| Doc_id | Review | Left | Term | Right | Sentiment | Polarity | Rating |
| -0BI9jXyEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | Great information! This is a high quality course. | Great information! This is a high | Quality | course. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | This course had a profound impact on the procedures I use for data analysis. It provides best practices for documenting the steps of the analysis to ensure accuracy and quality. I highly recommend taking this. | the analysis to ensure accuracy and | Quality | I highly recommend taking this. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I've already written a review but it seems to have been removed... This is an awful course, there is very little purpose to it whatsoever, it is basically a module in markdown which will in all honesty not have much application for most learners. In addition, the course is not at all balanced / laid out well, there is a peer assignment in week 1, which you need to have covered week 2's content for. Lastly, the recording quality of some of the lectures is awful, it is clear that they have simply used some recordings of an actual classroom session of a related course instead of recording for Coursera. In all honesty, this entire specialisation is of awful quality, it is not a data science course, it is a "here's a few useful things in R" course, and the instructors should be ashamed that their institution makes money from it. | 2's content for. Lastly, the recording | Quality | of some of the lectures is | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I've already written a review but it seems to have been removed... This is an awful course, there is very little purpose to it whatsoever, it is basically a module in markdown which will in all honesty not have much application for most learners. In addition, the course is not at all balanced / laid out well, there is a peer assignment in week 1, which you need to have covered week 2's content for. Lastly, the recording quality of some of the lectures is awful, it is clear that they have simply used some recordings of an actual classroom session of a related course instead of recording for Coursera. In all honesty, this entire specialisation is of awful quality, it is not a data science course, it is a "here's a few useful things in R" course, and the instructors should be ashamed that their institution makes money from it. | this entire specialisation is of awful | Quality | it is not a data science | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | In this course, there was a slide presentation with audio recorded in a classroom. This part of the course should be replaced as soon as possible to offer better experience. As it is presented right now, with a loudy environment, it really doesn't match to the quality of the other courses. | it really doesn't match to the | Quality | of the other courses. | Negative | 0.83 | 4.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | One of the most useful classes so far! Provides great foundation for creating quality reports! | far! Provides great foundation for creating | Quality | reports! | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Some videos have bad audio quality. | Some videos have bad audio | Quality | | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | To be honest, I couldn't realize why this had to be an entire seminar on its own. Apart from that, in some videos the audio quality was rather poor and the instructor seemed to have caught some cold or something. Although the topic of the course is interesting and significant, I think that do far it is the least engaging of the specialization... | that, in some videos the audio | Quality | was rather poor and the instructor | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | First I've been thinking that the topic is not so important to create a whole course for it, but after watching it and trying some of the technics mentioned here I found that the quality of my analysis increased , also now I spend much less time trying to organise my scripts, data and findings. Thanks! | mentioned here I found that the | Quality | of my analysis increased , also | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Some of the videos has low quality, which make them harder to understand for non native speakers. In my opinion there is also too less tips for second assessment. | Some of the videos has low | Quality | which make them harder to understand | Negative | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Covers some important and interesting areas and is generally well taught (although the recording quality on the videos varies). Interesting final project! | generally well taught (although the recording | Quality | on the videos varies). Interesting final | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I have fallen asleep during 3/4th week, and it have never happened to my during any of the Coursera courses... I'm sorry, but it completely failed my expectations. 3 weeks out of 7 gone, and I have learnt absolutely nothing about dogs. Yes, I got some psychological basis, but that's not what I looked for/ The lecturer politely suggests to buy his book ... well if it is the same quality as the presented course, than it's useless... | well if it is the same | Quality | as the presented course, than it's | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | really well done. quality shines through | really well done. | Quality | shines through | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Both the specialization and the course are top quality. Professor Muppala is the best! | specialization and the course are top | Quality | Professor Muppala is the best! | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Following the overall quality of this Specialization, this course was excellent. From the content, to the assesments, material and teachers. This course is a really good starting point to become an expert in Machine Learning techniques. | Following the overall | Quality | of this Specialization, this course was | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The specialization has a good quality on average. I started doing this course immediately after it went open. I had a feeling that the quality of the course went down (questions were often unclear and it took time to figure out what is expected as an answer). However, many problems were solved quite fast and teaching stuff is really helpful. I still would like to see more about MapReduce in-depth in this course. I did not have a feeling that it was covered sufficiently (only theory, no hands-on material). In general, hands-on material was great and useful. | The specialization has a good | Quality | on average. I started doing this | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The specialization has a good quality on average. I started doing this course immediately after it went open. I had a feeling that the quality of the course went down (questions were often unclear and it took time to figure out what is expected as an answer). However, many problems were solved quite fast and teaching stuff is really helpful. I still would like to see more about MapReduce in-depth in this course. I did not have a feeling that it was covered sufficiently (only theory, no hands-on material). In general, hands-on material was great and useful. | I had a feeling that the | Quality | of the course went down (questions | Negative | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | This is a great intro class, designed to be completed within the Ableton trial period. Ableton should pay Erin a commission on sales that come out of this course, because I imagine it's bringing them 100s of new sales! The materials (mostly videos) are excellent and easy to follow. I learned a lot in this short class and would love to see an "intermediate" Ableton class in the future. My only complaints are related to the collaboration software that you need to use for this course, blend.io. Site navigation in blend.io can be painfully slow, and the site is buggy. I would have preferred to simply share information via dropbox or some other file sharing method. The peer review process is a great idea, although I think it's really tricky to do this in a music/art, because there is so much subjectivity and not much of a rubric. (There are some quantitative questions just to verify that the student follows instructions, but the open feedback is totally open). But, overall, the peer review works pretty well and gives students an additional incentive to turn in a quality product. | additional incentive to turn in a | Quality | product. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -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! | on the Scratch program once the | Quality | of the video is adjusted. 2) | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | i was a dot, you molded me in a line.... :) happy to join the course quality of education play create program repeat, Instructor is excellent in explaining everything of the course, thank you Instructor , university of Edinburgh and Coursera | :) happy to join the course | Quality | of education play create program repeat, | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| -Y69EP9dEeSa0SIACyGBQw | Excellent course! The content is great in quality, quantity and structure!! 5 stars to that! However, I am giving 4 stars since passing the course or not depends mostly on Extension Exercises, which at the beginning seem to be optional but they in fact mandatory. | course! The content is great in | Quality | quantity and structure! ! 5 stars | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | What can I say? An extremely complete course, very resourceful, dynamic and with great quality content from reliable sources. If you are interested in genetics, you will love this take on epigenetics; definitely worth it. | very resourceful, dynamic and with great | Quality | content from reliable sources. If you | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 0ayiYtaOEeWvEArBkQ8C9Q | Interesting material and good teacher but very poor use of the media (an audio file would have been sufficient for most lectures) and low quality recording for some lectures (background noises, echos, wind...) | sufficient for most lectures) and low | Quality | recording for some lectures (background noises, | Negative | 0.97 | 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. | aligned well with instructional material. Low | Quality | of sound in videos. No feedback | Negative | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| 0HiU7Oe4EeWTAQ4yevf_oQ | The quality of the presentation is very low, and way below the quality in other courses. The assignments are very poorly designed. This is not a subjective personal experience. This is based on discussions with other learners in the forum who have expressed disappointment and frustration. | The | Quality | of the presentation is very low, | Negative | 0.73 | 1.0 |
| 0HiU7Oe4EeWTAQ4yevf_oQ | The quality of the presentation is very low, and way below the quality in other courses. The assignments are very poorly designed. This is not a subjective personal experience. This is based on discussions with other learners in the forum who have expressed disappointment and frustration. | very low, and way below the | Quality | in other courses. The assignments are | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| 1b9VUDu6EeWdUgozVKt3nw | I really did want to take this course in a specialization mode. However I sampled some of the course videos in the different courses making this specialization and decided against it. In the course videos we see no teacher or lecturer just pictures of people and power-point slides with a flat voice in the background reading the slides. In my opinion this does very little in making this topic interesting as it comes out flat and more work should have been put into making of this MOOC considering one has to pay for the specialization. There were also no discussion forums of any kind available. More work should be put into the making of the lecture videos by the school to give it a realistic classroom experience. Unfortunately I dropped out of the MOOC because of the poor quality done by the school despite it being a topic of interest for me. | the MOOC because of the poor | Quality | done by the school despite it | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| 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. | Overall good | Quality | course, interesting and relevant. The only | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1cz3WSsXEeWccAqzeA4VPw | The quality of content, as well as the style and approach of the instructor made this course a valuable learning experience. Assessments were tough, but helped review course material thoroughly. Overall, I would recommend this course to those who are inclined to learn about climate science. | The | Quality | of content, as well as the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1cz3WSsXEeWccAqzeA4VPw | This is a very enjoyable and instructive course. The lectures are excellent, the videos are high quality, and the essays are interesting and not too long or intimidating. The links provided are very helpful; you can study the topic of climate change to whatever academic level you wish to. I live in Southern Africa, and believe me, climate change is having a dramatic effect on we who live here. Never mind 2100, the time of change is here, now - today. | are excellent, the videos are high | Quality | and the essays are interesting and | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 1cz3WSsXEeWccAqzeA4VPw | Our Earth's Future provides a very helpful introduction to climate science, and addresses issues of climate change in a highly accessible and well presented series of lectures and readings. The course helped to quiet the inner-war of current controversy relative to climate change, by clarifying the issues, and providing explanations to help settle, for me, the inner-debate. This is great course and the quality of instruction is, in my experience, impeccable. Thank you for providing this education to life-long learners who might be seeking to better inform themselves relative to climate change and the issues of controversy relative to global warming. | This is great course and the | Quality | of instruction is, in my experience, | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Terrible course compared to all others I've seen on Coursera. Content is scarce, quality is low, maybe okay for college graduates, but being in business, it's just too slim. Video quality is also terrible. Don't waste 35$ | seen on Coursera. Content is scarce, | Quality | is low, maybe okay for college | Negative | 0.84 | 1.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Terrible course compared to all others I've seen on Coursera. Content is scarce, quality is low, maybe okay for college graduates, but being in business, it's just too slim. Video quality is also terrible. Don't waste 35$ | business, it's just too slim. Video | Quality | is also terrible. Don't waste 35$ | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Unfortunately, without a doubt, the worst und most uninformative course I've ever taken. Apart from stating the obvious nothing new. A lot of repetition of "useless" information. Super disappointed. Can't believe that such a course is offered here and that I really paid for nothing of such quality. | really paid for nothing of such | Quality | | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I think the best quality of this course is that it is a short course, which bolds the most important facts in our mind. It is not like that we don't know them at all, It's just we don't pay much or enough attention. I start using this method from today and I hope it goes well ! You should try this course, I think it worth it ! | I think the best | Quality | of this course is that it | Positive | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | done with in few hours; found it's useful for interview preparing, particularly for the multitasking part. have habits of time management, though didn't know how to organise language to show that quality during an interview. | to organise language to show that | Quality | during an interview. | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| 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. | The graded assignments are of varying | Quality | The most disturbing thing about them | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very good introductory course to probability and data. Very hands-on examples and outstanding explanations. I already had several statistics courses before in my life but not in this quality. I can really recommend this course to anyone who to learn more about statistics. | my life but not in this | Quality | I can really recommend this course | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Simple delivery with quality reading and video materials. | Simple delivery with | Quality | reading and video materials. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | The content of this course is not terribly difficult, I thought, but it's a very good introduction into most aspects of Data Science. You learn to familiarize yourself with R quite well and get a lot of independence to create a final project based on a huge data set. One thing I would've liked is a sample completed project, start to finish, to see what was expected- the things that got produced (which you peer review) varied hugely in quality. | you peer review) varied hugely in | Quality | | Positive | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Provided Unity scripts for projects don't work properly with newer versions of Unity. Quality of video recording is kind of crappy esp. audio. Most of the stuff learned in this course you'd be able to learn straight from the Unity tutorials anyway. Not recommended unless you absolutely need scheduled assignments in order to learn. | properly with newer versions of Unity. | Quality | of video recording is kind of | Positive | 0.77 | 2.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | quality of the video-presentations is top! assignments and quizzes are fair | | Quality | of the video-presentations is top! assignments | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Excellent hands-on introduction to the Unity game engine, the development workflow and the many nuances of how these all work together for the artistic as well as the technical designers. I especially appreciate the instructor's careful attention to learner-centered demonstration, and for his respectful use of, as well as frequent nods to, Unity as a top notch engine for quality development. Packed with a great deal of information, and the demonstration of how to apply this knowledge, I would highly recommend this course to anyone who is wanting to break into interactive media development, or is wanting to broaden their methods and application knowledge in this area. | as a top notch engine for | Quality | development. Packed with a great deal | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Really good course. Very high quality teaching and lectures | Really good course. Very high | Quality | teaching and lectures | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Excellent video content and quality, engaging assignments and helpful resources. | Excellent video content and | Quality | engaging assignments and helpful resources. | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I really enjoyed the course so far. The explanation is great. The only downside is the video quality is not that great its not bad but it would be a lot better if it was better quality. Its very Blurry even in High quality. Although thats not a problem that did not stop me from enjoying the course. | The only downside is the video | Quality | is not that great its not | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I really enjoyed the course so far. The explanation is great. The only downside is the video quality is not that great its not bad but it would be a lot better if it was better quality. Its very Blurry even in High quality. Although thats not a problem that did not stop me from enjoying the course. | lot better if it was better | Quality | Its very Blurry even in High | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I really enjoyed the course so far. The explanation is great. The only downside is the video quality is not that great its not bad but it would be a lot better if it was better quality. Its very Blurry even in High quality. Although thats not a problem that did not stop me from enjoying the course. | Its very Blurry even in High | Quality | Although thats not a problem that | Positive | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| 2NMoRcgLEeSA1yIACye2oA | I love it very much, this is the first chinese course with high quality display. | the first chinese course with high | Quality | display. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Video quality is poor. The content is quite interesting, but while navigating, the quality of the video disturbs me. It would be better, if you can upgrade this. | Video | Quality | is poor. The content is quite | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Video quality is poor. The content is quite interesting, but while navigating, the quality of the video disturbs me. It would be better, if you can upgrade this. | quite interesting, but while navigating, the | Quality | of the video disturbs me. It | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 33tTdzylEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Thank you for the opportunity provided. I am happy about the quality of it and of the lecturer too. | provided. I am happy about the | Quality | of it and of the lecturer | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course content seemed to be rushed out, as a result, the quality is not as good as the first two. | rushed out, as a result, the | Quality | is not as good as the | Positive | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Extremely highlevel, quality of the material is significantly lower than in the previous courses. | Extremely highlevel, | Quality | of the material is significantly lower | Negative | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course provides an overview on classification methods in machine learning. The lectures are clear and easy to understand due to the quality of the slides and of the explanations. The limit of this course lies in the assignments: too easy if done with the provided notebooks and tools. Sometimes impossible to do with different tools (the suggested machine learning package is free for educational purposes, but otherwise it needs a license). | easy to understand due to the | Quality | of the slides and of the | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | This is one of the best music courses in Coursera. Jonathan Biss is not only one of the great players of our time, but also manages to simplify and deliver outstanding quality content for learners in any theroetical | manages to simplify and deliver outstanding | Quality | content for learners in any theroetical | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | -Made on 10/05/2016- Low quantity of information and resources. For the cost , is not even near to other moocs. Block the sending and sharing of activities, and unable the peer evaluation because of a required payment, really handicap the learning and the quality of the course. If I pay a Mooc, is becouse of a strong quality and substantial learning; this two lacking in this course. I can give you a list of other moocs around this and other subjects (film, writing, mat, entrepreneurship, photography...) for you to make relations and compare structures. Please revise this course, you have nice video edition and the teacher is good, and willing to teach, but the global course is missing several things. I encourage you to take my words. | really handicap the learning and the | Quality | of the course. If I pay | Negative | 0.65 | 3.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | -Made on 10/05/2016- Low quantity of information and resources. For the cost , is not even near to other moocs. Block the sending and sharing of activities, and unable the peer evaluation because of a required payment, really handicap the learning and the quality of the course. If I pay a Mooc, is becouse of a strong quality and substantial learning; this two lacking in this course. I can give you a list of other moocs around this and other subjects (film, writing, mat, entrepreneurship, photography...) for you to make relations and compare structures. Please revise this course, you have nice video edition and the teacher is good, and willing to teach, but the global course is missing several things. I encourage you to take my words. | Mooc, is becouse of a strong | Quality | and substantial learning; this two lacking | Positive | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | fabulous course with lot of do's and don'ts... and an inspirational guide and techniques for a startup writer or a beginer. course with its full content , quality and knowledge . | course with its full content , | Quality | and knowledge . | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 3TdKKA-VEeWhsgqB1eduww | updated , easy to understand and great professor combination all of those quality make this course one of the best courses i ever take it | great professor combination all of those | Quality | make this course one of the | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Great media support (video and Interact Book) with teacher's quality for explanations and course's structure | (video and Interact Book) with teacher's | Quality | for explanations and course's structure | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very good and perfect course for new comers. The lessons have been properly designed and needs to applauded. The English language and orator ship is good and fair in listening. The picture quality is also good. The examples given are fair. | and fair in listening. The picture | Quality | is also good. The examples given | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | the peer feedback is not working that well. the time range is very short and the rating quality varies, so resubmissions of assignments can mean you have to re-enroll for the following course and lose your cohort. | is very short and the rating | Quality | varies, so resubmissions of assignments can | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | An absolutely complete course that teaches about Luxury companies, but mainly about Fashion. There are 2 great teachers that gives contents, but also makes sudents think about future and trends. Cases and interviews are also great !! I got very impressed about quality of Albini Group. Its clearer for me definition luxury vs fashion, business models, differences, challenges and opportunities in Fashion companies. Thank you Bocconi ! | ! I got very impressed about | Quality | of Albini Group. Its clearer for | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Thought the course does not start very strong, it evolves into a very interesting place of compact knowledge for both the fashion and the luxury industry. For a professional, like myself, who already has a master's degree in the field of luxury and works within the industry, it is a great way to get remind of the theories and the knowledge behind the management, the how and the why luxury does things in its own unique way. It would be even better to add knowledge into more "exclusive" categories like cars or yachts. Yet, the structure of the course, the delivery, the case studies and the overall performance keep the attendee's attention. Personally, I started the course a bit hesitant, but managed to finish it within only a week because of the flow and quality of information. | week because of the flow and | Quality | of information. | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | excellent quality | excellent | Quality | | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | The quality of the content is very good. However, the content should be more detailed. Further, certain key subject-areas are missing such as the fashion calendar, quality control, merchandising, cool-hunting and forecasting, market research, event management, public relations management, retail operations in more detail, logistics, store operations etc. Overall, however, the course is a good overview about managing fashion and luxury companies. Moreover, interviews with CEOs and brand directors would make the course more interesting. | The | Quality | of the content is very good. | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | The quality of the content is very good. However, the content should be more detailed. Further, certain key subject-areas are missing such as the fashion calendar, quality control, merchandising, cool-hunting and forecasting, market research, event management, public relations management, retail operations in more detail, logistics, store operations etc. Overall, however, the course is a good overview about managing fashion and luxury companies. Moreover, interviews with CEOs and brand directors would make the course more interesting. | missing such as the fashion calendar, | Quality | control, merchandising, cool-hunting and forecasting, market | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good quality content and great instructor. I recommend it! It does not cover though a very important feature from angular: directives. | Good | Quality | content and great instructor. I recommend | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | good quality | good | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent course! All the material was relevant and the exerises were challenging without being impossible. Professor Muppala is a very entertaining instructor. All three courses in the specialization so far have exceeded expectations. The only remark so far is the subpar quality of the subtitles in this course. There were many mistakes in nearly every video. Other than that, great work! | remark so far is the subpar | Quality | of the subtitles in this course. | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| 5c9BeiTUEeW3AhKilvRZ0Q | through this course i was able to right effectively on some complex topics which was what i was hoping for. Thanks a lot to the instructor Tamy Chapman whose video lectures were excellent in content and quality. | lectures were excellent in content and | Quality | | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| 5epfT7cBEeScDCIAC9REiQ | Not adapted to an online format. Low quality videos. Interesting topics, but no efficient progression. Many sections become an update about UCSD research, not adapted to the audience. | adapted to an online format. Low | Quality | videos. Interesting topics, but no efficient | Negative | 0.91 | 1.0 |
