellent, he explains everything clearly and gave us quizzes and projects not only to do, but to really learn from. He discusses subjects that really are worth thinking about, if you are considering becoming a Game Designer. I highly recommend this course for avid learners and those that would love to work hands-on on projects that concern Game Design. | explains everything clearly and gave us | Quizz | and projects not only to do, | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great content and great teacher. But I found the assignments and the quizzes not that great. I reckon the questions and corrections were a bit subjective and time consuming. | I found the assignments and the | Quizz | not that great. I reckon the | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | After the excellent first course in the specialisation, this was quite a disappointment. I realise that the subject matter in this course will inevitably involve abstract concepts and subjective opinions, but I didn't really 'get' the way that Casey was presenting the subject given that there were quizzes and assignments to follow. That's not to say that the videos aren't interesting. But, given their rambling style, they would be much more useful as reference material rather than driving the course, in my opinion. Many of the questions in the quizzes felt like they'd been added simply to make them up to the correct number. Some were so loose that you could write any answer and I'm sure you'd get a mark! Also, I'd say not to even start this course unless you have a clear idea for a game. The assignments require you to produce design documents that are tedious, going on impossible, to write without some firm rooted idea to start from. Maybe if you really want to be a game designer then this will be the course for you. If you are doing the course out of curiosity, for fun, or to learn how to control Unity, I'd give it a miss. | the subject given that there were | Quizz | and assignments to follow. That's not | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | After the excellent first course in the specialisation, this was quite a disappointment. I realise that the subject matter in this course will inevitably involve abstract concepts and subjective opinions, but I didn't really 'get' the way that Casey was presenting the subject given that there were quizzes and assignments to follow. That's not to say that the videos aren't interesting. But, given their rambling style, they would be much more useful as reference material rather than driving the course, in my opinion. Many of the questions in the quizzes felt like they'd been added simply to make them up to the correct number. Some were so loose that you could write any answer and I'm sure you'd get a mark! Also, I'd say not to even start this course unless you have a clear idea for a game. The assignments require you to produce design documents that are tedious, going on impossible, to write without some firm rooted idea to start from. Maybe if you really want to be a game designer then this will be the course for you. If you are doing the course out of curiosity, for fun, or to learn how to control Unity, I'd give it a miss. | Many of the questions in the | Quizz | felt like they'd been added simply | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This is a great course, if you want to hear The Questions you need to Answer to make a good game design for your game. It does not give you the answers, but it gives you a road map to follow. Downside of the course are Quizes and Peer Reviews. Quizes sometimes have shady and non-clear answers, especially for non-native English speakers. Assignments grading criteria makes your peers to choose from 1 to 5. And 5 is "you did so awesome, that you've impressed your peer very much". And this is not happening often. | follow. Downside of the course are | Quizz | and Peer Reviews. Quizes sometimes have | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This is a great course, if you want to hear The Questions you need to Answer to make a good game design for your game. It does not give you the answers, but it gives you a road map to follow. Downside of the course are Quizes and Peer Reviews. Quizes sometimes have shady and non-clear answers, especially for non-native English speakers. Assignments grading criteria makes your peers to choose from 1 to 5. And 5 is "you did so awesome, that you've impressed your peer very much". And this is not happening often. | course are Quizes and Peer Reviews. | Quizz | sometimes have shady and non-clear answers, | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | A pretty nifty course for game design. I loved getting to work on the documentation planning for the game I was creating. Simple and easy to follow. Some of the quiz questions were a bit tricky as I had spent more time than I though I would, going back to the lectures to review the questions. | easy to follow. Some of the | Quizz | questions were a bit tricky as | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I learn a lot by doing assignments and reviewing other people's assignments. The important con of this course was some of its quizzes' questions which was ambiguous or badly framed. | this course was some of its | Quizz | questions which was ambiguous or badly | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The information is good but is going too fast and I don't feel I have learned much from it. I'm on week 3 and I'm still not sure of how to make my assignments in a proper way. The quizzes are very confusing too and sometimes I felt frustrated. | assignments in a proper way. The | Quizz | are very confusing too and sometimes | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course has a good starting point, but there are so many things that ended up being wrong that I just can't force myself to give it more than 3 stars (and I'm not sure if it should be 3 or 2 stars). I think this is also the first course on Coursera that didn't get 5 stars from me (not sure if I've given 4 stars once only). So the bad parts first: Assignments are so unrealistic it's unbelievable. Week 1 is doable. Week 2 is problematic if you have a complex idea, let's say it's still doable, but you would certainly need more time than expected weekly hour work. Week 3 is insane. It is so out of the scope of this course. And week 4 is even worse, I had to use pen and paper and then explain only 1 of the core mechanics (even that used more than expected weekly hour work). Some of the quizzes are not fully clear if you are not a native English speaker. Sometimes I had to re-read things several times, and still wasn't sure what I was doing wrong (I realized that only after I managed to literally guess the correct answer). And most of all grading is the worst I've seen in any course. All of it based on a personal opinion. Hey I even managed not to get full points for a "document is HTML/PDF/....". I mean - how can I not get full points there? It either is or is not a HTML. It's so much subjective that it's making it awful. Now about the good parts: Professor did a great job, the course inspired so many ideas for me. The material is concise and it was a pleasure listening to this course. Most of the courses are too slow for me, so I have to fast forward them to 1.5 and some even to 2 times speed. I've run this course only on 1.25 speed, which is a good thing. I'm not a native English speaker. | weekly hour work). Some of the | Quizz | are not fully clear if you | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This class started out very rocky and the videos had errors, the quizzes had problems, and the assignments had a poor grading system. Hopefully, these will be corrected in future offerings. | and the videos had errors, the | Quizz | had problems, and the assignments had | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | One of the worst courses that I have taken in coursera. The videos feel unstructured without preparation and boring. The quizes are subjective. You can pass all of then without watching a single video or lecture. The assignments are interesting but the way of grading them are bad designed and subjective. Sad, I passed this course without trouble but made me stop wanting to get the full specialization. Spartans! Review the course or better close it. Its a shame. | unstructured without preparation and boring. The | Quizz | are subjective. You can pass all | Negative | 0.9 | 1.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I didn't like the class despite getting 100% on pretty much every assignment. I learned very little from the class. I don't think 99% of what was in the class was useful to me at all. The grading for the class had ludonarrative dissonance with the quizzes. The projects were graded by peers, but the rubric was nonsensical. 1-5 scale for submitting a PDF, for example. So, someone might give you a 1 for submitting the PDF and thus you wouldn't get a full-score. It was just idiotic. | class had ludonarrative dissonance with the | Quizz | The projects were graded by peers, | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course competes with a full specialization on Coursera with a slight flavor of the "Understanding Video Game" course also available on Coursera. The grading is supported by quizzes and assignment associated to a poor grading system. I found this single class less challenging and interesting than the full specialization on Game Design from CalArts although it allows you to have another view of the process of Game Design in a more engineering way (e.g. writing documentation and not thinking on creating game...). | Coursera. The grading is supported by | Quizz | and assignment associated to a poor | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Quizzes need redone | | Quizz | need redone | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Although the course content is highly informative and interesting, the way it's all presented it not the best, most of the time concepts are confusing because of this, quizzes become guessing games most of the time. Forums feel neglected by the course tutor, lot's of question that someone knowledgeable should answer become random rambling as nobody is sure as to what the tutor actually meant. As somebody said on the forums "I feel like I'm alpha testing your course". | concepts are confusing because of this, | Quizz | become guessing games most of the | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RKMa0PTnEeSR9SIAC7LYOA | The course covers the various aspects of Energy business in detail, but is very effectively covered. The case study surrounding the political decisions was very interesting, as this is generally not addressed in detail in traditional courses surrounding energy business. While completing each quiz has been challenging to get the required score of 9/10, the questions have been built to ensure exhaustive coverage. It is worth taking this course seriously and completing it. I really liked the course and would recommend this course for any one trying to understand the basics of energy business. | surrounding energy business. While completing each | Quizz | has been challenging to get the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Really helpful, but the quiz is a little difficult. I think class would better be extend to 5 weeks. | Really helpful, but the | Quizz | is a little difficult. I think | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very nice course. Good assignments and challenging quizes. | nice course. Good assignments and challenging | Quizz | | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | coursera的盈利项目，必须交钱才能take quiz and assignment。不过swirl还是很不错的。 | coursera的盈利项目，必须交钱才能take | Quizz | and assignment。不过swirl还是很不错的。 | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I will break down the review into the contents and comment on them. Before doing that and saving the trouble for people who do not like to read a lot - This course is an awesome kick-starter for R-programming. Video Lectures : The speed and content are just perfect. The concepts covered in each lecture and the manner in which it was taught just made them stick well in my mind. 2. Quiz - They were simple so I infer that they are meant to test how well we have learnt the concepts. 3. Swirl Practice Programming Assignments - A very innovative way to teach us in the R console itself. I really enjoyed playing with it. 4. Programming Assignment - It was a sheer pleasure to do the last assignment. The level was really good. I found it a bit daunting at first but then caught up by reviewing some concepts. 5. Discussion Forums - I couldn't be very active in terms of replying but I never missed to hear what mentors had to say. I owe thanks to mentors for their awesome posts that gave deeper insights especially Al Warren. I highly recommend this course. Prof. Peng - your videos are really good and far from boring. And yes, Thank you Coursera. | stick well in my mind. 2. | Quizz | - They were simple so I | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This was actually pretty hard. I felt like the questions asked in the quiz were considerable above and beyond what was taught - and the amount of R itself taught felt like being thrown in the deep end. | like the questions asked in the | Quizz | were considerable above and beyond what | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The lectures for this course do not adequately prepare students for the graded quizzes and assignments. | adequately prepare students for the graded | Quizz | and assignments. | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | So the course is a mixed bag. PROS: The lecture content is useful, albeit a bit dry. I can't give them too much slack for the dryness, after all it's coding. However, they could have shown more real-time coding, rather than just scrolled through powerpoints with the Command Window pasted. You definitely need to have R open when following along with the lectures. The quizzes are also quite useful, as you're required to know both the background of how things work and use the commands learned from the lecture. CONS: The assignments assume you know a lot more than the basic knowledge, and there's no real way to know how to do the assignments just from the lectures. The quizzes tend to be on the easy side and the assignments ramp things up quite quickly. There's no intermediate material to test your skill. You have to have worked in R to have even a minor chance at succeeding on the assignments. | following along with the lectures. The | Quizz | are also quite useful, as you're | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | So the course is a mixed bag. PROS: The lecture content is useful, albeit a bit dry. I can't give them too much slack for the dryness, after all it's coding. However, they could have shown more real-time coding, rather than just scrolled through powerpoints with the Command Window pasted. You definitely need to have R open when following along with the lectures. The quizzes are also quite useful, as you're required to know both the background of how things work and use the commands learned from the lecture. CONS: The assignments assume you know a lot more than the basic knowledge, and there's no real way to know how to do the assignments just from the lectures. The quizzes tend to be on the easy side and the assignments ramp things up quite quickly. There's no intermediate material to test your skill. You have to have worked in R to have even a minor chance at succeeding on the assignments. | assignments just from the lectures. The | Quizz | tend to be on the easy | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This course is not set up right, the assignments ask you to do things that aren't explained until the next weeks content, its kind of discouraging. In the end, it does teach you the basics of R, its just too bad that the way to get there is aggravating. The reason I still only give it 2 stars is because of the quality of the courses itself. There are many, many 1 and 2 minute videos, these could've easily been combined. The teacher seems unprepared in his lectures, he stutters and repeats a lot and makes a weird noise between slides. This shouldn't be necessary with pre-recorded lectures. The assignments and quizzes are also poorly written and contain spelling and sloppy mistakes, which doesn't make sense because the material isn't new. It all just makes it seem like the teacher doesn't really care and just wants to sell the course to a lot of people without putting in much effort. If you are not following the specialization I would not advise this course for beginners. I'm quite surprised to see the course get such high ratings. | with pre-recorded lectures. The assignments and | Quizz | are also poorly written and contain | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Quiz and especially assignments were poorly written. Spelling mistakes in slides is simply unacceptable in high-level academia, in my opinion. Especially for a course designed for a global audience. | | Quizz | and especially assignments were poorly written. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This course was mostly self learning. It gave me a framework to go along but what is presented in lecture and assignments are completely different. The discussion board and mentors are really good resources and can provide pointers to move along. It is definitely not a class that can provide sufficient information to learn and build applications, but the individual's effort in passing the quizzes and the projects will. It is up to the student to figure out through stack overflow, youtube, and other search result to figure out how to complete these assignments. I believe the assignments given from this class are realistic to real-world situations. | the individual's effort in passing the | Quizz | and the projects will. It is | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are planning to learn R, then go and buy a book. This course is a complete scam. At least don't pay any money. The reasons; 1.) They advertise that you need couple of hours of study per week. That's a lie, you have to study much more than that unless if you know a little R programming. 2.) The quiz questions are totally unrelated from the lessons. They teach you the basic stuff but they expect you to accomplish intermediate quizzes. 3.) The instructor has no idea how to teach. May be he is trying to prove something. I couldn't really understand his motives. If you really want to teach that's simple. You do couple of extra videos and teach whatever you are asking in quizzes, or tell us to read a certain material. He didn't do any of them which means he either doesn't know how to teach or this specialization is a complete scam. 4.) And I don't really understand what coursera is doing by the way? What kind of a business model is this. I was planning to enroll many specializations but now I am not going to do it. So think about how much they are loosing. Where is the quality assurance. Just because one guy comes up to you and say that he teaches this and that do you believe them? MY ADVICE TO YOU: DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THIS SPECIALIZATION. AND FOR ANY OTHER COURSE READ THE BAD REVIEWS FIRST (WHICH WAS MY MISTAKE). | little R programming. 2. ) The | Quizz | questions are totally unrelated from the | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are planning to learn R, then go and buy a book. This course is a complete scam. At least don't pay any money. The reasons; 1.) They advertise that you need couple of hours of study per week. That's a lie, you have to study much more than that unless if you know a little R programming. 2.) The quiz questions are totally unrelated from the lessons. They teach you the basic stuff but they expect you to accomplish intermediate quizzes. 3.) The instructor has no idea how to teach. May be he is trying to prove something. I couldn't really understand his motives. If you really want to teach that's simple. You do couple of extra videos and teach whatever you are asking in quizzes, or tell us to read a certain material. He didn't do any of them which means he either doesn't know how to teach or this specialization is a complete scam. 4.) And I don't really understand what coursera is doing by the way? What kind of a business model is this. I was planning to enroll many specializations but now I am not going to do it. So think about how much they are loosing. Where is the quality assurance. Just because one guy comes up to you and say that he teaches this and that do you believe them? MY ADVICE TO YOU: DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THIS SPECIALIZATION. AND FOR ANY OTHER COURSE READ THE BAD REVIEWS FIRST (WHICH WAS MY MISTAKE). | they expect you to accomplish intermediate | Quizz | 3. ) The instructor has no | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are planning to learn R, then go and buy a book. This course is a complete scam. At least don't pay any money. The reasons; 1.) They advertise that you need couple of hours of study per week. That's a lie, you have to study much more than that unless if you know a little R programming. 2.) The quiz questions are totally unrelated from the lessons. They teach you the basic stuff but they expect you to accomplish intermediate quizzes. 3.) The instructor has no idea how to teach. May be he is trying to prove something. I couldn't really understand his motives. If you really want to teach that's simple. You do couple of extra videos and teach whatever you are asking in quizzes, or tell us to read a certain material. He didn't do any of them which means he either doesn't know how to teach or this specialization is a complete scam. 4.) And I don't really understand what coursera is doing by the way? What kind of a business model is this. I was planning to enroll many specializations but now I am not going to do it. So think about how much they are loosing. Where is the quality assurance. Just because one guy comes up to you and say that he teaches this and that do you believe them? MY ADVICE TO YOU: DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THIS SPECIALIZATION. AND FOR ANY OTHER COURSE READ THE BAD REVIEWS FIRST (WHICH WAS MY MISTAKE). | teach whatever you are asking in | Quizz | or tell us to read a | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The combination of assignments and quiz were amazing, It did make me relook at things I though I was clear. Coding made it challenging and exciting | The combination of assignments and | Quizz | were amazing, It did make me | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Videos are poorly narrated and are marginally effective: vocabulary + key concepts only. The "swirl" exercises are woefully inadequate to prepare students for the quizzes. Foundational tasks (i.e. establishing a valid connection to the sample data) are conspicuously absent from the guided exercises; leaving too many students to seek help from message boards and google. Lastly, the "professors" are completely unreachable: they may as well be dead. After 30 years in the IT industry, I found this course to be profoundly aggravating and a complete waste of my time - I have abandoned this course and bought a "Teach Yourself" book instead. | inadequate to prepare students for the | Quizz | Foundational tasks (i. e. establishing a | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is not a course for a beginner in programming. If you are interested in learning R, I would recommend going to DataCamp and starting there. The lecture videos were not engaging, and the jump from the lecture and quizzes to the programming assignments was quite significant (as others have pointed out). The lecturer for this course does have a pre-programming assignment on his GitHub repository to aid in the first programming assignment, but this was not easy to locate nor advertised well (had to scroll through discussion forums before I saw someone mention it). The swirl assignments were the only saving grace for a class that was otherwise not engaging or structured well. The class could stand to be restructured: for example, it would have been nice for the lectures to cover the str() function before our first programming assignment. Overall, this class does seem to be a good choice for a "refresher" course if you already have some experience coding in R, but be wary if you have little to no programming experience. | the jump from the lecture and | Quizz | to the programming assignments was quite | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is a fast-paced and autodidact course. You'll learn in a real life environment (unlike the incredibly boring DataCamp courses). Instead of providing exercises you must be curious and learn and look for whatever you want. The quizzes were always challenging, sometimes going beyond the course material -which is, in my opinion, a great decission-. I learned in a month what I could have learned in 3 or 4 with DataCamp. I thank Roger D. Peng for making this course possible. | look for whatever you want. The | Quizz | were always challenging, sometimes going beyond | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The new platform Sucks!!! The people who just want to learn for free and not purchase a certificate are barred from attempting the quizzes unlike the old platform. Not being able to take the quizzes completely ruins the learning experience. | certificate are barred from attempting the | Quizz | unlike the old platform. Not being | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The new platform Sucks!!! The people who just want to learn for free and not purchase a certificate are barred from attempting the quizzes unlike the old platform. Not being able to take the quizzes completely ruins the learning experience. | Not being able to take the | Quizz | completely ruins the learning experience. | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I miss practical exercises that can be used to prepare the quiz | can be used to prepare the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The video lectures will help you to pass the quizzes, as they are primarily theory and background. The lectures will not, however, aide you in any way in completing the programming assignments. The first programming assignment is extremely difficult and very little is done in the lectures, the textbook, or in swirl to pull all of the pieces together prior to the first programming assignment/quiz. There are so many disparate concepts, that it would be nice if the instructor could at the very least, demonstrate a full analysis of some kind of tabular data in R. How to properly import the data, create the file, structure the data, and then perform some analysis. These concepts are introduced throughout the course, but never brought together in one complete project. | will help you to pass the | Quizz | as they are primarily theory and | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I must confess that this course is difficult for who is beginning programming with R, the assignments require a lot of work and they are very involved. Nevertheless, I´m extremely satisfied. The book and the lectures are very good and the quizes and exercises forces you to really understand what you are doing or you cannot pass...it is what I really wanted! Thank you Coursera and special thanks to the instructor for his great work! | lectures are very good and the | Quizz | and exercises forces you to really | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Awesome! It's a well-designed course for a beginner. The quizes and assignments ensured that I took an effort to browse and learn a couple of concepts in depth. Swirl exercises gave me a better understanding of what I've learnt from the vedio lectures. All in all, at the end of one month, you'll know all quick and dirty tricks to deal with huge datasets. Thank you! | well-designed course for a beginner. The | Quizz | and assignments ensured that I took | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Huge gap between theory and programming assignments, however quizzes are interesting and require some time to complete. | between theory and programming assignments, however | Quizz | are interesting and require some time | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Only the most basic of instructions for R, which are bland and easily read in the documentation or other free resources. There are very few best practices or real examples to use anything found within. The quizzes and assignments do not match the lecture material and are contrived. Not worth the money! | to use anything found within. The | Quizz | and assignments do not match the | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thanks to Coursera and Prof. Roger D. Peng for offering such a wonderful course on R Programming. Before the start of this session, my knowledge of R Programming is NIL. After attending the session, I'm confident that I could program in R and level of my knowledge is more than that of fresher. Thanks for the well designed course on R. The Quizzes and Assignments are good and helped me test my understanding. These helped me improve my confidence level as well. I appreciate Professors special video session before difficult assignment. Just following these sessions closely, I could complete the assignment to my satisfaction and have confidence to attempt and complete. I completed this course in the old format. Do I need to repeat it in the new format ? The Discussion Forums are amazingly helpful in sharing subject knowledge and making the learning Fun. Getting help from some corner of the world and getting thanks from some other corner of the world makes this learning truly Universal and great Fun. Thanks again to Coursera and Prof. Roger D. Peng. Wishing Coursera and my Professors all the best and Success always. Best Wishes, S. Ramalakshmanan | well designed course on R. The | Quizz | and Assignments are good and helped | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | R Programming in Coursera is a great course. You will learn a lot about R and a lot about advanced programming. But you will suffer along the way. Every lesson brings tons of knowledge, and every quiz will leave you with the feeling you only knew half of what was needed. You will have to fill in the blanks, which is easier if you have previous knowledge of R and/or have previous coding know-how. From someone who had taken other R programming courses, I loved and hated this one at the same time. It's a great way to really learn R, but be ready to put the additional hours and reading required to successfully pass. | brings tons of knowledge, and every | Quizz | will leave you with the feeling | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The content and the speed that they teach you R are actually good. But considering that we now have to pay 45€/49$ for the course you will expect more polished videos and quizzes. Some of the videos are just stutters, repetitions and filling words. It's seems like they have been in a rush without decent preparation. Also one of the quiz questions was simply wrong. This should be fixed. Furthermore some of the commands they present are deprecated and cannot be used anymore. | will expect more polished videos and | Quizz | Some of the videos are just | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The content and the speed that they teach you R are actually good. But considering that we now have to pay 45€/49$ for the course you will expect more polished videos and quizzes. Some of the videos are just stutters, repetitions and filling words. It's seems like they have been in a rush without decent preparation. Also one of the quiz questions was simply wrong. This should be fixed. Furthermore some of the commands they present are deprecated and cannot be used anymore. | decent preparation. Also one of the | Quizz | questions was simply wrong. This should | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The course takes more time and is more informative than the Toolbox course. The material in the videos is quite more basic than the material in the quizzes and assignments, but that should be expected. The only improvement I would suggest is to give lecture material on the deeper concepts involved in the assignments. | basic than the material in the | Quizz | and assignments, but that should be | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The video lectures were engaging with interesting tidbits thrown in to make the potentially dull topic not dull. I personally liked the rhythm and pace with which Dr Peng delivered the content. Also, the swirl exercises are a critical element of this course and I often found it effective to sandwich the swirl exercises between the video and the quiz. Doing this provided an incentive to complete the swirl practice and also made the quiz/assignment less of an exercise in 'dart-throwing' and more of validating what you've learned. Overall, great course to get started with R! | exercises between the video and the | Quizz | Doing this provided an incentive to | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The lectures are clear and exhaustive. Assignments and quizzes perfectly compliment the content and aptly test the learning. Definitely recommended to anyone who wants to learn. | are clear and exhaustive. Assignments and | Quizz | perfectly compliment the content and aptly | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | i generally think the course needs a lot of improvement as after week 1 the assignments and quizzes don't seem to relate to the course content. we are at very different levels so a more gentle easing and explanation of ideas is necessary other than this apparent quantum leap from one stage to the next. i have had to do a different course else where and i am getting the sort of good introduction into the R language, its not practical to expect everyone to understand the ideas in 4 weeks.programming is hard enough as it is. | after week 1 the assignments and | Quizz | don't seem to relate to the | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I think the video is much easier than the quizzes and assignments. There is a big gap between the weekly video and the quizzes. | video is much easier than the | Quizz | and assignments. There is a big | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I think the video is much easier than the quizzes and assignments. There is a big gap between the weekly video and the quizzes. | between the weekly video and the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Some problems with quiz | Some problems with | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I started this course early and was so excited to learn this new information I just dove right in! Unfortunately I am too far ahead and have to wait a few weeks until I can take my week 2 quiz. Instead of binge watching Netflix at night I get my nightly dose of Positive Psychology! I recommended this course too all of my friends, family and co-workers. | I can take my week 2 | Quizz | Instead of binge watching Netflix at | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Not a positive act to make people pay to be able to participate in the quizzes. The other audited classes allow everyone to participate in everything. We just do not become certified if we have taken the class for audit rather than credit. | be able to participate in the | Quizz | The other audited classes allow everyone | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Great course material for casual study. This class is not at all demanding but has a lot of useful materials that we can apply in our life. The quiz questions are too simple and obvious but I guess that is not the purpose of this course :) | can apply in our life. The | Quizz | questions are too simple and obvious | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | It has been an excellent source of learning. I am taking the time to read the books that are recommended with the course thus the learning is richer. The formats used of video, supplemental reading, quiz etc are useful and spot on. Thanks | formats used of video, supplemental reading, | Quizz | etc are useful and spot on. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I found the presentation of the topic very convincing: I'll try to foster micro-moments of positivity resonance in the future and I am fully convinced that this will have a significant positive impact on my life. The videos were good: not too long and each making a point. I'm not a big fan of the round table format, but I admit it was appropriate for the topic. The only aspect where I see room for improvement is the type of assignments: the quiz was part of the course but the weekly exercise was not. It is maybe worthwhile to create some little assignments with a peer-review, to foster a deeper investment of the participants into the course. | is the type of assignments: the | Quizz | was part of the course but | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I really like this course. During my education, there wasn't much emphasis on positive psychology, and I think it's a shame because it seems like such an easy and enjoyable way to improve not only psychological, but also physical health. Only thing I would change- I would like the Course to be harder, in terms of quizzes. More facts about research and such. | to be harder, in terms of | Quizz | More facts about research and such. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Really interesting and well presented videos. The quizzes were also well thought out with relevant questions without being too difficult. | interesting and well presented videos. The | Quizz | were also well thought out with | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | It was really a very good course, you can learn many data structures and its implementations along with programing assignments and quizes which are quite challenging. The idea of concept challenge was awesome. You could learn performing efficiency of the algorithms, benchmarking, linked lists trees hashmaps and other data structures. | implementations along with programing assignments and | Quizz | which are quite challenging. The idea | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | It's great that this specialization now get autoGrading for projects. It could be better if the Content Quiz is more challenging. | could be better if the Content | Quizz | is more challenging. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The course is fantastic! The professors are very enthusiastic and creative: they explain difficult subjects very clearly and provide visual aids and in-video quizes to enhance more deep understanding of material. Special thanks for the project assignments! They are very interesting and well-laid. I would recommend this course to programmers who want to deepen and practice their data-structures skills. For the novices this course should be taken after the first course of the specialization. | and provide visual aids and in-video | Quizz | to enhance more deep understanding of | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Amazing video lectures that help in understanding the concepts quickly. In video quizzes help make sure your thought process is right. But The assignments are way too simple if we follow all the steps provided. Assignments have to be more challenging. Surely 5 stars if they add more challenging assignments to this course. | understanding the concepts quickly. In video | Quizz | help make sure your thought process | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructors were engaging and most charming in the videos. Most suitable for programming learners taking the step from beginner to intermediate level. The material was divided into fun bite-sized videos, quizzes, and assignments; but still thorough with the details that were necessary. | was divided into fun bite-sized videos, | Quizz | and assignments; but still thorough with | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | This is an excellent course with super awesome syllabus. It is taught in an engaging manner, with quizzes. It could have been more improved by adding in-video quiz. | taught in an engaging manner, with | Quizz | It could have been more improved | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | This is an excellent course with super awesome syllabus. It is taught in an engaging manner, with quizzes. It could have been more improved by adding in-video quiz. | been more improved by adding in-video | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| rQhCYyaKEeW6YBLN1oULHQ | I have liked the course so far, I only have a sugestion on the quality of the videos: The first ones had a lot of background noise and the teacher explains a little too fast... maybe for students with a not very fluent level of Spanish it might be difficult to follow... I like the structure, it integrates activities, videos and quizzes so it is easy going. | structure, it integrates activities, videos and | Quizz | so it is easy going. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | This course provided a great experiece of online study. The high quality content of the videos and adequate rithym of assignments and quizzes are features that make it an admirable course. I strongly reccomend doing this course if you are still in doubt. | and adequate rithym of assignments and | Quizz | are features that make it an | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Over reliance on student grading. Material does not map well to the quizzes. | does not map well to the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | What can I say? Although it was a tough course but sometimes things were tough, it felt so incredibly fruitful each week. I think the main reason was because even though there were so many quizzes and the assignments which required so much time, they were carefully crafted in a way which helped build my abilities in a progressive manner. There was definitely a close alignment between instruction (video) and the assessments (quizzes/exams). You'll never be asked questions you weren't prepared to answer because of the aforesaid alignment. As I also work in a department which dabbles in educational research, I found the concepts thought in this course directly applicable to what's done in practice. Because the concepts were communicated so clearly, I could readily see examples of them in my everyday work! | even though there were so many | Quizz | and the assignments which required so | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I definitely learned a lot — I liked how there was a quiz and a brief written assignment every week. Good course! | I liked how there was a | Quizz | and a brief written assignment every | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I really enjoyed this course. The concepts and expectations were clear, the quizzes had good explanations for the answers, and the illustrations really helped to make each of the topic areas more understandable. | concepts and expectations were clear, the | Quizz | had good explanations for the answers, | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The actual educational value of this course is quite high. The score I can offer it in good faith is dragged down by the additional "assignments" like "Write you own quiz question!" and the expectation to review the quiz questions thought up by other students. Such things in a scientific course are unnecessary and may actually be counterproductive because of the reliance upon other students and their grasp of the material. If they are to remain part of this course, they really should be treated as supplementary and not required to complete the course. It really detracts from the experience for those of us who come here to learn and not to socialize. | assignments" like " Write you own | Quizz | question! " and the expectation to | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The actual educational value of this course is quite high. The score I can offer it in good faith is dragged down by the additional "assignments" like "Write you own quiz question!" and the expectation to review the quiz questions thought up by other students. Such things in a scientific course are unnecessary and may actually be counterproductive because of the reliance upon other students and their grasp of the material. If they are to remain part of this course, they really should be treated as supplementary and not required to complete the course. It really detracts from the experience for those of us who come here to learn and not to socialize. | and the expectation to review the | Quizz | questions thought up by other students. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I learned much more in this course than other courses about quantitative methods. It is clear and useful and inspiring. The quizzes are very good, because they are not only about konwledge,but also about whether you can apply the knowledge. And the interviews are very good too, which give us more information in different subjiects, or from different perspectives. But I feel the speaker's speaking speed is a little fast, and I hope that there will be exercise or quizzes in which we are given situation,and asked to come up with RQ, methods, analysis, etc. | clear and useful and inspiring. The | Quizz | are very good, because they are | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I learned much more in this course than other courses about quantitative methods. It is clear and useful and inspiring. The quizzes are very good, because they are not only about konwledge,but also about whether you can apply the knowledge. And the interviews are very good too, which give us more information in different subjiects, or from different perspectives. But I feel the speaker's speaking speed is a little fast, and I hope that there will be exercise or quizzes in which we are given situation,and asked to come up with RQ, methods, analysis, etc. | that there will be exercise or | Quizz | in which we are given situation, | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Nicely explained with easy to understand examples. Quite hard for those who have never studied research methods. Very dense information. I found one or two questions in the weekly quiz that I couldn`t answer with the knowledge available in the videos. | or two questions in the weekly | Quizz | that I couldn`t answer with the | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| ru6DZ3Q6EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Enjoyed the class, only part that was bad is I couldn't do any of the quizzes. I can't afford the cost. Other then that the class was very informative and I found it very entertaining as well. Thank you. | I couldn't do any of the | Quizz | I can't afford the cost. Other | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| S8Vh0SypEeWGvAojQA48rw | A example of the Capstone quiz, could made this course best. I suggest to give example of a business idea analysis and also lecture on it. | A example of the Capstone | Quizz | could made this course best. I | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| sCE0nT-OEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Content is good, but exercises could be improved, should also add a few interactive quizzes (e.g. a quiz before the segment to ask what they think are the 3 - 4 factors of X,Y,Z; then a quiz at end to summarize). Also add sources. | should also add a few interactive | Quizz | (e. g. a quiz before the | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| sCE0nT-OEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Content is good, but exercises could be improved, should also add a few interactive quizzes (e.g. a quiz before the segment to ask what they think are the 3 - 4 factors of X,Y,Z; then a quiz at end to summarize). Also add sources. | few interactive quizzes (e. g. a | Quizz | before the segment to ask what | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| sCE0nT-OEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Content is good, but exercises could be improved, should also add a few interactive quizzes (e.g. a quiz before the segment to ask what they think are the 3 - 4 factors of X,Y,Z; then a quiz at end to summarize). Also add sources. | of X, Y, Z; then a | Quizz | at end to summarize). Also add | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| sCE0nT-OEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I like the course and the material; I would suggest to include quiz, to the end of each section. As well, it will be easier to write a story from final task after each section, not at the very end | material; I would suggest to include | Quizz | to the end of each section. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | The course materials are very good for anyone who wants to get into SEO. I only gave 4 stars because I personally dislike the quizzes. They don't focus on what's important but rather on small detail questions that don't really matter. Other than that it's a great course! Most of it you can find in books too but with videos & the community it's more fun to learn on Coursera. | stars because I personally dislike the | Quizz | They don't focus on what's important | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Poor grading system. Based on 2 peers' "subjective" points of your week4 analysis assignment, even if you digested all the materials and received 100% on quizzes all weeks, you will have to repeat taking this course endlessly. At first I thought I did not analyze thoroughly so on my second session, I basically rewrote the whole assessment, followed by samples passed students gave me, also making sure I covered all the points the instruction asked me to cover, peer gives me 1 or 1.5 point for writing persona with little detail. I wrote 350 words persona, with stories and demographic of my target audience. Because I am 2.5 points short or so, I have to take this same course for the next round session for the third time, wait it it reaches week 4, resubmit my analysis that is now edited for 4 times. There is no clear guideline, format, or even sample provided, but the grades are left to the peers. Some pass with less than 300 word analysis with a lot of charts and pictures. I did as well but wasn't lucky at my first round so I developed 3 pg. analysis all in words to make it look like a true analytical report, didn't pass again. I do not know what this instructor is looking for as a form of assessment/analysis paper, and only those who are lucky enough to meet sensible peer graders pass. Waste of time, waste of money no one wants to spend lifetime to get a certificate especially when one knows what he or she is talking about. | the materials and received 100% on | Quizz | all weeks, you will have to | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Challenging, thorough and engaging. Repetitive in a good way, by gently going back over content you almost learn by default. The quizzes are professionally prepared and sometimes tough to pass! This is good as you are obliged to think hard, even go back through materials or ask others for advice until the knowledge sticks. Highly recommended and of great practical value. | you almost learn by default. The | Quizz | are professionally prepared and sometimes tough | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | The content is great, and the lectures are clear, but this course was made in a rush: there are many bugs throughout the quizzes and there is no contact at all with the lecturer in the forums, and there is no teaching stuff present in the forums. | there are many bugs throughout the | Quizz | and there is no contact at | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Course quality went downhill, compared to previous course in series. No 'teacher' involvement in comments / questions. Mistakes within quizzes. Both practice and rated. | in comments / questions. Mistakes within | Quizz | Both practice and rated. | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Good content, but blocked quizes in free version is bad idea. | Good content, but blocked | Quizz | in free version is bad idea. | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | The material is interesting and new, on that part the instructor is doing a good job. What is really VERY annoying about this course is the fact that in case you have questions/problems relating anything of the course material and you (as said by the instructor) post them to the discussion forums, there is COMPLETELY NO REPLY neither from the instructor, nor from the Coursera. There were obvious mistakes in one of the quizzes and lots of students were posting and discussing this in the forums (as this was actually preventing students from passing the course), but there was no answer whatsoever. I find this very unprofessional, especially because of the fact that this was a paid course. I do not know (and I also do not care) who is responsible for this - Coursera or the instructors, but this is something that should not be present in any of the courses on Coursera. I liked the first course very much, but the mentioned part of the second course was so annoying that I really would not recommend taking this course to new students. Sorry. | obvious mistakes in one of the | Quizz | and lots of students were posting | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Very poor. Full of errors in videos and quizzes (which affect final grade), no response from course organizers in the forum to multiple complaints from learners, and extremely thin on content. Could have been merged into the first course of the specialization (Introduction to SEO). I've taken $49 one-off certificate classes that provided 4-10 hours of content for 6-8 weeks; for this course I was charged $119 for 1-3 hours of content for what was supposed to be 4 weeks. I completed the course in a couple of days and felt like I learned more from free resources like Moz. Complete rip-off and easily the worse course of the half dozen I've taken on Coursera on various topics. It seems like you're paying for the UC Davis name on the certificates rather than the content. In addition to all that they dropped the price from $119 to $79 per course for the specialization after I paid for it, and refuse to refund the price difference. Fine - but if I'm paying a premium price I expect much better content and service than was received. | Full of errors in videos and | Quizz | (which affect final grade), no response | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| shV98lfdEeWT8xIUiEQHHQ | It's good for undergraduates, and people returning to academia (say, before starting a Master's course). It's a very short simple introduction. I kind of wish it had more examples of language to use in academic writing, contrasting good and bad examples. Some of the quiz questions and final exam questions need some proofreading. The videos from about week 3 to 4 have poor sound quality, but still understandable. | and bad examples. Some of the | Quizz | questions and final exam questions need | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| shV98lfdEeWT8xIUiEQHHQ | The course contains useful writing tips, but severly lacks practical writing assignments (peer-review assessment would be great here!). The quizzes are way too easy, IMO. | would be great here! ). The | Quizz | are way too easy, IMO. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| shV98lfdEeWT8xIUiEQHHQ | The course lacks for the practice exersises. Instead, the quizes are full of questions like "Present Simple tense is used to write about a special study implemented by a well-known scientist. True or false". The questions of this type are pointless. Still, the videos sometimes contain useful information. | for the practice exersises. Instead, the | Quizz | are full of questions like " | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| sK74dCWgEeW8-A6tkjXxWQ | Upon the first few views of the subject material, presented in the form of dramatized episodes, I was skeptical if this course was worth its time. I was pleasantly surprised once we moved into motivation in the 21st century, and the course only improved from there (though the multiple long videos in the financial crisis module felt redundant). A meaningful course as long as you can engage yourself with the material rather than rely on their sub-par assignments and quizzes to engage you. I also, did not participate in any discussions, but perhaps if I had this course would have been rated 5 stars. | rely on their sub-par assignments and | Quizz | to engage you. I also, did | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| SKOeUY7CEeW2aQ7olstw0Q | its a good course but have some problems in the quizzes | but have some problems in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course was tough, but I dont mind a challenge. But what I found frustrating about this course was that first the quizzes were often inconsistent with the lecture material, the TA's were less helpful than my fellow classmates (without whom I would not have made it through the course) and the final was an IMMENSE challenge that took over my life for about 1 week - despite the calculation by the instructors that it would take 6-8 hours. I did give it a few stars because I honestly did learn things I did not know, and I understand the value of the application of what was taught for modern businesses. I have been informed that the course is being reviewed by the instructors for strengthening and I 100% agree with that direction. | this course was that first the | Quizz | were often inconsistent with the lecture | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Quiz does not require hands-on experience of creating templates but rather simply plugging in numbers. Students may forget most of the content after finishing the quiz. | | Quizz | does not require hands-on experience of | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Quiz does not require hands-on experience of creating templates but rather simply plugging in numbers. Students may forget most of the content after finishing the quiz. | of the content after finishing the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Although more about Prob and Stat than learning to use Excel, concepts of binary classification and entropy are very interesting and are taught very deliberately and thoroughly. More practise quizes and worked out examples would be even better. | very deliberately and thoroughly. More practise | Quizz | and worked out examples would be | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Concepts are fantastic but the material developed to deliver the course is short of expectations, especially from a university. Excel sheets do not match what is demonstrated in video lectures, lots of confusion around how to complete tasks, quiz answer options not being correct, and missing Excel spreadsheets (e.g. video lecture says to refer to accompanying excel spreadsheet, but no spreadsheet available). Also, judging from past discussions by students, some inconsistencies around formulas being presented in video lectures versus assignment questions. could have been a great course, but the inconsistencies have made is very disappointing. | confusion around how to complete tasks, | Quizz | answer options not being correct, and | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Interesting statistical concepts, and great theory. However, the lectures and the quizzes do not prepare the student well for the final project. | theory. However, the lectures and the | Quizz | do not prepare the student well | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The title is very misleading. Excel is an afterthought for this course; instead there is a heavy focus on statistics. The class claims to be for beginners, but that is clearly not the case, as it requires previous knowledge in inferential statistics and calculus. Excel is hardly used and is certainly not the focus; there are weeks where Excel is not used at all. There are no practice assignments, only quizzes. It's clear that this course is outdated and poorly maintained, as the videos refer to examples that are not included or content that was not presented. Needless to say, I will not be taking any other courses in this specialization. | There are no practice assignments, only | Quizz | It's clear that this course is | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The course structure is not thoughtfully prepared. There is a lot of confusion around what the instructor wants to say. The practice quizzes and course content have no match whatsoever | instructor wants to say. The practice | Quizz | and course content have no match | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This class required far too much independent study. The instructor did not provide enough instruction or reading material to complete the quiz each week. There was too much focus on the conceptual data with very little emphasis on practical application of the material. | or reading material to complete the | Quizz | each week. There was too much | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The class has great concept but it needs a bit more structure and change to hit its full potential. The Good:-The spreadsheets and exercises along with Quiz material. The project was also very informative. The Bad:- The video need to better explain how Area Under Curve and how the Credit model make sense. It was not very intuitive and I struggled for over 2 weeks to put the Project together due to this gap. But a worthwhile class with great potential. I am glad I took it. | Good:-The spreadsheets and exercises along with | Quizz | material. The project was also very | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | this course is definitely NOT for beginners. you MUST have intermediate to advanced knowledge of statistics and math. I had to resort to google and khan academy extensively just to grasp the concepts in this course. This course also does not teach you everything about excel, let alone master it. you just refer to pre made excel sheets for quizzes. thats it. Good luck figuring those out. | to pre made excel sheets for | Quizz | thats it. Good luck figuring those | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This is my first Coursera course and I wasn't sure what to expect. I was hoping for a good experience but preparing myself for mediocrity. I finished the course at 2am on Monday morning and I've been really impressed, both with the Coursera "infrastructure" and with the quality of the teaching from Daniel Egger and his team. I live in South Africa where tertiary educational standards vary widely, and appear to be on the decline. More and more, we are going to need MOOCs like this from the best universities in the world. More specifically, relating to this course, I found the video lectures well presented and the quizzes thoughtfully prepared. The Excel models really helped with grasping the concepts and practice. A couple of suggestions: a) The course FAQ makes light of the background knowledge necessary to cope with the course. It needs to be more honest about the need for mathematics and statistics. Linear regression is not for sissies, in my opinion. b) Please tell us at the START of the course that we should attack the project week by week. This advice isn't (unless I missed something) given until you open the week 6 project. Ahem... it's too late by then! I spent a very frantic 4 nights last week crunching the project work, 4 quizzes and the assignment. I got to bed at 2.30am, and i'm not a night owl. Overwhelmingly though, a really interesting course. I'm already starting the next one. | video lectures well presented and the | Quizz | thoughtfully prepared. The Excel models really | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This is my first Coursera course and I wasn't sure what to expect. I was hoping for a good experience but preparing myself for mediocrity. I finished the course at 2am on Monday morning and I've been really impressed, both with the Coursera "infrastructure" and with the quality of the teaching from Daniel Egger and his team. I live in South Africa where tertiary educational standards vary widely, and appear to be on the decline. More and more, we are going to need MOOCs like this from the best universities in the world. More specifically, relating to this course, I found the video lectures well presented and the quizzes thoughtfully prepared. The Excel models really helped with grasping the concepts and practice. A couple of suggestions: a) The course FAQ makes light of the background knowledge necessary to cope with the course. It needs to be more honest about the need for mathematics and statistics. Linear regression is not for sissies, in my opinion. b) Please tell us at the START of the course that we should attack the project week by week. This advice isn't (unless I missed something) given until you open the week 6 project. Ahem... it's too late by then! I spent a very frantic 4 nights last week crunching the project work, 4 quizzes and the assignment. I got to bed at 2.30am, and i'm not a night owl. Overwhelmingly though, a really interesting course. I'm already starting the next one. | week crunching the project work, 4 | Quizz | and the assignment. I got to | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Don't be fooled by how detailed and clear the first weeks videos are. The second thru the final weeks are lacking details and explanations and found myself lost during most of the videos. There were even a few typos and errors. Be ready to do a lot independent research and learning from other sources in order to complete the weekly quiz. I was unable to complete the final project of this course due to the lack of knowledge provided by the lecture videos and some of own research. I was hoping to complete the specialization for this, but it doesn't seem like this course provided me with enough to proceed. ** The use of excel on the weekly basis was poorly integrated with the flow of the course. | in order to complete the weekly | Quizz | I was unable to complete the | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The training course excellent however I would like to find the quiz for the week number 1 | I would like to find the | Quizz | for the week number 1 | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Given this is the third (or fourth) iteration of this course, it's telling that the errors from the original release remain in the videos and quizzes. There are other, higher-quality Data Science MOOCs available. | release