| 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 ! | chewing up my data, but the | Quality | is so poor you can't always | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | great material and video quality, love it. | great material and video | Quality | love it. | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Not the expected quality | Not the expected | Quality | | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| 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. | based on impressions after module 1: | Quality | of lectures: just dry material from | Negative | 0.87 | 2.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | A very good intro into the process behind creating higher quality game rules and storylines. Also a lot of fun to watch. Definitely a good course for | into the process behind creating higher | Quality | game rules and storylines. Also a | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | This was a great course! Well put-together in terms of material, well made in terms of video quality (editing, etc.), and well laid out in terms of pacing. The homework assignments were fun and pushed you every week to change something about your simple paper game. A+ | well made in terms of video | Quality | (editing, etc. ), and well laid | Positive | 0.88 | 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. :) | Quizes would be nice too. The | Quality | of the course is very high. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | The course is quite interesting, but I have not given it a 5 star because the quality of some videos is very poor. | it a 5 star because the | Quality | of some videos is very poor. | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 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. | run through the course as a | Quality | control. One of the quizzes has | Positive | 0.79 | 2.0 |
| 6GKIgtwaEeWbigpIjeBbbQ | Fantastic course with humor knowledge learning journey~ Fully accepted this teaching model with lots of interaction and high quality post course exam. | with lots of interaction and high | Quality | post course exam. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Thank you to the instructors and the university! A very interesting course that not only focuses on the content and quality of Scandinavian TV and movie productions but also on the broader (institutional and cultural) framework in which they are produced. I would have rated it 4.5 starts if possible, but as halves are not possible I give it 4. Possible improvements: -the delivery of the course can be a bit livier, smoother; some instructors seem a bit at unease with this format -while an interest in Scandinavian movies and TV series is an implicit prerequisite for a course like this, sometimes simply mentioning 'lists' of directors, movies, series you might never have heard of can make it a bit overwhelming, hard to relate to -students' engagement could be enhanced with more interactive assignments | only focuses on the content and | Quality | of Scandinavian TV and movie productions | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | One of the best coursers I have seen on Coursera so far. The video production quality, course structure and content is extra ordinary compared to other courses that I've seen so far. | Coursera so far. The video production | Quality | course structure and content is extra | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Thanks a lot for all the instructors and the team behind this course. The content quality reminds me of some agile principles. Simplicity of the words, the illustrations, the examples Feedback from students through the discussions Technical excellence and good design Welcoming change (I've witnessed commitments of the team to improve some points in the content) I'm thrilled to go on and look at the next courses I say Bravo ! Smail | team behind this course. The content | Quality | reminds me of some agile principles. | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Great course, now i have a really clear idea about the many choices in processes to make a better software in a quality and timely manner. I´m enjoying so much this specialization, Thanks! | make a better software in a | Quality | and timely manner. I´m enjoying so | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Good introduction to many core concepts. Overall video and presentation quality are quite good. The course is not particularly challenging, so if you are concerned with time requirements, I don't think you need to worry. | core concepts. Overall video and presentation | Quality | are quite good. The course is | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Good course! Excellent to reinforce my knowledge on scrum, xp and agile. In the end however I think that the content was somehow repetitive, but this not change the quality of the course. | repetitive, but this not change the | Quality | of the course. | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | It is no surprise that a course that emphasises quality is of the utmost quality. An enjoyable and valuable learning experience. | surprise that a course that emphasises | Quality | is of the utmost quality. An | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | It is no surprise that a course that emphasises quality is of the utmost quality. An enjoyable and valuable learning experience. | emphasises quality is of the utmost | Quality | An enjoyable and valuable learning experience. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | This course is excellent, the content is rich, the videos are amusing and helpful, the interviews are just great. Thank you so much for such a high quality course! | so much for such a high | Quality | course! | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 6r0j3li_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Awesome quite demanding but I guess quality standarts are intertwined... Great! | Awesome quite demanding but I guess | Quality | standarts are intertwined. . . Great! | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 76FVnKNaEeWHXAr1OpR7HQ | The course is very cheap. However, training material has poor quality. | cheap. However, training material has poor | Quality | | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good introduction to Python, it gets you into the mindset of programming and combining syntax to do something useful. The videos could be more to the point and better quality though. | more to the point and better | Quality | though. | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Comprehensive coverage of the basics and great for getting started with python for beginners.Includes interactive sessions of great quality which helps for better understanding. | beginners. Includes interactive sessions of great | Quality | which helps for better understanding. | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | very good lectures and even fun. the tool is extremely useful. more feedback and assistance would generally improve the quality | and assistance would generally improve the | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excelent course! Excelent professor, great pedagogical methods used, a very accesible language and very good quality information. And the book is awesome! Thanks for uploading it. | very accesible language and very good | Quality | information. And the book is awesome! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Prof. Severance is a fantastic teacher. I'm so happy to see people like him committed to good quality learning for everyone. I got the print version of the book, which helped me go though the course more easily. | people like him committed to good | Quality | learning for everyone. I got the | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really appreciate and enjoy this high quality classes. I have learned a lot in python programming through this class. | really appreciate and enjoy this high | Quality | classes. I have learned a lot | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is exceptional that comes with quality lecture materials as well as easy and understandable explanation for all level of learners. | course is exceptional that comes with | Quality | lecture materials as well as easy | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very good one... want to have this quality more :D | . . want to have this | Quality | more :D | Negative | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I though that this was a very good beginner course to programming. I have had a introductory course for C programming and it was similar. The quality was good and it had many good ways to reinforce the concepts. Although some of the beginning classes were very basic I still learning some concepts that I did not know. | programming and it was similar. The | Quality | was good and it had many | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great lessons. Appreciate the efforts taken by Professor to gather the data and create a learning material of such high quality. | a learning material of such high | Quality | | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The content inside this course is well tought through. Questions and asignments holds high quality. If you haven't been in contact with Python before, this might be the first step for you, and when I say first step, then I really mean first step. | through. Questions and asignments holds high | Quality | If you haven't been in contact | Positive | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | it was a great course. Mr. Chuck, knows how to teach quality material to the masses. i would only suggest that on the programming assignments, it would be best if the instructor doesn't write half of the code. one reason is that having some of the code written would make that student think that the piece of code provided must be a part of the whole code. and as i worked on the programming assignments i realized that much of the code provided wasn't needed, in fact it took me longer than necessary to solve the assignments because i kept using the code provided, and upon solving the assignment none of the code that was provided was a part of the code i wrote. .... on to the next course. Data Structure. thank you coursera and UM. | Mr. Chuck, knows how to teach | Quality | material to the masses. i would | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good quality course given by a pedagogic and charismatic teacher! It is too easy for someone who already knows another coding language, but I understand that it is intended for beginners. | Good | Quality | course given by a pedagogic and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr. Chuck really made me feel enthused and confident throughout this course. Quality of the teaching material is also very high and lectures are interesting, engaging and clear. | enthused and confident throughout this course. | Quality | of the teaching material is also | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The quality of the content is excellent and is presented clearly (although the lecturer drinking various things throughout the lectures was odd...). I plowed through all seven weeks in a day because I had already finished the first three weeks of the Rice University Python course (also on Coursera); I would say this entire course is nearly equivalent to the first three weeks of the Rice course. My reasons for doing this are two-fold: (1) practice, practice, practice, and (2) I plan to take all four courses in this series from U Mich - I am interested in the web and database aspects that do not seem to be covered in the Rice course. I did learn a thing or two from each course that was not presented in the other, but those points were relatively minor and would probably be stumbled across on a future troubleshooting visit to stackoverflow. | The | Quality | of the content is excellent and | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 7jEat7ioEeWfYA612mWHZw | The audio quality of a lot of the lectures are quite bad. A number of the slides seem to be un-organised at times, with repeating information, making them confusing. While all the information seems to be presented, it feels like it could be done better with more time spent preparing and recording the videos. | The audio | Quality | of a lot of the lectures | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 7t9y531dEeWKYwric11Hpw | the quality of this course is very low, and the content are not interesting and useful at all. | the | Quality | of this course is very low, | Negative | 0.73 | 1.0 |
| 7t9y531dEeWKYwric11Hpw | This is a very great program full of important and accurate information! Congratulations! I find it very complete inside its category. It's pretty interesting since the first moment you watch the first video lecture. Good design and presentation of the program. In other words: beautiful! Thanks. Keep bringing quality! | other words: beautiful! Thanks. Keep bringing | Quality | | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 7vasMEd_EeW8cBKtDAegYw | Top quality lectures, so far.... | Top | Quality | lectures, so far. . . . | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 82sYmnQ8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Very good audio and video quality. Explanations are very understandable and given with a lot of examples. Summaries and connections between the different content parts are provided regularly. | Very good audio and video | Quality | Explanations are very understandable and given | Positive | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| 84pGjiPgEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Very interesting and high quality course. | Very interesting and high | Quality | course. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 84pGjiPgEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Very well put together, high video production quality, excellent use of supporting materials. Great Information, relevant contributions from interviewed members. | well put together, high video production | Quality | excellent use of supporting materials. Great | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 8cCaMoJkEeWXJRLCDq5sWw | Professor Asher Susser is wonderful! It is amazing to have the opportunity to study such high quality classes. Thank you very much and best wishes from Brazil! :) | the opportunity to study such high | Quality | classes. Thank you very much and | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | I really like the content of this course and the quality of the readings. The videos are intuitive and help you go through the most important concepts. I definitely recommend it! And big thank you to the teachers that delivered high standard course! | content of this course and the | Quality | of the readings. The videos are | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | Very good MOOC ; clear and quick with high quality contents and lessons. Thanks | ; clear and quick with high | Quality | contents and lessons. Thanks | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | Quality done! | | Quality | done! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Very short. Quality of the course is OK. | Very short. | Quality | of the course is OK. | Negative | 0.77 | 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. | Tools, or any other really good | Quality | AV digital editor the result is | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 8om3I-4LEeSbxyIACw0OOQ | Great quality teaching and challenging homework. Much appreciated. Hoping for the Part B, and C to be on coursera soon. | Great | Quality | teaching and challenging homework. Much appreciated. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 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 | until they had acceptable and balanced | Quality | A minor thing, I would like | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 8To4DTVtEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Without a doubt the worst course I have ever taken anywhere. When the instructor, who is supposed to be teaching you how to write iOS apps, takes (no exaggeration) SIX minutes to even figure out how to open XCode, you know you're in for a rocky ride. Still, I stuck with it for three more weeks. To my horror, the course only got worse from there. This course was clearly thrown together with a minimum of effort by someone who is not qualified to teach the subject. It's an insult to Coursera customers, and a major failure of quality control. | customers, and a major failure of | Quality | control. | Negative | 0.66 | 1.0 |
| 8To4DTVtEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The material and videos are so poor, and low quality, I am happy to not have bought this course | videos are so poor, and low | Quality | I am happy to not have | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 8To4DTVtEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Really good information, good quality presentation. The working examples are well chosen and fun to work along with. Thank you! | Really good information, good | Quality | presentation. The working examples are well | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | Fantastic! A well presented course filled with high quality information from leading experts in the field. | well presented course filled with high | Quality | information from leading experts in the | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | Great subject and some very well presented videos. However there were several which were incomprehensible. Either because of the quality of the video or the very heavy accent of the speaker especially to a non-American viewer. One doesn't always want to read a transcript but to listen and concentrate. If all the videos had been of good listenable quality I would have given the course 5 stars | were incomprehensible. Either because of the | Quality | of the video or the very | Negative | 0.94 | 3.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | Great subject and some very well presented videos. However there were several which were incomprehensible. Either because of the quality of the video or the very heavy accent of the speaker especially to a non-American viewer. One doesn't always want to read a transcript but to listen and concentrate. If all the videos had been of good listenable quality I would have given the course 5 stars | videos had been of good listenable | Quality | I would have given the course | Negative | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | "Gut Check: Exploring Your Microbiome" is a fabulously informative course that contains a significant amount of pertinent information presented in a well-paced, user-friendly manner. The class offers high quality ancillary resources for further research on the topic in the forms of interviews, journal articles, books and website links. I would recommend this course to anyone who might have an interest in the gut microbiome, whether it be for personal reasons or for academic research as it provides a solid foundation for future studies in this arena. | user-friendly manner. The class offers high | Quality | ancillary resources for further research on | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 9a6pC3gcEeWxvQr3acyajw | A really thorough course into making characters. I personally think that I have leaped further, in the quality of my writing. Recommend it to anyone willing to spend time to work on their writing. | I have leaped further, in the | Quality | of my writing. Recommend it to | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 9D3LWblUEeWbNBLZhfEI2Q | Before I enrolled in this course, I had heard a lot about Prof. McGready's teaching skills. After having taken Statistical Reasoning for Public Health 1, I must say how fortunate I was of having had him as an online instructor. I firmly believe he really cares about your learning process and finds the easier way to explain difficult concepts without losing quality in education. Awesome experience! | to explain difficult concepts without losing | Quality | in education. Awesome experience! | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | The Course is really good. The presentation is intense and clearly structured. I would specifically emphasize the quality of the required and recommended reading lists. | structured. I would specifically emphasize the | Quality | of the required and recommended reading | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Very interesting course. I found the reading material sources particularly relevant without exceeding unnecessary in quantity and issues. Professor Edwin Bakker didactic approach is especially suitable to my ideal concept of how a teacher should communicate with his/her audience. Together with Moral Foundations of Politics held by Professor Ian Shapiro, I would rate these two the most attractive and expectations matching courses I've ever come across online. Thanks to Coursera, Leiden University and all the people who makes this miracle of quality online teaching for free ever possible. Stefano | people who makes this miracle of | Quality | online teaching for free ever possible. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Excellent course. Organized and with teaching materials of good quality. | and with teaching materials of good | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | An extremely informative and well designed course, I had a wonderful experience learning from Prof. dr. Bakker, his team and colleagues and all the guest scholars who gave their valuable time to this course. I think this curse is a shining example of the wonderful novelty of coursera in providing quality education to people literally across the globe! It's been a pleasure doing this course and I recommend it to all my friends interested in this field and look forward to working on many other courses in the future! | wonderful novelty of coursera in providing | Quality | education to people literally across the | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | The quality and quantity of the material provided are simply outstanding. “Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Comparing Theory and Practice” is first and foremost a well-structured course built upon solid academic standards. I would recommend it even to those who already have knowledge in this field because most certainly there will be something that you did not know. Excellent course! | The | Quality | and quantity of the material provided | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | It is a great theme, but at many points the course focuses on "who said what", regarding authors and papers, and emphasizes this type of question throughout all the tests. I think a longer course where these statements and papers could be properly discussed and explained would easily be a 5-star rating. The instructor clearly knows a lot on the subject and the material is top quality. | subject and the material is top | Quality | | Positive | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Poor quality videos make the course less appealing and make it seems to be unprofessional | Poor | Quality | videos make the course less appealing | Negative | 0.91 | 1.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Terrible...can't believe how a quality the course is. Embarrassing. | . . can't believe how a | Quality | the course is. Embarrassing. | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | (I posted this review in a blog [https://guhyasamajacenter.wordpress.com/2015/10/03/review-of-the-free-coursera-tibetan-buddhist-meditation-and-the-modern-world-lesser-vehicle-course-given-by-uva/]. Much of the courseware was outstanding. Many of the videos were so poorly done (boring) that I couldn't watch them. (I do not watch people read prepared text in a video. Ever.) ----------- From the blog ---------------------------------- I recently took the FREE Coursera course, "Tibetan Buddhist Meditation and the Modern World". (https://www.coursera.org/learn/buddhist-meditation) From the course catalog: " Tibetan Buddhist Meditation and the Modern World explores the immense variety of meditation practices past and present. We present their histories, their philosophical underpinnings, their transformations in the modern global world, and we give you a chance to reflect upon meditation practices through secular contemplations designed just for this course." (Note: In the class overview, it is noted that the term "Lesser Vehicle" is "perjorative" but they use it anyway. ??") There are many FREE reasons to take this FREE "Lesser Vehicle" course (the first of four): #1 - An awesome, wonderful hour-long interview with Sharon Salzberg, one of the founders of the Insight Meditation Society. What an awesome lady. I was not aware that she is also a Dzogchen student. (Did I mention it was FREE?) Worth signing up for the course just to skip to Week 6 to watch this interview. #2 - Guided Meditations by Dr. Anne Klein and Anam Thubten. Very, very, very nice. FREE, it's ALL FREE. #3 - The Science of Mindfulness against the Background of the Scientific Study of Meditation videos with Dr. Clifford Saron, neuroscientist. His videos start in Week 1 and continue through Week 6 in building a basis for understanding the scientific research on meditation. He (and the course) demonstrates what can and cannot (presently) be scientifically proven about meditation. One excellent example: Two trained pianists were told to learn a complicated piece of music, one with the piano, and the other only in his imagination. After 2 weeks (I think) of practice, their brains' MRI patterns exhibited almost the exact same changes. Dr. Saron noted that the results are not definitive but still may have implications for the compassion/bodhicitta meditations we do. #4: An interview on "Buddhist Modernism", with David McMahan. Very much academic-oriented. One statement, in particular, struck me since, the more I think about it, the more I think it might be true: "The Buddhist Tantra teachings are not accepted nor are they popular in the West." For all the Buddhist monastics that visit the USA and the West to grab donations and go back to their home countries, few of them are sticking around to teach complete Tantra classes. The few that do (and do it well) are having a hard time making ends meet. (That's just my opinion, I guess.) There are also short 5-10 minute interviews with Khenpo Tsultrim Lodro (a short "snapshot" of the Tibetan take on the week's particular subject, which was often better (to me) than the 90min-long "talking head" version ) and Ven. Tsoknyi Rinpoche ("How does Buddhism change in a New Culture" and "Benefits and Dangers of Secularing Buddhism", the TB rebuttal, as it were. He did note that motivation is the key. Bad agenda = bad results, good motivation will cause good results.) Have I noted the course is FREE? So you can take the course, and the following courses, without doing any of the assignments/quizzes. Watch (or download) any video or transcript to your heart's content whenever you wish in any order you wish. (That assumes the courses are not taken off-line at a future date.) Further in the course description is a blurb that may point to at least 3 future courses in "Mahāyāna, …Vajrayāna, …and a fourth vehicle, which is explicit in many Tibetan materials, though no standard term ever emerged that was accepted by all sectarian traditions - we will thus term it as the “Natural Vehicle” or “Post Tantra”." If the quality of guided meditations (GM) in following classes are even half the quality of this course's GM's, then that's all the reason I need to continue the future classes, too. Course gotchas: #1. That said (other shoe dropping here), the other half of the course was videos of people reading their prepared academic papers, in monotone or semi-monotone voices. (Transcripts are available. I figure I can read a paper in 5% of the time someone else reads it to me in a video. Ugh.) However, they would probably need the voice of Morgan Freeman, James Earl Jones, B. Cumberbatch or James Spader to keep me awake. To be fair, the content is golden, although the papers seems to be geared to the academic community, rather than the student community. Books and Videos on these subjects are all over Amazon, YouTube, FPMT, Dharma-Documentaries, etc. #2. The Sharon Salzberg (SS), in her interview, brought up an excellent point. She noted that she and a noted clinical psychology (CP) scientist (researcher) (whose name I have forgotten) were at a conference where the issue on the table was that someone was having trouble with "loving kindness" meditation as a first meditation class. SS noted that she would instantly recommend the student change to "calm abiding" meditation whereas the CP could not change that student's meditation technique to another technique (such as calm abiding) as her research findings would then be invalid. Similarly, many of the non-Buddhist guided meditations that I viewed in this course felt like a physical education or "How To" class. Do this. Do that. It did not feel as though they lived the material, just taught it. (Whereas it was patently obvious Dr. Klein & Anam Thubten were definitely "walking the walk", so to speak, so were able to speak from the heart.) Interviews I did not watch, that may be of great interest to others, include meditation in the school system by Tish Jennings, meditation in the Business Community (an interview with David Mick), the Burmese meditation tradition in an interview with Erik Braun, the MBSR (Meditation Based Stress Reduction) with Susan Bauer-Wu, and meditation in the legal community with Rhonda Magee. And all that is just the first course. Many of it's "failings" may just be my karmic opinions. The course is worth checking out and watching/reading/meditating on those parts that interest you. In that respect, the breadth of the course content is quite nice and so well done. Grade: B-. | or “Post Tantra”. " If the | Quality | of guided meditations (GM) in following | Negative | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | (I posted this review in a blog [https://guhyasamajacenter.wordpress.com/2015/10/03/review-of-the-free-coursera-tibetan-buddhist-meditation-and-the-modern-world-lesser-vehicle-course-given-by-uva/]. Much of the courseware was outstanding. Many of the videos were so poorly done (boring) that I couldn't watch them. (I do not watch people read prepared text in a video. Ever.) ----------- From the blog ---------------------------------- I recently took the FREE Coursera course, "Tibetan Buddhist Meditation and the Modern World". (https://www.coursera.org/learn/buddhist-meditation) From the course catalog: " Tibetan Buddhist Meditation and the Modern World explores the immense variety of meditation practices past and present. We present their histories, their philosophical underpinnings, their transformations in the modern global world, and we give you a chance to reflect upon meditation practices through secular contemplations designed just for this course." (Note: In the class overview, it is noted that the term "Lesser Vehicle" is "perjorative" but they use it anyway. ??") There are many FREE reasons to take this FREE "Lesser Vehicle" course (the first of four): #1 - An awesome, wonderful hour-long interview with Sharon Salzberg, one of the founders of the Insight Meditation Society. What an awesome lady. I was not aware that she is also a Dzogchen student. (Did I mention it was FREE?) Worth signing up for the course just to skip to Week 6 to watch this interview. #2 - Guided Meditations by Dr. Anne Klein and Anam Thubten. Very, very, very nice. FREE, it's ALL FREE. #3 - The Science of Mindfulness against the Background of the Scientific Study of Meditation videos with Dr. Clifford Saron, neuroscientist. His videos start in Week 1 and continue through Week 6 in building a basis for understanding the scientific research on meditation. He (and the course) demonstrates what can and cannot (presently) be scientifically proven about meditation. One excellent example: Two trained pianists were told to learn a complicated piece of music, one with the piano, and the other only in his imagination. After 2 weeks (I think) of practice, their brains' MRI patterns exhibited almost the exact same changes. Dr. Saron noted that the results are not definitive but still may have implications for the compassion/bodhicitta meditations we do. #4: An interview on "Buddhist Modernism", with David McMahan. Very much academic-oriented. One statement, in particular, struck me since, the more I think about it, the more I think it might be true: "The Buddhist Tantra teachings are not accepted nor are they popular in the West." For all the Buddhist monastics that visit the USA and the West to grab donations and go back to their home countries, few of them are sticking around to teach complete Tantra classes. The few that do (and do it well) are having a hard time making ends meet. (That's just my opinion, I guess.) There are also short 5-10 minute interviews with Khenpo Tsultrim Lodro (a short "snapshot" of the Tibetan take on the week's particular subject, which was often better (to me) than the 90min-long "talking head" version ) and Ven. Tsoknyi Rinpoche ("How does Buddhism change in a New Culture" and "Benefits and Dangers of Secularing Buddhism", the TB rebuttal, as it were. He did note that motivation is the key. Bad agenda = bad results, good motivation will cause good results.) Have I noted the course is FREE? So you can take the course, and the following courses, without doing any of the assignments/quizzes. Watch (or download) any video or transcript to your heart's content whenever you wish in any order you wish. (That assumes the courses are not taken off-line at a future date.) Further in the course description is a blurb that may point to at least 3 future courses in "Mahāyāna, …Vajrayāna, …and a fourth vehicle, which is explicit in many Tibetan materials, though no standard term ever emerged that was accepted by all sectarian traditions - we will thus term it as the “Natural Vehicle” or “Post Tantra”." If the quality of guided meditations (GM) in following classes are even half the quality of this course's GM's, then that's all the reason I need to continue the future classes, too. Course gotchas: #1. That said (other shoe dropping here), the other half of the course was videos of people reading their prepared academic papers, in monotone or semi-monotone voices. (Transcripts are available. I figure I can read a paper in 5% of the time someone else reads it to me in a video. Ugh.) However, they would probably need the voice of Morgan Freeman, James Earl Jones, B. Cumberbatch or James Spader to keep me awake. To be fair, the content is golden, although the papers seems to be geared to the academic community, rather than the student community. Books and Videos on these subjects are all over Amazon, YouTube, FPMT, Dharma-Documentaries, etc. #2. The Sharon Salzberg (SS), in her interview, brought up an excellent point. She noted that she and a noted clinical psychology (CP) scientist (researcher) (whose name I have forgotten) were at a conference where the issue on the table was that someone was having trouble with "loving kindness" meditation as a first meditation class. SS noted that she would instantly recommend the student change to "calm abiding" meditation whereas the CP could not change that student's meditation technique to another technique (such as calm abiding) as her research findings would then be invalid. Similarly, many of the non-Buddhist guided meditations that I viewed in this course felt like a physical education or "How To" class. Do this. Do that. It did not feel as though they lived the material, just taught it. (Whereas it was patently obvious Dr. Klein & Anam Thubten were definitely "walking the walk", so to speak, so were able to speak from the heart.) Interviews I did not watch, that may be of great interest to others, include meditation in the school system by Tish Jennings, meditation in the Business Community (an interview with David Mick), the Burmese meditation tradition in an interview with Erik Braun, the MBSR (Meditation Based Stress Reduction) with Susan Bauer-Wu, and meditation in the legal community with Rhonda Magee. And all that is just the first course. Many of it's "failings" may just be my karmic opinions. The course is worth checking out and watching/reading/meditating on those parts that interest you. In that respect, the breadth of the course content is quite nice and so well done. Grade: B-. | following classes are even half the | Quality | of this course's GM's, then that's | Negative | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This was the first MOOC I ever signed for and I wasn't disappointed. Far more complex, detailed and demanding than I had expected.... which suited me perfectly. Although brilliantly researched and scripted, Professor Germano's detailed input is spoiled by his unecessarily academic style. I found that his tendency to accumulate endless lists of adjectives had an unfortunate hypnotic effect. I very much like the material presented by Kurtis Schaeffer, especially his contribution on the development of Buddhism in the US. His interviews were well-conducted and his remarks always to the point. Interesting - and again complex material from Clifford Saron who managed to caputre the attention of my rather non-scientific brain. Very well presented material and a pleasure to listen to him. The input from the Tibetan participants was more accessible to non-specialists, straight to the point and very refreshing. The work done by the meditators was brilliant and probably what I had been looking for when I registered for the course. I feel that I now know just enough to pursue the practices on my own. It all feels very new, a little bit scary, quite exhilarating and luminous. Some of the interviews were more interesting than others but they all contributed to broaden the scope of the course. I only give 4/5 to the MOOC because of the poor quality of the subtitles. Not being a native speaker and not used to hear American English, I had to rely on them. They were so bad that, at times, what was written was exactly the contrary to what was being said. Hardly any proper names or foreign words were spelt correctly either. Beware ! The course has introduced me to a new world and I will definitely pursue my new-born interest in Tibetan Buddhist Meditation. I will also sign up for more MOOCs in the future. Overall an extremely positive experience indeed. I am looking forward to seing you again for the 'Greater Vehicle'. | the MOOC because of the poor | Quality | of the subtitles. Not being a | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | excellent quality of study material | excellent | Quality | of study material | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Very good introduction to philosophy. The amount of work and care that was used to create this course is clearly visible in the videos with the speakers, backgrounds, video and sound quality. Thanks very much! | the speakers, backgrounds, video and sound | Quality | Thanks very much! | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 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. | found it to be of high | Quality | and worthy of my investment to | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Very good course, Offers insights from various domains of Philosophy, which one doesn't go in usually. And ends up discovering that there are in fact various ways to look at this subject which is an essential tool for living and constant improving our quality of life. The University of Edinburgh has structured this course well, and the faculties, bright and deep in their domains makes you understand the contents more easily then they are. Thank you. | for living and constant improving our | Quality | of life. The University of Edinburgh | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Great course to introduce non-professionals/beginners into major fields or topics of philosophy. Excellent quality of lessons: teachers were always good to understand, even for non-native speakers, and eager to get across main themes to disciples inexperienced in philosophical studies. Only critique: difficulty levels of exams could have been more evenly balanced. I can only recommend this course to anyone interested in the study of philosophy; great job by the University of Edinburgh and its staff for organizing this on Coursera. | fields or topics of philosophy. Excellent | Quality | of lessons: teachers were always good | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | I found this course very effective, i liked it very much. it provides an overview of all the major topics of Software Security and more important, gives the knowledge and tools to dive deeply into it by yourself using several grate things this course provides: Reading recommendations before each lesson, VM projects and interesting interviews with experts on each field. The homework were challenging enough and covered pretty much all the topics, and the videos were in high quality and well organized. I strongly recommend this course to any Software developer | and the videos were in high | Quality | and well organized. I strongly recommend | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I again found many of the lectures to be difficult to follow along, there seems to be lots of different styles of videos in the way that the person was superimposed on the slides. In fact it was often impossible to read the text in the slide due to the size of the presenters head which obscured the text. Honestly this data science course is getting worse as the months progress, you really should think of updating the content of the course if you want to continue to charge money for it. 2 stars as I did actually learn something despite the quality of the material and its delivery. | did actually learn something despite the | Quality | of the material and its delivery. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I was really disappointed with this course. I took the other courses from Brian Caffo and truly enjoyed them. For the previous courses, I've always used the books and they helped me tremendously to be able to comprehend the material. There is a book for Regression Models but but it's a real mess. It feels like a draft that no one cared to take a second look. There is a bunch of wrong code and typos. The explanation doesn't go as far as it should. I had to resort to many different sources just to be able to get by the course. I hope the instructors review this course soon because it does not have the same quality as others. If they don't review it, don't bother paying for it. Try learning Regression Models elsewhere. | it does not have the same | Quality | as others. If they don't review | Negative | 0.78 | 1.0 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | Excellent Course. Quality classes. | Excellent Course. | Quality | classes. | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| bIkXsq9HEeSmzyIAC0yFng | Program demystifies the evolving world of CIOs in a typical global corporation. Coverage being introductory familiarizes participants nicely through some of the nuances & emerging trends. When I took the course participant numbers was fewer, so feedback was quite delayed. So one should plan to be patient to get their peer reviews. Based on peer reviews i sensed much variations in their expectations. Few sections are in French with Subtitles. Subtitle quality requires audit/review. | are in French with Subtitles. Subtitle | Quality | requires audit/review. | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| BJXF0TLTEeSasiIACxClrQ | This course is really, well, introductory. While the material presented is interesting, the lectures can be quite dull at times - especially later on in the course when substantial time is spent plugging numbers into the same expressions 3 or 4 times. Beginners will probably be better off reading a wikipedia article or any general chemistry textbook. For the others, setting the playback speed to 1.50 improves the quality of the course a lot. | speed to 1. 50 improves the | Quality | of the course a lot. | Positive | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| BK2bam0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | If you are not sure if your email will sound good to the reader this course is the quickest way to improve your writing skills. It is simple, objective, practical and the lecture videos are of high quality. | the lecture videos are of high | Quality | | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | Undoubtedly one of the best if not the best MOOCs. Period. Has set a very high bench mark as it what a management course should be and how the pedagogy for the development of MOOCs in general. Ofcourse the quality of some of the vi | of MOOCs in general. Ofcourse the | Quality | of some of the vi | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| BPkiQyWcEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Excellent coverage. The assignments are good and the quality of the video is gret | The assignments are good and the | Quality | of the video is gret | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Enjoyable and informative. The assignments were workable, though they were not always super-well coordinated with the course material. The in-lecture exercises are of uneven quality. The course material is obviously spliced together from other sources in places. All this notwithstanding, the lectures are interesting, and the exercises help a lot to cement in the concepts. As an experienced programmer, but a newcomer to functional techniques, this was satisfying. I'm aware that the other courses in this sequence suffer from similar issues to what I outlined, but I'm moving ahead anyway. | The in-lecture exercises are of uneven | Quality | The course material is obviously spliced | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Great course and very helpful. The following details prevent me from giving it a 5 stars review: * the explanation of the tools to use during the course is very messy. It may discourage people that are less used to work their way around searching working tools. * The audio of the videos sometimes loses A LOT of quality. * For me it seemed like all the assignments were on spot with the balance between theory and standalone thinking. However, I really noticed the jump of time invested for the last assignment. I think the course would highly benefit from having an assignment on Week 5, instead of having that pause in between. Anyway, the course was greatly structured and interesting. Can't wait to go on with the whole specialization! | videos sometimes loses A LOT of | Quality | * For me it seemed like | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 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. 🕷 | delivered (well, except maybe the audio | Quality | at times), and challenging just enough | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | The assignments in particular were of very high quality and interesting. I liked the academic approach to teaching. | in particular were of very high | Quality | and interesting. I liked the academic | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| BuO0neR5EeWYOBIRup69HQ | So far I've gone through the first week. Lots of business and technical info. The video quality is AMAZING!! | business and technical info. The video | Quality | is AMAZING! ! | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Aside form the sound quality issues during certain sections, the quality of this course is excellent! | Aside form the sound | Quality | issues during certain sections, the quality | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Aside form the sound quality issues during certain sections, the quality of this course is excellent! | quality issues during certain sections, the | Quality | of this course is excellent! | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| c8dPVxUQEeWpKw4zIcjkHw | The quality of videos was pretty poor. The question and answer format of discussion was not a great idea (might have been great for kids videos). Doesn't enthuse us to continue the course. Thanks however for putting the effort and making this available to everyone for free. Really appreciate that. | The | Quality | of videos was pretty poor. The | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Reviewing process is quite slow, thus you have to wait until someone review your assignment and grade it, even if you complete this course in just 1 week but you can't pursue certificate in just 1 week because review of assignment 3-4 days minimum for each one. Coursera should improve that problem, but overall teaching quality was great. | improve that problem, but overall teaching | Quality | was great. | Positive | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Good quality information, excellent instructor. | Good | Quality | information, excellent instructor. | Positive | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | I thought the content was great, but I thought the assignments were too onerous. I did the first one, but I didn't feel like I learned from it and peer feedback was very slow. I looked at the other assignments, but I thought they only asked me to put to paper things I was already thinking about anyway. Given the untimely and low quality of peer feedback on the first assignment, I didn't feel like I'd learn anything from completing and submitting any assignments. I refuse to buy a webcam for Coursera (I have a phone with that capability but the Coursera app doesn't support it for identity verification), so I can't get a certification anyway. I thought the content was interesting, but too basic to pay for. The major value I see in the certification path is extensive feedback on the capstone project, as I thought peer feedback came too late and wasn't extensive enough to be valuable. I do think the instructor does a good job of presenting the content | anyway. Given the untimely and low | Quality | of peer feedback on the first | Negative | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Very well presented material, good production quality. A tad bit sparse on details, but I guess that is apt for an Intro level course. | Very well presented material, good production | Quality | A tad bit sparse on details, | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | I thought the material was presented at an overly high level and was not particularly useful, particularly in the second half of the course. Add more detail. Furthermore, the presentation style of the professor is not engaging, nor does he address interesting archetypes or examples in his lectures. The early material was fine but again presentation could be dramatically improved. Lastly, the assignments were rather interesting early on but once again quality decreased as the course progressed. | interesting early on but once again | Quality | decreased as the course progressed. | Positive | 0.86 | 2.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very well made course. The pace and sound quality of the course is excellent. | made course. The pace and sound | Quality | of the course is excellent. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | High quality didactic teaching. | High | Quality | didactic teaching. | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | is excellent way of learn English . i really learn so many grammar and improve my English. i need your one advise. how i improve my reading skills. and improve my speaking quality. i hope you give me advise. thank you . | reading skills. and improve my speaking | Quality | i hope you give me advise. | Negative | 0.94 | 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! | coach. Please keep delivering and developing | Quality | education. I express my sincere and | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | For the eager student maybe some more resources should have been shared. I was hoping to learn some production quality environment basics e.g. the ideal editor, best practices etc. That said- I really liked how the 3 components, css, js and html were stitched together to help understand interactive webpages using js. | was hoping to learn some production | Quality | environment basics e. g. the ideal | Negative | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| 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 | It was an amazing Course. High | Quality | videos, good practice quiz and interesting | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| d1D5SCmGEeWEOhKP8F7imw | The quality of the slides, and the notes written on them were fantastic. It was a great experience. Looking forward to the capstone project. | The | Quality | of the slides, and the notes | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d1D5SCmGEeWEOhKP8F7imw | The quality of the lectures is very good but the material of the course has some little deficiencies, at least compared to the previous courses of the specialization: -Some slides are not completed. Dr. Khurram Afridi completes these slides in the lecture, but there are not the slides with the final result. I had to take screen captures to save this final result. -Subtitles impede to watch correctly the video when explaining in the subtitles area. I had to switch off the subtitles to be able to watch the video correctly. -I missed the pdfs of the homework assignments. I like to work on them off line, so I had to enter into the assignments to be able to see them. -I also missed the questions alternated during the videos as in previous courses. For these reasons I only give 4 stars instead of 5. | The | Quality | of the lectures is very good | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course is excellent. The teachers, the content, the duration, all is premium quality | content, the duration, all is premium | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | This class probably isn't as good as the previous two--but those had such high quality, they're hard to compete with. Overall, I continued to become a bit more comfortable with java and learned some things that might help me with my data science potential in the future! | previous two--but those had such high | Quality | they're hard to compete with. Overall, | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Love the succinct quality of the videos. The information was clear, and the assignments easy to follow. I learned a lot, and felt supported by the community. I felt a bit rushed for some assignments, specially the rapid prototyping one. Better understanding of the time that would take me to conceptualize and draw was needed (the 2 hours observed on the time estimate were not realistic on my part - it took me 7 hours give or take for the whole assignment - and apparently other students have the same issue, since 4 assignments I graded were missing sketches or re-using the same ones for different scenarios.) | Love the succinct | Quality | of the videos. The information was | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Instructor is clearly reading off of cards or a prompter that doesn't face the camera so he's constantly not looking at you which is frustrating. The feeling of each lesson being so scripted takes away from the feeling of a professor teaching material with which he is comfortable. Comparing this to UC San Diego course videos is like night and day and really makes you realize the importance of quality production/natural flow of teaching. | makes you realize the importance of | Quality | production/natural flow of teaching. | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Some of the videos feel a little outdated but otherwise high quality. | a little outdated but otherwise high | Quality | | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Good information and assignment design, but please just have someone on your team go through this. I could list the issues with your lectures, but they're so easy to detect by anyone who is watching them actively. It makes me think that QC isn't a part of your workflow, and worry about the quality of future courses in this specialization. | your workflow, and worry about the | Quality | of future courses in this specialization. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | The quality of the lectures and teaching was the lowest i have ever seen on Coursera. I wanted to do the whole specialty, but after this first one i was so disappointed that i will stop. The assignments were overly complicated and demanding for no real reason. I have used Coursera for years and this is the first time I have wanted a refund. | The | Quality | of the lectures and teaching was | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | I think the course covers pretty good range of topics and gives you a good information. I really liked the peer review assignments and I think they put pressure on you to achieve the goals and learn from them. I definitely did not like the multiple answer questions or the last assessment. The questions are not well presented and there is a clear violation of the help and error recovery heuristic for me. I also did not like the video set-up. The quality of the course material is really poor and disappointing. I would like to believe that on a UI course people would have come up with a better and more intuitive set-up. Finally, I would like to have a document in the course resources that students can download and keep that contains all the information we taught like quick reference guide. Again we can download the videos but when you are looking to fins something specific searching in 2-3 videos is not fun at all. | not like the video set-up. The | Quality | of the course material is really | Negative | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | The content of this course is good but the production quality of the videos are not vary high. | course is good but the production | Quality | of the videos are not vary | Negative | 0.85 | 3.0 |
| DUIbAwrmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Mr. Sidel is an expert in this theme, the quality in theory and practice is awesome ! Do not hesitate to take this course ! It is unbeliebable that you can gt it for free!!!!! | an expert in this theme, the | Quality | in theory and practice is awesome | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | Very useful course and excellent quality content. | Very useful course and excellent | Quality | content. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | One of the best coursers I have seen on Coursera so far. The video production quality, course structure and content is extra ordinary compared to other courses that I've seen so far. | Coursera so far. The video production | Quality | course structure and content is extra | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | A very good course, offered in very smart method Clear course objectives, good notes, language suitable for non-native speakers, excellent filming quality and the plus is using cartons which simplify the ideas Thanks university of Alberta and all the instructors | suitable for non-native speakers, excellent filming | Quality | and the plus is using cartons | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | High quality course, really broadened my understanding of distribution in the hospitality industry. I enjoyed it immensely. | High | Quality | course, really broadened my understanding of | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| e4SzF9c1EeS-LCIAC3icWw | Very interesting and inspiring course. The material is of very good quality and the teacher is, to my mind, excellent. | The material is of very good | Quality | and the teacher is, to my | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| e4SzF9c1EeS-LCIAC3icWw | Very bad course. The content can barely be applied outside US, you don't know from which perspective it's explained (for sales or purchasing people), the videos are bad quality, the teacher is babbling, no extra resources, no interaction with the audience outside the assessments. | purchasing people), the videos are bad | Quality | the teacher is babbling, no extra | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| eBEnnYkqEeWGBwqGAoUFww | I have a Master Degree in Management, yet I had really limited knowledge in Accounting. The quality of the course and the Professor is a Top Quality. I am starting a new job in a finance department of a multinational corporation. This has been a perfect refresh. I have performed the courses in 3 days. Thank you | really limited knowledge in Accounting. The | Quality | of the course and the Professor | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| eBEnnYkqEeWGBwqGAoUFww | I have a Master Degree in Management, yet I had really limited knowledge in Accounting. The quality of the course and the Professor is a Top Quality. I am starting a new job in a finance department of a multinational corporation. This has been a perfect refresh. I have performed the courses in 3 days. Thank you | and the Professor is a Top | Quality | I am starting a new job | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | A great course in a great specialization. Very high quality content. | in a great specialization. Very high | Quality | content. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | One of the best coursers I have seen on Coursera so far. The video production quality, course structure and content is extra ordinary compared to other courses that I've seen so far. | Coursera so far. The video production | Quality | course structure and content is extra | Negative | 0.76 | 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. | The course is rather short. The | Quality | is good but the quantity is | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| eEsmqKAMEeSI0SIAC2iJgw | I am a retired geologist and have recently taken up astronomy and astrophotography as a hobby. As is clear from the course there is a close association between the two sciences and I was keen to learn more. This is my fifth astronomy MOOC and by far and away a country mile the best; how many of those in a parsec?. Apart from the sheer breadth of subject matter covered I particularly liked the way various maths formulae (not too difficult) were explained and gradually used to explain and link various aspects of astronomy - thus adding weight to the explanations and especially how it all elegantly fits together. If you want to do just one course to understand astronomy, this is the one. Many thanks to David and team for the high quality of lectures and diagrams etc. which thoroughly backed up the lectures + the interviews provided insight form other experts in their respective fields. If you're ever in the UK do look me up - I also cycle and would love to go on a ride and talk astro etc. Thanks again to all. Here's my website if you're interested: https://watchthisspaceman.wordpress.com/ | David and team for the high | Quality | of lectures and diagrams etc. which | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| EfvjN5XvEeSqQiIACyEY7w | I want to thank Ed and the University of Virginia for the effort and the quality of the course. It was really helpful. | Virginia for the effort and the | Quality | of the course. It was really | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| EfvjN5XvEeSqQiIACyEY7w | First course (of this type, I mean business, management... etc) I took, planning to take the second part as well. I would strongly recommand taking this course. Easy to follow, well paced, has quality course materials, and inspiring. | Easy to follow, well paced, has | Quality | course materials, and inspiring. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | Excellent course because is: Organized, current informed, excelent references, high quality, and deliver for very experience instructors | Organized, current informed, excelent references, high | Quality | and deliver for very experience instructors | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | This is a good course, providing quality information. It has a bit of a financial lean, as the professor has a background in this area; this was stretching for me as an engineer, but ultimately I found it helpful, as the financing of healthcare is an incredibly important issue! Unfortunately, the professor is a bit hard to understand; he does not speak in proper grammatical structure and often rambles or mutters, so even as a native English speaker, I had to turn on subtitles in order to understand the point he was trying to get across. Overall, after taking this course, I feel *much* more versed on the healthcare landscape and all the players involved therein. I recommend this course to students who want to better understand the general workings of the healthcare industry. | This is a good course, providing | Quality | information. It has a bit of | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | the quality of the lecture is poor - slides are dense and full of bullet points which the professor LITERALLY JUST READS OUT on videos. I did a google search, and found almost all of the analytical charts he presented, readily available on the internet. What exactly is the point in the lecture then? Instead, why don't you compress some valuable learning nuggets into half the course time, instead of hearing you ready through your ocean of bullet points, and needlessly underline (in red) the current bullet point your reading. Seriously, this is one the poorest quality lectures I've ever done! The quality of peer assignments to grade are a joke. Classmates are simply copying bits and pieces of the lecture material to make up the 'market sizing memo'. I seriously doubt the learning value in this class, and the quality of instruction. | the | Quality | of the lecture is poor - | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | the quality of the lecture is poor - slides are dense and full of bullet points which the professor LITERALLY JUST READS OUT on videos. I did a google search, and found almost all of the analytical charts he presented, readily available on the internet. What exactly is the point in the lecture then? Instead, why don't you compress some valuable learning nuggets into half the course time, instead of hearing you ready through your ocean of bullet points, and needlessly underline (in red) the current bullet point your reading. Seriously, this is one the poorest quality lectures I've ever done! The quality of peer assignments to grade are a joke. Classmates are simply copying bits and pieces of the lecture material to make up the 'market sizing memo'. I seriously doubt the learning value in this class, and the quality of instruction. | Seriously, this is one the poorest | Quality | lectures I've ever done! The quality | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | the quality of the lecture is poor - slides are dense and full of bullet points which the professor LITERALLY JUST READS OUT on videos. I did a google search, and found almost all of the analytical charts he presented, readily available on the internet. What exactly is the point in the lecture then? Instead, why don't you compress some valuable learning nuggets into half the course time, instead of hearing you ready through your ocean of bullet points, and needlessly underline (in red) the current bullet point your reading. Seriously, this is one the poorest quality lectures I've ever done! The quality of peer assignments to grade are a joke. Classmates are simply copying bits and pieces of the lecture material to make up the 'market sizing memo'. I seriously doubt the learning value in this class, and the quality of instruction. | quality lectures I've ever done! The | Quality | of peer assignments to grade are | Negative | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | the quality of the lecture is poor - slides are dense and full of bullet points which the professor LITERALLY JUST READS OUT on videos. I did a google search, and found almost all of the analytical charts he presented, readily available on the internet. What exactly is the point in the lecture then? Instead, why don't you compress some valuable learning nuggets into half the course time, instead of hearing you ready through your ocean of bullet points, and needlessly underline (in red) the current bullet point your reading. Seriously, this is one the poorest quality lectures I've ever done! The quality of peer assignments to grade are a joke. Classmates are simply copying bits and pieces of the lecture material to make up the 'market sizing memo'. I seriously doubt the learning value in this class, and the quality of instruction. | value in this class, and the | Quality | of instruction. | Negative | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| eH8S1b38EeWxzxJER_JW2w | You have to use adobe illustrator to make the infographic and I didn't think the course did a good enough job giving the basics for that. I had to do a lot of googling to figure out how to do stuff on my own. All of the assessments are done by the people in the course and I thought people were a little too harsh. If someone is completely new to AI then it is a bit much to expect the infographic to be magazine quality. | expect the infographic to be magazine | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| eH8S1b38EeWxzxJER_JW2w | Well, while I felt really frustrated after having played ALL of this course videos, I have first put very negative comments here for its reviewing. I have then been kindly asked to reconsider my comments under the light of the usefulness of this course to some audience. For sure, it might be that I was not of the attended audience. And I still think that this course was of no interest to me - this is the reason why I'm still pleased not to have paid for its useless certificate. Nevertheless, this course might be of interest for some students. This is definitively true. So, let me suggest a new title for it: "Design and Make Infographics for the Dummies". Because that's it! This course is definitively perfect for the ones who know nothing about Infographics and they might enjoy it. Finally, I shall neither modify nor remove my previous comments on the examples used by the author. Please notice that Coursera still gets all my confidence about the usefulness and the quality of their proposed courses. For instance, just have a look to the course "Machine Learning" of one of its co-founders, Andrew Ng. ------------------------------------ My previous comments here below: For sure I was not the correct audience for this course. But nothing useful to be learned in here. Karl Gude is too much speaking of what he has formerly done, which is of only interest to him. I dislike the examples he uses : violence, sex, illness, accidents, weapons, war, drugs - and fruits, ok. Are these the only topics of interest to him? Finally, it appears that the $45 certificate does not worth it. I'm pleased not to have paid for it. And I definitively not recommend this course. Waste of time if not even waste of money. | confidence about the usefulness and the | Quality | of their proposed courses. For instance, | Positive | 0.63 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The initial lessons were rather chaotic. The idea was good, but the execution was not really good. The significantly improved the quality for the second course so I assume that for a new iteration, the it will be better too. | really good. The significantly improved the | Quality | for the second course so I | Positive | 0.87 | 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. | In my honest opinion, the | Quality | of this course is not that | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The Good: The idea of having the lectures in a Q&A style, two experts in continuous conversation about the topic has a potential The Bad: That potential is wasted on poorly planned lessons and course content The Ugly: Instructors run the Swift code that is written during the lesson and they get a wrong result due to an error in the code. They both agree that the result is weird but then continue to explain that this is how Swift works. In short, they are misleading and confusing you on a topic you are trying to learn. This is of course unintentional but gives you a clue about how the quality check on lecture videos are taken care of. Details here: https://www.coursera.org/learn/swift-programming/discussions/DBk-SJO2EeWNbBIwwhtGwQ | you a clue about how the | Quality | check on lecture videos are taken | Negative | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Poor Quality | Poor | Quality | | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The quality of the course is not as I expected from a Coursera course. | The | Quality | of the course is not as | Positive | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Probably guys did big amount of work, but the course looks extremely raw. Half of lectures time is talking about nothing and it seems that there were no lecture plan before shooting the video. It would have been ok if the course had been free, but I expected much more from it for that price. Thank you for you work, but, I think, you need to keep improving the quality of the course. | you need to keep improving the | Quality | of the course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I am sure if you are familiar with the content or an expert programmer looking for an overview of a new language then this would be perfect but you do need to understand swift before starting this introduction to swift. The lessons felt very unstructured, unplanned and ad hoc almost like the people presenting didn't know they were being recorded, this meant that the examples given were contrived without consideration to the suitability to present the concept succinctly and would require anyone but an existing swift programmer needing to carry out additional reading which rather defeats the purpose of an "introduction to..." course. A little scripting and lesson planning and preparation of content would have made the difference between this excellently produced and edited course being awkward and an effort to attend into a really useful reference for beginers of swift programming. To summarise, the obviously expert technical knowledge of the speakers and the quality of the editing are let down by rushed lesson content. | knowledge of the speakers and the | Quality | of the editing are let down | Positive | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Quality and length of material is mediocre. | | Quality | and length of material is mediocre. | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Poor video quality, weak, ad hoc examples, not well thought flow. Seems like tutors have not spent time on proper preparation. Free courses on iTunesU (especially those by Stanford University) are far more better. | Poor video | Quality | weak, ad hoc examples, not well | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | No stars for this course, 3 modules I did, and I think is not a valuable course, gives a bad introduction to the language, there are inconsistencies in the theory and knowledge of the language. The preparation of the course is poor, there is no direction, a lot of errors using playground and the instructors hesitate and doubt all the time during the recording of the screen. That's not good point for the prestigious University of Toronto and Coursera. One star for the review is too much, no preparation, lack of security, bad quality. | no preparation, lack of security, bad | Quality | | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I wish I had paid closer attention to the refund policy. The production quality and content did not meet my expectations. | to the refund policy. The production | Quality | and content did not meet my | Negative | 0.78 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Sadly, this course is NOT an Introduction to Swift Programming. As a beginner I found this course was not structured and I was confused about the correct steps to take in order to start programming in Swift. No doubt that these guys are knowledgable but they do not plan the course or teach in a linear fashion. Furthermore the sound and video quality is poor and I have decided to quit this course after the first week and a half. | fashion. Furthermore the sound and video | Quality | is poor and I have decided | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | A resource if your starting with Swift. Video quality is often poor. Examples are a bit too contrived. Generally, presentations should be better prepared, too much figuring things out during the video. Good choice of project for the practical.Many interesting coding practice tidbits along the way but needs polish. | if your starting with Swift. Video | Quality | is often poor. Examples are a | Negative | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Bad audio quality Poor presentation Not for professional developers (perhaps can be fine for beginners) | Bad audio | Quality | Poor presentation Not for professional developers | Negative | 0.9 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The material is OK, the video quality is regular and the instructors are childish. I prefer the Android specialization where the instructors are more mature and professional. | The material is OK, the video | Quality | is regular and the instructors are | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I am dropping the course. Suggestions 1) One person talk to the audience...rather than 2 or 3 talking to each other 2) Volume and pic quality poor 3) Its going too slowly.....just not enough "meat" to get me engaged...esp if u compare to the course by Paul Hegarty Stanford | each other 2) Volume and pic | Quality | poor 3) Its going too slowly. | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | During this course, as a complete novice, I am shocked daily by how much there is to learn about music. The course does an excellent job of inspiring one to learn more and providing the quality of content to enable one to do so. | to learn more and providing the | Quality | of content to enable one to | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | The high quality of videos and content makes this course an outstanding, fantastic and entertainment MOOC course for everyone who wish to learn the big history that is hidding in the Universe. Thanks coursera and macquare University for let us access to this beatiful show of altruism and openness, both of you deserve not only a big five star but a great standing applasue. Congratulations great course. All my best Coursera community, Carlos Arturo Pimentel. | The high | Quality | of videos and content makes this | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Excellent course in integrating all the 'ologies' that give insight into how it all came together from the Big Bang to the development of life to a vision of the future landscape of human existence. Excellent presenters, the right level of subject matter content and an exceptional level of production quality. A great job done by the entire staff and much appreciated. | and an exceptional level of production | Quality | A great job done by the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | I loved every minute of this course. I only watched the video's because of lack of time, but really was sorry when reaching the end. Iit is packed full with (new) insights, very entertaining with excellent quality images, comments from the various lecturers that will make you think in a more balanced way about the world we live in. I did not know about Big History and signed up out of curiosity. However, I believe it should be mandatory for everybody to get this kind of connection of various disciplines to understand more of what got us here. Strongly recommended! | (new) insights, very entertaining with excellent | Quality | images, comments from the various lecturers | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | A super well structured course with high quality lectures and enveloped in a deeply interesting narrative. | super well structured course with high | Quality | lectures and enveloped in a deeply | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Incredible course in every way: Highly competent lecturers, excellent video quality in both content and production, great pacing and delivery of information and dozens of links to engaging resource material. One of the best MOOCs I have ever participated in: fun, informative and intriguing! | way: Highly competent lecturers, excellent video | Quality | in both content and production, great | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| EZVzungdEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Clear lectures with practical advice, and very good assignments. The assignments in the plot class and the character class were too confusing and structured, but the assignments in the craft of setting class were perfectly designed to help the student practice whatever was taught in the modules. I know it sounds unimportant, but we're here to write, and when we're given awkward assignments, the peer reviews go haywire and the writing quality declines for everyone. I read some of the best work, peer work, in this class and in the style class. | reviews go haywire and the writing | Quality | declines for everyone. I read some | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| f8wh4qQ-EeWF3A6Yvo0Lpw | The course content is excellent, but the peer review quality can be improved. Course Mentors are kind and helpful, however, the system is not functioning well sometimes. | is excellent, but the peer review | Quality | can be improved. Course Mentors are | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | Very thought provoking course. The online content was well presented, and the supporting reading was highly quality, relevant material that expanded my knowledge on this subject and I am sure it will be really helpful in improving my future research projects and planning. Highly recommended. | and the supporting reading was highly | Quality | relevant material that expanded my knowledge | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | This course is nicely organized and has manageable readings & videos. The video quality could be better. It's very very basic information about research. It might be useful to someone who does not know anything about it at all. The title might lead one to expect that methods of research such as qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method would be explored. Rather, this course is a general overview of what research is. | manageable readings & videos. The video | Quality | could be better. It's very very | Negative | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | High quality content. Congratulations to the team! | High | Quality | content. Congratulations to the team! | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Best course I have done so far in Coursera. The professor has the simplest solution to every problem. I look forward to doing the specialization. Also, after this course, I would personally like to study at the university of Illinois now that I have experienced the quality of learning | now that I have experienced the | Quality | of learning | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | This course dedicates an entire week to very simple topics. The lectures could use some serious editing too. To help you understand what I expect, I'm taking this at the same time as I'm taking Wharton's Week 1 Entrepreneurship program. I've also taken Wharton's Intro to Marketing course which I highly suggest over this course. The quality is dramatically better. Getting Started: Agile Meets Design Thinking is a University of Virginia course that also is a great example of how these courses should be done. I'm hoping the next courses in the Digital Marketing Capstone are much better so that I'm not watching a lecture and counting how many times the professor pushes his glasses back up. On the plus side, I did like the engagement this course encourages by forcing you to go to other websites & accomplish things as well as review your peers work. I wish your peer reviews had less of an outcome on your grade though. In my experience, many people did not even read the instructions on how to review the assignments. | highly suggest over this course. The | Quality | is dramatically better. Getting Started: Agile | Positive | 0.69 | 2.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Very educational course. This was my first MOOC course, and my first actual course on Coursera, and I'm impressed by the quality and programming. I've been in digital marketing for more than a decade, and I still learned important information about this field. | Coursera, and I'm impressed by the | Quality | and programming. I've been in digital | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | High quality and great insights | High | Quality | and great insights | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Well prepared videos from quality side. Content is nice. Gave a lot of new insights. Professor is great | Well prepared videos from | Quality | side. Content is nice. Gave a | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Loved the content. The instructor was great. The assignments were interesting and beneficial. I feel like I learnt a lot. The only aspect I didn't like was the "view from the quad" section. I quality wasn't great, and I didn't learn any new insights. Plus they always had the same 4 people they were interviewing so not a great sample size. | view from the quad" section. I | Quality | wasn't great, and I didn't learn | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I have just completed Module 1 and I am really enjoying the course. Good quality presentations with a good depth of subject matter. From a health professional's (RN, ENP) who has not studied this subject before, this is an excellent introduction to the topic so far. | am really enjoying the course. Good | Quality | presentations with a good depth of | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Thank you very much Karin and Lorraine for your course! It really helped to understand more about Epidemiology, but more importantly about the mathematics behind them! I'm sure going to put in practice all the knowledge you gracefully displayed on those lessons! Thanks very much, your job is of really high quality! | your job is of really high | Quality | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | This course is not so good. A lot of things are just come from the instructor's head without correcting reference from high quality literature. He can say whatever he think is right. But I would not say all animals do not have complex language systems, or we have one single origin of language. I would also suggest the instructor to interview more world-famous linguists, not just play simple ask and answer with his students. The examples of different languages in the later weeks are interesting. But somehow I expect some better understanding of more aspects of languages. In general I would say it still has so much space for improvement. I would not recommend anyone to spend time on learning this course. | head without correcting reference from high | Quality | literature. He can say whatever he | Positive | 0.73 | 1.0 |
| 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. | balance between presentations and interviews. The | Quality | of the reading materials was well | Positive | 0.99 | 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. | quizzes were entertaining - but the | Quality | of the questions is questionable. Sometimes | Positive | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| 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. | working javascript functions is lacking. The | Quality | of the explanations also varied in | Positive | 0.77 | 2.0 |