remain in the videos and | Quizz | There are other, higher-quality Data Science | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I would like to have more example, it feels there is mostly theory. The quizzes were super easy, I dropped out at final project, I couldn't get through the first questions. The course (and especially the final project) requires a good basis in statistics beforehand. The assistants are super helpful and patient. | feels there is mostly theory. The | Quizz | were super easy, I dropped out | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The lecture videos are not super helpful and the instruction and support for final project is somewhat lacking. You need a relatively solid background coming into doing the project beforehand. Just study the course material is not enough for you to complete your final project, in fact you need peer help or to read more materials to fully understand and finish the project. The quizzes compared to what is asked in the project is too simple and thus not constructive enough in the overall learning. Overall I would recommend you to have a solid background before proceed with this course if you want to improve your learning experiences. | understand and finish the project. The | Quizz | compared to what is asked in | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | In the course info this is described as the first course in the series and that it requires no prior knowledge but the first week quiz contains questions referring to an equation 'discussed in the previous course'. | prior knowledge but the first week | Quizz | contains questions referring to an equation | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Was very frustrated with this course. Does not have a strong emphasis on Excel skills and the statistics models provided seem to be randomly chosen and poorly explained. Quizzes were interesting, but time-consuming because of the necessary extra research outside of provided lectures. | be randomly chosen and poorly explained. | Quizz | were interesting, but time-consuming because of | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Quite an useful course for Excel application in business decision-making. But I think the final project is a little more difficult than weekly assignments. And only Quiz 1 has some hints about the potential problems we might come across during the quiz. The linear regression part, especially multivariate linear regression, need more explanations how to derive the matrix in Excel. Even though I followed every steps and referred other classmates' discussions, I cannot work out the matrix with Excel. So sad :( | difficult than weekly assignments. And only | Quizz | 1 has some hints about the | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Quite an useful course for Excel application in business decision-making. But I think the final project is a little more difficult than weekly assignments. And only Quiz 1 has some hints about the potential problems we might come across during the quiz. The linear regression part, especially multivariate linear regression, need more explanations how to derive the matrix in Excel. Even though I followed every steps and referred other classmates' discussions, I cannot work out the matrix with Excel. So sad :( | we might come across during the | Quizz | The linear regression part, especially multivariate | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Videos fine. Quizes impossible to understand unless you take previous courses and have time to go through forums and more extra staff. It takes a lot of time. Not suggested unless you have it. | Videos fine. | Quizz | impossible to understand unless you take | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Much work needs to be done on this course to make it friendly to learners. The quizzes and assignments do not align with what is taught in the lessons. Further, the content in the lessons does not even show or explain what is expected from the learning. I spent the majority of my time exploring the discussions to discover what I was supposed to be doing and the rest of it on Google teaching myself the concepts that were not taught in the course. | make it friendly to learners. The | Quizz | and assignments do not align with | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Great information included. I feel like I know much more about modelling data than when I started. The quizzes can be in that without the hints on the discussion forum I don't know how I would have completed them just based on the information in the videos. | data than when I started. The | Quizz | can be in that without the | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Very confusing lectures, he says you don´t have to have a basic level of excel to do the course but I didn´t find that true. Struggled through all of the lecture videos and the quizzes seemed to come out of left field. | of the lecture videos and the | Quizz | seemed to come out of left | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It has a lot of problems, including: Not so many lectures about excel itself - most of the time you will be watching videos about statistic methods. The lectures are very superficial, even though the quizzes and projects demand a lot of knowledge and time. The course seems to have a staff of one man: the professor of the course rarely replies (even though he did at the beginning of the session) and all the work seems to be done by his assistant, who tries his best, but ends up not coping with all the questions asked at the discussion forums. | are very superficial, even though the | Quizz | and projects demand a lot of | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Really interesting course and material and a very good instructor. This would be a 5 stars course if it wasn't for the final project. During lessons some concepts of statistics were taken as known (which is okay). However the final project required to utilize a combination of all new learned material on a whole different level of difficulty compared to the preceding quizzes. I did not expect that jump in difficulty and enjoyed the course a lot but the final project just was a struggle. | of difficulty compared to the preceding | Quizz | I did not expect that jump | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| svzDI2FSEeW6DxKCi866Kw | As usually Johns Hopkins offers very disappointing courses because of their boring lectures and senseless quizzes. | of their boring lectures and senseless | Quizz | | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| SxjkGailEeSy_SIAC49HnA | learned a lot so far, even the quizzes are intelligent | a lot so far, even the | Quizz | are intelligent | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I almost need to come back and listen to these lectures again. This course is pretty technical -- it involves several different digital tools. I found that it was possible to do well on the quizzes without really mastering the technical tools. Now that I'm trying to put them into use more fully, I find I don't understand them as well as I should have. I take responsibility for perhaps not pushing to understand the first time -- but I also encourage Coursera and @RandyHlavac to perhaps include something more than "did you get an account?" checks for the tools -- to make sure students grasp how to use the tools before they move on. | possible to do well on the | Quizz | without really mastering the technical tools. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | Fantastic, just want to get that one quiz figured out so I don't loose marks for questions that didn't apply? help | just want to get that one | Quizz | figured out so I don't loose | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | I've only taken 2 classes with Wharton online. This and Intro to financial accounting. Financial accounting is awesome. It taught smoothly and explained things well. This class jumped around and didn't give full explanations and had questions on one quiz that we didn't learn until the next week. | explanations and had questions on one | Quizz | that we didn't learn until the | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course does not belong to this specialization. Poor content, poor assessment quiz, and felt quite disappointed. It is way below par. I never thought I would have to rate it this bad. If not for specialization that I am aiming for, I would never take it. Period. | this specialization. Poor content, poor assessment | Quizz | and felt quite disappointed. It is | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | the quiz is so frustrating | the | Quizz | is so frustrating | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Pros: Very good information and methods for running real life business models. The course provided the spreadsheet modules which allowed you to tinker around and learn them. I consider myself a power Excel user and I picked up some very good new modeling methods. Very concise. Cons: I did Week 2 on my lunch break. Some questions on the quizzes were a bit vague. Probably need some working knowledge of Excel before taking this class. If you need to complete a lot of modeling with your job, this is a good course to pick up some skills. | lunch break. Some questions on the | Quizz | were a bit vague. Probably need | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | It's a good course, with quite a bit for a newbie to learn. Would have appreciated more in-depth examples in the lectures though, as I often found a gap in the lectures and the questions asked in the quiz. Even otherwise, good stuff. | and the questions asked in the | Quizz | Even otherwise, good stuff. | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecture was quite good but some questions of the quiz made me confused, maybe it can be written in a different expression. | good but some questions of the | Quizz | made me confused, maybe it can | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Wharton's online MD can not have a course so poorly develop (lectures vs quiz vs material) | course so poorly develop (lectures vs | Quizz | vs material) | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Frankly speaking, it should be the most disappointing MOOC I have ever enrolled so far. The Professor's teaching is clear and comprehensible but the depth of the course content cannot meet the university level, especially from a worldwide renowned school like Wharton. Quiz is the most terrible part which seems like nobody could get it because of the ambiguous questions and paranoid answer area. Personally, I, like many other mates, am really grateful to Coursera for offering everyone this equal opportunity. But courses with that kind of quality but staggering price will destroy the company's brand. We all want Coursera to go further and better, but few people prefer monopoly businessman rather than prestigious professors and diligent intellectuals. | a worldwide renowned school like Wharton. | Quizz | is the most terrible part which | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | For what you pay for, this course is not worth it. While I was able to follow the lectures, the material is very introductory and I was hoping to learn more. The lectures are really short in duration and the quizzes aren't challenging. I feel that pricing of this Specialization is purely due to the brand name of Wharton. Please improve this Specialization to encompass more depth in the course material or lower the price. | really short in duration and the | Quizz | aren't challenging. I feel that pricing | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | It was a good course. The quizzes should be corrected since some questions are ambiguous. | It was a good course. The | Quizz | should be corrected since some questions | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecturer was very slow, and some things were not explained very well (while very simple concepts were often over-explained). Also, I'm quite sure there were at least 2 errors in the weekly quizzes. One that comes to mind is a question that had identical options for two of the multiple-choice answers, but only one of them was correct (50/50 guess, more or less --- I had to take the quiz 3 times before I guessed right!). | least 2 errors in the weekly | Quizz | One that comes to mind is | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecturer was very slow, and some things were not explained very well (while very simple concepts were often over-explained). Also, I'm quite sure there were at least 2 errors in the weekly quizzes. One that comes to mind is a question that had identical options for two of the multiple-choice answers, but only one of them was correct (50/50 guess, more or less --- I had to take the quiz 3 times before I guessed right!). | --- I had to take the | Quizz | 3 times before I guessed right! | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Many errors in the quizzes made this course a disaster, although the course staff was eager to correct them as more complains in the discussions arrived. Being the second course in the specialisation, it doesn't actually live up to the expectations as it mostly covers the very basics of the excel functionality in terms of modelling. | Many errors in the | Quizz | made this course a disaster, although | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Overall the course was good, but the quiz assignments need work. When entering formula's there should be more clarity. Formula's can be entered in many ways and even when right were often counted as wrong. | the course was good, but the | Quizz | assignments need work. When entering formula's | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The qiuz are managed terribly, full of error and I seriously doubt the professor ever seen these quiz before. The Course suit for a beginner but a bit fragile, I expect more about building a usable model. This course need serious review. | doubt the professor ever seen these | Quizz | before. The Course suit for a | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | 1st 3 weeks were helpful but questions of the quiz were unclear & improvement is really necessary but still an ok course for basic learners.It could be much better | were helpful but questions of the | Quizz | were unclear & improvement is really | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | stars. On the other hand, the | Quizz | were very poorly designed. It took | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | maximum three tries on every single | Quizz | to pass and I did just | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | Also, there were questions on the | Quizz | that weren't even covered in the | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | particular module. E. g. , on | Quizz | #1, there was a question about | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the | Quizz | and answers! ! And if you're | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course was very average to me. Compared to the first course in the specialization, Fundamentals of Quantitative Modeling, which was absolutely great. What I liked: Good info on the tools in excel that are needed. What I didn't like: Time spent on content that necessarily wasn't regarding models; the critical material was buried in videos and was very brief. More time should have been spent. Additionally the quiz questions were subjective at times based on what was said on video and the formula answers weren't correctly graded in many cases. This course could have been much better, maybe I was just spoiled by the first course. | should have been spent. Additionally the | Quizz | questions were subjective at times based | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course needs tremendous improvement. In contrast to previous fundamentals of quantitative modelling module, this lags in lot of areas. No clear explanations and the quizzes are worded super vague and filled with with bugs. I expected a lot under Monte Carlo Simulation. However, too simplistic example and explanation was presented. The topics were not introduced clearly. | areas. No clear explanations and the | Quizz | are worded super vague and filled | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Poor quize | Poor | Quizz | | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This was very disappointing, especially considering it's a Wharton product. The "course" was little more than an afternoon's worth of seminars. Since I am not a paying participant, I could not take the quizzes, so I finished watching the videos in less than a day. In addition, there are NO collateral or supporting materials provided. None of the spreadsheets or workbooks illustrated in the videos are available anywhere on the course site, despite their being advertised in the videos. All in all, it was consistent with the first course in this "specialization". Again, very disappointing. I'm glad I didn't spend any money on this. | participant, I could not take the | Quizz | so I finished watching the videos | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | The People Teaching this course are the best and they have so much life and show a good interest, they actually teach and they make the course enjoyable and by so doing i was able to pass all my quizzes and assignments. | was able to pass all my | Quizz | and assignments. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | A strong overview of the crisis that balances the depth and breadth of the material well. Strengths: Balance of narrative and data. Logical sequencing gives a nice structure and a more digestible package. Excellent level of detail, neither missing the forest for the trees nor ignoring the trees altogether. Weaknesses: Does not address alternative theories or interpretations of the crisis, even to shoot them down. Several quizzes were poorly-constructed, featuring obvious typos or nonsensical statements. Additional module to update the material (stale since mid-2015) was promised, but not delivered. | even to shoot them down. Several | Quizz | were poorly-constructed, featuring obvious typos or | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Very interesting course that provides a comprehensive, yet accessible, account of the global financial crisis as well as of its causes and consequences. Both Prof. Metrick and Mr. Geithner do a great job in explaining the materials using clear slides and easily understandable graphics and figures. The course setup is also clear and can easily be completed. The quizzes offer a good opportunity to keep track of the course contents (maybe extend them to 3-4 questions instead of just 2?). Perhaps a comprehensive final exam reviewing the materials of all prior weeks would be sensible, as one might have forgotten what topics were discussed in week 1 or 2 while learning the contents of week 11. | and can easily be completed. The | Quizz | offer a good opportunity to keep | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | This was a great course. It was very well structured and the quizzes after each lecture were useful for quickly catching my own misunderstandings about the material presented. I learned so much from it and it really changed my perspective on the global financial crisis. My only complaint is that there no guidance on where to get supplementary information, either books or articles, on the topic. | was very well structured and the | Quizz | after each lecture were useful for | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| TN6htXEnEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Once again a good course but the quizzes are improvable. I had 98%, I don't say it because I didn't know the answers. Many questions just don't make sense. Other than that the course was very interesting! | again a good course but the | Quizz | are improvable. I had 98%, I | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| TN6htXEnEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Course itself is excellent, cases are very good and practical, but the only thing is lots of technical issues with the assignments and quizzes. Therefore only 3 stars. | technical issues with the assignments and | Quizz | Therefore only 3 stars. | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| towthzydEeW0tw4knrMo3Q | I enjoyed this course. I found the quizzes hard, but persevered, and managed to pass with 84.5% | enjoyed this course. I found the | Quizz | hard, but persevered, and managed to | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | Very comprehensive course. However, I found one professor to teach above the level of an introductory course. This is kind of a misnomer. To me, this course was not introductory. It was very difficult. Although, it would be good for someone that is taking the MCAT's. My points are: Very comprehensive, quite a lot of information (if you don't have chemistry and microbiology backgrounds it is easy to get lost), quite difficult tests and quizzes, rewarding if you can finish it. | get lost), quite difficult tests and | Quizz | rewarding if you can finish it. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | Nice videos, well explained. The powerpoints are extremely useful and clear. However sometimes there is a confusion between what is said in the videos and in the lecture notes and the quiz questions. It may just be me however. Apart from that last thing, the rest is all good! | in the lecture notes and the | Quizz | questions. It may just be me | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | I have already completed 3 modules, and I just love this course. The program, the videos and the quizes are all very well designed, the exam questions although a bit of higher level compared to the theory exposed, makes you think in real physiology and that's really great. You can see that this course is planned and designed with the real objective of teaching you physiology, and you can see the effort that's been placed here by both teachers in order to make this happen. So congratulations to both of you and to the University of Duke. Great job in general terms. | The program, the videos and the | Quizz | are all very well designed, the | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | The effect of this course in understanding the body physiology and understanding the terminology of other courses can be compared to learning to read. Now I can take other, more specialized courses without having to Google every other word and actually understand the processes they're talking about instead of simply memorizing them. Especially, now that I am taking several other courses, I have the opportunity to appreciate the depth clever systematic approach to explain such complex processes of our body. Sometimes I got the feeling that I lack some background as many terms used to explain processes were not explained. But that was greatly compensated by teachers' and mentors' participation in the forum and answering questions on every subject. I was amazed that such free course offers the luxury of teachers replying to your questions, and this actually motivated me to study even more diligently. And yes, come up with new questions :) By the end of the course not all my questions were answered, but on the other side, without this course I never would even think of asking those questions about work of human body! Such great interest and inquiry have you wakened in me, thank you very much! I would like to note that the course used a wonderful array of tools to create understanding of the subject. One of the best was storytelling by Dr. Jakoi. Stories in the best way to learn as theoretical information is related to real-life situations, and in fact, I remembered all stories that she told, like stories about her son who had high parasympathetic tone, about guy who drank too much water to remove kidney stone, etc. Along with remembering the stories, I remembered the information it was about. One more thing I would like to note is that I liked your tests and practice quizzes. Not all courses have practice questions after the lessons and it’s excellent way to memorize info. Also, quizzes include tasks of application of knowledge in some practical situations - makes you think and analyze the info to explain real-life phenomena. It’s difficult to correctly reply to such questions only relying on information: you need understanding of the process. In this way, these are excellent quizzes. So thank you very much for such high quality educative course, it helped me a lot! | I liked your tests and practice | Quizz | Not all courses have practice questions | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | The effect of this course in understanding the body physiology and understanding the terminology of other courses can be compared to learning to read. Now I can take other, more specialized courses without having to Google every other word and actually understand the processes they're talking about instead of simply memorizing them. Especially, now that I am taking several other courses, I have the opportunity to appreciate the depth clever systematic approach to explain such complex processes of our body. Sometimes I got the feeling that I lack some background as many terms used to explain processes were not explained. But that was greatly compensated by teachers' and mentors' participation in the forum and answering questions on every subject. I was amazed that such free course offers the luxury of teachers replying to your questions, and this actually motivated me to study even more diligently. And yes, come up with new questions :) By the end of the course not all my questions were answered, but on the other side, without this course I never would even think of asking those questions about work of human body! Such great interest and inquiry have you wakened in me, thank you very much! I would like to note that the course used a wonderful array of tools to create understanding of the subject. One of the best was storytelling by Dr. Jakoi. Stories in the best way to learn as theoretical information is related to real-life situations, and in fact, I remembered all stories that she told, like stories about her son who had high parasympathetic tone, about guy who drank too much water to remove kidney stone, etc. Along with remembering the stories, I remembered the information it was about. One more thing I would like to note is that I liked your tests and practice quizzes. Not all courses have practice questions after the lessons and it’s excellent way to memorize info. Also, quizzes include tasks of application of knowledge in some practical situations - makes you think and analyze the info to explain real-life phenomena. It’s difficult to correctly reply to such questions only relying on information: you need understanding of the process. In this way, these are excellent quizzes. So thank you very much for such high quality educative course, it helped me a lot! | excellent way to memorize info. Also, | Quizz | include tasks of application of knowledge | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | The effect of this course in understanding the body physiology and understanding the terminology of other courses can be compared to learning to read. Now I can take other, more specialized courses without having to Google every other word and actually understand the processes they're talking about instead of simply memorizing them. Especially, now that I am taking several other courses, I have the opportunity to appreciate the depth clever systematic approach to explain such complex processes of our body. Sometimes I got the feeling that I lack some background as many terms used to explain processes were not explained. But that was greatly compensated by teachers' and mentors' participation in the forum and answering questions on every subject. I was amazed that such free course offers the luxury of teachers replying to your questions, and this actually motivated me to study even more diligently. And yes, come up with new questions :) By the end of the course not all my questions were answered, but on the other side, without this course I never would even think of asking those questions about work of human body! Such great interest and inquiry have you wakened in me, thank you very much! I would like to note that the course used a wonderful array of tools to create understanding of the subject. One of the best was storytelling by Dr. Jakoi. Stories in the best way to learn as theoretical information is related to real-life situations, and in fact, I remembered all stories that she told, like stories about her son who had high parasympathetic tone, about guy who drank too much water to remove kidney stone, etc. Along with remembering the stories, I remembered the information it was about. One more thing I would like to note is that I liked your tests and practice quizzes. Not all courses have practice questions after the lessons and it’s excellent way to memorize info. Also, quizzes include tasks of application of knowledge in some practical situations - makes you think and analyze the info to explain real-life phenomena. It’s difficult to correctly reply to such questions only relying on information: you need understanding of the process. In this way, these are excellent quizzes. So thank you very much for such high quality educative course, it helped me a lot! | In this way, these are excellent | Quizz | So thank you very much for | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | I would like to rate this fabulous course as excellent under Dr. Emma Jakoi and Dr. Jennifer Carbrey, brilliant instructersThank you very much for all the kind explanation given for my questions, and good video quizzes, enjoyable problem sets and mind provoking exams. Regards and lots of thanks. Indira Raghunathan | for my questions, and good video | Quizz | enjoyable problem sets and mind provoking | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Quiz isn't challenging enough to validate the understanding of the user taking the course . | | Quizz | isn't challenging enough to validate the | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I had some issues with this course which is why I rated it a 2. First off, let me start by saying this is a very good overview of what the Cybersecurity Terms are, but I wish it went deeper into the subject. 1. Having to pay just to take the quizzes for an overview course is kind of a joke. I could see asking for money if you went into more detail information regarding each lesson, but just telling me what each term means and then pointing me to a website, then asking for 50 bucks is kind of cheap considering no in-depth information was ever given. 2. Why did you have all of those people that are in the field of cybersecurity just read off a list of terms? You could have done that, kind of a waste of time for those other people. I am guessing that you had to pay them. Which would explain why you are asking 50 dollars just to take the quizzes. 3. Where was the real life experience? Explain to me the most common mistakes people make with each of the different type of networks as securities. That would at least be worth 50 dollars, for some real world practical use. I could have easily googled these terms and have in the past. I thought it would contain more detailed information about the subject considering is technically an online course. | to pay just to take the | Quizz | for an overview course is kind | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I had some issues with this course which is why I rated it a 2. First off, let me start by saying this is a very good overview of what the Cybersecurity Terms are, but I wish it went deeper into the subject. 1. Having to pay just to take the quizzes for an overview course is kind of a joke. I could see asking for money if you went into more detail information regarding each lesson, but just telling me what each term means and then pointing me to a website, then asking for 50 bucks is kind of cheap considering no in-depth information was ever given. 2. Why did you have all of those people that are in the field of cybersecurity just read off a list of terms? You could have done that, kind of a waste of time for those other people. I am guessing that you had to pay them. Which would explain why you are asking 50 dollars just to take the quizzes. 3. Where was the real life experience? Explain to me the most common mistakes people make with each of the different type of networks as securities. That would at least be worth 50 dollars, for some real world practical use. I could have easily googled these terms and have in the past. I thought it would contain more detailed information about the subject considering is technically an online course. | 50 dollars just to take the | Quizz | 3. Where was the real life | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | This is the poorest Coursera course I have participated in. Very few and short videoes that only scratches the surface of Cybersecurity. Instead you are directed to massive amounts of readings with no guidance on what should be read. To read it all includes sometimes +1000 pages for one week (not going to happen). I ended up just reading the introduction, glancing through the texts and searching for the answers for the quiz. This course totally miss the purpose and potential of MOOCs and the great Coursera platform. It's a shame. | searching for the answers for the | Quizz | This course totally miss the purpose | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | The course is for an overview of many aspects of cybersecurity. There are many resources to read, videos that briefly discuss concepts of the week. Then there are quizzes and discussions with the topic of the week, doing the possibility at the student to talk about that and post his idea for assimilate concepts and reaching goals of the course. This is useful also for discuss with other students and how your ideas is viewed. I think there is a very basic course in his entire length, with more reading lectures at academic or professional level not for a beginner. it can be adding videos with more length and in-depth that in a easy way the ten domain about cybersecurity. | of the week. Then there are | Quizz | and discussions with the topic of | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I like the class and the assignments. Lessons are quite short however with the assignments and quizzes I am forced to search for the answers among provided reading material. I feel I am learning a lot! | short however with the assignments and | Quizz | I am forced to search for | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Interesting course ... final quiz is a little bit going deep into details | Interesting course . . . final | Quizz | is a little bit going deep | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | The best part about this course was that it made sure you are interested in learning the subject. If not, it is really really difficult to get on with it. It makes sure you understand the subject really well and you have to give back to the community. I liked the fact that you have to read the "Readings for this module" part, otherwise you won't be able to pass the Quizzes at the end of each module. You have to write a short paragraph which it will be reviewed by peers, who will in turn give you ratings. You have to do the same for other peers. This was probably the best aspect of this course. The music was extremely annoying and the quality of the content in the videos was okay, but the most important part is that it guided me in the right direction every time. Sometimes, by the end of the video, the music started in between the lecture itself and played itself for 3-4 seconds. | won't be able to pass the | Quizz | at the end of each module. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | A little bit too much generalist, need more precision. And unlimited attempt for quizz is not a godd idea, because quizz don't mean anything | more precision. And unlimited attempt for | Quizz | is not a godd idea, because | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | A little bit too much generalist, need more precision. And unlimited attempt for quizz is not a godd idea, because quizz don't mean anything | is not a godd idea, because | Quizz | don't mean anything | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I find this course very informative, but at the same time the videos seem pointless. All the quizzes are on the suggested reading material. The videos are quite cursory- almost an afterthought. | the videos seem pointless. All the | Quizz | are on the suggested reading material. | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Video content barely summarizes the outline of each module. The questions in the quiz are not "though provoking". Peer discussion are rather superficial and do not cover half the content of the course. Readings are OK, show good sources, but there is no real discussion about them in the videos or in the quizzes. | each module. The questions in the | Quizz | are not " though provoking" . | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Video content barely summarizes the outline of each module. The questions in the quiz are not "though provoking". Peer discussion are rather superficial and do not cover half the content of the course. Readings are OK, show good sources, but there is no real discussion about them in the videos or in the quizzes. | in the videos or in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | The videos and documents are not balanced with the quizzes. The quiz questions are sometimes verbatim sentences from one book with a missing word - which I find hardly a test of acquired knowledge. The course must rise above only a few definitions and rough concepts. Most of the video's hardly offer insights - they last only 2 minutes and cover a few of those definitions. This course has a lot of potential, but in its current format and content it was a disappointment. | documents are not balanced with the | Quizz | The quiz questions are sometimes verbatim | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | The videos and documents are not balanced with the quizzes. The quiz questions are sometimes verbatim sentences from one book with a missing word - which I find hardly a test of acquired knowledge. The course must rise above only a few definitions and rough concepts. Most of the video's hardly offer insights - they last only 2 minutes and cover a few of those definitions. This course has a lot of potential, but in its current format and content it was a disappointment. | not balanced with the quizzes. The | Quizz | questions are sometimes verbatim sentences from | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| TYSbV73jEeW1WAr3aepXuw | I find this to be very very basic advice on how to write a scientific paper. I can't even see where the "project" is coming, plus the strong accent of instructors makes it really hard to follow sometimes -- even with the subtitles. To make things even better, accessing the quizzes is imposible unless you pay for the certificate. I found the course disappointing. | make things even better, accessing the | Quizz | is imposible unless you pay for | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This is an excellent overview of the issues surrounding sustainable development. Some of the content needs updating, in particular with relation to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Furthermore, some of the quiz answers are incorrect based on the data referred to and the resources appear to have been updated since the course was written. There is nobody monitoring the forum and addressing issues raised. | Development Goals. Furthermore, some of the | Quizz | answers are incorrect based on the | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Great course! Significant issues covered and well presented. Data errors in the quizzes make it less charming however. | well presented. Data errors in the | Quizz | make it less charming however. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | started quite good, but slow videos and the last quiz was about just numbers. it is good to know what are the measurements, but if we won't teach about that too, the more concrete informations and not numbers would be more informative and useful. | but slow videos and the last | Quizz | was about just numbers. it is | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Some questions in the quiz do not have the proper data sources. Please review quiz questions, sources and answers expected. Thank you very much for this learning opportunity.< Sincere thanks and deep admiration and gratitude to Prof. Sachs for his genuine, continuous contributions to society. He is a true insporation to me. Kind regards, yullie matsouka | Some questions in the | Quizz | do not have the proper data | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Some questions in the quiz do not have the proper data sources. Please review quiz questions, sources and answers expected. Thank you very much for this learning opportunity.< Sincere thanks and deep admiration and gratitude to Prof. Sachs for his genuine, continuous contributions to society. He is a true insporation to me. Kind regards, yullie matsouka | the proper data sources. Please review | Quizz | questions, sources and answers expected. Thank | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Extremely well done videos, Professor Sachs is articulate and clear. The videos are a bit lengthy 25 minutes each so this asks quite some time investment. The quiz are not easy, one must often look up charts and work with various statistical methods which were not always easy to manage - hence the 4 instead of 5. However this does force one into mining world organizations for data so overall it's a good learning process. It never fails to amaze me how much data we have collected globally and for so long! | asks quite some time investment. The | Quizz | are not easy, one must often | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Excellent course content but very poorly designed quizzes. More clarity is needed in formulating questions, since different pages have different values for the same data sets (even on the same website such as the World Bank indicator datasets) and it will be difficult for students to get the right answers. | course content but very poorly designed | Quizz | More clarity is needed in formulating | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | The course itself is excellent. I just wished they got rid of the zooming in on graphs. Also, there is some issues with making the quizzes depend on web links that change over time. | is some issues with making the | Quizz | depend on web links that change | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | I really enjoyed how expert Professor Sachs is on sustainable development. He seems to know a lot about the subject and we can see a spark on his eyes when he is teaching. Moreover, the lectures and quizzes are comprehensive and well organized. However, apart from the last Week, I think that solutions for the many problems that Professor Sachs presents are not showed properly. Although there are many issues unsolved, there may be a lot of good examples throughout the world to be presented together with these issues. Kind Regards, Rodolfo | is teaching. Moreover, the lectures and | Quizz | are comprehensive and well organized. However, | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Muy buen curso, entrega lo que ofrece y Jeffrey Sacks explica muy bien. El único problema son los quiz, traen links que no funcionan y hay respuestas que están mal. | bien. El único problema son los | Quizz | traen links que no funcionan y | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This course proves to be very informative, and the quizzes push to discover new sources for course material. However, it is highly focused on the programs set by the UN and could provide more solutions and feedbacks on what is being done. Very much oriented toward public policies. Good experience overall. | to be very informative, and the | Quizz | push to discover new sources for | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Very good course, I enjoyed it very much and appreciated the educated and polite style of Prof. Jeffrey Sachs. I would have appreciated a copy of the figures and grafique shown. The course release in 2012 would need to be updated. The Quizz need a real involvement of the student to be completed; challenging but I personnaly appreaciated very much. The Quizz would need some profound revision since some links are not available anymore and some answer are simply wrong. A Statement from the Columbia University / Prof. J. Sachs would have been welcome since completing the 14 week course imply a real involvement from the student. Overall very appreciated course, Thank Prof. Sachs! | would need to be updated. The | Quizz | need a real involvement of the | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Very good course, I enjoyed it very much and appreciated the educated and polite style of Prof. Jeffrey Sachs. I would have appreciated a copy of the figures and grafique shown. The course release in 2012 would need to be updated. The Quizz need a real involvement of the student to be completed; challenging but I personnaly appreaciated very much. The Quizz would need some profound revision since some links are not available anymore and some answer are simply wrong. A Statement from the Columbia University / Prof. J. Sachs would have been welcome since completing the 14 week course imply a real involvement from the student. Overall very appreciated course, Thank Prof. Sachs! | I personnaly appreaciated very much. The | Quizz | would need some profound revision since | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | At first, i didn't know what to expect; i thought it was going to be pretty hard, because of my lack of experience in that specific area. It turns out that every lesson is perfectly explained,the quizzes are not easy tough! Highly recommended! | every lesson is perfectly explained, the | Quizz | are not easy tough! Highly recommended! | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | I really enjoyed this course. Very fluid, well organized and well-present. In my opinion, quizzes should not contain questions referring to the book, because not everyone (like me) can afford buying it. I would enjoy if Prof. Sachs could go deeper in the topics and explore them a little bit more and make student´s job a little bit more difficult. | organized and well-present. In my opinion, | Quizz | should not contain questions referring to | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This course is wonderfully and engagingly taught by the great Jeffrey Sachs, with a lot of food for thought, excellent visual aids, relevant data and statistics, and supplementary readings which add a lot to the course. The quizzes not only test the knowledge found in the lectures, but ask the students to analyze other data from sources such as the UN and World Bank. Overall, a holistic and information-packed introduction to the field of sustainable development. | a lot to the course. The | Quizz | not only test the knowledge found | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This course is pretty much what i expected from an online course. I just rate it with four stars because: 1. Quiz questions are often just about interpreting world bank data and not about the contents of the course. 2. Having read Prof. Sachs book the course does not offer additional insights. | it with four stars because: 1. | Quizz | questions are often just about interpreting | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | In this course there is a lot of valuable information, well prepared lessons and readings. I would try to make quizzes more complicated. | readings. I would try to make | Quizz | more complicated. | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | The course would be great if only everybody could fully participate. As I cannot pass quizzes and submit assignments not having purchased it, I have less motivation to carry on :( | fully participate. As I cannot pass | Quizz | and submit assignments not having purchased | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Great course, I've learned a lot, but it is somewhat discouraging not being able to pass the course because I can not pay for it. I don't need the certificate, but I would still prefer getting feedback on the quizzes and getting involved with the assignments. | still prefer getting feedback on the | Quizz | and getting involved with the assignments. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | I learned a great deal with this course and have become more confident in photography. There are a few little problems with the quizzes, but considering this is the first time the course is offered, that is quite normal. | a few little problems with the | Quizz | but considering this is the first | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | very dissapointing to not be able to make the quizzes and the assigments without paying it | not be able to make the | Quizz | and the assigments without paying it | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| u3goXsk9EeWT3Aqsn0BGnQ | So much disjointed information.... I felt absolutely crushed trying to learn and understand all this. Am waiting for another 8 hours before I can reattempt the quiz. Personally, I feel that this course assumes the student is automatically an expert in statistics (simply due to completing the first intro to statistics course). The logical progression of how to approach different problems - and the terminology of the statements involved has been thrown out the window... If you're new to statistics, I suggest you should at least double the time allocation they provided... | hours before I can reattempt the | Quizz | Personally, I feel that this course | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| u3goXsk9EeWT3Aqsn0BGnQ | This course is really well prepared. The material is very clear and good resources are provided for further learning. The quizzes and labs are always relevant to the course content. | are provided for further learning. The | Quizz | and labs are always relevant to | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Not the best one on coursera. Included many details that are not really relevant and quizes just checked if you memorized it. | that are not really relevant and | Quizz | just checked if you memorized it. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Too much version specific details. Instructor was reading slides vs explaining the technologies ( telling a story ) The Quiz part cant be more lame | ( telling a story ) The | Quizz | part cant be more lame | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Good intro, but the quizzes could be more challenging. | Good intro, but the | Quizz | could be more challenging. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This is an excellent course to get some basic knowledge about the iOS and Android history, when and how this systems developed their unique features, or how that influenced products in whole. Yet, quizzes are a bit boring. They require you to actually know history of evolving features tied to exact dates/versions. | that influenced products in whole. Yet, | Quizz | are a bit boring. They require | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | It was a great course. The integration of quizes during videos is a great Idea. It keeps you interested. Great teacher as well. | a great course. The integration of | Quizz | during videos is a great Idea. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| UAqCjp_TEeWLkg68u0gykQ | very poor. even though for the most part I found the videos engaging, the course's overall structure doesn't help to 'read the novel together', as is stated in the title. the quizes are poorly written, even for me, a native russian speaker, it was often hard to understand the questions, and sometimes its plain guess work on the opinions of the course authors. often a required number of answers to pass a quiz is the same as the total number of questions in that same quiz. the essay's topics rarely correspond with the actual reading of the book. for the very first week the essay required knowledge of the book that hasn't been read yet by the participants. or it should be stated that one needs to read the book prior to taking the course. then again that would require the change of the course's name. | is stated in the title. the | Quizz | are poorly written, even for me, | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| UAqCjp_TEeWLkg68u0gykQ | very poor. even though for the most part I found the videos engaging, the course's overall structure doesn't help to 'read the novel together', as is stated in the title. the quizes are poorly written, even for me, a native russian speaker, it was often hard to understand the questions, and sometimes its plain guess work on the opinions of the course authors. often a required number of answers to pass a quiz is the same as the total number of questions in that same quiz. the essay's topics rarely correspond with the actual reading of the book. for the very first week the essay required knowledge of the book that hasn't been read yet by the participants. or it should be stated that one needs to read the book prior to taking the course. then again that would require the change of the course's name. | number of answers to pass a | Quizz | is the same as the total | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| UAqCjp_TEeWLkg68u0gykQ | very poor. even though for the most part I found the videos engaging, the course's overall structure doesn't help to 'read the novel together', as is stated in the title. the quizes are poorly written, even for me, a native russian speaker, it was often hard to understand the questions, and sometimes its plain guess work on the opinions of the course authors. often a required number of answers to pass a quiz is the same as the total number of questions in that same quiz. the essay's topics rarely correspond with the actual reading of the book. for the very first week the essay required knowledge of the book that hasn't been read yet by the participants. or it should be stated that one needs to read the book prior to taking the course. then again that would require the change of the course's name. | number of questions in that same | Quizz | the essay's topics rarely correspond with | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | This class isn't very good. It is confusing and not well explained, and the quizzes are too short and badly written. I gave up on week 5 (of 6) because I just didn't feel i was learning very much, particularly about what the title of the course would suggest you'd be learning about. | and not well explained, and the | Quizz | are too short and badly written. | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I feel this course is designed in a way that may be too challenging to those who know nothing about music, sound, or biology. The quizzes dont really match the material covered and some of the questions are too ambiguous. The explanations are a little hard to follow as well. It does cover some interesting information about the relationship of music to speech. However, for someone a little more advanced in music and biology, I was hoping for more to be covered. I would have enjoyed more discussion of the history of modes and tuning systems, including more discussion of the Pythagorean comma (and how adjusted need to be made to intervals, especially in a chorus) and Kepler's work. I also would have enjoyed more discussion of rhythmic entrainment, the social cohesion hypothesis of the evolution of music, the roles music plays in human life, the way that bodies synchronize, and more about the relationship of music to emotional regulation, meaning, and personality. Im sure there is more as well. Giving this course 3 stars is generous in my opinion. | about music, sound, or biology. The | Quizz | dont really match the material covered | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I didn't understand very much of this course. Instructor relies heavily on the use of various charts. They were seldom explained in a way I could understand. Instructor seemed to believe that underlining things in the charts served as an explanation. After completing the entire course & listening to many of the lessons several times, I can't tell you "what we like to hear and why". Instructor speaks in a monotone with no emotion. Seems bored stiff. Seems like he's just talking, but his mind is elsewhere. Quizzes frequently contained questions for material to be covered in a future lesson | talking, but his mind is elsewhere. | Quizz | frequently contained questions for material to | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I slogged through it and got an 89, but the videos were boring and the quizzes were poorly worded and should have had greater correlation with the course content. | the videos were boring and the | Quizz | were poorly worded and should have | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Potentially interesting and useful material presented in boring and sometimes unclear manner. Quizzes failed to correlate to the material in the lectures. Got something out of the course but the potential was there for much more. | in boring and sometimes unclear manner. | Quizz | failed to correlate to the material | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The course was alright in the sense that it was descriptive, however, the level of critical thinking suggested for the course was not actually indicative of the material presented. A lot of the material presented was great, but when the quiz came around, questions regarding the material were unequal. For example, in one quiz, there was a question about Galileo, but there was no mention of Galileo in the lecture for that week, and, a lot of the PDF'S were repetitive and not diverse in the material being taught. | presented was great, but when the | Quizz | came around, questions regarding the material | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The course was alright in the sense that it was descriptive, however, the level of critical thinking suggested for the course was not actually indicative of the material presented. A lot of the material presented was great, but when the quiz came around, questions regarding the material were unequal. For example, in one quiz, there was a question about Galileo, but there was no mention of Galileo in the lecture for that week, and, a lot of the PDF'S were repetitive and not diverse in the material being taught. | were unequal. For example, in one | Quizz | there was a question about Galileo, | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Very informative and interesting. However the quizzes didn't coincide well with the lectures. | Very informative and interesting. However the | Quizz | didn't coincide well with the lectures. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The content was interesting, but the quizzes didn't relate to the lectures very often. It was as if there was a major piece missing in this course. One of the questions even referenced a book that was never mentioned or made available. Also, several of the musical sections seemed to be in the wrong place. I think maybe this is one of the classes that doesn't work well in this format. | The content was interesting, but the | Quizz | didn't relate to the lectures very | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The material in this course is very interesting, and many of the musical demonstrations are extremely helpful. I am glad I took it. However, much of the most interesting material is poorly explained; I would loved if fewer ideas were covered in more depth. The quizzes were for the most part poorly written, and only somewhat correlated with the presentation of material in the lectures. So there is definitely much room for improvement. | were covered in more depth. The | Quizz | were for the most part poorly | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Good video content, but quizzes need to be revised. | Good video content, but | Quizz | need to be revised. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The content is great. But there's not a lot of activity on the discussion boards, and there are some technical issues with the quizzes (using future lesson material on current quizzes). But the content is really fascinating. | are some technical issues with the | Quizz | (using future lesson material on current | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The content is great. But there's not a lot of activity on the discussion boards, and there are some technical issues with the quizzes (using future lesson material on current quizzes). But the content is really fascinating. | (using future lesson material on current | Quizz | But the content is really fascinating. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Great content and great teacher. But I found the assignments and the quizzes not that great. I reckon the questions and corrections were a bit subjective and time consuming. | I found the assignments and the | Quizz | not that great. I reckon the | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The course was very superficial, mostly with tips and hints. It's good to be aware that the option for performing the quizes and tasks were unavailable, making it hard to evaluate the experience of the course fully. | that the option for performing the | Quizz | and tasks were unavailable, making it | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The information in this course was valuable, but the assignments were poorly integrated with the course. The types of documents assigned were either not covered or barely covered in the course leaving the students to guess what was expected. For one assignment the provided template left off a section required in the grading criteria. The quizes were also poorly tied to the lecture material and some of the questions were ambiguous. There were several quizes were a single wrong answer resulted in having to take the quiz over. | required in the grading criteria. The | Quizz | were also poorly tied to the | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The information in this course was valuable, but the assignments were poorly integrated with the course. The types of documents assigned were either not covered or barely covered in the course leaving the students to guess what was expected. For one assignment the provided template left off a section required in the grading criteria. The quizes were also poorly tied to the lecture material and some of the questions were ambiguous. There were several quizes were a single wrong answer resulted in having to take the quiz over. | questions were ambiguous. There were several | Quizz | were a single wrong answer resulted | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The information in this course was valuable, but the assignments were poorly integrated with the course. The types of documents assigned were either not covered or barely covered in the course leaving the students to guess what was expected. For one assignment the provided template left off a section required in the grading criteria. The quizes were also poorly tied to the lecture material and some of the questions were ambiguous. There were several quizes were a single wrong answer resulted in having to take the quiz over. | resulted in having to take the | Quizz | over. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | This course tries to cover the many aspects around the games industry. But the coverage in each of the subject is not deep enough to be useful. For example, the instructor talks about project management, public speaking, how to write a resume etc. The instructor starts by talking about why they are useful, and then followed by one to two 10-15 minutes long video lectures. Each of these could worth a full Coursera course and I am sure the other courses have better coverage than in this course. The quiz questions are not well thought and do not stimulate thinking at all. Some of the "correct" answers are personal opinions but you have to choose them in order to pass the quiz. The third peer grading assessment asks students to post a video either to pitch himself/herself or to pitch the game the student makes. However, the specialization up to this point does not equip student with the skills beyond the basics. Unless you are already in the industry, I do not think anyone can make anything impressive to be worth pitching in front of the audience. | coverage than in this course. The | Quizz | questions are not well thought and | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | This course tries to cover the many aspects around the games industry. But the coverage in each of the subject is not deep enough to be useful. For example, the instructor talks about project management, public speaking, how to write a resume etc. The instructor starts by talking about why they are useful, and then followed by one to two 10-15 minutes long video lectures. Each of these could worth a full Coursera course and I am sure the other courses have better coverage than in this course. The quiz questions are not well thought and do not stimulate thinking at all. Some of the "correct" answers are personal opinions but you have to choose them in order to pass the quiz. The third peer grading assessment asks students to post a video either to pitch himself/herself or to pitch the game the student makes. However, the specialization up to this point does not equip student with the skills beyond the basics. Unless you are already in the industry, I do not think anyone can make anything impressive to be worth pitching in front of the audience. | them in order to pass the | Quizz | The third peer grading assessment asks | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| URpKtPs6EeSnBSIACi-PoQ | This was an awesome start to understanding innovation and how to go about assessing and generating innovation ideas. The final quiz where we assessed an example business plan was great and really helping in my understanding of finances required to start a business. | and generating innovation ideas. The final | Quizz | where we assessed an example business | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| UShq4HPgEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | 1. Sometimes the audio of the recordings is poor, making it difficult to listen. 