| 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. | the explanations also varied in their | Quality | Some things that were pretty easy | Positive | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is great, professors are awesome and quality of material is great. I loved it and I highly recommend this course! | is great, professors are awesome and | Quality | of material is great. I loved | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Fq__yk2bEeS5fSIACy-OMw | The lecture quality should be dramatically improved. Even at 2x speed, I feel Iyengar should further practice is presentation and redo the videos. In the conclusion, Iyengar states that no textbooks are available for the field because it is "new", but an Amazon search shows several seem to exist, and many of the studies referenced in this course are years old, even more than a decade in some cases... so I think better materials for more organized slides must exist. I've taken more than 5 coursera classes, and this has been my least satisfying. ... I do appreciate the introduction this provided, for free, and plan to keep learning in this space, though not in this course sequence. | The lecture | Quality | should be dramatically improved. Even at | Negative | 0.72 | 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! | put together quite hurriedly without much | Quality | testing and preparation. It also lacks | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | Although this course holds quite a lot of information, it is quite slow in the way the information is transmitted and unfortunately, the presenter did not 'made homework' in terms of preparing what to say. In addition to the lagging of 'so, anyways, uhmm...' or just silence, many of the videos are also quite low in quality - especially sound due to bad microphone. Overall the information was interesting and useful, and I'm looking for Part II. | videos are also quite low in | Quality | - especially sound due to bad | Negative | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| Fw4ZgaAIEeSrPCIAC1SWlw | I am not really happy with the quality of the course, but the courses from Dr. Whiteman are the only mechanical engineering courses available on Coursera. And it seems that Dr. Whiteman is very enthusiastic, so I am grateful for his efforts. Well done! | am not really happy with the | Quality | of the course, but the courses | Negative | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent material with high quality quizzes. Highly recommended. | Excellent material with high | Quality | quizzes. Highly recommended. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Low quality slides. Monotone lecturing style. | Low | Quality | slides. Monotone lecturing style. | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| GixeETxVEeW0tw4knrMo3Q | This is a great course whether you're new to horses or just want to top-up or refresh your knowledge. I Really liked the format and Dr Mortensen is an enthusiastic and knowledgable teacher. I like that he reviews the discussion boards and works student's comments in to his intro videos. Good quality course. Thank you. | in to his intro videos. Good | Quality | course. Thank you. | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| GkyTjuR5EeWpUQ6vdoq9ZQ | I really enjoyed this course and enjoy this subject in general. My only complaint is the audio quality for the videos are worse than any other class I've taken. The intro/out is very loud then the speakers are barely audible which became frustrating. That aside, it is a great course. | My only complaint is the audio | Quality | for the videos are worse than | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | I absolutely love the quality of this MOOC. The way all speakers elaborate the concepts is very clear and comprehensive without loosing in technical quality. The MOOCs given by the EAWAG are like a book you just can't put down. The notions are down to earth, applicable and tested on the field. I JUST CAN'T WAIT TO START the MOOC on Planning and Design of Sanitation Systems and Technologies. | I absolutely love the | Quality | of this MOOC. The way all | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | I absolutely love the quality of this MOOC. The way all speakers elaborate the concepts is very clear and comprehensive without loosing in technical quality. The MOOCs given by the EAWAG are like a book you just can't put down. The notions are down to earth, applicable and tested on the field. I JUST CAN'T WAIT TO START the MOOC on Planning and Design of Sanitation Systems and Technologies. | and comprehensive without loosing in technical | Quality | The MOOCs given by the EAWAG | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | very high quality materials and experiment design. Thank for teacher's great effort! | very high | Quality | materials and experiment design. Thank for | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| gt5ybBU-EeWhTg59fTWfpQ | My rating of this course is excellent, because the quality is high. Interviews expert Don Norman was exciting, because it is one of the most important personalities in this field. Professor Scott, has very good methodology to give lessons, good explanation. It is a course where you can learn and put into practice what he learned very quickly. | this course is excellent, because the | Quality | is high. Interviews expert Don Norman | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 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 | . ), they are of good | Quality | and the fact Andrew used them | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Hi, I appreciate this course and the efforts put into it. However, I am unlikely to focus on it or be as much engaged as I'd hope to due to sound quality in your videos. I am really sorry for rating this course 4 stars. I hope that you'd recored your videos with a better microphone so I could enjoy listening to you and be more engaged in the course. I hope that you understand that it is hard to take a course with a bad sound quality, especially, that there is no excuse not to upgrade the microphone. Nowadays, almost everyone is using a respectably good microphone to recored videos. I believe if you use a better microphone many students would be more engaged and willing to take your course. My opinion might change after finishing this course but I don't think I'd be finishing this course anytime soon or at least on time before the next session because of the sound quality. Best regards, | I'd hope to due to sound | Quality | in your videos. I am really | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Hi, I appreciate this course and the efforts put into it. However, I am unlikely to focus on it or be as much engaged as I'd hope to due to sound quality in your videos. I am really sorry for rating this course 4 stars. I hope that you'd recored your videos with a better microphone so I could enjoy listening to you and be more engaged in the course. I hope that you understand that it is hard to take a course with a bad sound quality, especially, that there is no excuse not to upgrade the microphone. Nowadays, almost everyone is using a respectably good microphone to recored videos. I believe if you use a better microphone many students would be more engaged and willing to take your course. My opinion might change after finishing this course but I don't think I'd be finishing this course anytime soon or at least on time before the next session because of the sound quality. Best regards, | a course with a bad sound | Quality | especially, that there is no excuse | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Hi, I appreciate this course and the efforts put into it. However, I am unlikely to focus on it or be as much engaged as I'd hope to due to sound quality in your videos. I am really sorry for rating this course 4 stars. I hope that you'd recored your videos with a better microphone so I could enjoy listening to you and be more engaged in the course. I hope that you understand that it is hard to take a course with a bad sound quality, especially, that there is no excuse not to upgrade the microphone. Nowadays, almost everyone is using a respectably good microphone to recored videos. I believe if you use a better microphone many students would be more engaged and willing to take your course. My opinion might change after finishing this course but I don't think I'd be finishing this course anytime soon or at least on time before the next session because of the sound quality. Best regards, | next session because of the sound | Quality | Best regards, | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | great lessons, with very explained material. the major downside for this course is the terrible sound quality, it just can't be heard with regular speakers, you have to hear it with earspeakers, and it still not that great. | this course is the terrible sound | Quality | it just can't be heard with | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | After completing the Machine Learning Course and after going through all of these videos and assignments, now I can say that I have learnt a lot from this course and content of the course have good quality and helps you expertise this field. Thanks a ton Prof. Andrew NG. | content of the course have good | Quality | and helps you expertise this field. | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is acourse with a very high quality. Insights shared by the teacher and those programming homeworks are the most valuable part for me. There is relatively less material from theoretical aspect, but it's still good. (I use PRML as a complementary resource.) | is acourse with a very high | Quality | Insights shared by the teacher and | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Prof Andew Ng explains concepts and algorithms in a clear way. I'm impressed with the quality of the programming assignments , which was very thoughtful and instructive. | clear way. I'm impressed with the | Quality | of the programming assignments , which | Positive | 0.97 | 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 | and team to make this high | Quality | class accessible to everyone. Learnt a | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Just finished the course. This is indeed an amazing course which can get started you in practical machine learning in less than 3 months. You will developing your own neural networks from the scratch. Below are the pros and not pros (i won't call it cons) that i experienced. PROs : Gets onto topics right away. Information about practical implementation Doable. Not too difficult and not downright easy. You have to put effort if you do not have backgroud in undergraduate mathematics to understand the concepts. Prof. Andrew Ng. - He has knack of explaining something very complex in a very easy manner. Also, he justifies if he is not going to explain something Assignments evaluation and practical scenarios. Not PROs : Very High Level : This course does NOT go in detail to explain the derivations and mathematics behind machine learning course. I think its OK and that is what makes the course doable. I find it really hard to accept a formula if the reasons are not known and hence, sometimes our only task was to learn the formula. For example : in SVMs. What Next : It is just a feedback. I think at the end of course, course team should guide students, what do to next. May be which course can be a good follow up course for this. So, at the end, i just want to thanks Coursera team, Stanford Team, mentors, peers and Prof. Andrew Ng for spreading this knowledge for free. It is really helping people like me to study something not readily available in good quality in reach. Hopefully, i will also be able to give back to community some time soon. | something not readily available in good | Quality | in reach. Hopefully, i will also | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Despite I guess the course has a pretty good coverage of the ML basics, it is definitely just an introductive class. In particular I was surprised by the low quality of the material. The following are my notes and suggestions: -- I found the lectures highly redundant, with many unnecessary repetitions -- using a vector notation (like an arrow or a simple line on top of the letters) throughout the course would have make formulas much more readable -- too much hand writing on the slides while talking: a better set of slides with blocks of text shown at the right moment would be much smoother and readable -- very, very poor video editing (many times it's clear some parts of the videos were meant to be cut!!) -- the desire to create a format suitable for people with a scarce algebra preparation lead to use not the appropriate terminology, which would be more correct and easier to understand. Just realize that ML is basically applied math, and without a good math knowledge it is almost pointless to approach the subject | I was surprised by the low | Quality | of the material. The following are | Negative | 0.85 | 3.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Way of teaching, quality of examples is one of the Best. | Way of teaching, | Quality | of examples is one of the | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The instructor Andrew Ng has put in lot of effort to explain the fundamentals and then the coding assignments take it to the next level. Video length and quality is optimum. Discussion forums are very useful whenever I get stuck with a technical or course related problem. | the next level. Video length and | Quality | is optimum. Discussion forums are very | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good introduction to machine learning. The content is fairly basic, it's up to you is you want to go deeper into the subject. Only one downside, the quality of videos is low. | the subject. Only one downside, the | Quality | of videos is low. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course with great quality assignments from a credible and reputed expert in the field. | Great course with great | Quality | assignments from a credible and reputed | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course is very good,throgh taking this course,I have a general picture about machine learning .But ,there still exsists several problems,for example,the quality of the videos are low,and I am really looking forward to new version of the course. | exsists several problems, for example, the | Quality | of the videos are low, and | Negative | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The quality of this course is really astonishing. Never in my life had I though that it was possible to get University-Level courses taught by experts not only in such nice format and delivered by an amazing platform like Coursera but also for free (If you don't want to get a certificate). The course on only goes into detail about the math behind machine learning but the instructor (Andrew Ng) also makes hard concepts easy to understand, which is critical in order to apply them later on at the course as it also shows you how to apply what you have learnt. | The | Quality | of this course is really astonishing. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course both with quality content and teaching. Loved the way Prof NG taught this class. Really happy to complete this course. | Excellent course both with | Quality | content and teaching. Loved the way | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's really impressive that Andrew Ng created this course, which (I believe) was the original Coursera course. And, at the halfway point I am finding it somewhat useful. However, I've been doing the University of Washington Machine Learning Specialization in tandem and I much prefer that course. The videos are clearer, both in terms of audio quality and presentation, and I am able to seamlessly transition from lectures to quiz/homework, whereas with this Stanford course I sometimes find that the lectures do not prepare me for the homework. That may also be because I had not used Matlab prior to this course, but am very fluent in python, which is used in the UW course. Finally, the notation used in the lectures can be quite confusing for me at times. UPDATE: I am now finishing the last week of the course, and I increased my rating to 4 stars. The course got easier and more fun after the halfway point. If you are struggling through the early weeks, I encourage you to stick with it, as it pays off later on. | clearer, both in terms of audio | Quality | and presentation, and I am able | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Good quality, Andrew NG is all the best. | Good | Quality | Andrew NG is all the best. | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course really makes you understand how Machine Learning algorithms work. You have to solve challenging programming exercises to complete it. Fortunately the support given by the community is always one click away. Professor Andrew Ng is really an engaging person who transmit his deep love for the matter. I would save the fifth star for when typos will be solved and audio quality will be improved. | typos will be solved and audio | Quality | will be improved. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It was really an excellent course. It was challenging but feasable with a huge quantity & quality of knowledges. I have learned a lot of things about Machine Learning. Thanks a lot, Mr Andrew Ng | feasable with a huge quantity & | Quality | of knowledges. I have learned a | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Wonder Prof. and coherent informative material, the only minor issue is the bad sound quality, other than that it is excellent and recommended for everyone passionate about the field of Machine Learning. | minor issue is the bad sound | Quality | other than that it is excellent | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I have been really impressed with the quality of this course. The subject of the lecures is undoubtedly fascinating, while the teacher, Andrew Ng, is able to introduce even the most complex topics with clarity and effectiveness. The weekly workload is reasonable and carefully planned, as the difficulty of assignments and tests. Many thanks for making this course available! | have been really impressed with the | Quality | of this course. The subject of | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Top quality! | Top | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I saw the date of recording and it was 2011 but boy are these videos great! I am on Week 3 but already know that the quality is top notch. At no point of time would you wonder how to do this extra thing. Prof. Andrew covers everything from statistics to MATLAB/OCTAVE tutorial. Really worthy course. | 3 but already know that the | Quality | is top notch. At no point | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good introduction to machine learning. The only issue I have is quality of video materials which is rather low mostly due to bad mic used. | The only issue I have is | Quality | of video materials which is rather | Negative | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Low quality video and audio | Low | Quality | video and audio | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Sound quality could be improved in video. It kind of curbs the understanding of what the teacher is saying :/ Otherwise everything's great! | Sound | Quality | could be improved in video. It | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I'll only mentions things I didn't like: sound/video quality is poor, lack of lecture notes. | mentions things I didn't like: sound/video | Quality | is poor, lack of lecture notes. | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Judging by my three weeks' study, this course is surely high quality and helpful. Hope to learn more from Professor Ng in the following weeks. Five stars! | study, this course is surely high | Quality | and helpful. Hope to learn more | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Highly recommended. Quality lectures, each one with programming assignments which leave you with usable opensource code, with appropriate tutorials for those assignments and adequate test-cases. Well worth the time invested. | Highly recommended. | Quality | lectures, each one with programming assignments | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | High quality content, learned a lot about ML | High | Quality | content, learned a lot about ML | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course content was excellent. Only drawback was voice recording quality. | excellent. Only drawback was voice recording | Quality | | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Quality lessons, good course if you want to start in machine learning. | | Quality | lessons, good course if you want | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Course is designed perfectly and it covers almost everything about supervised and unsupervised learning. Video quality is awesome and examples given are sufficient. Hope to see RStudio codes also in future. Regards, Ritesh Jain | about supervised and unsupervised learning. Video | Quality | is awesome and examples given are | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course. At the beginning, the of this course, I just want to learn something about neural network, but then I was fully attracted by this course. My major is biology but Andrew successfully makes me understand every point here. It is logical and understandable. It does not mean that it is an easy course, but reflects the elaborate work and deep understanding of Andrew. Now previous hard fields like computational biology and bioinformatics became quite easy to me.I can easily find out the algorithms they apply and know their shortages. If only I can know machine learning several years ago! The course covers the underlying mathematical analysis of several famous algorithms like neural network, SVM, PCA and recommendation system. It contains clear instructions to answer 'what', 'why' and 'how' levels of them, and to their actual applications and limits including the workflow to check the quality of my product. It is magic to realize that the advanced technologies like face recognition and auto-driving are just built by such basic blocks. Learners can have a solid understanding of the different fields in machining learning, and decide whether or not to go further. I proceeded to learn probabilistic graphic model, and hopefully it might be my key figure in my research paper on interfering casual relationship and influence of protein interaction during neural stem cell differentiation | including the workflow to check the | Quality | of my product. It is magic | Positive | 0.86 | 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 the videos though. Furthermore, the | Quality | of sound is awful. Well designed | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Audio quality is not great. Also, all concepts could be easily taught in Python rather than Matlab. Great material never the less. | Audio | Quality | is not great. Also, all concepts | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good. Only negative bit is the sound quality of the videos. | Only negative bit is the sound | Quality | of the videos. | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Can't thank enough for offering through this course ! The pace of lessons, insights, brevity of course material and very valuable assignments are right mix for anyone wishing to learn this subject, which one finds often hard to grasp and apply while learning directly from books, even with technical background. This course is an example of how access top quality learning can be democratized and be brought within reach of so many who wish to learn it. Thank again Prof. Ng and team for this enlightenment | an example of how access top | Quality | learning can be democratized and be | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The materials and assignments are of great quality. | materials and assignments are of great | Quality | | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | First of all, this course is a quality product: lectures are clear and effective and exercises are challenging enough. Perhaps the conclusion "now you can consider yourself an expert in machine learning techniques" is a slight exaggeration but, certainly, you are made aware of those techniques enough to think about using them effectively and getting some results. And, as an added bonus, you will learn the basics of Octave/MATLAB, which is not a bad thing since, as stated in the course, they are great prototyping tools. It's certainly a recommended course for whoever deals with data analysis problems, where perhaps a killer machine learning system is not the priority but some solid conclusions about the data are essential. | of all, this course is a | Quality | product: lectures are clear and effective | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | good material but sound quality of videos is bad, could use his own machine learning techniques to improve the sound, also no literature which is bad. | good material but sound | Quality | of videos is bad, could use | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Truly amazing quality of study that everyone can get from Coursera. Machine Learning topic got very well explained by the Instructor & He is obviously mastering this topic in all dimensions. I am benefited with enormous confidence into Machine learning topics which I would enhance further with practical experience in my field of study. | Truly amazing | Quality | of study that everyone can get | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Wonderful course! Sound quality requires revision, but content is supreme. | Wonderful course! Sound | Quality | requires revision, but content is supreme. | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The topic is interesting, the course content is presented clearly, and the lectures are informative. While the assignments can be challenging, they really help to reenforce the lessons. From what I gather, the class was recently moved over from an older Coursera model/design. This is frustratingly apparent at times. Some information can be difficult to find, particularly in the Discussion section. I would love to see this class updated to match the quality of some more recent classes I have taken. | this class updated to match the | Quality | of some more recent classes I | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent and challenging course. It would be great if you could improve the quality of the audio. | great if you could improve the | Quality | of the audio. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent, informative and fun introduction to machine learning. The programming assignments are carefully designed to incrementally ramp up the difficulty and the nuances of Octave/Matlab relevant to the assignments are explained beforehand. The quality is truly impressive, although I wish there was a little more mathematical depth to some of the lectures. Many derivations and details of linear algebra were kind of glossed over but I understand that there's a lot to cover in a fairly short period of time so it is understandable (and most people probably don't mind it anyway). This is one of the few courses that really keeps me motivated to complete all assignments. Thank you, Prof. Ng. | the assignments are explained beforehand. The | Quality | is truly impressive, although I wish | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Some mistakes on the slides but they are all corrected in the forums. High quality and insightful. | all corrected in the forums. High | Quality | and insightful. | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course. Concepts were explained very well and the hands on exercises helped to gain confidence in implementing some of the algorithms. This course is simply magical in transforming a person who is new to machine learning into an expert. I have already started applying machine learning techniques in real life problems. Thanks to Stanford University and Mr. Andrew for providing such high quality content. | Mr. Andrew for providing such high | Quality | content. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | High quality human learning :-). Priceless practical advises, wide range of topics, well designed assignments. Highly recommended. | High | Quality | human learning :-). Priceless practical advises, | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Exciting course! Astonishing work to develop all videos and prepared files and guidelines for programming exercices. Andrew Ng make concepts very accessible and very illustrated. The real life exercices immediately give ideas of implementations. We have quickly hands-on thanks to exercices. The diversity of covered fields through the examples taken is quite impressive and useful. I found the difficulty of exercices very subtly tuned to develop really interesting tools thanks to the pre-written codes. These codes also give opportunities to exploit further Octave/Matlab capabilities. I deeply thank the team for granting us access to a such high quality content. | us access to a such high | Quality | content. | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The educational quality of this course is, without a doubt, incomparable | The educational | Quality | of this course is, without a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Content of the course was great! Sound quality is a bit lower, but you'll get used to it | of the course was great! Sound | Quality | is a bit lower, but you'll | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Absolutely top quality course - well done Andrew Ng! | Absolutely top | Quality | course - well done Andrew Ng! | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was fantastic. A glimpse of how good quality education could be brought to the millions of people around the world who otherwise would be capable but were not lucky enough to be born in the right place and/or with enough resources to afford world class education. | fantastic. A glimpse of how good | Quality | education could be brought to the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| GukyRC_jEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | A superb course to take. Well presented, informative and logically structured. It was interesting for me as I learned about the US health care system and the way adoption and future use of the EHR is driven. I found it fascinating to compare my experience with the UK's NHS Quality and Outcomes Framework with the US methods. I was also surprised to find that Implied Consent is not defined, particularly with referrals. I would highly recommend this course. | my experience with the UK's NHS | Quality | and Outcomes Framework with the US | Positive | 0.69 | 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! | enriching primarily due to the high | Quality | of the lectures given by Professor | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| hbvvfJLaEeWBSw79YYA_8Q | This is a great course, with quality material and helpful videos. I felt very engaged and interested to learn through the course. I have learned some good techniques to help my clients at work with de-escalations techniques and paraphrasing for example. Thanks! | This is a great course, with | Quality | material and helpful videos. I felt | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I found a number of the lessons were light on content, but I have guilty knowledge having used ArcMap on and off for the past few years. A lot of the meat of this course is replicated in similar or only slightly more detail in the follow-on class in the specialization. If you have experience with GIS or Arc I would strongly recommend skipping this class and moving directly to GIS Data Formats, Design and Quality. | to GIS Data Formats, Design and | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | very good and hight quality video , more exemple step by step i like this cousre | very good and hight | Quality | video , more exemple step by | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Thank you for providing such quality courses, simple and great explanation Nick !! :D | Thank you for providing such | Quality | courses, simple and great explanation Nick | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Excellent modules, excellent teaching, excellent moderation and responsiveness from the tutor. I was not expecting this quality. Really good! | tutor. I was not expecting this | Quality | Really good! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| HFhDw-STEeWYOBIRup69HQ | Given the quality of the first 2 courses for the "Cloud Computing Specialisation", I think that this course fell short of my expectations. I think that the instructors attempted to cover the whole range of existing technologies in the field of Cloud Computing. However, since it has become a quite expanded domain, the instructors were only able to cover the topics superficially due to time constraints. In the same way, the assignments were not really demanding, they were repetitions of the lecture videos to some extent. There was no practical assignment, which was a bit disappointing. I believe that the instructors should consider reformatting this and the second part of this course to make them more similar to the "Cloud Computing Concepts" course. Thus, I would prefer this course to cover fewer topics, but to a greater extent. Ideally, the learners should have to complete a full deployment of one sample technology of those presented (and possibly developing some features). That would require more time, but it would also provide more knowledge to the learners. Sincerely. | Given the | Quality | of the first 2 courses for | Negative | 0.62 | 2.0 |
| hhFDsQ72EeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | Teaching quality is good, but more example needed. | Teaching | Quality | is good, but more example needed. | Negative | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| hhFDsQ72EeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | Excellent course and introduction to game theory. Some parts were difficult, but quality teaching needs to be challenging. I think there are areas for improvement, but I would overall recommend the course. | theory. Some parts were difficult, but | Quality | teaching needs to be challenging. I | Negative | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I am really disappointed, to be honest! Course covers mostly trivial stuff; lectures are just presenting code snippets; many inaccuracies; nothing about HTML5; entire 4-week-class can easily be completed in one week. Definitely not near the quality I am used to from Coursera. Udacity’s "Intro to HTML and CSS" and "JavaScript Basics" are way better. | one week. Definitely not near the | Quality | I am used to from Coursera. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Needs way bigger scope and a bit more going into details. The Full Stack Web Development course is somewhat like that. Lectures are good and easy to understand, both visuals and speak are nice and clear. Hopefully next one remains great quality but with more content :) | clear. Hopefully next one remains great | Quality | but with more content :) | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| 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. | exciting. Great explanations, knowledgeable professors, high | Quality | videos and challenging quizzes that force | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Use this course to reinforce your front end skills and not to learn for the first time. There's too many gaps in the presented content for a beginner. The video and audio were presented in a professional high quality format that you would expect from a major university. However, the course structure was slightly unorganized and didn't flow as well as other courses of similar content. Sometimes the instructors seemed to be at a loss for words and stumbled along with arms flailing. At 2X speed it's very obvious and entertaining. It was a fair attempt for their first online Coursera Web Development course. Hopefully, University of London will improve with future courses. | were presented in a professional high | Quality | format that you would expect from | Positive | 0.79 | 3.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Straightforward, quality content. | Straightforward, | Quality | content. | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| HIUPOchIEeSA1yIACye2oA | This course provide me an opportunity to know what happened in an international museum.Also the good quality of the impartation encourage me to learn more knowledge about museum education.Thank you very much. | an international museum. Also the good | Quality | of the impartation encourage me to | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | Had lots of fun doing this course. The lectures were all top quality and never bombarded us with too much information at once. Kudos to Kevin, Matt and Yoav for a memorable experience! :) | course. The lectures were all top | Quality | and never bombarded us with too | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| Hr9lByyfEeWccAqzeA4VPw | My overall experience with this Specialization, in general, and this 1st Course, in particular, is very positive. On the positive side, I really like the fact that the Courses are practice-oriented and provide not only theoretical frameworks, but also insights from experts, practical guidance, and evidence-based best practices. Also, the idea of applying Team-Based Learning (TBL), in the forms of Readiness Assurance Tests (RATs) and scenario-based RAT Application Exercises, for assessing participants' learning, is excellent! However, there are a couple of downsides, that's why I'm not giving a 5 star positive feedback. The first problem is that not all of the required readings are freely available via the Coursera platform, or elsewhere online. I appreciate the excellent quality of the chosen materials, but, if it becomes compulsory to spend more than US $100 for buying books, then the total cost of this Specialization elevates quite a lot, given that I had to pay €162 for it. On my opinion, there should be at least a note in the description of both the Specialization and the Courses about these requirements, in order to make an informed decision before enrolling. The second downside has to do with Course 1 and Course 2 overlapping materials. I'm referring to guest interview videos. That's mainly a problem of the 2nd Course, as there are almost no guest interviews in this Course, and the one interview provided is already available in Course 1. I understand that the topics discussed apply to the topics of both Courses, but, still, I find it an unnecessary repetition. The last problem is about the dates that the Courses are run. Course 1 runs during a given period, Course 2 is on demand, but it makes sense to attend it before Course 3, that also runs during a given period, which overlaps with the period of the 1st Course. Sorry, this makes it very difficult to attend everything and to seriously focus, as it's always about running for deadlines, especially when one has to produce three (3) Board Effectiveness Assessment Reflection (BEAR) papers :( . | elsewhere online. I appreciate the excellent | Quality | of the chosen materials, but, if | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Really an amazing course. Helped me get a deeper understanding of calculus. Teaching quality is outstanding and assumes very little prior knowledge. The course guides you through the logic of theorems in an intuitive way at the beginning and slowly introduces more complicated problems. Would recommend to anyone with no calculus experience or who took calculus years ago but never felt they mastered the core concepts. | a deeper understanding of calculus. Teaching | Quality | is outstanding and assumes very little | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The lecturer is a naturally gifted teacher with seemingly limitless passion and enthusiasm for the course material. Freely downloadable textbook is also of very high quality. This course is a cut above the rest and should be examined by anyone designing a MOOC. | textbook is also of very high | Quality | This course is a cut above | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | When it comes down to it, there's simply not the support to assist a student that has a really hard problem, "hacker mentality" seems to equate to "figure it out on your own cuz nobody's going to help you". If things do not work perfectly for you then you are likely never to be able to finish because your "peers" don't know any better either. The way this class is set up makes me angry every time I have to deal with it. I would probably be just as well served doing just the swirl() exercises. I would quit if I hadn't paid all the way through in advance. I can't believe this is the type of school John Hopkins is to produce a course of this quality, but I guess I have to. | to produce a course of this | Quality | but I guess I have to. | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | Some parts of material is good quality, but some is bad - also some show bad practices in R. Extensively use swirl as assignments over self work. It is better to go through good tutorial over R base plotting system and ggplot2. | Some parts of material is good | Quality | but some is bad - also | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The learning process is a complete experience, full of knowledge, good videos and excellent teachers. I think is a 5 stars quality course, because of the amount of tools teachers give. Each one special and necessary. Graphic Design is about making our soul, heart and brain work together. I believe this course is a great way to get this team to complete our expectations. | I think is a 5 stars | Quality | course, because of the amount of | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great course! High quality. Good peer review | Great course! High | Quality | Good peer review | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Fantastic. Amazing quality of teaching, must be one of the top courses. | Fantastic. Amazing | Quality | of teaching, must be one of | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Incredible quality of materials. Very well paced. | Incredible | Quality | of materials. Very well paced. | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | that is currently provided. If the | Quality | of the quizzes was better and | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| iN8yoSWdEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Very practical, great exercise, easy to understand and follow through, the student doesn’t need major computer programs or high quality technology in order to complete each assignment. The design of each assignment is made to use your imaginations, hands on tools and materials. Love the videos, clear, to the point beautiful made. Lots of room to work and do something quite good and unique if the student want! I am really having fun! Thank you! | need major computer programs or high | Quality | technology in order to complete each | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I'm not mother. I'm still a college student but, the course gave me a lot of tools to improve the quality and take care of the cooking at my home. I decided to take this course because of my dad, who has a heart disease. Thank you so much. | lot of tools to improve the | Quality | and take care of the cooking | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | The presenter is very confident and extremely passionate about what she is discussing. I have had a change of heart about how to take care of my child's diet. Usually the video presentations are great, very high quality, my only niggle is that sometimes the black screen PPTs go on for a bit too long, and can be repetitive. Overall a very good course. | video presentations are great, very high | Quality | my only niggle is that sometimes | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Excellently done. Easy to follow and well organized. I learned a lot! It was a pleasure to see the professor so excited and passionate about the subject and about her family. I love the plurality of the subtitles. Surprised and pleased by the quality of them (korean is the only one I can vouch for). | subtitles. Surprised and pleased by the | Quality | of them (korean is the only | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Thank you so much for such a great course Mrs.Adam! Being a mom of a little child is much easier now, at least at the kitchen! Now I can say that quality of the foods I buy will be higher and the quantity of the red meat we eat will be managed. Wish you success in your future project and health and happiness to your family! Best regards, N.U. Kurchakova | kitchen! Now I can say that | Quality | of the foods I buy will | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Interesting class with great practical tips. The instructor encourages eating only the highest quality food, but is also realistic about what her audience will be able to obtain. The recipes make healthy cooking less intimidating. | instructor encourages eating only the highest | Quality | food, but is also realistic about | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Very very interesting, and practical in home cooking for working mothers, , give important tips of nutrition about mixing food o all types, speaking of technical issues, video is very good quality, the teacher is clear, and production is very attractive and well created. | technical issues, video is very good | Quality | the teacher is clear, and production | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Excellent course. The material presented was not difficult to comprehend. I highly recommend this to parents who are in a quandry every night when the question, "what's for dinner?" presents itself. More than the content, I was most impressed by the manner in which the course was taught. Instead of a "talking head" format, the instructor used a variety of techniques to present the material, including teaching the majority of the class from her kitchen, using an interactive "blackboard" to illustrate concepts while she spoke and lots of cooking demonstrations. Kudos to Stanford for producing such high quality content. I have started a lot of Coursera courses and this is the first one that I've been able to complete because the content kept me engaged. | to Stanford for producing such high | Quality | content. I have started a lot | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | the access to the course and the quality of the material being taught | access to the course and the | Quality | of the material being taught | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | The flash tutorials are helpful. Instructor quality is low, production quality of instructor videos is low. Not on par with the University of Virginia project management course. Pace of course is also extremely slow, though it may be appropriate for novice students. That should be made clear up-front in the course description. | The flash tutorials are helpful. Instructor | Quality | is low, production quality of instructor | Negative | 0.84 | 2.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | The flash tutorials are helpful. Instructor quality is low, production quality of instructor videos is low. Not on par with the University of Virginia project management course. Pace of course is also extremely slow, though it may be appropriate for novice students. That should be made clear up-front in the course description. | helpful. Instructor quality is low, production | Quality | of instructor videos is low. Not | Negative | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | A fantastic introduction course. It left me craving more, which I think might be the most important quality in an intro-level course. | think might be the most important | Quality | in an intro-level course. | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 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. | ideas. Slides are well designed. Video | Quality | and sound quality is also great. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 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. | well designed. Video quality and sound | Quality | is also great. You will encounter | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 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. | You will encounter lots of good | Quality | reading materials. Quizzes will help you | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | The course is awesome. Not too lengthy video with good explanation. The only drawback is the audio quality of some of the lectures. | The only drawback is the audio | Quality | of some of the lectures. | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Best in it's Class. Short but so much descriptive with a constant effort to deliver high quality teaching with easy understanding language and concepts! It's highly recommended to those who are new to Data Science, and want to make their Base strong( like me) | a constant effort to deliver high | Quality | teaching with easy understanding language and | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | most part of this course is a duplicate of the "R programming" course. microphone/sound of the teacher quality is very bad. not original, boring, dividing this in "4 weeks" is too ridiculously long, this should be done in 1 week to enable users to take more time for the "R programming". this course should be free. don't lose too much time on it, it's doable in a day or a weekend and move on to "R programming". asking for so much money to see how to install R and github is a shame. feels like this course has been added just to have a round number for the specialization. even the survey in the end asking for feedback starts with a question not adapted to moment it's been asked "did you get a certificate?" of course i did not as i've just finish the course and now wait for my peers to review my final submission. | programming" course. microphone/sound of the teacher | Quality | is very bad. not original, boring, | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Clean and simple to understand. Hope the rest of the courses in the series are of similar quality. | in the series are of similar | Quality | | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Really poor quality of the material. | Really poor | Quality | of the material. | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Highest quality MOOC I've taken yet. | Highest | Quality | MOOC I've taken yet. | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | A good course with high quality information and good presenters. | A good course with high | Quality | information and good presenters. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Although the content is correct, quality models videos and materials is very low, wanted to make all the specialization, but I'm not satisfied with the quality of the course. It's a shame, because the JHU is an excellent University | Although the content is correct, | Quality | models videos and materials is very | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Although the content is correct, quality models videos and materials is very low, wanted to make all the specialization, but I'm not satisfied with the quality of the course. It's a shame, because the JHU is an excellent University | but I'm not satisfied with the | Quality | of the course. It's a shame, | Negative | 0.82 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Excellent introduction to Data Science topics. The course material and the hands-on project assignments speak for high quality professors. | hands-on project assignments speak for high | Quality | professors. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | High quality course that challenging, but not too demanding. The course uses relevant cases and really makes you think about strategy implementation. | High | Quality | course that challenging, but not too | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Video quality had some issues. | Video | Quality | had some issues. | Negative | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| IzWUDIo9EeWbIxKn7M-nSQ | The course is very interesting but includes essentials and basic principles only! That is why 4/5. But in terms of quality it's 5/5 only! | why 4/5. But in terms of | Quality | it's 5/5 only! | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| j3fuwJ3EEeSfuyIACxcGsQ | Words can not describe the level of quality this course have. A must for all microelectronics engineers. | can not describe the level of | Quality | this course have. A must for | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| jA4AZLlTEeWfYA612mWHZw | I normally struggle to give poor reviews to free online content, but there are so many glaring fundamental issues with the presentation and content of this course, that it I feel it's important to warn people not to waste their time with this course in it's current form. The mapping and planning lectures raise some good points, but the rest give only the most basic overview of the topic at hand, glossing over steps enough that you would probably learn just as much watching youtube, or looking around inside wordpress on your own. The delivery of the lectures needs a lot of work, with distracting, erratic pauses between words, and the sound frequently cutting out mid-word as they switch between slides. I found it difficult to make it through more than 15 minutes of content. I gave more than 1 star because the links underneath the slides contain some valuable information, so if you can be bothered trawling through the slides you can gleam some knowledge there. Hopefully the creators of the course take on board the many negative reviews and give a major overhaul to the course, to bring it in line with the quality of almost all other content on Coursera. | bring it in line with the | Quality | of almost all other content on | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| jA4AZLlTEeWfYA612mWHZw | This was the most poorly designed course that I have ever encountered. Whoever is in control of quality assurance was caught napping on this one - the instructors were woeful! It was as if the principles of instructional design and adult learning were abandoned entirely; there was minimal instruction and I had to rely on my intuition and the assistance of a study buddy to work hard to complete the course. If you are completely new to website design (as I was), prepare for a steep learning curve as you will be spending many hours preparing and organising your info - the title is deceptive and misleading! Ann, Melbourne, Australia April 2016. | encountered. Whoever is in control of | Quality | assurance was caught napping on this | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| JBCvTm03EeWEewoyD2Bc5Q | Good material, insightful thoughts about starting a business. However, course material could be better quality. Looking forward to the following courses. | However, course material could be better | Quality | Looking forward to the following courses. | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | The course is number one among all ~10 courses I've taken on Coursera platform! Bullet points: 1) The material is given in a structured way and simple to understand because of every-day examples we encounter in our life. 2) Outstanding audio and video quality of the lectures makes Princeton University's coursers more likely to be taken. 3) The lecturer has touched a various of controversial topics (religions, Buddhism in particular) and masterfully aligned them with a modern psychology discoveries. | life. 2) Outstanding audio and video | Quality | of the lectures makes Princeton University's | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I really enjoyed this course and felt the material was appropriate in scope and quality for an introduction to Aerial Robotics. I have a few issues with it though. While this wasn't a problem for me, I feel those who haven't done maths with vectors and matrices before would struggle with the maths presented here. There was some inconsistency in notation throughout the lectures - though I expect this will be fixed in future runs of this course. Given how much the programming assignments involved tuning PD controllers, I think there should have been some additional material provided on how to go about doing this. The difficulty of the last programming assignment came out of nowhere and given that you need to pass all the assignments in order to pass the course, this made it especially stressful. Having gotten almost full marks on the course until that point, the prospect of that all being for naught because I couldn't complete the final assignment in time was incredibly stressful and unfair. The simulation would fail with a Matlab ode45 error - with absolutely no information as to why that should fail. Trying to debug something by guesswork on a time limit is not a valuable educational experience. I feel all of these issues are fixable though and on balance I think this was a very good course. | material was appropriate in scope and | Quality | for an introduction to Aerial Robotics. | Positive | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| K0cCzBtHEeWsqgoIBu2JdQ | The online lectures delivery by Dr Wayne are of a very high quality. Dr Wayne makes learning difficult concepts easy and the presentation is peppered with practical demonstrations of concepts at hand in the video. Learning is highly effective for the interested self-directed learner as there's good engagement and sufficient challenges are created along the way and during lecture delivery for the interested student. | Wayne are of a very high | Quality | Dr Wayne makes learning difficult concepts | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| K28H5jJ0EeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | A lot of work writing but the quality of instruction is excellent. | lot of work writing but the | Quality | of instruction is excellent. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| K28H5jJ0EeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | Such a boring course. No challenge at all, no meaningful example, and in the end seems that everybody grade without any reason. I don't think I'll finish the specialization, it's too expensive for such a poor quality | too expensive for such a poor | Quality | | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| k8B9WjxkEeW7GArkqhNhJw | Excellent overview of the music business. The course had a "goldilocks" quality to it...not too much information so as to overwhelm a beginner but just enough examples and facts to whet the appetite of those looking to dig deeper or become better prepared and more knowledgeable about their business as an artist! | The course had a " goldilocks" | Quality | to it. . . not too | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| kbmiwPT-EeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | This course is simply AMAZING!!! Thank you Michigan University, & Mr. Scott for your meticulous efforts in bringing to the world quality education in the most simplified pattern!!! Kuddos to Coursera!!! | efforts in bringing to the world | Quality | education in the most simplified pattern! | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| kbmiwPT-EeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | this is a excellent course that helps you inproving your thinking quality. | that helps you inproving your thinking | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | Excellent and interesting course on a very important topic. Very professional production and high quality lectures. It was quite easy, apart from the brain chemistry sections. | topic. Very professional production and high | Quality | lectures. It was quite easy, apart | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This course has provided me high quality of contents, tips and knowledge I had miss-understood about Social Media before taking the classes. Now I feel like a kind of expert in the issue of Social and an big enthusiast in the task of "identify as specific as you can the market you really want to develop". What amazing assessment! Thank you! | This course has provided me high | Quality | of contents, tips and knowledge I | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| l-VzSGYDEeWq4RLQvtY_lQ | Quality stuff | | Quality | stuff | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 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). | videos and slides are excellent. The | Quality | of the exam materials was not | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good overview of HTML/CSS/Javascript. Nice audio/video quality and preparation. Fun homework assignments and examples. Would have liked more CSS touches. | Good overview of HTML/CSS/Javascript. Nice audio/video | Quality | and preparation. Fun homework assignments and | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | One week shorter than other similar courses but the eLearning lectures are of excellent quality and the assignments do stretch you to learn | the eLearning lectures are of excellent | Quality | and the assignments do stretch you | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Not happy with the quality of the material. Dropped the whole specialization halfway through this class. | Not happy with the | Quality | of the material. Dropped the whole | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A lot of information, easy to understand, good quality of lectures and interesting practical exercises! Thanks! | of information, easy to understand, good | Quality | of lectures and interesting practical exercises! | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I am totally new in this new HTML language, CSS and Java Script. I like the quality of the information provided in the videos. For a new student like me this is really useful but still, I am not able to cope with the speed of the course. But still, the information is good and I am going to continue until the end. Thanks! | and Java Script. I like the | Quality | of the information provided in the | Negative | 0.66 | 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. | The presentations are professionally done with | Quality | audio and HD video. (The Professor | Negative | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | The course has a very important content. But I believe that it could improve it's quality, develop better slides, the teacher could be more dynamic. Other features like innovative assignments based on real life, partnerships with companies to provide content, and everything that could be a differential to the course will be awesome. | believe that it could improve it's | Quality | develop better slides, the teacher could | Negative | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Very Interesting topic, great production quality , great lecturer ! | Very Interesting topic, great production | Quality | , great lecturer ! | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| mIVIotyJEeWcBg435JRSdw | At the first time it was a very usefull course in terms of knowing how we can improve life quality of this population in particular, but, at the end the course it turned into another perspective that for me does not met all the objectives previously exposed | knowing how we can improve life | Quality | of this population in particular, but, | Negative | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | Big 5 star. Unfortunately I can't give more. My suggestions are to re record the section where the male instructor was explaning the very first android app,; the video quality on that section was very poor. My next suggestion will be: you guys mapped that course perfectly, you should add an advance level to this course or at least, create an android specialization for this course. At last, it would be a better idea after all 9 blocs, before the student submitted their project, the instructors create a big app that include some of the bloc or all of the blocs. This course will be my first completed course on coursera and I will definitely going to pay for that one later | first android app, ; the video | Quality | on that section was very poor. | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Quality of this course is better than the rest of the specialization. | | Quality | of this course is better than | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The video quality and content were good. Unfortunately, there were a lot of spelling errors and grammatical mistakes in the written portions. | The video | Quality | and content were good. Unfortunately, there | Negative | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| mqcQFm6vEeWJ-wrnmCvZZw | Great... Thank you for building a quality course. | . Thank you for building a | Quality | course. | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Really well made, easy to access this language and explainations in english are really good quality. Just a pleasure to learn chinese. .... | explainations in english are really good | Quality | Just a pleasure to learn chinese. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | It is really good course, fine video and sound quality were most likely for me. Also it's very good lessons order. | good course, fine video and sound | Quality | were most likely for me. Also | Neutral | 0.50 | 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 | think the quizzes could've been higher | Quality | Many of the images used in | Positive | 0.86 | 3.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | The course has great quality videos and gave me good insights on the topic. | The course has great | Quality | videos and gave me good insights | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | quality course with enough practice | | Quality | course with enough practice | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Bad teaching quality. | Bad teaching | Quality | | Negative | 0.77 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Excellent quality, loved the quizzes and graded assignments, completely worth the time and money! Highly recommend! | Excellent | Quality | loved the quizzes and graded assignments, | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Algorithmic Toolbox consists of a series of slides containing slimmed down explanations on introductory algorithmic concepts, followed up with programming assignments. The slides are the centrepiece of the course, as the presenters rarely stray from the bullet points and pseudocode they're comprised of. I learned a lot during this course. Although, to gain confidence in your knowledge, this is a course that will require you to seek out additional materials to supplement your learning. Perhaps unsurprising being an introductory course, but the presenters struggle when faced with setting expectations. Throughout the course presenters often gloss over fairly complex concepts, treating them as they were trivial knowledge. This applies to mathematical definitions, proofs where most steps are skipped, tree diagrams without the context of their underlying theory, or bullet points used in place of what could be detailed explanations. All material is left equally weighted. Rather than providing explanations like: "We don't need to go into detail on this, only x concept from it is important for what we want to focus on. Reference this chapter in this book for more detail." presenters would read mathematical definitions verbatim from the slides and move on. I was often unsure of how much I would need to know about such concepts. In terms of communication ability, the presenters don't hold up against many of the free/low-cost services I'm accustomed to using, for example: MIT OpenCourseWare, Udacity, edX, Khan Academy, Code School, Treehouse, etc. Perhaps unsurprising, as these competing services often feature professional communicators rather than professional researchers. But the marketplace for quality online education is definitely becoming a competitive one. Users now expect nothing less than presenters with exceptional communication/teaching ability. In most videos the presenters read verbatim from the slides and motion with their hands to explain concepts that would be better broken down on a whiteboard. Rarely straying from the slides, the times the presenters go into more depth on a concept, you get a scribble in the corner of a slide, lacking the clarity I've come to expect when approaching complex concepts from master educators like YouTuber PatrickJMT or Khan Academy. After a couple weeks into the course, I just went straight to the slides, read MIT's Introduction to Algorithms, and skipped most of the course videos. But all things considered, the course served as a good curriculum to guide my focus through the introductory concepts, regardless of where I sought it out. | professional researchers. But the marketplace for | Quality | online education is definitely becoming a | Positive | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | This is a good course, and I liked the quality of video lectures. The material is structured and lets the students understand the basic approaches they can follow to solve algorithmic tasks. Also a good plus is that there are assignments. First, they are of different complexity - so anyone will find an interesting task there. Second, there are prepared starter files for 3 languages - so you spend time working on algos, not on bootstrapping projects. And third - grading is automatic. Just for fiuture - as a more engaging thing there could be also made tasks to review of other people's assignments (as it is done in other courses) and implementing a test case which makes a wrong solution to fail (which is something like TopCoder does). But this idea is too raw and needs more thinking. | good course, and I liked the | Quality | of video lectures. The material is | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | I finished the first session of Master Algorithmic Programming Techniques, the Algorithmic Toolbox course. This is an amazing course. To review why this course (and series) is awesome: 1) 25 + programming assignments, ranging from easy to advanced. 2) Unlike many other CS courses, this course allows multiple programming languages. You have choices of C C++, Java, Python2, Python3. They may add more to the list :). 3) Super active forum, the learners come here to debate approaches and share knowledge a lot. There were so many times I'm convinced my algorithm can't be optimized anymore, then another guy came in with another genius idea. 4) Plus, the instructor, Mr. Alex S. Kulikov is a super nice guy, he made 300+ forum posts in the first session alone, to guide learners thoroughly.Comprehensive grader: grades you on correctness, time use, memory use. You have no choice but to optimize all 3 aspects to pass. This course has premium access. However, both the quality and quantity are well worth the price. You can read other learners' comments and many agree with this. | has premium access. However, both the | Quality | and quantity are well worth the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Very good quality! | Very good | Quality | | Positive | 0.81 | 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. | interesting and instructive spreadsheet exercises. The | Quality | of the presentations, subtitles and slides | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is a solid course. The videos are a bit low quality, and the API's used are sorta derpy, but the content is good. | The videos are a bit low | Quality | and the API's used are sorta | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Love this course, the quality of this course is far beyond to what my current online master degree offers. | Love this course, the | Quality | of this course is far beyond | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course is for programmers that wanted to improve their techniques and knowledge of the language, since the course shorts videos with real life experiences, that give you advices on how their abilities and produce quality programms. | on how their abilities and produce | Quality | programms. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Seems like the quality of this specialization goes down with every course. The instructor is not showing us the way we should think about developing programs in NodeJS, but he insists on using PowerPoint slides to show us how to code! It's 2016, and there are way better mediums for communicating with your students. Simply copying and pasting code and explaining what every line does is not the right way of teaching any concept, especially when you are dealing with a new technology. For the start, the instructor can actually type the code and explain what goes through his mind during each step. That way anyone can follow his problem solving methods and benefit from the course. I had to take other online courses on Code School and Pluralsight just to understand what's going on, and later come back to finish the homework. | Seems like the | Quality | of this specialization goes down with | Negative | 0.83 | 1.0 |
| 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 | the concepts more effectively 3) The | Quality | of the presentations is somewhat lower | Positive | 0.66 | 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 | Coursera fees, I'd expect much more | Quality | in place to make it 70 | Negative | 0.76 | 3.0 |
| NiK99anHEeS88iIAC1WehA | Quality speakers and current topics with good discussion | | Quality | speakers and current topics with good | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| NiK99anHEeS88iIAC1WehA | This course has been outstanding, from the professor and the quality of guest speakers. Thank you so much for giving the opportunity for those of us abroad to be able to take this course and increment the knowledge we have about public policy and how we can become the future leaders of the world in our countries. | outstanding, from the professor and the | Quality | of guest speakers. Thank you so | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| NNe5CEW4EeW8ow5lHOiKYQ | the capstone project had peer reviews, requesting you to consider executive feedback, otherwise i am not able to actually judge the quality of my work | not able to actually judge the | Quality | of my work | Negative | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| NpTR4zVwEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | As usual for this specs - a very high quality course. | this specs - a very high | Quality | course. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| NpTR4zVwEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | One of the best coursers I have seen on Coursera so far. The video production quality, course structure and content is extra ordinary compared to other courses that I've seen so far. | Coursera so far. The video production | Quality | course structure and content is extra | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| NpTR4zVwEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | I am Krishna Kant Kumar, working as a software quality analyst. Through this course, I learnt, how to estimate an iteration or doing an estimation of project. | Kant Kumar, working as a software | Quality | analyst. Through this course, I learnt, | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is an excellent course. This is worth your time and money. I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in learning to make websites. The instructor is great and the content is of high quality. | and the content is of high | Quality | | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Thank You Colleen for this course which was delivered in the most simplest manner. Easy to understand with quality material. I am glad I enrolled for this course and I have also en | simplest manner. Easy to understand with | Quality | material. I am glad I enrolled | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Good, clear quality lectures. the right amount of work involved to do some learning without having to rearrange my life. overall very good course. | Good, clear | Quality | lectures. the right amount of work | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | which is easy to understand. The | Quality | of the video and audio are | Positive | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This was one of the excellent course. A good quality fundamentals and concept oriented. | of the excellent course. A good | Quality | fundamentals and concept oriented. | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | The subject matter is good, but the course does not adequately explain behavioral finance concepts. Most of the course consists of slide decks to read. There is a dearth of video content. I expected better quality from a course provided through Duke University. | of video content. I expected better | Quality | from a course provided through Duke | Negative | 0.73 | 2.0 |
| NuH3s9uFEeWoKQ6POrXqdQ | While the efforts of the coursemakers are greatly appreciated, much could be done to refine the quality of the course. Many materials have broken links and the lack of character entry for some practice problems poses an issue as pinyin with tones is rather hard to type. | could be done to refine the | Quality | of the course. Many materials have | Neutral | 0.50 | 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. | all this complex stuff with extraordinary | Quality | in different scenarios: lab, room, his | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Nyq7nXzPEeWb-BLhFdaGww | 13 weeks long? This is basically his class syllabus transferred to a MOOC! The first video was a ridiculous waste of my time. The videography was totally unprofessional. Shaky camera, this long walk and football kicking with a brain on the football field??? The audio is horrible... use a mic. I signed up for a neuro course, not an advertisement of the campus. This guy needed an Instructional Designer to help him condense and build this course into something digestible. This is MOOC, not a college course. I am horribly disappointed at the quality. I needed an overview of the main components of Neuro Medical Science. | I am horribly disappointed at the | Quality | I needed an overview of the | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| O6SzVx2GEeSKwCIACzUCbQ | I truly enjoyed the content as well as the format of this class. While the pace was very swift, it was apparent that a lot of thought was put into developing this course. I feel like I've gained a quality education on the basic introductory information to Communication Science. The Little Box of Nuances inspire me to further explore this subject. | I feel like I've gained a | Quality | education on the basic introductory information | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| O941HzsyEeWjyxInT4zYJQ | I like what kind of job you have done creating this series of courses. But the final course was too long. In the end, I made the final document for the last night from scratch, received 100%, and I was a little upset. I would like something more complicated as the final task. Even the criteria for evaluation were extremely formal, with no concept of quality assessments. Nevertheless, thank you very much. I learned a lot of details and nuances of game development. And I got a bit of confidence in the chosen field of activity. | extremely formal, with no concept of | Quality | assessments. Nevertheless, thank you very much. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Wonderful course with very clear and precise information, extremely well explained making easy to understand every single topic. I guess they used lots of strategy experience into how to transfer knowledge. Thank you very much for the high quality content. | you very much for the high | Quality | content. | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | The course was very interesting and engaging. It provided a lot of quality learning materials and touched on various real world examples. | engaging. It provided a lot of | Quality | learning materials and touched on various | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Very good learning. And good quality of videos. | Very good learning. And good | Quality | of videos. | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Very dynamic, good teacher, quality material, it gives you different approaches about strategy as concept and shows you what can we learn from the past about strategists and how it is being applied these days. | Very dynamic, good teacher, | Quality | material, it gives you different approaches | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | This course is very helpful in giving students a survey in the major thoughts of the modern Western world. The fact that it is carried out by Wesleyan University, a premier Liberal Arts College in the United States, ensures its quality and seminar-style coherence. I find it particularly interesting when each chapeter is started by an assigned reading task with the instructor's videos following, which is a rather typical method by which American collegiates learn humanities. | in the United States, ensures its | Quality | and seminar-style coherence. I find it | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | Great course with quality instruction for introduction to the material. | Great course with | Quality | instruction for introduction to the material. | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| OJkRmJz-EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Fantastic course! ( always suggest to take the courses in sequence, but this one can be a stand alone course as well). I'm definately taking the next course as well! Very high quality of teaching as well as materials and other resources. | next course as well! Very high | Quality | of teaching as well as materials | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | This was, by far, the most useful online course I have taken. The course quality is excellent and the concepts were explained clearly. I highly recommend. | course I have taken. The course | Quality | is excellent and the concepts were | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | Matt, thanks a lot for very useful and interesting course! It's exceeded all my expectations. I apply new knowledge on a daily basis at my work and it has helped me a lot already to imporve the quality of my communication on all levels (colleagues, management, subordinates). Thanks a lot! p.s. I´ve understood that it´s better not to start a course if there are X-mas holidays in the middle. For me the course took a bit longer because of that:) Thanks a lot again! Public speaking course should be a mandatory part of all high schools program | a lot already to imporve the | Quality | of my communication on all levels | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | Great course. I just loved the way Matt McGarrity developes his lectures, he provides a wide variety of resources for us to understand and practice public speaking. I feel so happy and grateful that Coursera is providing this high quality courses. | that Coursera is providing this high | Quality | courses. | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | This was one of the better courses I've taken on Coursera. Simply put, I learned a lot. It was information dense, well thought out material, and presented by someone with the quality of ethos indicating a true educator. Also it tackled challenges like how to practice public speaking in a MOOC context with the creative application of video technology. Thank you Dr. McGarrity. | and presented by someone with the | Quality | of ethos indicating a true educator. | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| oSAFEslDEeWCSBJ1_yk7Tw | Excellent course, quality teaching | Excellent course, | Quality | teaching | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | very low quality and not practical | very low | Quality | and not practical | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The quality of the course is awesome, the material is very solid and professor Chuck is a very didactic. | The | Quality | of the course is awesome, the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Chuck!!! Thanks so much you are an incredible teacher and I can also tell an incredible human being. Ofcourse im going to keep on going with the next certificates. This classes are awesome and with this you allow that people with low or non income can learn, grow and improve their quality life. Thanks so much again!!! | can learn, grow and improve their | Quality | life. Thanks so much again! ! | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very high quality course | Very high | Quality | course | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I really appreciate and enjoy this high quality classes. I have learned a lot in python programming through this class. | really appreciate and enjoy this high | Quality | classes. I have learned a lot | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great job, very good quality items ... | Great job, very good | Quality | items . . . | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | like part one, top quality course!!! | like part one, top | Quality | course! ! ! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Pc2juyEIEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | poor quality and even worse presentation by the teacher | poor | Quality | and even worse presentation by the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | I believe the quality of the course is above average. But I have to admit that it can hardly be called a great course, in that the content of the course seems to be loose, inconsistent and sorta unorganized. Martin is no wonder one of the greatest computer scientists in the world, but there is still a long way to go before his course can match his ability as computer scientist. Many thanks for Martin anyway for his great contribution to the world, hope your course will keep growing as Scala does! | I believe the | Quality | of the course is above average. | Positive | 0.91 | 3.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | This course is a re-hash of both the excellent "Functional Programming Principles in Scala" and the mediocre "Principles of Reactive Programming in Scala". Unfortunately, in quality it's closer to the latter: mixed quality, lectures that seem unrelated to their corresponding assignments, many errors (both typos and, more seriously, examples that don't type-check!) and a general lack of an in-depth motivation for the principles. Staff participation in my run of the course (2016) was disappointingly low; in some cases there was no response at all to students pointing out glaring errors in the lectures. It's very noticeable that this course is a patchwork of previous courses. In same cases the video lectures even display the wrong title for the course, or mention lectures that no longer exist in this version of the course! The course has interesting parts (I was especially thrilled when I saw there were lectures about FRP), but its quality is way below "Functional Programming Principles in Scala". I'm disappointed. To make this review constructive, my recommendations: 1- Pay attention to quality. Make sure all examples compile and type-check. 2- Make sure you're not repeating content already in other courses, especially if they are part of the same specialization! 3- If you're going to re-use content from other contents, make sure it fits the current course. Do not mention lectures not in the course. | Programming in Scala" . Unfortunately, in | Quality | it's closer to the latter: mixed | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | This course is a re-hash of both the excellent "Functional Programming Principles in Scala" and the mediocre "Principles of Reactive Programming in Scala". Unfortunately, in quality it's closer to the latter: mixed quality, lectures that seem unrelated to their corresponding assignments, many errors (both typos and, more seriously, examples that don't type-check!) and a general lack of an in-depth motivation for the principles. Staff participation in my run of the course (2016) was disappointingly low; in some cases there was no response at all to students pointing out glaring errors in the lectures. It's very noticeable that this course is a patchwork of previous courses. In same cases the video lectures even display the wrong title for the course, or mention lectures that no longer exist in this version of the course! The course has interesting parts (I was especially thrilled when I saw there were lectures about FRP), but its quality is way below "Functional Programming Principles in Scala". I'm disappointed. To make this review constructive, my recommendations: 1- Pay attention to quality. Make sure all examples compile and type-check. 2- Make sure you're not repeating content already in other courses, especially if they are part of the same specialization! 3- If you're going to re-use content from other contents, make sure it fits the current course. Do not mention lectures not in the course. | it's closer to the latter: mixed | Quality | lectures that seem unrelated to their | Positive | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | This course is a re-hash of both the excellent "Functional Programming Principles in Scala" and the mediocre "Principles of Reactive Programming in Scala". Unfortunately, in quality it's closer to the latter: mixed quality, lectures that seem unrelated to their corresponding assignments, many errors (both typos and, more seriously, examples that don't type-check!) and a general lack of an in-depth motivation for the principles. Staff participation in my run of the course (2016) was disappointingly low; in some cases there was no response at all to students pointing out glaring errors in the lectures. It's very noticeable that this course is a patchwork of previous courses. In same cases the video lectures even display the wrong title for the course, or mention lectures that no longer exist in this version of the course! The course has interesting parts (I was especially thrilled when I saw there were lectures about FRP), but its quality is way below "Functional Programming Principles in Scala". I'm disappointed. To make this review constructive, my recommendations: 1- Pay attention to quality. Make sure all examples compile and type-check. 2- Make sure you're not repeating content already in other courses, especially if they are part of the same specialization! 3- If you're going to re-use content from other contents, make sure it fits the current course. Do not mention lectures not in the course. | were lectures about FRP), but its | Quality | is way below " Functional Programming | Negative | 0.84 | 2.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | This course is a re-hash of both the excellent "Functional Programming Principles in Scala" and the mediocre "Principles of Reactive Programming in Scala". Unfortunately, in quality it's closer to the latter: mixed quality, lectures that seem unrelated to their corresponding assignments, many errors (both typos and, more seriously, examples that don't type-check!) and a general lack of an in-depth motivation for the principles. Staff participation in my run of the course (2016) was disappointingly low; in some cases there was no response at all to students pointing out glaring errors in the lectures. It's very noticeable that this course is a patchwork of previous courses. In same cases the video lectures even display the wrong title for the course, or mention lectures that no longer exist in this version of the course! The course has interesting parts (I was especially thrilled when I saw there were lectures about FRP), but its quality is way below "Functional Programming Principles in Scala". I'm disappointed. To make this review constructive, my recommendations: 1- Pay attention to quality. Make sure all examples compile and type-check. 2- Make sure you're not repeating content already in other courses, especially if they are part of the same specialization! 3- If you're going to re-use content from other contents, make sure it fits the current course. Do not mention lectures not in the course. | my recommendations: 1- Pay attention to | Quality | Make sure all examples compile and | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | The content is excellent (as always), however the form leaves a bit to be desired. The video quality kept reverting to "low", and even on "high", the resolution was nothing to be proud of in 2016 (or at any time during this century). Also, the instructors appeared to make references to lectures that are not a part of this edition of the course. But these are small issues – the course is definitely worth taking, small imperfections or not. | bit to be desired. The video | Quality | kept reverting to " low" , | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | The course had many information provided and thanks for that. But there are some things I disliked and I guess by fixing them the course would become much much better. 1. The information refers to the PMBOK very often. That is good, as the PMBOK worth (must?) reading for any PM, but it is a bit difficult to understand anything while a teacher just retranslates something, from any book — especially not written by the one — with poor examples. The much better way for lecturer is to explain it by oneself, not by just staying there and repeating what I can read from my display. 2. I dislike fixating to any software. Maybe Microsoft Project is a good example, but I am sure not the only one at first, and as I am a Mac person who has personal Macbook and Mac Pro at work I am not going to use Windows only for one application. There are plenty of them these days, the same or just similar. The key is not a software itself but the methodology using in the one. The methodology is worth understanding, for sure. 3. Grammar mistakes and misprints. It looks a little strange that no one reviewed the materials: neither on Coursera (I am sure it is not so easy to review every course) nor the creators. I am highly puzzled about how it could be possible: if it is a free course for someone there are also many of those who are paying for the courses, and the courses also represent the University. How the University cannot find someone to check the mistakes before publications? (To be precise there are tiny mistakes related to headers and graphics which make the materials looks untidy). 4. Materials production is very poor in details, even for the key ones: typography, colours, thickness of the fonts and lines. There are no contrasts, no highlighting — that looks as a draft, not as a final course worth spending the time, effort and money. If there are no people available to help with producing the materials of a good quality you can ask people from trueowl inc. (the website is trueowl.com and the working email is trueowl@trueowl.com) to help with it. They — we, as I am member of the team — are highly concerned about educational materials and motivated to enhance the quality of the materials, even for free of charge. Anyway I am glad I finished this course, as it gave me understanding which way should I continue with diving deeper into the theme. Thank you! | producing the materials of a good | Quality | you can ask people from trueowl | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | The course had many information provided and thanks for that. But there are some things I disliked and I guess by fixing them the course would become much much better. 1. The information refers to the PMBOK very often. That is good, as the PMBOK worth (must?) reading for any PM, but it is a bit difficult to understand anything while a teacher just retranslates something, from any book — especially not written by the one — with poor examples. The much better way for lecturer is to explain it by oneself, not by just staying there and repeating what I can read from my display. 2. I dislike fixating to any software. Maybe Microsoft Project is a good example, but I am sure not the only one at first, and as I am a Mac person who has personal Macbook and Mac Pro at work I am not going to use Windows only for one application. There are plenty of them these days, the same or just similar. The key is not a software itself but the methodology using in the one. The methodology is worth understanding, for sure. 3. Grammar mistakes and misprints. It looks a little strange that no one reviewed the materials: neither on Coursera (I am sure it is not so easy to review every course) nor the creators. I am highly puzzled about how it could be possible: if it is a free course for someone there are also many of those who are paying for the courses, and the courses also represent the University. How the University cannot find someone to check the mistakes before publications? (To be precise there are tiny mistakes related to headers and graphics which make the materials looks untidy). 4. Materials production is very poor in details, even for the key ones: typography, colours, thickness of the fonts and lines. There are no contrasts, no highlighting — that looks as a draft, not as a final course worth spending the time, effort and money. If there are no people available to help with producing the materials of a good quality you can ask people from trueowl inc. (the website is trueowl.com and the working email is trueowl@trueowl.com) to help with it. They — we, as I am member of the team — are highly concerned about educational materials and motivated to enhance the quality of the materials, even for free of charge. Anyway I am glad I finished this course, as it gave me understanding which way should I continue with diving deeper into the theme. Thank you! | materials and motivated to enhance the | Quality | of the materials, even for free | Negative | 0.76 | 3.0 |