2. For non-speakers of Spanish, the translations are not so great and sometimes lack proper grammar or are almost literal translations of the spoken Spanish version. This makes the subject matter, although very interesting, very difficult to fully grasp. This also occurs in the quizzes, causing me to either misunderstand or not understand the questions. Overall, it is a very interesting course but the 'execution' is not up to standard. It could be improved by updating the audio recordings, and correcting the translations for the subtitles | grasp. This also occurs in the | Quizz | causing me to either misunderstand or | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | This is an excellent course. I have learnt a great deal and found the course easy to follow when broken into bite size chunks. The quizzes and coursework have reinforced my learning. I would recommend this course for anyone who wants to learn about our universe. | broken into bite size chunks. The | Quizz | and coursework have reinforced my learning. | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Amazing course! Chris Impey is a wonderful teacher. The lectures are captivating, but at a level that is appropriate for astronomy beginners. The quizzes are only easy if you were paying attention, and the writing assignments consolidate the material. This course has made me even more interested in the subject and since starting it I have even gone beyond the scope of this course and done my own investigations. Definitely recommended. | is appropriate for astronomy beginners. The | Quizz | are only easy if you were | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| UwQkL5z8EeWJORITtzkPnQ | Great instructor, and the quizzes and exercises genuinely make you think a little bit. | Great instructor, and the | Quizz | and exercises genuinely make you think | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| UwQkL5z8EeWJORITtzkPnQ | Excellent course. Larry is a great teacher and the quizzes and assignments give a great opportunity to consolidate our learning. One recommendation I would give is to try to make the forum more useful maybe by including TAs o including mentors that response on the course contents and not only on technical issu | is a great teacher and the | Quizz | and assignments give a great opportunity | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Sorry but yet again a potentially great course spoiled by the implementation, way too many mistakes in the quizzes, peer review grading systems which in places are nonsense . I hope things get better and I give the the course the 5 stars the content would merit if it had been properly QCed and delivered to best Coursera standards | way too many mistakes in the | Quizz | peer review grading systems which in | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | If there hadn't been so many hiccups with the videos and quizzes I would recommend this course. However, I lost a great deal of time viewing incomplete videos and trying to complete quizzes covering material that was not addressed or only partially addressed in the videos. Then had to go back and Review all the videos once they had been re-uploaded. It was a very frustrating experience. I lost momentum and even motivation and as a result am now behind with the assignments and quizzes. | many hiccups with the videos and | Quizz | I would recommend this course. However, | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | If there hadn't been so many hiccups with the videos and quizzes I would recommend this course. However, I lost a great deal of time viewing incomplete videos and trying to complete quizzes covering material that was not addressed or only partially addressed in the videos. Then had to go back and Review all the videos once they had been re-uploaded. It was a very frustrating experience. I lost momentum and even motivation and as a result am now behind with the assignments and quizzes. | incomplete videos and trying to complete | Quizz | covering material that was not addressed | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | If there hadn't been so many hiccups with the videos and quizzes I would recommend this course. However, I lost a great deal of time viewing incomplete videos and trying to complete quizzes covering material that was not addressed or only partially addressed in the videos. Then had to go back and Review all the videos once they had been re-uploaded. It was a very frustrating experience. I lost momentum and even motivation and as a result am now behind with the assignments and quizzes. | now behind with the assignments and | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | The explanations are a bit and drawn out. For non-native English speakers, this is very difficult to understand as well at time difficult for native speakers. Also, the course for auditors is not very interactive and we cannot participate in some quizzes and work submission. | and we cannot participate in some | Quizz | and work submission. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| u_Rrw_tfEeSuiSIACwuNww | Very good course. The material is very well presented and the quizzes and assignments are very consistent with the course material. I would recommend it to anyone who wishes to dig a little deeper into marketing analytics. | is very well presented and the | Quizz | and assignments are very consistent with | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course disappointed me. I expected to receive knowledge about negotiation. But it's more advertisement for the book. I did every step in the course until the quiz and the quiz asks for knowledge which wasn't in the course. I assume that i should have read the book to be prepared to do the quiz. That's not why i registered on coursera. | step in the course until the | Quizz | and the quiz asks for knowledge | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course disappointed me. I expected to receive knowledge about negotiation. But it's more advertisement for the book. I did every step in the course until the quiz and the quiz asks for knowledge which wasn't in the course. I assume that i should have read the book to be prepared to do the quiz. That's not why i registered on coursera. | course until the quiz and the | Quizz | asks for knowledge which wasn't in | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course disappointed me. I expected to receive knowledge about negotiation. But it's more advertisement for the book. I did every step in the course until the quiz and the quiz asks for knowledge which wasn't in the course. I assume that i should have read the book to be prepared to do the quiz. That's not why i registered on coursera. | to be prepared to do the | Quizz | That's not why i registered on | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Good material and final. Quizzes at the end of each week would be helpful. Also, the videos could have been quite a bit shorter. | Good material and final. | Quizz | at the end of each week | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Very good! It's my 2nd course on Coursera after "Learning how to learn" and I supposed to meet small quizes after each unit, just to remember the material better. | and I supposed to meet small | Quizz | after each unit, just to remember | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course was really useful and Prof. Siedel is such a great person. It is a pleasure listen to his lectures that were more like stories. I however would have liked to have little quizzes in between the weeks to review the content. It adds up quite a lot and even taking notes, at the end some info gets missing. I definitely recommend this course though. I am sure I will do much better in my next negotiation. | would have liked to have little | Quizz | in between the weeks to review | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | mostly it was good, should have quizzes in each section | mostly it was good, should have | Quizz | in each section | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | The course is very and very good and usefull, but it's easier for the attendants to take the quiz by the end of each Module and do the final test shorter (about 10-15 questions are enough) | for the attendants to take the | Quizz | by the end of each Module | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course covers all the bases of general negotiation. The professor is well traveled and credentialed in his field and gives very frank, matter-of-fact presentations of the material. The only thing I would change about the course is that I would have periodic check-up quizzes to help the learner gauge his/her understanding. | that I would have periodic check-up | Quizz | to help the learner gauge his/her | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course is the worst one in this specialization. The lecture and quizzes are so boring. | in this specialization. The lecture and | Quizz | are so boring. | Negative | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | I feel that the lecture material lacks proper explanation of the key concepts but the questions in quizzes are good although the lectures should have been more conceptual rather than theoretical | key concepts but the questions in | Quizz | are good although the lectures should | Positive | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The Course material and method of testing the understanding of the student needs to be improved. Despite the low quality of the quizzes, the course is very inspiring. The examples showed are very good and the lectures concentrated on teaching the underlying concept rather the Mathematics involved, which was refreshing. | Despite the low quality of the | Quizz | the course is very inspiring. The | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The course was very good, but I guess there were too many quizzes, and the instructions / questions in the quizzes and other assignments are not unambiguous. That could be improved. Other than that I liked the course and the specialization very much. | I guess there were too many | Quizz | and the instructions / questions in | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The course was very good, but I guess there were too many quizzes, and the instructions / questions in the quizzes and other assignments are not unambiguous. That could be improved. Other than that I liked the course and the specialization very much. | the instructions / questions in the | Quizz | and other assignments are not unambiguous. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The material in the quizzes is not adequately described in the lectures or notes. Some of the quizzes require 100% to complete with some problems being quite difficult. Most importantly, I do not believe the course leaves behind an effective understanding of the material that would allow you to apply it. I thought the aerial course was much better. | The material in the | Quizz | is not adequately described in the | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The material in the quizzes is not adequately described in the lectures or notes. Some of the quizzes require 100% to complete with some problems being quite difficult. Most importantly, I do not believe the course leaves behind an effective understanding of the material that would allow you to apply it. I thought the aerial course was much better. | lectures or notes. Some of the | Quizz | require 100% to complete with some | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | videos and the questions in the | Quizz | Also a lot of time the | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | discrepancy between the video and the | Quizz | because my impression is that the | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | information to be used in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | part of the course are the | Quizz | There are 24 graded quizzes in | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | the quizzes. There are 24 graded | Quizz | in total, to pass the course | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | the minimum passing marks for each | Quizz | is 80%, that wouldn't have been | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | been such an issue if most | Quizz | had 5 or more questions, which | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | not the case, most of the | Quizz | have 4 or less questions. This | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | miss only one question in a | Quizz | with 3 questions there's already no | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | the course! The content of each | Quizz | is also very troublesome, we are | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | templates and a question in its | Quizz | was about an electric circuit that | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | 8-hour period between attempts at the | Quizz | only hindered my progress. I was | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | and engaged in studying for each | Quizz | however, after 3 failed attempts I | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | A tough course,yet agood one if you are persistent. The materials and some Quizzes seems out of touch,you will be searching all over the web for answers because the lectures simply wont have those answers,This is a fairly high level intro to mobility ,you must be persistent .to complete this . | are persistent. The materials and some | Quizz | seems out of touch, you will | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course covers very interesting topics, but there are some serious shortcomings in the lectures. Too much information is just omitted or taken for granted. Some of the lecturers are rather inexperienced. Reading or reciting mathematical expressions in a monotonous voice without actually pointing to the visual representation of the lecture material makes it very difficult to follow. Better care should also be taken with the quizzes - if one looks at the comments or questions posted by some learners, it is clear that we simply don't understand the question, or a question is answered correctly in essence , but the quizz expected more (or less) precision without stating so . Finally for some reason the support from Technical Advisors was also lacking in the specific session that I did, contributing to my frustration and rather negative experience of what could be a very good course | should also be taken with the | Quizz | - if one looks at the | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course covers very interesting topics, but there are some serious shortcomings in the lectures. Too much information is just omitted or taken for granted. Some of the lecturers are rather inexperienced. Reading or reciting mathematical expressions in a monotonous voice without actually pointing to the visual representation of the lecture material makes it very difficult to follow. Better care should also be taken with the quizzes - if one looks at the comments or questions posted by some learners, it is clear that we simply don't understand the question, or a question is answered correctly in essence , but the quizz expected more (or less) precision without stating so . Finally for some reason the support from Technical Advisors was also lacking in the specific session that I did, contributing to my frustration and rather negative experience of what could be a very good course | correctly in essence , but the | Quizz | expected more (or less) precision without | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Although main teacher looks very cult, I wonder how there are so many mistakes in this course. The first one that don't looks like a hands on matlab tutorial as the others i have taken. Some unclear questions in quizzes. Some mistaken or unclear math in video and quizzes. Looks like no staff is following the course. Some people complain about this. Too many references and resource papers require payment, and not everyone's university or school have them available, they are just too expensive. | have taken. Some unclear questions in | Quizz | Some mistaken or unclear math in | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Although main teacher looks very cult, I wonder how there are so many mistakes in this course. The first one that don't looks like a hands on matlab tutorial as the others i have taken. Some unclear questions in quizzes. Some mistaken or unclear math in video and quizzes. Looks like no staff is following the course. Some people complain about this. Too many references and resource papers require payment, and not everyone's university or school have them available, they are just too expensive. | or unclear math in video and | Quizz | Looks like no staff is following | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | useless and most of the time | Quizz | are note related with them. In | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | with them. In order to solve | Quizz | you have not only to recover | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | In that contest what are the | Quizz | what should quizzes have to test | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | what are the quizzes, what should | Quizz | have to test if no content | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Good teachers but a lot of questions in the quizzes were very ambiguous and unrelated to the Course Content. | a lot of questions in the | Quizz | were very ambiguous and unrelated to | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | I think this was a poorly structured online course. Especially for someone who is attempting this course having experienced two excellent previous courses in the specialization. It was good only in few patches but the link was seriously missing. I realize this area is a bit more advanced but with all due respect to the knowledgeable instructors, they could have emphasised more on basic building blocks rather than cramming in so much information which my bandwith couldn't handle it. I did guesswork in almost all the quizzes after week 2 which further adds to my disappointment. I think the Robotics specialization is better off without this course because there is little or no value addition here. Expecting a lot better from the next course in the series. | did guesswork in almost all the | Quizz | after week 2 which further adds | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Interesting to learn about how and why robots differ from animals. The material was relatively easy to digest because the lectures were well paced and at the end there was a summary of the content. The quizzes are intelligent, so the course is not a give away. | a summary of the content. The | Quizz | are intelligent, so the course is | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The course has a lot of interesting material, but I believe that a few points may be improved: 1) Exercises with Matlab are not programming ones (except for the PD controller). In my opinion, more detailed exercises (with a guide for solving them) would help to understand better the concepts behind the theory. For example, programming a rimless wheel or a SLIP template. 2) The course has a strong emphasis in theory. Some of the lectures were boring an difficult to follow. As I said before, a more practical approach would be more rewarding. 3) Quizzes were sometimes based on intuition, or topics outside of the course, rather than topics learned from the lessons. On the other side, the TAs were highly involved in the course. In addition, an extensive list of additional resources (books, papers) is a plus. I believe that the following sessions will be better than the first one! | approach would be more rewarding. 3) | Quizz | were sometimes based on intuition, or | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Nice high level overview of the motion of robots. I would have liked to do more programming (modeling of robots, controllers, etc.) in the course and have the lectures tie in closer with the content of the quizzes. The TAs were very active in the forums and helped clarify/fix any problems that came up. | closer with the content of the | Quizz | The TAs were very active in | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | It is not well done as the previous courses. The quizzes usually do not concern the topic of the lessons or better, the lessons do not help in anyway to solve the problems. | done as the previous courses. The | Quizz | usually do not concern the topic | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The quiz do not relate to the lectures....a lot of thinks need to be explore in documents outside of the course and the knowledge of the student has to be higher. Not a course for not engineering background. | The | Quizz | do not relate to the lectures. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | I really enjoyed this course and the way art was discussed based on theme rather than chronologically. My only issues with the class were the frustrations with the quizzes being graded incorrectly. | class were the frustrations with the | Quizz | being graded incorrectly. | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have taken many courses on Coursera now, and I've enjoyed and learned a lot from most of them, but I have to admit I was disappointed with this one, despite having a deep interest in modern art and art theory. Here are some of my criticisms: 1. The course is aimed at teachers and art educators, which was not made at all clear on the course info page, apart from a single reference to the 'pedagogical framework'. If I'd understood this, I may well not have enrolled. 2. I found the course very basic, with no consideration of art theory beyond a level appropriate for classroom discussion. This is in contrast to many other Coursera courses, which have been pitched at graduate level or above. I don't really feel like I learned anything on this course. 3. The video lectures are very short and uninformative, but the weekly reading list is very long and much more time consuming that the actual tuition. I would have preferred a better balance between tutorials and reading. 4. The weekly quizzes were very short (six questions, where other courses typically have 20 to 30 questions per module), and and questions focus almost entirely on the pedagogical set texts, with very little attention paid to the art history or the works discussed in the tutorials. If you are not going to be tested on the material, what is the point of all that required reading? 5. The final peer-assessed assignment is lacking in instructions or guidance. For example, you are required to upload images of 3 or 4 artworks and discuss them. It is in fact impossible to upload more than a single image, but there are no instructions on what to do about this. People found various workarounds - uploading pdfs or Word documents, or zipped folders of images, but really, there should be some official guidance on this. 6. Comments made when assessing other students' work are not anonymous - this is unique in my Coursera experience, where anonymous marking is the norm, and knowing how fractious people can get when they are disappointed with their grade, I am not at all happy about having my name made available to them. Overall, the only reason I persisted with this course is that I wanted to get a certificate with MoMA written on it. Too bad I couldn't have actually learned something as well. | tutorials and reading. 4. The weekly | Quizz | were very short (six questions, where | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | Quiz was not well structured and title suggested a different idea than what the course was really about. Its a teachers guide. | | Quizz | was not well structured and title | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have no complaints over the content. I would however, change the final quizzes, which rely too much on one essay rather than on the videos or on other reading material. | I would however, change the final | Quizz | which rely too much on one | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course is designed for school teachers and, perhaps, for art museum's workers. I'm neither, but I took this course because I'd like to know more about the modern art. The course is essentially a merge of two independent parts, namely, videos about artworks and papers about different theories of education in art. I took this course because of artworks, so I was not interested in papers. Videos were great; especially the first one in each lesson. Even my husband, who isn't fond of art in general, found these videos interesting. In videos, lecturer explains history and meaning of each piece of art. Required reading was dramatically different. First, students are required to read at least 10 pages (art papers) about approaches in teaching AND at least 4 articles in museum's website PER WEEK. Actually, careful reading not just browsing does take a lot of time, in fact, it takes way more time per week than claimed. In addition, these reading were not useful for me! I am not interested in teaching art, and reading same facts about artworks that I've heard in lectures is waste of my time. Seriously, I and most of people grasp most of the ideas from the first time; even if not, I would watch the video again. Why should I do extra reading that brings me no extra knowledge? On a good side, one can pass quiz without any reading. Just a bit of thinking process, and you pass with 5/6 or 6/6 score. Overall, the course is attractive because of amazing videos. However, I believe that this course must be reorganized in two different courses - one would be about artworks and understanding of art, another would be about teaching techniques in art. | a good side, one can pass | Quizz | without any reading. Just a bit | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | Good information. Can be a bit longer. Completed too quickly. Can improve on the quizzes | too quickly. Can improve on the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | Nice idea, but too many technical difficulties. I tried to complete quiz 4 nine times and eventually passed the deadline. And in order to submit my final assignment I had to embedded my images into a word doc and export it as a PDF... I won't get extra marks for being able to work THAT out! ; ) I did enjoy the rest of the course though. Thanks for all your efforts. | technical difficulties. I tried to complete | Quizz | 4 nine times and eventually passed | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | Excellent concepts and content. Poor quiz composition and monitoring by MOMA staff of discussion. Logistical hassles tainted joy from the delivery. | Excellent concepts and content. Poor | Quizz | composition and monitoring by MOMA staff | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | there were mistakes in the quizzes. | there were mistakes in the | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | It was really a nice experience learning the fundamentals of Project Management. An eyeopener to the all the experienced workforce. The Course is really well designed including the content, pedagogy, Quizzes, Evaluation criteria and the assignments. At the end of the week, it will make sure you are well equipped the fundamental tools and try implementing them in the practical scenarios. | well designed including the content, pedagogy, | Quizz | Evaluation criteria and the assignments. At | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | I didn't pay for the certificate, and I just watched the videos and took the quizzes without certification. I wanted to get exposure to project management. The class was well taught, gave a lot of information in short video segments. Great outside examples to illustrate the concepts covered. Great value and awesome for the Darden to provide this class (especially since it was free!). | watched the videos and took the | Quizz | without certification. I wanted to get | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | I love the way the class was organized from initiation to project execution and closing. I think the class would be better if the reason behind the correct quiz answers was given, for me this help me understand how to reason and be in the proper mindset when choosing and answer. Overall, great class and tea | if the reason behind the correct | Quizz | answers was given, for me this | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | It is a very good and intensive course of project management. Some pieces of information have been provided little bit balled, which made me make mistakes in quizzes. However I enjoyed all the stuff. Thanks a lot! | which made me make mistakes in | Quizz | However I enjoyed all the stuff. | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | A really good course. I especially like the practical supplementary lectures on MS Project and Excel. Would be better if the assessments took on more challenging formats than just multiple choice quizzes. | challenging formats than just multiple choice | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Pros: Basics were explained well. A good kick start for beginners who are travelling towards learning Project planning and management. Cons: Wish we had assignments to practice MS Project to a certain extent. Some of the Quiz questions were confusing (Esp. the 3rd week quiz) | a certain extent. Some of the | Quizz | questions were confusing (Esp. the 3rd | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Pros: Basics were explained well. A good kick start for beginners who are travelling towards learning Project planning and management. Cons: Wish we had assignments to practice MS Project to a certain extent. Some of the Quiz questions were confusing (Esp. the 3rd week quiz) | were confusing (Esp. the 3rd week | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| VfuJSYYDEeW99gozy_2pgw | Insightful and In-depth introductory of the events leading to the catastrophic events of holocausts coupled with engaging quiz. Additional reading supplements were great as well. Recommended | events of holocausts coupled with engaging | Quizz | Additional reading supplements were great as | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| VfuJSYYDEeW99gozy_2pgw | This course was very educational. I thought the illustrations were helpful. My only negative comment was that the quiz questions were a little confusing at times and difficult to know what answer to choose. At times, multiple answers seemed correct based on the material presented in the lessons. I do plan to take Part 2. | only negative comment was that the | Quizz | questions were a little confusing at | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | I enrolled in this course after completing the html5 course. At the culmination of the CSS3 project, I feel ways more confident in my web development skills, although I am a far ways off being a web designer. The pace of the course is excellent, and the quizzes and projects allowed me to put in practice the theory I learned about. I also love how the professor discusses the material and organised this course. I truly recommend this course to anyone at the beginner level. | the course is excellent, and the | Quizz | and projects allowed me to put | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | The quality of teaching is outstanding and I liked the pace and progression to the next section. If you work on reviewing the presented material to prepare for the quizzes and make regular effort to code using CSS, you will see that beginning without any understanding of CSS3, you will finish with a much better and in depth understanding on this subject...big time! Great course, I recommend it! | presented material to prepare for the | Quizz | and make regular effort to code | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Very broad instruction but very picky quizzes. Spent more time frustrated with trick questions on quizzes than actually learning something. | Very broad instruction but very picky | Quizz | Spent more time frustrated with trick | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Very broad instruction but very picky quizzes. Spent more time frustrated with trick questions on quizzes than actually learning something. | time frustrated with trick questions on | Quizz | than actually learning something. | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| vIC_m1i_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Foolish quiz answers, seemingly plagiarized assignments, dead forums, in my opinion, make this a less than satisfactory specialization. Great lessons, excellent presenters, and 'sticky' information - well, that makes this course worth its' cost, and it is well worth looking into. I imagine it will become better with age - this is the first iteration so don't let my fours stars dissuade you from exploring this specialization further. I am looking forward to part 2. | Foolish | Quizz | answers, seemingly plagiarized assignments, dead forums, | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | Readings were not necessary for the course and quizzes were extremely difficult, seeming to be worded in an attempt to stump students, and many questions were not from the course lessons. Videos very dry and boring. | not necessary for the course and | Quizz | were extremely difficult, seeming to be | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | Very well structured course, with thoughtful and sensible quiz reviews. | structured course, with thoughtful and sensible | Quizz | reviews. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | The material is useful, but the execution is poor. There were numerous quiz questions that I think they just had coded wrong on their end. I think they need to carefully look at the questions with the most incorrect answers and ask themselves if they've made a mistake. Also, this might be the first time they've tried making a peer-reviewed project part of the course, but they did a poor job. They made it a homework assignment for week 2, but didn't make it clear that it wasn't due until the end of the course, even though Coursera sends you emails saying it's due soon. This caused a great deal of confusion. Some of the required readings also had broken links. It's odd nobody on their end checked those the week the material was taught. They do provide a lot of useful supplemental material (though often pay-walled). | execution is poor. There were numerous | Quizz | questions that I think they just | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| vtYNwf__EeS9ISIACxWDhA | Great class! Some quiz problems and coding problems are pretty difficult. | Great class! Some | Quizz | problems and coding problems are pretty | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| VuRXs3EiEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | This course is terrible for many reasons. Firstly, the amount of content is ridiculously small - only about 20 minutes of video lectures per week. Moreover, more than 50% of content is just non-relevant. Secondly, practical assignments are very poorly planned: 1) in weeks 3 peer graded assignment students are asked to save Tableau workbooks as twbx files, even though this feature is not supported by Tableau Public that is used in this course. The assignment itself is just opening and saving file in Tableau. 2) in weeks 4 peer graded assignment you just asked to write some vaguely defined 1 page description. It doesn't include any Tableau-related activities. Thirdly, quizzes are ambiguous and very general. Overall, this course is just a waste of time. For comparison, you can easily get more useful information about Tableau from the 4 minute long "Getting started" video on the Tableau website than from this course. Just wonder how Coursera allows such courses to be places on the platform. | doesn't include any Tableau-related activities. Thirdly, | Quizz | are ambiguous and very general. Overall, | Negative | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| W-hoIJw3EeWJORITtzkPnQ | Useful. I feel some areas such as strategy, getting to MVP etc could benefit from more case studies and materials to work through. The overall content of the lectures is good but to internalise it there needs to be more 'work' for the students to engage in rather than just a quiz at the end. | engage in rather than just a | Quizz | at the end. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| W-hoIJw3EeWJORITtzkPnQ | I really enjoyed this course. There were ideas that really helped me defined my idea. I love the presentation. I would suggest breaking some of the longer modules into smaller parts. Add another Quiz on the third and 4th lesson. I do love this specialization. I am going to keep going. | modules into smaller parts. Add another | Quizz | on the third and 4th lesson. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Wa2LIymGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Dear Prof, I take the opportunity to thank prof. Dragan Maksimovic for his detailed explanation and excellent course material. I have learnt many exciting things while answering practice and Home work quiz questions. Looking forward for Magnetic design (next course in specialization). Once again thanks prof. for all that you gave to us through the course. Thanks Pandu S | while answering practice and Home work | Quizz | questions. Looking forward for Magnetic design | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Great course, I like short videos where concepts are well explained and the quizzes are not tiresome at all but I consider than the pdf of the power point documents could be better, the complete solution does not appear in most of them | concepts are well explained and the | Quizz | are not tiresome at all but | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Good overview of engineering statics. However, I wish the homework and/or practice problems were built into the coursera platform like the quizzes. | into the coursera platform like the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | An excellent course; it helped me to learn the most fundamental topics of Engineering Mechanics conceptually and with clarity. One of the major things that I liked about the course was that Dr Wayne made the otherwise seemingly difficult topics very easy and simple to understand. Questions (of lecture modules as well as quiz) were also very nice. Thank you very much Dr. Wayne! | (of lecture modules as well as | Quizz | were also very nice. Thank you | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I liked everything about this course except the unavailability of answers to the quiz questions. I think that once when someone passes the test, he/she should be able to view the answers. | the unavailability of answers to the | Quizz | questions. I think that once when | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| wD1C7I_eEeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | I would have given this course NO stars at all if that option were available!!! The course is designed in contradiction of all the principles it preaches--there are no forums for the students, there is no way you could contact the instructor, the instructor keeps reading badly, stammering like a first-grader, speaks monotonously and there's no interaction whatsoever! Furthermore, there are mistakes in the quizzes and you have to choose blatantly wrong options if you want to get the 100% score! Although the subject matter about Virtual Instruction is pretty interesting and the instructor made it sound like the most boring thing in the world! Many of the links are outdated or not working at all and often the documents she refers to are 10 or more years old. Bear in mind that Virtual Instruction is a fast developing field and the technology as well as the legal framework are changing very fast too. In a nutshell, if this course were not a part of a Specialization track, I would not have paid for it. Unless you want to do the specialization, I wouldn't recommend this course or any by the UC Irvine because all of the lack forums and no channels for communication with the instructors!!! In one word BAD! | Furthermore, there are mistakes in the | Quizz | and you have to choose blatantly | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| wD1C7I_eEeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | I found much of the content to be interesting and timely. However, I thought the quizzes were poorly written. There was no feedback, so as a learner it was hard to grow from errors. Also, there were many that required more than one answer, if you missed one, you missed entire question. Without feedback, it was difficult to know which one you missed. The week 4 lesson content was a bit dense for an introductory course. It was dry and could've been more global. Last, the large lesson assignment was only graded by peers with no feedback from the instructor. | and timely. However, I thought the | Quizz | were poorly written. There was no | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Great course, great content. If I were allowed to do the quizzes without paying, I would have completed the course and most likely gotten the certificate. I can't commit to a course and pay for it before I experience it. | I were allowed to do the | Quizz | without paying, I would have completed | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I enjoyed the course overall, but the HR component/perspective was only somewhat useful. Beware of the final unit (week 4): the takeaways and the final quiz are not well aligned. In the week's final project, though the questions doesn't ask for them, be sure to explain your rationales. When reviewing your peers' work, the points rely on whether you've explained yourself. Cheri Alexander's inclusion of videos felt like filler and the notion of having to create a video as an assignment is time-consuming and ultimately not necessary to our learning. Because I experienced a great course with two of the three professors in Leading Teams, I can only conclude that Professor Alexander designed the final assignment, criteria, and quiz. These components were not clear. Fortunately, my classmates were very supportive and understood the spirit of the assignment. It's a good class, but I enjoyed the first one in this specialization more. | 4): the takeaways and the final | Quizz | are not well aligned. In the | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I enjoyed the course overall, but the HR component/perspective was only somewhat useful. Beware of the final unit (week 4): the takeaways and the final quiz are not well aligned. In the week's final project, though the questions doesn't ask for them, be sure to explain your rationales. When reviewing your peers' work, the points rely on whether you've explained yourself. Cheri Alexander's inclusion of videos felt like filler and the notion of having to create a video as an assignment is time-consuming and ultimately not necessary to our learning. Because I experienced a great course with two of the three professors in Leading Teams, I can only conclude that Professor Alexander designed the final assignment, criteria, and quiz. These components were not clear. Fortunately, my classmates were very supportive and understood the spirit of the assignment. It's a good class, but I enjoyed the first one in this specialization more. | designed the final assignment, criteria, and | Quizz | These components were not clear. Fortunately, | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| wEl1EleDEeWTbwotamPtlQ | The course was too short and did not provide any reading material. It would be more helpful to have more and shorter quizzes. | helpful to have more and shorter | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Was only videos and 2 question quizzes until the very end. I was very surprised by the assignment at the end as it was never mentioned in any of the videos. Almost didn't finish it in time because it was due right after Christmas. Would like more hands-on assignments throughout the course instead of one at the end. | Was only videos and 2 question | Quizz | until the very end. I was | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Just write in terms of workload. Good mixture of projects and quizzes. Good teacher and content, explained in an easy to understand way. | workload. Good mixture of projects and | Quizz | Good teacher and content, explained in | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Good course and good introduction to Meteor.js. I knocked it down one star because the assignments are not as effective as they could be. Weeks 1-3 are short, easy quizzes. Only in week 4 is there a programming assignment, and it is a doozy. More than 6 hours for me--nothing like the 30 minutes it claims (however, I will point out it was a good assignment and I learned a lot). I think if the assignments were structured more like the U of Hong Kong web development courses this would be a five star course. | be. Weeks 1-3 are short, easy | Quizz | Only in week 4 is there | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| wmoTBzyAEeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | The material is very interesting. There a a huge number of quizzes over poorly explained (or not at all explained) models, which would still be an interesting challenge if the models themselves had better explanations. This has been the most frustrating Coursera class I have taken, not because of the subject difficulty, but because of the lack of adequate resources for working with the models. | There a a huge number of | Quizz | over poorly explained (or not at | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| wmoTBzyAEeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | Fabulous overview of the science of global warming! I really appreciated the step-by-step approach and the comprehensive coverage of the subject. Playing with the models was highly useful in most cases, though some of the quiz questions related to the models seemed to be overly finicky in the answers they'd accept as correct. In any case, I thoroughly enjoyed this course and will be using the knowledge I gained from it as I begin pursuing a Master's in environmental science this summer. | most cases, though some of the | Quizz | questions related to the models seemed | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| wmoTBzyAEeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | This course is addressing a critical subject matter. The material is great. I love the math. But these are my personal metrics: A 4-star course has a high level of student collaboration and teaching staff participation, a 5-star course has very responsive teaching staff. I love learning the material but the learning environment is disappointing. As the course progresses to the later weeks, the inconsistency between quizzes and lectures grows. Not greatly but enough to frustrate. Some quiz questions, with multiple choice options with only one correct answer, will not accept any answer. There are a few questions which are not covered in the video lecture (or covered in later weeks). Some answers can be found in the book (but the book supposedly is not required). Some answers can be googled but the answers vary wildly between sources. Mathematical Thinking from Stanford is the gold standard. | the later weeks, the inconsistency between | Quizz | and lectures grows. Not greatly but | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| wmoTBzyAEeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | This course is addressing a critical subject matter. The material is great. I love the math. But these are my personal metrics: A 4-star course has a high level of student collaboration and teaching staff participation, a 5-star course has very responsive teaching staff. I love learning the material but the learning environment is disappointing. As the course progresses to the later weeks, the inconsistency between quizzes and lectures grows. Not greatly but enough to frustrate. Some quiz questions, with multiple choice options with only one correct answer, will not accept any answer. There are a few questions which are not covered in the video lecture (or covered in later weeks). Some answers can be found in the book (but the book supposedly is not required). Some answers can be googled but the answers vary wildly between sources. Mathematical Thinking from Stanford is the gold standard. | greatly but enough to frustrate. Some | Quizz | questions, with multiple choice options with | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Really good information for people starting companies and figuring out how to lead manage future employees. Some of the videos were cut off at the end and a word misspelled on the quiz. Other than that great job keep up the great work! | and a word misspelled on the | Quizz | Other than that great job keep | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The concepts were interesting and helpful. It would be professional of the instructor to cite sources and employ classic principles of curriculum design. The construction of quiz items is a particular opportunity for improvement. | of curriculum design. The construction of | Quizz | items is a particular opportunity for | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This course feels quite weak, especially for the paid course, for these reasons: Models (Leader as Mentor, Coach, etc..., CTFAR model), which are given in this course, are given as is, with no references on how they were developed, authorship, and how good the results of application are. Almost no (just one) external references for reading to better understanding course material. The amount of material (about 3 hours of video, 4 quizzes, 2 discussions and 1 assignment) doesn't feel like it's a month's course, more like a one/one-and-a-half week. No references on topics, described as "hard" during the course (for example, identifying your values), which would make this topics less "hard". No instructor interaction on the course forum (I don't know if this should be like this or not, but it still feels bad). However, the final assignment is good and practice oriented. | (about 3 hours of video, 4 | Quizz | 2 discussions and 1 assignment) doesn't | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| Wp6z-dymEeWUwhJ351EtdQ | I enjoyed this course a lot! It gives a good introduction to the topic of real time systems, the lessons are well organized and you don't need to be a computer science expert to learn and understand the material taught in the course. The course not only teaches theory but gives you practical guidelines and very useful examples/assignments to illustrate how the theory is used in practice to solve typical problems and design real time systems , which is the feature I liked most about this course. This "hands-on" approach is very useful to the practitioner, with some inexpensive and simple hardware at your disposal the open-source software tools introduced in the course can get you quite far in designing your own real time system! Needless to say, no course is perfect and there are always things that can be improved. For example, the wording of the assignments and quizzes in this course is in dire need of an update/edit. | the wording of the assignments and | Quizz | in this course is in dire | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Wp6z-dymEeWUwhJ351EtdQ | The course feels pretty shallow and it ignores all the interesting stuff like proofs. There is no written material available, so if you can't follow the lectures, poor you. Quizzes aren't very well formulated and sometimes the correct answer is more of a matter of opinion rather than a hard fact. Evaluation seems to be based solely on peer review and there are no model solutions available, so the points you'll get may vary depending on how your peers understood the assignment and if they were interested in the review process at all. My overall feeling is that nothing was quite challenging on the course, and I didn't learn much more than what I could have learnt by reading a few paragraphs per topic from Wikipedia. I also felt that the programming assignments were quite disjoint from the core, tough I don't feel like I understand the core better than before the course because none of the assignments made me think why something works, rather than that we just mechanically reproduced the examples shown in the lectures. | can't follow the lectures, poor you. | Quizz | aren't very well formulated and sometimes | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | I really enjoyed learning about magic in the middle ages and am grateful for the opportunity offered by the University of Barcelona. The lectures were clearly spoken and the content was good. However, I would have liked to go more into detail about the practices of magic, I missed that a little bit. For example, the specifics of several charms/ingredients/etc are only treated on a few occasions. I have now also enrolled in different courses on Coursera and I can say that this course could have been organised better, with better assignments, quizzes, etc. So there is still room for improvement. | been organised better, with better assignments, | Quizz | etc. So there is still room | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | It was an incredibly interesting and insightful course, which opened up a lot of interesting avenues and ways of looking at medieval magic, the time and people and beliefs. The course was well organized, and the lectures were interesting and easy to follow along. I liked the course work with the quizzes and the written part and peer review as well. Thank you very much for the time and effort that went into this very cool and interesting course. | liked the course work with the | Quizz | and the written part and peer | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| Wv_qFVYzEeWKXg4Y7_tPaw | Really excellent materials and links but spoiled by typos on the videos and in the quiz questions. I'm sure some of the quiz answers conflicted with what had been said in the videos. | on the videos and in the | Quizz | questions. I'm sure some of the | Positive | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| Wv_qFVYzEeWKXg4Y7_tPaw | Really excellent materials and links but spoiled by typos on the videos and in the quiz questions. I'm sure some of the quiz answers conflicted with what had been said in the videos. | questions. I'm sure some of the | Quizz | answers conflicted with what had been | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| wywOj9ZqEeWoww7Hc7148Q | The course is great, but i think it should include more problems or quizzes to apply what is learned in the lectures. | it should include more problems or | Quizz | to apply what is learned in | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Personally not a big fan of Roger Peng's approach while teaching. The lessons get a bit confusing, and so does the questions from the quiz. Jeff Leek's approach is more calm and simple. Nevertheless, the course in general is really good. | so does the questions from the | Quizz | Jeff Leek's approach is more calm | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent course. Would like to see more courses like this regarding machine learning for example - courses not focused on the implementation and tools (for example I am with strong Java background, have read several AI/ML books, implemented several ML algorithms, including deep learning (DBNN, SdA, Dropout FFNN) - but all courses are built around python/octave/R tools which I have no interest right now to learn and it is nearly impossible for me to learn both the implementation tool/language and ML theory in parallel. Therefore I do not search for the course in the specific implementation language, I search for the course that can teach & verify my skills one level higher - and I think the way the examples were done in the quizzes - is the right (and perfect) way to do it. Hth. Tomas | the examples were done in the | Quizz | - is the right (and perfect) | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Liked how a lot of content was covered in a small amount of time. Thought the instructor was effective in presenting the important elements of the lectures. Only issue is some typos in the quizzes that were a bit distracting. | issue is some typos in the | Quizz | that were a bit distracting. | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| X3F5IHK0EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Great course - learned a lot. Videos are short and easy to understand/view and the quiz and questions help to integrate and test the concepts taught. The entire series is the best online learning course I've ever taken! Definitely recommend., | and easy to understand/view and the | Quizz | and questions help to integrate and | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| X3F5IHK0EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | This course deals mainly with the topic of evaluating the performance of investments and uses the outcomes to discuss the benefits of active and passive funds. Measures are introduced to evaluate the risk adjusted returns of investments. In addition, evaluation tools for the performance of active managers are presented. The videos are of great quality. The quizzes could be more challenging. | videos are of great quality. The | Quizz | could be more challenging. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| X4ituSzfEeWl3A7Kuc0JCQ | OK. the main professor clearly knows his stuff. On the other hand he goes into unnecessary detail and then quizzes you on it even though its not relevant to the course (typical bricks and mortar education type BS). The assistant instructors (likely this guys students) are not as great and the whole thing is amateur night. | goes into unnecessary detail and then | Quizz | you on it even though its | Negative | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| X4ituSzfEeWl3A7Kuc0JCQ | Course is very good! It would be better if the lessons are more on practical side or practical quiz output | more on practical side or practical | Quizz | output | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| X8YjHDowEeWnxw5wP_KHTw | O curso é bom, o problema são os erros do quiz. Há muitas questões que estão comprovadamente corretas, mas ao finalizar, aparecem como erradas, o que nos obriga a refazer o teste mais de uma vez. | o problema são os erros do | Quizz | Há muitas questões que estão comprovadamente | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| X8YjHDowEeWnxw5wP_KHTw | Very bad learner experience. I'm disappointed. I don't know if what I have learnt is correct or not. All quizzes and some lectures have errors, impossible to get a 10/10. There're few characters to learn. -- Muy mala experiencia de aprendizaje. Estoy decepcionada con éste curso. He aprendido pero no sé si lo que he aprendido es correcto! Casi todos los test y algunas presentaciones tienen errores (y no son pocos), es imposible sacar un 10 ni con diccionario. Además hay muy pocos caracteres y no se explica la relación de cada carácter con el significado de las palabras. | learnt is correct or not. All | Quizz | and some lectures have errors, impossible | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | in the material. In addition, the | Quizz | are poorly written. Some questions are | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | allowed only one attempt at a | Quizz | every 8 hours, where many other | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the | Quizz | question set to clarify what you | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Gayle was an outstanding lecturer. I have little economics background and I was able to follow all lessons quite well. Videos were of perfect length, not too long. I enjoyed the graphs, etc in presentations as well as the questions in the middle of a video (to see if we were paying attention). Quizzes were very helpful. The big assignment with the simulator took some time but was worth it. It brought together all ideas and I think it taught me a lot. This was my 1st coursera course so i think the bar is set very high. | see if we were paying attention). | Quizz | were very helpful. The big assignment | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Good course, well structured. Just needs some technical improvements in order to be able to review wrong / right answers in quizzes. Nice to have a second more advanced course in this topic. Joaquín | review wrong / right answers in | Quizz | Nice to have a second more | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Everything excellent, especially using IT for explaining with graphics. However, I think it needs a bit development on quizzes. | it needs a bit development on | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Very nicely and comprehensive taught. Material is supported with lots of graphs and multimedia that makes it more exciting. Short quiz questions are incorporated into the videos to keep the students alert, and the articles provided as a mandatory reading keep the link with the real world. I think the corse makers did a fantastic job! | that makes it more exciting. Short | Quizz | questions are incorporated into the videos | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Please decrease the time between the retake of the quizz! I can't wait for 7 days in order to retake a quizz! | time between the retake of the | Quizz | I can't wait for 7 days | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Please decrease the time between the retake of the quizz! I can't wait for 7 days in order to retake a quizz! | days in order to retake a | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Great course for people with limited notions on economic policymaking. Great to-the-point videos and quizzes that give an excellent picture which perfectly fits today's policymaking frame. After taking this course I think I can fully understand what the newspapers talk about regarding economic policymaking | economic policymaking. Great to-the-point videos and | Quizz | that give an excellent picture which | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Good content, but blocked quizes in free version is bad idea. | Good content, but blocked | Quizz | in free version is bad idea. | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Student should be able to see results of test ( at least quiz 1 and 2) before we decide to purchase. Overall the course was easy to understand and follow. I look forward to taking to others in the series. | results of test ( at least | Quizz | 1 and 2) before we decide | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | An evaluation is always tied to the value it provides in relation to the paid price. On the plus side: 1) It provides an interesting historical perspective of Search Engines, their evolution and the evolution of the algorithms and their purposes. 2) Rebeka May talks slowly and clearly. The transcripts also help in reviewing the contents of each lesson. On the minus side: 1) It is very theoretical and with no practical application. 2) Lots of terminology pops out of the blue without any prior explanation, and would be difficult to understand for a total newbie. Just as a very simple example, backlinks are mentioned several times. What is a " backlink" ?? I know what they are, but not everybody does. 3) There should be real support material, not merely " transcripts" 4) The Peer review does not make any sense. There should be a real test. The peers do not have a "higher" knowledge level to make an evaluation of the alummni. 5) It is not possible to take the quizzes unless you " upgrade" . Presently this costs $ 80. Conclusion: it is an interesting course, but at $ 80 provides no value.Audit the course instead. UC Davies and Coursera should provide this course free of charge or with a voluntary "donation" | is not possible to take the | Quizz | unless you " upgrade" . Presently | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | The presentation of this course is top-notched. I hope the content of this course can be longer. I hope the quizzes can be more rigorous and challenging | can be longer. I hope the | Quizz | can be more rigorous and challenging | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| XJUJYyzXEeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | I would suggest to review quiz questions, because in some cases several answers are correct, but still just one accepted as right one. But in general very good course with very broad introduction to telecommunications and IoT. Thank You! | I would suggest to review | Quizz | questions, because in some cases several | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| xL0drBU7EeWpKw4zIcjkHw | I found the course very interesting. The weekly assignments were a great challenge, but lacked reference to some reading on the subject.When I went quiz I've found that most of the questions had to do with concepts that weren't covered in the videos. I think that this courser should have further readings about these concepts. | on the subject. When I went | Quizz | I've found that most of the | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| xL0drBU7EeWpKw4zIcjkHw | I really enjoyed this class a lot! The assignments directly tested the weekly material and I thought they were useful activities. The end quiz was good to re-think the entire course and reflect on all of the material we learned. | they were useful activities. The end | Quizz | was good to re-think the entire | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I found this a very good course, the reason I rate it so low is because the quizzes had a minimum of questions and these were very basic ones. The actual course content was interesting and informative and covered in depth . | it so low is because the | Quizz | had a minimum of questions and | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It's not a challenging course, but it is very informal at the same time. The interviews with the journalist throughout the course were my favorite parts because David was very detailed when it came to explaining how important food is a whole, compared to focusing just on nutrition individually. It's an introductory course, so I expected it to be an easy pass. Just take simple notes along the way, and you will pass the quizzes with no problem. Thanks Coursera and Stanford! | way, and you will pass the | Quizz | with no problem. Thanks Coursera and | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Fairly well designed course and quizzes | Fairly well designed course and | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very good course overall. It gave me some good thought nuggets to keep in mind for the future. At times the course felt more like it was trying to sell the notion of home cooking rather than being about "food and health". Sometimes terms were hastily presented and maybe assumed to be common knowledge, which left me confused in one of the quizzes ("serum triglycerides", for instance). The course touches on interesting topics that could've been elaborated more on, for instance how transfats are made. | me confused in one of the | Quizz | (" serum triglycerides" , for instance). | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Interesting and well presented information. I wished the course had been more interactive and had spent more time on the chemistry of nutrition. Also the lectures and quizzes could have been longer. | of nutrition. Also the lectures and | Quizz | could have been longer. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | The materials are wonderfully presented and the instructors are very likable and engaging. However, the quizzes are very pandering and the course overall is not very challenging. | very likable and engaging. However, the | Quizz | are very pandering and the course | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I learned a lot, and it was easy to follow and keep up with. The quizzes could have been a little more difficult, but overall, it was a great course. | follow and keep up with. The | Quizz | could have been a little more | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Awesome course. I won't say that it was way too easy for me to solve the quizzes. I have been reading for a while before I took this MOOC. Loved everything about this course. Both the instructors were amazing, especially Dr. Maya Adam. Would love to take another course with her. Some really good additions to my knowledge database. Though it was good to learn how to access a proper food market to buy good food. Thank you guys for such an amazing learning experience. I will be waiting for another course from the same team. ADIOS!!!! | easy for me to solve the | Quizz | I have been reading for a | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Fantastic!! Really enjoyed the course Informative and enjoyable course which helped me understand the history of Rock/Popular music upto 1970. Prof Kovach's lectures helped me explore music and artists who I had long forgotten or did not even know of. This is a good course for both professionals like Dj's, student's as well as lay people like me who love both music as well as history. The only problem I had is that one had to do a lot of hunting on the net and that took a lot of my time. But it was well worth it because of what I heard and saw. The quizzes were sometimes too detailed and memory oriented. Maybe a more conceptual framework of questions can be considered in the future. Will definitely do Part 2 shortly! Thanks Prof Kovach and the Team. We are blessed by your effort and dedication | what I heard and saw. The | Quizz | were sometimes too detailed and memory | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Thank you for the course. It's really interesting! I enjoy it so much, especially the quizzes :) | enjoy it so much, especially the | Quizz | :) | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Excellent general course about the history of Rock in the Western World. Lots of names of musicians, companies, and music make the course seem to revolve around memorization. Even so, the professor does describe the historical element in logical chains of events and biographies. The quizzes could have been offered every week. There's no need to clump the quiz material. | chains of events and biographies. The | Quizz | could have been offered every week. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Excellent general course about the history of Rock in the Western World. Lots of names of musicians, companies, and music make the course seem to revolve around memorization. Even so, the professor does describe the historical element in logical chains of events and biographies. The quizzes could have been offered every week. There's no need to clump the quiz material. | There's no need to clump the | Quizz | material. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | This nice course helped me to understand the rock music in more systematical, organized way. The lecturer was very good, the visual part of the videos helped a lot, and supplementary materials too. The only disappointment I had with sometimes too specific questions in the quizzes, which meant that I must stop the video all the time to make an enormously specific notes, and this kinda spoils the integrity here. Nevertheless it was a great experience, and I definitely plan to go to the part 2 in the next year. | sometimes too specific questions in the | Quizz | which meant that I must stop | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | As a standard overview, the course is fine. However, the lecturer skirts around or hand waves away controversial or difficult subjects, and he's apparently afraid of offending anyone by getting too close to saying "fuck" or "sex" even in an academic setting. Additionally, this course won't introduce anyone to forgotten and erased artists of the past - women are largely absent from his history of rock, even though Janis Joplin and The Supremes didn't come out of nowhere. The quizzes are also too heavy on the trivia - "who published what when" questions rather than critical thinking questions about why or how. | didn't come out of nowhere. The | Quizz | are also too heavy on the | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| XRy7uCAeEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Proof reading needed, for the slides and for the quizzes. Overall, this is a low content course delivered in a rather boring and uninformative way. | for the slides and for the | Quizz | Overall, this is a low content | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| XRy7uCAeEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Horrible quiz questions. I found the distractors to be too similar to the answer, what is the point in having 4 possible correct answers? | Horrible | Quizz | questions. I found the distractors to | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| XRy7uCAeEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | The quiz questions were not clear enough sometimes. | The | Quizz | questions were not clear enough sometimes. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| XupniISSEeWcSw7mZ7gPOw | This course was a great start to Foundations of Everyday Leadership. I actually learned tangible examples and techniques. The assignments and quizzes were great and I can't wait to keep learning in the courses to come! | examples and techniques. The assignments and | Quizz | were great and I can't wait | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| XupniISSEeWcSw7mZ7gPOw | Excellent course! Very well taught. Dr Gregory Northcraft is very well spoken and engaging. This course is nicely structured with Readings, Videos, Cases, Essays, and Quizzes. About 6 hours per week for 4 weeks. Nicely paced. I did not take this with the for credit iMBA classes, but am considering doing so and might thus repeat these courses to take the iMBA classes. I like that you can get certificates and a Specialization in the Leadership and can even grow this into the iMBA which is a fully accredited world class MBA program from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. I highly recommend this course! | with Readings, Videos, Cases, Essays, and | Quizz | About 6 hours per week for | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| XupniISSEeWcSw7mZ7gPOw | Unfortunetly I can only give a 3/5. There were more things that I didn't like and think that should be improved. What I liked: Positive to see Illinois keep presenting specializations on Coursera. The material was ok, with clean presentation style. The case studies is a very positive resource to have in the course to think critically. What I didn't like: The course is excessivelly short, with only 30-40 minutes of videos per module. Previous courses in both specialization - digital marketing and improving videos have at least 1.5 to 3 hours of video materials. A huge gap. Also if I benchmark against the top specializations from Wharton and U. Michigan (Business Foundations, Business Analytics, Leading People and Teams and Finance: Valuation and Investing) all of them pack a 1.5 to 3 hours of video lectures. There is a huge gap. Also I didn't found the quizzes challeging. In a digital world content is king - both in quality and quantity. You have quality, but are missing the quantity. Unfortunetly I see a trend - the other course of the managerial economics specialization also is very short. A minor thing that I also didn't like was the form that the slides were presented. As in previous specializations - in my opinion all of the module slides should be in the readings section in only one document, instead of divided in small pieces per video lecture. I hope that yu accept my critic as constructive because I have liked most of Illinois courses and was very impressed by the quality and extensive set of videos in the Improving Business speciaization. | gap. Also I didn't found the | Quizz | challeging. In a digital world content | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| xx-VwD-OEeWBrBIWi3mmCw | I'd encourage some refinement of the quizzes, for clarity purposes. | I'd encourage some refinement of the | Quizz | for clarity purposes. | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| xx-VwD-OEeWBrBIWi3mmCw | There is quality implicit in the approach taken, but in my opinion, this course is excessively short, having only 20-25 minutes of videos per week, what is very limiting. Also there is no slides of the material covered what I find not adequate. To fully grasp the theories underlyind in the lectures, slides would be determinant. Just watching videos and doing quizzes is not a very effective form of learning. | determinant. Just watching videos and doing | Quizz | is not a very effective form | Positive | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | In my opinion, the final exam was weak since it was compacting the quizzes throughout the course. The content could be 50% theory and 50% practice which i consider that it was more theoretical. | weak since it was compacting the | Quizz | throughout the course. The content could | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Not enough information is provided to pass some of the quizzes without extensive additional research into organic chemistry or other topics. There is no help forum or feedback from instructors | provided to pass some of the | Quizz | without extensive additional research into organic | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | You can really feel the passion and experience the facilitators have on this OPV subject, even via the videos. This course is a must for people interested to delve into OPV, especially as a starting point for research. The course covers into detail almost from cradle to grave about OPV, and what I like most is that they highlighted a lot of previous and current experiments and research regarding OPV. Some of the quizzes can be a bit challenging as a few of them require 100% to pass. But all in all, 5 stars for me. Congratulations on a course well done. | research regarding OPV. Some of the | Quizz | can be a bit challenging as | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | I would give this course a five based on the content it provides, but it lacks in three key areas. First, no forums, really? This is how we learn when we have NO instructor or TA support. They also lack workable calculations. Second, there was a GLARING error in a quiz that no one caught, showing a near complete lack of understanding of energy conversion. Third, the quiz engine has had a number of errors in the calculations. specifically in formula formatting. These are advanced systems that clearly need more testing. But all in all, this is GREAT content if you want to learn about organic (polymer OPV) solar cells. | was a GLARING error in a | Quizz | that no one caught, showing a | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | I would give this course a five based on the content it provides, but it lacks in three key areas. First, no forums, really? This is how we learn when we have NO instructor or TA support. They also lack workable calculations. Second, there was a GLARING error in a quiz that no one caught, showing a near complete lack of understanding of energy conversion. Third, the quiz engine has had a number of errors in the calculations. specifically in formula formatting. These are advanced systems that clearly need more testing. But all in all, this is GREAT content if you want to learn about organic (polymer OPV) solar cells. | understanding of energy conversion. Third, the | Quizz | engine has had a number of | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Very good course overall. There was a problem with the formulas in several quizzes, though. One couldn't get the app to reflect a formula properly, which resulted in the questions being qualified as wrong. Otherwise nice, interesting course Congrats, and thanks for sharing your knowledge folks! | problem with the formulas in several | Quizz | though. One couldn't get the app | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | The course gave me a good, in-depth understanding of OPVs and how further developing the technology surrounding them could help solve the energy crisis. The material was thorough and the quizzes were challenging without being frustrating and encouraged you to learn more about the topics discussed. My only problem was that I was unable to access a community forum so a few times I was stuck on an assignment and had no way to find out information to help me. Instead I just had to guess and work through it alone which wasn't horrible but I would have like to have been able to discuss it with other people taking the course. Overall a good course that has gotten me very excited about OPVs and the future of solar technology. | The material was thorough and the | Quizz | were challenging without being frustrating and | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| y20FTlDPEeWMlwoziUhyxQ | The course fails to clearly explain how to use so many of the formulas that the professor just glides over in class. The quiz was far harder than it should have been, mainly because the professor failed to properly introduce and teach students to use the formulas. | just glides over in class. The | Quizz | was far harder than it should | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| YcfRNRoCEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Definitely improved from the first course of this specification. Better feedback on errors regarding quizzes' questions and still really interesting assignments for peer review that help you to learn. Still missing a document or a file with all the notes that one can take away and use as a reference guide, hence only 3/5. | specification. Better feedback on errors regarding | Quizz | questions and still really interesting assignments | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Awesome Course. One of the best courses , i have been part of on coursera. well paced, very rich in content, very good delivery of the ideas,. Assignments very good. A value for time i just wish practice quiz to have more number of question, and more challenging. A VERY SPECIAL THANKS TO JOGESH. THANKS A LOT | for time i just wish practice | Quizz | to have more number of question, | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The lectures for this class are incredibly weak. Later lectures by the same professor are reasonable and decently structured. These lectures need to be redone. The quizzes are either out-of-order or expect you to do a lot of research on your own beyond the class notes and topics. The class project is unbelievably simple, and the final metric for the class project includes duplication and one portion of the grade assigned simply if you feel the person you're grading "tried". | lectures need to be redone. The | Quizz | are either out-of-order or expect you | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | An Excellently conceived course with good content and a competitively efficient evaluation components viz., assignments and quizzes. | evaluation components viz. , assignments and | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I really wanted to learn this stuff. I have almost no background in statistics. But the lectures didn't cover stuff with enough rigor and repetition for me to pick up much. So I pretty much gamed the quizzes and project enough to get through the class. Rather disappointing. | So I pretty much gamed the | Quizz | and project enough to get through | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Homework, lectures, and the quiz are completely out of sync. Bayes rule is introduced and appears in the homework but no where else. Things appear on the quiz that aren't in the home work or lecture. This was put together from scraps of another lecture, but in an incoherent fashion. When Caffo tells the viewer that they'll need to use other resources, he wasn't kidding. I dropped this the first time when I kept introducing things that completely had not been introduced, took another stats class, then came back and aced it. I don't mind accelerated learning or using other resources, but there's guide for which concepts are needed and where coverage for them can be found. This leaves little recourse but to know stats already, or go learn it before taking this course. Otherwise you don't know enough to even go find the pieces you need. Incidentally, the dude who does the lectures for Khan Academy does a fantastic job and the lectures are a joy to watch, though some people might prefer something that moves less slowly and carefully and perhaps they would prefer something that glosses over the fundamental concepts more. If that's the case, I can't say enough good things about Biostatistical Analysis by Zar but thoroughly, logically categorizing statistical methods with short, clear examples, references to the original research, and building up one concept after another in logical order. The chapters are short, but the first 16 or so should give you a good enough foundation to deal with about any intro stats class. As it is, Caffo's presentation needs some serious testing and remodeling, but there's no indication that it'll match what Khan Academy did regardless of how much work goes in. At best, it's a bitter pill you can swallow if you already know the concepts. | Homework, lectures, and the | Quizz | are completely out of sync. Bayes | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Homework, lectures, and the quiz are completely out of sync. Bayes rule is introduced and appears in the homework but no where else. Things appear on the quiz that aren't in the home work or lecture. This was put together from scraps of another lecture, but in an incoherent fashion. When Caffo tells the viewer that they'll need to use other resources, he wasn't kidding. I dropped this the first time when I kept introducing things that completely had not been introduced, took another stats class, then came back and aced it. I don't mind accelerated learning or using other resources, but there's guide for which concepts are needed and where coverage for them can be found. This leaves little recourse but to know stats already, or go learn it before taking this course. Otherwise you don't know enough to even go find the pieces you need. Incidentally, the dude who does the lectures for Khan Academy does a fantastic job and the lectures are a joy to watch, though some people might prefer something that moves less slowly and carefully and perhaps they would prefer something that glosses over the fundamental concepts more. If that's the case, I can't say enough good things about Biostatistical Analysis by Zar but thoroughly, logically categorizing statistical methods with short, clear examples, references to the original research, and building up one concept after another in logical order. The chapters are short, but the first 16 or so should give you a good enough foundation to deal with about any intro stats class. As it is, Caffo's presentation needs some serious testing and remodeling, but there's no indication that it'll match what Khan Academy did regardless of how much work goes in. At best, it's a bitter pill you can swallow if you already know the concepts. | where else. Things appear on the | Quizz | that aren't in the home work | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Very disappointed with how the transition from the old Coursera platform to the new platform has been handled: lots of instances of the "see lecture X" in the quizzes where the reference is now just wrong because the lectures got renumbered, an almost complete lack of community TA/mentors, and no explanations from anyone as to how the new platform works. Perhaps the worst of all has been the almost complete lack of acknowledgement of any problems from the folks at JHU. This feels like it's just been dumped on the students without any real testing or any appropriate resources to sort out any problems. | " see lecture X" in the | Quizz | where the reference is now just | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Even as a mathematician I found it super useful to participate this class. I have learned similar material in an undergrad course, but I forgot most of it. In fact this course is so much better than the undergrad course I took, because quizzes and the project help me to learn the material by practical exercises. I am really thankful for the Data Science team for this course and all the Data Science Specialization! | the undergrad course I took, because | Quizz | and the project help me to | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Very effective review! but quizzes were not challenging enough to test the concepts taught in the class | Very effective review! but | Quizz | were not challenging enough to test | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | The University of Alberta has done an excellent job with this whole series of paleontology courses. The interactives are well designed, and the lectures and quizzes are interesting and memorable. I'm a fan and am looking forward to learning more! | well designed, and the lectures and | Quizz | are interesting and memorable. I'm a | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I'd like to be able to take a free version of the quizzes. | take a free version of the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| YjCOKcQTEeWI6BLH_IXMZw | I liked the quiz questions. Thanks. | I liked the | Quizz | questions. Thanks. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| yO13mkySEeW_MgoxMAgbMQ | Great course, and great lectures! I would make the quizzes and coursework more rigorous for those who'd like to learn a bit more and be challenged. From this course, I'm interested in pursuing an online Master's degree sometime in the near future! Thank you. - Sebastian | great lectures! I would make the | Quizz | and coursework more rigorous for those | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | After completing this course you'll have a good idea on how professional PMs schedule and budget complex projects. It will also teach you some valuable techniques that can be applied to projects you may be handling in your own work. I was unfortunately not impressed by the fact that the final exam was quite simple, simply borrowing questions already asked during the lesson quizzes. | questions already asked during the lesson | Quizz | | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | Excellent course. The videos by Professor Meloni are greatly supported by follow on presentations and quizes. Great information backed up by the interviews of professionals from the field ad to the learning enviroment. I have already become an advocate for Coursera and reccomended to many of my coleagues. | supported by follow on presentations and | Quizz | Great information backed up by the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | Doing this course 'Budgeting and Scheduling projects' gives learners, a practical approach to Project management based on PMBOK methodology. Prof Margaret Meloni is a great teacher. Students will enjoy her crisp and clear communication of ideas. Slides are well designed. Video quality and sound quality is also great. You will encounter lots of good quality reading materials. Quizzes will help you to test your knowledge as you progress. Overall, an excellent course fit for project managers and project team members who work for construction projects. Also good for the aspiring project managers. Thanks to Prof Margaret and UC Irvine for the great course. | lots of good quality reading materials. | Quizz | will help you to test your | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The last two weeks felt rushed. The Binary Search Tree/AVL Tree module doesn't have a quiz or an assignment and it's easy to move on without fully understanding both data structures. This allows for wasting time on the last assignment which relies on understanding AVL trees. I recommend reading the external resources for each lesson and making sure you have a grasp of the data structure before moving to the next module. | Tree/AVL Tree module doesn't have a | Quizz | or an assignment and it's easy | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | [Slightly updated according to Michael's questions] The course is fine, but comparing to the previous one - Algorithmic Toolbox - this one is weaker and with lesser quality. Pros: the course contains some interesting data structures and valuable observations. The starter files for assignments are in place. Related books are given after each video session. All the tasks have automatic grader. There is a couple of interesting tasks to do. Cons: the material is mostly lectures, and there is even a video where lecturer just reads the article from Wiki (Splay tree - has the same information with same lack of some proofs). Expected: add quizzes as it was in the first course. The course has less weeks - only 4 as comparing to 5 in AT. So various important data structures are not discussed. The course has less homework - 3 tasks each week as comparing to 5 in AT. And all 3 are usually just implementations of some basic algos seen in lectures. I consider the course valuable due to a number of good videos and a couple of good tasks to do. But in general, this course has the area for improvement. | lack of some proofs). Expected: add | Quizz | as it was in the first | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | very nice!It will be better if we can be offered some quiz and feedback,not only coding assignment. | if we can be offered some | Quizz | and feedback, not only coding assignment. | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| yS8ezjDPEeW-zwq84wShFQ | Just wasn't a fan of the videos: way too long and oftentimes unrelated to the course material. Quizzes had no connection to the lectures either. | oftentimes unrelated to the course material. | Quizz | had no connection to the lectures | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| yS8ezjDPEeW-zwq84wShFQ | Was a little uncertain at first but after completing week 1 I have become comfortable with the quirky style of the course. I wasn't game to try the quizzes until I had downloaded the book on my iPad and read chapter six, glad I did and will use this as my weekly process. Enjoying this course very much. Week 2 quizzes were more testing, took three attempts at both quiz 3 and quiz 4 even though I passed on first attempt: 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 5 out of 6 / 6 out of 6. I like the dialogue format and that the language style is in modern conversational English. Socrates guy is hard to please, but he still forces us to think after 2,000 years. Pity the Greeks don't have him around today, their economy might be in better shape. The dentist at our local shopping centre is called Socrates but I don't believe they are related. | I wasn't game to try the | Quizz | until I had downloaded the book | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| yS8ezjDPEeW-zwq84wShFQ | Was a little uncertain at first but after completing week 1 I have become comfortable with the quirky style of the course. I wasn't game to try the quizzes until I had downloaded the book on my iPad and read chapter six, glad I did and will use this as my weekly process. Enjoying this course very much. Week 2 quizzes were more testing, took three attempts at both quiz 3 and quiz 4 even though I passed on first attempt: 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 5 out of 6 / 6 out of 6. I like the dialogue format and that the language style is in modern conversational English. Socrates guy is hard to please, but he still forces us to think after 2,000 years. Pity the Greeks don't have him around today, their economy might be in better shape. The dentist at our local shopping centre is called Socrates but I don't believe they are related. | this course very much. Week 2 | Quizz | were more testing, took three attempts | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| yS8ezjDPEeW-zwq84wShFQ | Was a little uncertain at first but after completing week 1 I have become comfortable with the quirky style of the course. I wasn't game to try the quizzes until I had downloaded the book on my iPad and read chapter six, glad I did and will use this as my weekly process. Enjoying this course very much. Week 2 quizzes were more testing, took three attempts at both quiz 3 and quiz 4 even though I passed on first attempt: 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 5 out of 6 / 6 out of 6. I like the dialogue format and that the language style is in modern conversational English. Socrates guy is hard to please, but he still forces us to think after 2,000 years. Pity the Greeks don't have him around today, their economy might be in better shape. The dentist at our local shopping centre is called Socrates but I don't believe they are related. | testing, took three attempts at both | Quizz | 3 and quiz 4 even though | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| yS8ezjDPEeW-zwq84wShFQ | Was a little uncertain at first but after completing week 1 I have become comfortable with the quirky style of the course. I wasn't game to try the quizzes until I had downloaded the book on my iPad and read chapter six, glad I did and will use this as my weekly process. Enjoying this course very much. Week 2 quizzes were more testing, took three attempts at both quiz 3 and quiz 4 even though I passed on first attempt: 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 4 out of 6 / 4 out of 6; 5 out of 6 / 6 out of 6. I like the dialogue format and that the language style is in modern conversational English. Socrates guy is hard to please, but he still forces us to think after 2,000 years. Pity the Greeks don't have him around today, their economy might be in better shape. The dentist at our local shopping centre is called Socrates but I don't believe they are related. | attempts at both quiz 3 and | Quizz | 4 even though I passed on | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| YtGHVvFzEeWo_AqNz_CgPw | Le cours est très bien et bien dispensé mais je crois que les quizz pratiques ne sont pas nécessaires. Tout ce qui a rapport avec la pratique devrait se limiter aux exercices de programmation. Les quizzes devraient pouvoir vérifier la connaissance des syntaxes du langage. | dispensé mais je crois que les | Quizz | pratiques ne sont pas nécessaires. Tout | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| YtGHVvFzEeWo_AqNz_CgPw | Le cours est très bien et bien dispensé mais je crois que les quizz pratiques ne sont pas nécessaires. Tout ce qui a rapport avec la pratique devrait se limiter aux exercices de programmation. Les quizzes devraient pouvoir vérifier la connaissance des syntaxes du langage. | limiter aux exercices de programmation. Les | Quizz | devraient pouvoir vérifier la connaissance des | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| yVldYUd5EeWb5ArkqfgJBw | I am a newbie with R.Pi so this course help me a lot in the studying process with R.Pi. I gain many new interesting knowledge. I wish the learner could take the quizzes and know the results without upgrade, that would be better. I agree once the learner need to print the results and some official certificate, so need to upgrade. | wish the learner could take the | Quizz | and know the results without upgrade, | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Pros: Information is perfect for anyone looking at Business Intelligence as a career field, or already in the career field itself. I found the first week to challenge my on-the-job knowledge of a fuller set of concepts and general terminology. Cons: The wording on the quiz questions, in some cases, seems much different than the PPT slides and the instructor's language. UPDATE: The wording is a significant challenge, even when advancing into the more complex topics. I have had many differences of opinions on the solutions based on wording in the requirements. | terminology. Cons: The wording on the | Quizz | questions, in some cases, seems much | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Awful. Just awful. There are dozens of students trying to install Pentaho and failing. Only reason I managed is that I have prior experience with the software. There are no TAs, no help, nothing. The Quiz is a scam designed to force you to shell out even more money of the so-called-optional textbook, and the assignments are extremely vague and orders of magnitude beyond the laughable 30 minutes the instructor suggested they should take. My submissions for week 3 total over 30 pages -- and I work a full time job... Avoid this class, do not reward terrible courses with your cash. | no TAs, no help, nothing. The | Quizz | is a scam designed to force | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| yXMpEJw3EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Lot off myths about the finances were cleared in this course. The quizes were also good. Thank you professors for the valuable inputs. | were cleared in this course. The | Quizz | were also good. Thank you professors | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I enjoyed Professor Seamon's lectures and I also enjoyed his book. While you do not need to purchase the book, it is well written and really helpful and interesting. Professor Seamon has an endearing and personal style which makes the material come to life. The movie selection was excellent and helped reinforce many of the technical definitions about memory. I feel the quizzes could have been a little more challenging. Overall a very enjoyable experience. | definitions about memory. I feel the | Quizz | could have been a little more | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Course was fascinating! Clearly presented. I loved the structure with a summary at the end of each lecture. The quizzes contained only information that was included in the lectures. Easy familiarity of the instructor made me feel like we were having a friendly discussion. Instructor intended to present information to the general public rather than psychology majors & he accomplished that goal. This is my favorite MOOC so far & I never expected to find one I liked more than the | the end of each lecture. The | Quizz | contained only information that was included | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I really enjoyed this class - it gave me some insight to how the mind works. The lectures were easy to understand, no full of jargon, and the quizzes helped clarify what I needed to focus on | no full of jargon, and the | Quizz | helped clarify what I needed to | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| Z3yHdBVBEeWvmQrN_lODCw | Excellent Course! Thank you very much! If we can have access to the answers to the quiz after everyone submits the results, that will be great. | access to the answers to the | Quizz | after everyone submits the results, that | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ZgdEeNmtEeWIyg6KWmLgkQ | Excellent! Dr. T is awesome! The in-lecture quizzes are the greatest | Dr. T is awesome! The in-lecture | Quizz | are the greatest | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| zKZY59dlEeSQOCIAC0ELFw | This course very briefly presents large picture concepts of Entrepreneurship without going into a enough detail to provide any major benefit. I would see this being most useful to a person who had only vague ideas of what entrepreneurship entailed overall. The quizzes seemed to focus more on what was said during the lectures rather than what large scale constructs actually define entrepreneurs or processes overall. i.e. questions focused on sentence construction and ordering in a lecture rather than the overall concepts the sentences themselves were expected to convey. | of what entrepreneurship entailed overall. The | Quizz | seemed to focus more on what | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Lectures are intuitive and easy to follow, while the quizzes complement them perfectly. I really enjoyed this course! | and easy to follow, while the | Quizz | complement them perfectly. I really enjoyed | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | A great lectures, I really like the attitude of this professor. He is really into his subject and I appreciated his resolution, when it comes to reducing the legacy of his favorite sociologists, into just one crucial point. Not five stars for quizzes, the parts concerning reading of classics could be much more motivating, in the aspect of the actual reading and anderstanding. Wish the course from University of Amsterdam on modern authors to come sooner. | crucial point. Not five stars for | Quizz | the parts concerning reading of classics | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course is the absolute best I have taken on Coursera. The teacher is very engaging, explains with ease is a very friendly professor that guides you effectively as if you weren't taking this class online. It is elegantly designed with in-video questions and helpful quizzes that are short and on-point. I liked the over-all design, it touches in the most important thinkers of Sociology but also focuses on aspects that aren't always taught in Sociology classes. A great course! | designed with in-video questions and helpful | Quizz | that are short and on-point. I | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent overview on the major sociological thinkers from Adam Smith to Norbert Elias. A very good introduction to the subject. Beware though - the professor is an engaging teacher, but his quizzes are tough. You actually have to do some of the recommended readings to answer the questions - there are at least three questions in each quiz based on the writings of the sociologist who is the subject of the test. | is an engaging teacher, but his | Quizz | are tough. You actually have to | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent overview on the major sociological thinkers from Adam Smith to Norbert Elias. A very good introduction to the subject. Beware though - the professor is an engaging teacher, but his quizzes are tough. You actually have to do some of the recommended readings to answer the questions - there are at least three questions in each quiz based on the writings of the sociologist who is the subject of the test. | at least three questions in each | Quizz | based on the writings of the | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great lectures with clear explanations and illustrations. Well chosen readings. Extremely interesting topics. Some of the quiz questions were ambiguous, particularly ones that asked students to pick the quotes that best represent a particular idea. | Extremely interesting topics. Some of the | Quizz | questions were ambiguous, particularly ones that | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I have started this course again and again. Although the lectures themselves are clear enough, the quizzes are sometime so confusing and don't reflect the way that topic was taught. The worst part is R lab. I understand nothing of it. It makes no sense. I should not be part of a basic statistics course. I have wasted my money on a specialization that I can't get because I will not, and simply cannot learn R. They should have made that clear this would involve programming. I am only now thinking of learning from the videos but have given up the hope of getting a specialization certificate. The instructor in the first two session was still engaging, but starting in the third lesson the instructor is so boring and his voice makes me drowsy. Plus his sentences are so long and confusing. He has a horrible way to explain something. They need to keep in mind this is BASIC statistics, so cut down on the jargon. He does introduce the terms in 3.01 but just after one video the words don't magically sit in my memory. I've given 3 stars because although I have to work double hard just to make sense of what the instructor says by reading a book on basic statistics, at least the videos provide a structure, good examples and after watching them a few times things become clear. | lectures themselves are clear enough, the | Quizz | are sometime so confusing and don't | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I loved the course. The clear explanations, tough quizzes and cheerful attitude helped me invest and find joy in statistics. Now I want to learn more and more. | the course. The clear explanations, tough | Quizz | and cheerful attitude helped me invest | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | great intro class to statistics. Love the animation, teaching style and R lab exercises. The first class in coursera that video content and quiz are relevant. Highly recommended!!! | in coursera that video content and | Quizz | are relevant. Highly recommended! ! ! | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I hadn't touched math in any real way in years and this was a great re-introduction. The videos were fun and engaging, and while the material was challenging, I felt I got a lot out of it. I highly recommend it for people who need statistics for their work or for a degree program but who are feeling a little intimidated by it. As far as feedback goes, I would have liked to get explanations for quiz questions I couldn't answer. I wish there was a way to say, "This is the quiz score I'd like to accept; now please explain to me the ones I missed." The lack of feedback on the quizzes was frustrating at times. | have liked to get explanations for | Quizz | questions I couldn't answer. I wish | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I hadn't touched math in any real way in years and this was a great re-introduction. The videos were fun and engaging, and while the material was challenging, I felt I got a lot out of it. I highly recommend it for people who need statistics for their work or for a degree program but who are feeling a little intimidated by it. As far as feedback goes, I would have liked to get explanations for quiz questions I couldn't answer. I wish there was a way to say, "This is the quiz score I'd like to accept; now please explain to me the ones I missed." The lack of feedback on the quizzes was frustrating at times. | to say, " This is the | Quizz | score I'd like to accept; now | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I hadn't touched math in any real way in years and this was a great re-introduction. The videos were fun and engaging, and while the material was challenging, I felt I got a lot out of it. I highly recommend it for people who need statistics for their work or for a degree program but who are feeling a little intimidated by it. As far as feedback goes, I would have liked to get explanations for quiz questions I couldn't answer. I wish there was a way to say, "This is the quiz score I'd like to accept; now please explain to me the ones I missed." The lack of feedback on the quizzes was frustrating at times. | The lack of feedback on the | Quizz | was frustrating at times. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | It is really helpful to get an idea for statisctics. Examples, quizzes, assignments as well as R lab designed on according to content of class. There is no suprise. | get an idea for statisctics. Examples, | Quizz | assignments as well as R lab | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent course and well taught by both instructors. 4 stars because of the lack of feedback on quizzes and exam. | of the lack of feedback on | Quizz | and exam. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | some of the videos were outstanding and easy to understand. Need more handholding for understanding of concepts and review/explanation of the quiz results will reinforce learning further. | of concepts and review/explanation of the | Quizz | results will reinforce learning further. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good course, but it seems there are some errors in the quiz and labs | there are some errors in the | Quizz | and labs | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Despite some error in the quizzes I learned quite a lot by taking this online course. Apparently the course organisers are overwhelmed by its success, since they react (too) slowly to comments made by students in the discussion fora. At least, errors should be tackled immediately. | Despite some error in the | Quizz | I learned quite a lot by | Negative | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I never thought I would learn so much so quickly in a math course. The course moves fast, but being able to rewind the videos and repeat anything I don't understand is really helpful! I love the applicability of what I'm learning, and my ability to take notes and practice everything on the quizzes makes the information stick. | notes and practice everything on the | Quizz | makes the information stick. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Puerile, made up examples with made up data, no deeper treatment of the mathematics involved than the here-is-a-magic-formula-use-it approach and mistakes (including serious conceptual and factual errors) evident in the quizzes and the R labs. Far better to look out for the "Data Analysis and Statistical Inference" course by Duke on Coursera that is presented by a passionate statistics teacher, covers the same material (and more) and provides a far better introduction to R than this course. One of the stated purposes of this specialization is to clean up the way social scientists conduct science and are perceived as scientists; in this respect, it appears that the worst enemies of social scientists are social scientists. | and factual errors) evident in the | Quizz | and the R labs. Far better | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I think the notes given after the lectures should contain the formula the students need. Also the quizes should show the correct answers once you completed them, if not you cant figure out why the questions are wrong. | formula the students need. Also the | Quizz | should show the correct answers once | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| zo2jLrZHEeWVcRIZgPr_Xw | A good course, please provide more practice quiz in depth. | good course, please provide more practice | Quizz | in depth. | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| ZQDT5AS2EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | Great insight into conducting for people at all levels. It's invaluable as a musician to have as many skills up your sleeve as possible and that's what this course helps with. The video lessons are quite long, but the multiple choice quizzes more than make up for that where other courses have little content and lots of complicated technology requests for submitting assignments. Perfect! | quite long, but the multiple choice | Quizz | more than make up for that | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| zSmzLR5LEeS6wiIACzGPEQ | I felt this course was stimulating, thought provoking and challenging. The course for me was about awareness more than just passing the quizzes. I felt the interviews were especially interesting. It is my hope that as I move towards opening my own business I keep many of these principles in mind. | awareness more than just passing the | Quizz | I felt the interviews were especially | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Great course, but the quizzes are not quite there yet. They focus too much on minor details and the questions are sometimes awkwardly phrased. | Great course, but the | Quizz | are not quite there yet. They | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | I found Wesleyan University's course "The Ancient Greeks" rich in varied information. Professor Andrew Szegedy-Maszak's lectures are particularly thoughtful and the quizzes are clear. An altogether enjoyable, well-worth experience. | lectures are particularly thoughtful and the | Quizz | are clear. An altogether enjoyable, well-worth | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Totally excellent and enthralling! The subject matter is well treated and easy to follow. The quality of the videos are top as well. I fell the the mix of lecture, reading and quiz at the end of the week was just right. | the mix of lecture, reading and | Quizz | at the end of the week | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | This is an absolutely 5-star course. Educational, interesting, right-paced... It is very clear that the professor has a passion for the subject and is deeply knowledgeable. There are two questions after every video lecture, which focus on the most important parts of the lecture and also helps the student see if they understood the content. Reading assignments are relevant and interesting. End-of-the week quizzes are challenging, but can be completed very successfully if the student paid close attention to the subject. I would recommend this course to everyone who likes history or ancient cultures. I hope for a sequel, too! | are relevant and interesting. End-of-the week | Quizz | are challenging, but can be completed | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Excellent survey course. Only wish there was more information given on details of daily life, also wish the course was a bit longer. Had issues with verifying the quizes. | longer. Had issues with verifying the | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | A lesson with discussion about the question of quizz. | with discussion about the question of | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Material is excellent, but new format for coursera pages is horrible. Hard to find anything, taking pdf dumps to create saved artifacts from class is completely broken, quizzes do not allow you to see your answers after you submit them even after you have finished the class so you have to remember to save the quiz answers before submission. Worst part for me is that you can only get a certificate if you agree to verified certificates which means giving coursera access to your webcam and also allowing them to save your typing patterns with to me I don't mind paying something for the courses, but will not use verified certificates as I have no need for their verification, and will only take on demand classes that use this format if they have content i really want. | artifacts from class is completely broken, | Quizz | do not allow you to see | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Material is excellent, but new format for coursera pages is horrible. Hard to find anything, taking pdf dumps to create saved artifacts from class is completely broken, quizzes do not allow you to see your answers after you submit them even after you have finished the class so you have to remember to save the quiz answers before submission. Worst part for me is that you can only get a certificate if you agree to verified certificates which means giving coursera access to your webcam and also allowing them to save your typing patterns with to me I don't mind paying something for the courses, but will not use verified certificates as I have no need for their verification, and will only take on demand classes that use this format if they have content i really want. | have to remember to save the | Quizz | answers before submission. Worst part for | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| zUyBBjnyEeWCYBKNeFwojw | Creo que el curso está muy bien explicado en cada uno de los vídeos y es fácil de entender con los ejercicios de los quiz y de los vídeos. | entender con los ejercicios de los | Quizz | y de los vídeos. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| _3l2SpONEeW2aQ7olstw0Q | It does not fully utilize the power and possibilities of a MOOC (students cannot study at their own pace, there is no live interaction, standard quizes and assignments), which is a bit ironic. Peer-reviewing really brings down the quality of the feedback. Not everyone is capable of testing, evaluating and giving constructive feedback. | there is no live interaction, standard | Quizz | and assignments), which is a bit | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| _ehbrDx9EeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | Dedicated resource person. Good reading materials. Challenging quizzes and assignments. | resource person. Good reading materials. Challenging | Quizz | and assignments. | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | On later parts the videos are poorly edited and less interactive. In one place practice quiz has wrong answer marked as right. (Whether it's a situational question or behavioral). | less interactive. In one place practice | Quizz | has wrong answer marked as right. | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This course seems patched together. The volume isn't consistent, even within videos. Some videos / slides are great and full of information, while others are just long periods of talking with one word or phrase on the screen and none of the information put in written form. Some of the questions occur in multiple practice quizzes. Also, there are misspellings in the quizzes. Finally, one quiz marked a question wrong and then, in the comments, noted the answer was right. Further, some of the videos seem to stretch out information to fill time. | the questions occur in multiple practice | Quizz | Also, there are misspellings in the | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This course seems patched together. The volume isn't consistent, even within videos. Some videos / slides are great and full of information, while others are just long periods of talking with one word or phrase on the screen and none of the information put in written form. Some of the questions occur in multiple practice quizzes. Also, there are misspellings in the quizzes. Finally, one quiz marked a question wrong and then, in the comments, noted the answer was right. Further, some of the videos seem to stretch out information to fill time. | Also, there are misspellings in the | Quizz | Finally, one quiz marked a question | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This course seems patched together. The volume isn't consistent, even within videos. Some videos / slides are great and full of information, while others are just long periods of talking with one word or phrase on the screen and none of the information put in written form. Some of the questions occur in multiple practice quizzes. Also, there are misspellings in the quizzes. Finally, one quiz marked a question wrong and then, in the comments, noted the answer was right. Further, some of the videos seem to stretch out information to fill time. | misspellings in the quizzes. Finally, one | Quizz | marked a question wrong and then, | Neutral | 0.5 | 2.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This course was a bit mediocre. The videos were often choppy, awkward, and cut off in the middle of sentences. The quiz questions were unclear and generally poorly written, and didn't make me think enough. I did enjoy the onboarding special topic section, and the quality was higher there. But the first 3 weeks need quite a bit of revision and fine-tuning. | in the middle of sentences. The | Quizz | questions were unclear and generally poorly | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Very succinct and interesting content. Though provoking quiz | succinct and interesting content. Though provoking | Quizz | | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | The presentation is succinct and the course touches on all the key areas of macroeconomics. It would be great, however, if it were easier to review a completed quiz and find out why a wrong answer provided was incorrect. | were easier to review a completed | Quizz | and find out why a wrong | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | A great course! Whether you are simply interested in applying some concepts into your life, or a student (like myself) looking to brush up/or learn economics, this is a great intro course! I especially love the module overview at the beginning of each week. I usually copy and paste "key questions" into Evernote, and answer them when I'm watching the videos. Then I would review the Q&A before and after each quiz. It turns out to work great for me! Thanks for making this course available on Coursera! | the Q&A before and after each | Quizz | It turns out to work great | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Very well explained and not too fast. The quizzes were challenging but fair. I can totally recommend this course, because it gives you a good insight in macroeconomics and was not too theoredical. I also would like to thank Cousera for this great learing opportunity. | explained and not too fast. The | Quizz | were challenging but fair. I can | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Presentation slides could've been better prepared. The quiz could've thrown the right answers after finishing. But it was very informative overall | slides could've been better prepared. The | Quizz | could've thrown the right answers after | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | The course discussed a great deal of very important information, but the instruction was very rushed, and often lacked the specific details needed - for example, formulas were sometimes left out, and it was assumed you could/would just "figure it out." The quizzes were very detailed and specific - which I do not disagree with - but I feel as though they sometimes focused on minutiae rather than large or critical concepts. There were also several spelling and grammar mistakes throughout the quizzes. | " figure it out. " The | Quizz | were very detailed and specific - | Neutral | 0.5 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | The course discussed a great deal of very important information, but the instruction was very rushed, and often lacked the specific details needed - for example, formulas were sometimes left out, and it was assumed you could/would just "figure it out." The quizzes were very detailed and specific - which I do not disagree with - but I feel as though they sometimes focused on minutiae rather than large or critical concepts. There were also several spelling and grammar mistakes throughout the quizzes. | spelling and grammar mistakes throughout the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Well done. Logical progression of learning, good examples, clearly spoken. There were quite a few spots where sound or video cut out for several minutes while the other (either sound or video) continued to work. Not sure if it was my computer or a course issue. One quiz (i believe week 10 or 11) had a question with two right answers. You could either choose 3) all of the above or 4) answers 1&2 (which were both correct). I believe '4' was the correct answer. Very well created overall...nice job. | computer or a course issue. One | Quizz | (i believe week 10 or 11) | Negative | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Although the course cover everything there can be in Macro-economics, the course is tightly bound with US economy. Also the questions, some of them, in quiz are exact from the slides. I think there could have been changes. None the less, it was best thing i have learnt in past 6-12 months. Awesome going through it. | the questions, some of them, in | Quizz | are exact from the slides. I | Neutral | 0.5 | 4.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | One of the best courses around in Coursera, with intensive contents and quizzes. At the end of these two courses (I took the Microeconomics as well), I totally grasped the fact that "economics is not something to memorize, but to conceptualize"!! | in Coursera, with intensive contents and | Quizz | At the end of these two | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| _xNLlFY4EeWKXg4Y7_tPaw | Very interesting course, providing a descent overview of the whole water management and policy question. A lot of interesting examples are provided to illustrate the different points and various experts are interviewed throughout the course. I still believe though that the general message remains very generic and would benefit from further technical details to go more in depth. Also, the English subtitles do not always exactly match the oral French version. Finally, the marking only based on quizzes that can be retaken several times makes it very easy in my view. I believe that assignments that would require more involvement from the students (e.g. maybe group assignments with other students?) or applications of the course concepts to case studies would greatly enhance the quality of the course. Still, it remains a very interesting and well dispensed course! | Finally, the marking only based on | Quizz | that can be retaken several times | Negative | 0.6 | 3.0 |
| _xNLlFY4EeWKXg4Y7_tPaw | very interesting course, with good examples. Just the fact it is french with quizz in english makes it not that easy!!! Some of the module are just too theoretical. But nice, very good overall | the fact it is french with | Quizz | in english makes it not that | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| __JK5M3TEeSa0iIAC9RQCQ | Well, The course helped me to realize the need to check on my savings and expenses and more so planning on money as a whole. If the courses were offered without having to be necessarily purchased in order to make the quiz part valid, It would be good. | purchased in order to make the | Quizz | part valid, It would be good. | Positive | 0.6 | 5.0 |
| __JK5M3TEeSa0iIAC9RQCQ | Great intro course for learning how to manage your money. Interesting content and the quizzes are pretty relevant to the content. | your money. Interesting content and the | Quizz | are pretty relevant to the content. | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | this is the best course i have ever took on programming, it's prepare students to solve problems using any programming language. thanks for the professors at duke for crafting this course, great tutorials, quizzes it's really better than the first course in this specialization | for crafting this course, great tutorials, | Quizz | it's really better than the first | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | It's a very good introductory course that I will definitely suggest to anyone who wants to start over. The videos and especially the programming assignments are wonderful. But if you don't pay for a certificate you will not be able to participate in the module quizzes, a bit frustrating when you put a serious amount of effort. | able to participate in the module | Quizz | a bit frustrating when you put | Neutral | 0.5 | 5.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | If you are a real beginner like me (having zero or little programming knowledge) and your time is limited, I think this course (or the specialisation) is not suitable for you. The assignments and quizzes are very time consuming. One week I spent literally 30+ hours writing and debugging codes for just one quiz. | suitable for you. The assignments and | Quizz | are very time consuming. One week | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | If you are a real beginner like me (having zero or little programming knowledge) and your time is limited, I think this course (or the specialisation) is not suitable for you. The assignments and quizzes are very time consuming. One week I spent literally 30+ hours writing and debugging codes for just one quiz. | and debugging codes for just one | Quizz | | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course is just terrible. It leaves an impression of being unfinished. There's a lot of knowledge missed out from lectures while being expected from the student in the quizzes. Lecturers themselves have a very vague understanding of how java works and how to code in real life. What they say in some lectures is very misleading and gives either false or just insufficient understanding of certain mechanisms. The examples are overcomplicated. They demand a full concentration on domain knowledge rather than on programming itself. | expected from the student in the | Quizz | Lecturers themselves have a very vague | Neutral | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | As usual the 4 professors(presenters) have done an excellent job. The resources, videos, assignments and quizzes are very helpful, well thought out and comprehensive. They have done an enormous amount of work. But there seem to be problems with the import edu.duke.* due to installation problems (e.g. Windows 10). Maybe include 3 videos like:( example from other Coursera courses e.g. R Programming) Installing BlueJ on a Mac Installing BlueJ on Windows Installing Bluej on (Mac) ; including these would enable me to give a rating of 5 stars. For the beginner programmer this would help a lot. I know there is the Discussions forum (very helpful) and students must sweat a bit to get BlueJ to work on some messy Operating Systems but this is my comment as a Beta Tester | job. The resources, videos, assignments and | Quizz | are very helpful, well thought out | Positive | 0.6 | 4.0 |