| POZJ3uOtEeSoXCIACw4Gzg | Good quality. | Good | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| prHAajqwEeWXuQopUhAqaw | It was a fantastic education on basics of International law for the students like us who are from developing nation and have no access to quality education. | nation and have no access to | Quality | education. | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | I'm unimpressed with the quality of the material and uninspired by the professor's video presentations. Out of the dozen or more courses here that I have taken, this one ranks at the bottom. I'm not going to disenroll at this time, but I have lost interest without even progressing beyond the first week. Maybe if I get inspired later, I will try again. | I'm unimpressed with the | Quality | of the material and uninspired by | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | First of all, thank you for the course, as it enables students to get a bit more up-to-date and knowledgeable in the topic. On the other hand, unfortunately it's not worth one's time as it didn't deliver very good quality, nor on its promise regarding "The Big Picture". Pros: Easy to understand. Self-paced. Objectivity and positive overall message. Cons: Overall quality and clarity of the lectures is not very good. Lectures are a bit hard to follow, not because of the complexity of the topic, but because of some controversial and outdated data, and the speaking and presentation style of the lecturer. Assignments contain too many trivial questions, but also some mistakes which makes some questions impossible to answer correctly, based on the lectures, or at all. No staff engagement or feedback on the forums, which is especially problematic regarding to aforementioned mistakes. The title and description of the course don't inform students that it is completely US-centric, and mostly concentrating on petroleum/oil. So along with a lot of important topics, "The Big Picture" is missing. | as it didn't deliver very good | Quality | nor on its promise regarding " | Negative | 0.87 | 2.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | First of all, thank you for the course, as it enables students to get a bit more up-to-date and knowledgeable in the topic. On the other hand, unfortunately it's not worth one's time as it didn't deliver very good quality, nor on its promise regarding "The Big Picture". Pros: Easy to understand. Self-paced. Objectivity and positive overall message. Cons: Overall quality and clarity of the lectures is not very good. Lectures are a bit hard to follow, not because of the complexity of the topic, but because of some controversial and outdated data, and the speaking and presentation style of the lecturer. Assignments contain too many trivial questions, but also some mistakes which makes some questions impossible to answer correctly, based on the lectures, or at all. No staff engagement or feedback on the forums, which is especially problematic regarding to aforementioned mistakes. The title and description of the course don't inform students that it is completely US-centric, and mostly concentrating on petroleum/oil. So along with a lot of important topics, "The Big Picture" is missing. | and positive overall message. Cons: Overall | Quality | and clarity of the lectures is | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I will recommend everyone to spend some quality time with Dr. Raj to discover happiness inside you. | will recommend everyone to spend some | Quality | time with Dr. Raj to discover | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | In addition of the very relevant content, all the materials and videos are of very high quality. Além do tema ser muito relevante, todo o material e os vídeos são de alta qualidade. | and videos are of very high | Quality | Além do tema ser muito relevante, | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | thank you for this course and the professional way it has been set up. the enthusiasm, quality and learning I got out of this are way beyond anything I could I have imagi | has been set up. the enthusiasm, | Quality | and learning I got out of | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Good fun & very thought-provoking. Deductions for sometimes lousy sound quality of videos and inane placing of quizzes. | thought-provoking. Deductions for sometimes lousy sound | Quality | of videos and inane placing of | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | A must! I'm sure EVERYBODY can benefit inmensly from taking this course! Excellent content, excellent quality, excellent proffesor! | taking this course! Excellent content, excellent | Quality | excellent proffesor! | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Great for everyone! I recomend! This course will definitly improve que quality of your life! | This course will definitly improve que | Quality | of your life! | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. I am using the information in it to improve my life. I shared its teachings with friends and family, out of the belief that it is valuable information which will improve their quality of life. | valuable information which will improve their | Quality | of life. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am just mid-way through this course but I really can't stop myself from writing this review now, before I even finish it! Definitely it is the best course I have personally taken, despite the large number of courses I have experienced, some of them of excellent quality, in Coursera and elsewhere. Here we have a charismatic professor giving a great teaching performance, offering a vast amount of knowledge, a wealth of positive motivation and a big lesson for life! Obviously there is huge effort and hard work behind these exemplary video lectures. I would give it a 6/5 if I could.. | experienced, some of them of excellent | Quality | in Coursera and elsewhere. Here we | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| QgmoVdT2EeSlhSIACx2EBw | Pros: Content Professor Depth of material Cons: Exams are shit, full of mistakes, stuid questions asking 2 values but you have one field to fill in the data. Totally unacceptable quality issues with exams. READ THE FORUM!!!! | fill in the data. Totally unacceptable | Quality | issues with exams. READ THE FORUM! | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Wonderful course. As an Electronic Engineer, I've always have a lack of Knowledge in Data Base structures. Nowadays, not only software applications but software based hardware solutions depend on this infra structure to warehouse data and information. Moreover, we live today in an Analytic world, deep mining knowledge to make decisions every day. This Course met all expectation I had and I want to get trough specialization track. By the way, professor Mannino is a great mentor and quality of support material (book, slides, assignment, etc.) is totally above the line. | Mannino is a great mentor and | Quality | of support material (book, slides, assignment, | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The lecture videos have a format that is a bit over structured. It feels like the instructor takes as much time asking and answering an often contrived "motivation" question as he does teaching relevant material. The slides are of sufficient quality however to make viewing the lectures optional. . I would have appreciated having all the courses documents in single zip file. | material. The slides are of sufficient | Quality | however to make viewing the lectures | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| qogqSFgBEeWBNwpVGuknww | Topics presented well for comprehension, good lecture quality. These topics are covered in grad level statistics courses at certain universities. | presented well for comprehension, good lecture | Quality | These topics are covered in grad | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | well designed and impressive courses! I learn a lot about Tableau technique and the whole process of data analysis, including preparing the data analysis process with scientific guidance, making persuasive illustration and giving a high quality presentation!! I have learned a lot! | persuasive illustration and giving a high | Quality | presentation! ! I have learned a | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| qqP6hnElEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Great course! Got to know in depths about data formats, digitization, quality and uncertainty in data and online maps. | in depths about data formats, digitization, | Quality | and uncertainty in data and online | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| qqP6hnElEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | I enjoy this course , Excellent learning resource for Gis Data Formats, Design and Quality that teaches with examples , | for Gis Data Formats, Design and | Quality | that teaches with examples , | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| qqRBbiEREeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | The quality of the slides, video, and presentation in this course is much lower than those offered by this Speciality or coursera in general. Very disappointed in this. | The | Quality | of the slides, video, and presentation | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| QRDjcWLVEeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | The course content is very very good and not superficial as some courses we see around here. I liked very much how the order of subjects where build. However, if you allow me to give a *constructive* criticism, please let me say that the strategy chosen to ask lectures to read from previous written scripts, instead of letting them present more naturally, was a bad one. I understand that in order to make the legends/captions available, the lecturers kinda read from scripts their talks and this was very bad. It would be much better next time if you allow each speaker give the talk naturally as they want, with no reading, and then latter produce the subtitles. The lecturers are reseachers and not ACTORS so the final result of reading word by word what they were saying compromised a lot the final quality of their talks. Please don't get me wrong, I just trying to be constructive giving back somehow the time and effort spent by you guys to prepare such nice course. | saying compromised a lot the final | Quality | of their talks. Please don't get | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| qu8u8vqKEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Good quality. Very instructive and inspirational. Thank you! | Good | Quality | Very instructive and inspirational. Thank you! | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| qXxuFBUnEeWhTg59fTWfpQ | Exceptionally good course in content, topic, applicability, interest and quality. Highly recommended to new leaders or anyone wanting to improve their ability to relate with, evaluate and motivate their coworkers and subordinates. | in content, topic, applicability, interest and | Quality | Highly recommended to new leaders or | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Great quality lectures and fun real life examples! Would be even better if more structured background literature was given and more connections were being drawn between coursework from different weeks. | Great | Quality | lectures and fun real life examples! | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | The teaching quality is very average and mediocre at best. The assignments are merely implementation of lectures . The Stanford and Princeton courses on Algorithms are better courses to take for one to pursue a serious study of Algorithms. | The teaching | Quality | is very average and mediocre at | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | Really Good Course , Problems are of good quality , the content is time saving and easy to understand. | Course , Problems are of good | Quality | , the content is time saving | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| r32oHRuLEeWxXBLj8jbgsw | This is a best class I joined in coursera whit high quality of sound and method of teaching tnx | I joined in coursera whit high | Quality | of sound and method of teaching | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | This is just a poor sample of a course. Very few material, low quality assignments and grading. | a course. Very few material, low | Quality | assignments and grading. | Negative | 0.96 | 2.0 |
| 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. | The contents and | Quality | of the video lectures are great. | Positive | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| 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. | the video lectures are great. The | Quality | of the supplementary materials (like the | Positive | 0.89 | 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. | the Specialization which was of good | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 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. | money for this course and the | Quality | of it is notably worse than | Negative | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | In this course we will get to know about shortest path algorithm such A*, Dijkstra's, concept of configuration space and path planning in the same, developing Probabilistic road maps and RRT and also a bit about Artificial potenial fields. All the algorithms are neatly explained. The material though very short(in terms of total hours of video lectures) is nicely compiled. The quality of the MATLAB exercises is very good with few issues here and there. We can extract a lot about MATLAB implementation of different simulations by spending time understanding the given code and also implementing missing sections as part of the assignment. Overall, a great course. | video lectures) is nicely compiled. The | Quality | of the MATLAB exercises is very | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The course is very bad and feels thrown together at the last minute. Learning A* and Dijkstra's algorithm is great however the assignments require you to learn not just the little details but to "discovery" techniques not even mentioned in the course material. In addition, you must have strong matlab programming skills and be familiar with much matlab functionality in order to debug some of the assignments. You must have more knowledge concerning matlab than any of the course material or pointers provides. Meaning that beginners will NOT pass this course. The automatic grader provides no feedback at all except pass or fail. This is unfortunate as it can look like your code is working correctly but, the grader is using some edge cases to grade the code but will not include any information indicating what to look for. This is really atrocious. Although the TA's do occasionally provide answers to questions. The total amount of time TA's spend answering questions is just really poor. Don't expect even well asked questions to be answered at all. In addition, the coded template quality upon which your own code depends is horrible and thrown together. You will spend way too much time analyzing it for clues as to what went wrong. Sadly, enough all of these issues have caught up with me and I was unable to pass assignment 2 part 2. Even, though everything looks like it works and achieves the desired goal and even works with all of my own test cases. The grader is merciless. Perhaps, in the feature more time can be devoted to make this course better and I can spend more time learning how the algorithms and maths work rather than matlab and the automatic grader. At this time I don't feel like my money was well spent on these courses. I don't think I would like to risk another 50 dollars learning matlab and debugging the automatic grader on any of the other courses in this specialization. That is very disappointing as I really am passionate about learning robotics and looked forward to the other courses as well. | all. In addition, the coded template | Quality | upon which your own code depends | Positive | 0.64 | 1.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | An excellent course with Professor Bushee, as always (I completed a previous ten weeks course with him, also a superb quality programme of study), very practical, focused and complete, and absolutely enjoyable. | course with him, also a superb | Quality | programme of study), very practical, focused | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 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. | course - and find that the | Quality | and complexity of content is all | Positive | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| RFyNbG0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | It's of great help and the presentation is of super quality. | and the presentation is of super | Quality | | Positive | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| 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. | 2 stars is because of the | Quality | of the courses itself. There are | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Poor quality. A disappointing experience. The lectures are very basic, thought for people that have no experience in programming. This might be ok, but the difficulty of assignments should follow; instead, they can be relatively hard; newbie programmers will probably have an extremely hard time solving them, considering that many of the problems they will encounter are not treated at all in the course. The course does not focus enough on what differentiates R from other languages: just a few videos on data types, *apply functions, and a tiny little bit of scoping (very unclear). All these areas should have been expanded, and the course should have had more arguments as well. Finally, the assignments are not enough and their grading system is quite poor: instead of submitting your code and testing it automatically, you should calculate some quantities by hand and select the results out of a few possibilities. All in all, I was disappointed with the course. | Poor | Quality | A disappointing experience. The lectures are | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| 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 are loosing. Where is the | Quality | assurance. Just because one guy comes | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Death by power point. If you can learn from essentially listening to a pod cast and reading unix type manual pages, then this course is for you! If you're like the rest of the population, then these lecture videos are useless. The only redeeming quality to this course has been the homework, but you can find them online or come up with them on your own. | videos are useless. The only redeeming | Quality | to this course has been the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I've seen a general improvement in quality respect to the other about exploratory analysis, nothing else to say! Awesome job! | I've seen a general improvement in | Quality | respect to the other about exploratory | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A good course with high quality information and good presenters. | A good course with high | Quality | information and good presenters. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Super satisfied with this course! Lecture videos are top quality, the PDF is available which makes studying and going back to the material more easy. The swirl programming lectures are very well done. I learnt more than I expected, quicker than I thought I would! Thumbs up! | this course! Lecture videos are top | Quality | the PDF is available which makes | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Excellent course, great professor and very good quality content. Thank you | course, great professor and very good | Quality | content. Thank you | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | This Course is very helpful, and healthy for our daily life of living as well to others that are around us. Thanks to Dr Barbara F, and everyone to contribute with their knowledge to improve quality of life. I have enjoyed this course since the beginning. Thanks very much ! | contribute with their knowledge to improve | Quality | of life. I have enjoyed this | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | the course is interesting and challenging. it presents the positive psychology paradigm in a broad and exhaustive way. the loving kindness meditation is a special gift that will be with me forever. I especially appreciate how the lessons were managed, with the small group of four "students" who were then interviewed as experts in their fields of study or practice. I only have to complain about the video quality. especially long videos used to interrupt after the first 5 minutes, both image and sound or image only. the only way to go further was refreshing continuously. so I hadn't any chance to do all the embedded activities. my general review is: excellent course to have a first glance at positive psychology and a good platform to dive in from. | have to complain about the video | Quality | especially long videos used to interrupt | Positive | 0.96 | 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. | only have a sugestion on the | Quality | of the videos: The first ones | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | This course really helped me to filter out unnecessary and false information and do better quality researches. I always advise this study to people who could merit from it. So far, the best course I have ever done. | and false information and do better | Quality | researches. I always advise this study | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| 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. | experiece of online study. The high | Quality | content of the videos and adequate | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The material has a very good quality. The teacher explains the subject very well and the videos are very supportive. The build-up in the course is well-thought and works like a charm, I am excited to continue with the specialization. | The material has a very good | Quality | The teacher explains the subject very | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | This course is excellent! I found the content of very high quality, the lecture videos are very clear and easy to understand. What I find remarkable however, is the quality of the exams and assignments! The staff have put in a lot of effort in creating questions and assignments which really test your understanding and knowledge with a clever marking system which always works out to give you a fair mark even when the assignments are peer reviewed. Well done to Anne-Marie and the other staff who put together this course :) | found the content of very high | Quality | the lecture videos are very clear | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | This course is excellent! I found the content of very high quality, the lecture videos are very clear and easy to understand. What I find remarkable however, is the quality of the exams and assignments! The staff have put in a lot of effort in creating questions and assignments which really test your understanding and knowledge with a clever marking system which always works out to give you a fair mark even when the assignments are peer reviewed. Well done to Anne-Marie and the other staff who put together this course :) | I find remarkable however, is the | Quality | of the exams and assignments! The | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I was extremely impressed by this course, its pedagogy, its depth and breadth, the clarity of the lectures, the quality of the material. Well done to all involved. I have signed up for the entire specialization and hope that the rest matches up to this. | the clarity of the lectures, the | Quality | of the material. Well done to | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I had taken 99% of the course last time, but didn't have time to do the assignments or complete it fully. I was pleased to see it was running again. I've followed many many many Courseras and this is by far the highest quality. Well done! What you did right? Illustrations. They perfectly capture the concept without distracting. They are amusing and just-the-right-degree-of-imperfect, which makes the course material feel approachable.The graphic design. The slightly messy, hand-written, crumpled paper background design is perfect. Not pretentious, not overly boring. Just that little touch of individualism and authenticity we need. This is a great way to avoid alienating your students, to keep a connection. Philosophy of science, history of science, research designs, etc. Despite having studied for a BSc, an MSc, and a scientific postgrad, I had to find out about these concepts through on-line courses and podcasts. I was really happy to see these neatly presented to me in a structured way in one spot in the context of a formal Research methods course. When covering these sections, you also did a great job at sticking to the important stuff. I am extremely impressed. In the reality of research, we get sucked in by the nitty gritty and forget about the big picture. Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful framework behind the scientific method.You actually bothered spell-checking the transcript, particularly for proper names. I've had Courseras where the transcript seemed more like a onomatopeas than serious text. This is all I remember for now, all that's fresh off my mind, as am just up to week 2 right now, but I wanted to give you all a thumbs up for this great course you've wrapped up. I am seriously considering registering for the entire specialisation because of the quality of this course. | this is by far the highest | Quality | Well done! What you did right? | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I had taken 99% of the course last time, but didn't have time to do the assignments or complete it fully. I was pleased to see it was running again. I've followed many many many Courseras and this is by far the highest quality. Well done! What you did right? Illustrations. They perfectly capture the concept without distracting. They are amusing and just-the-right-degree-of-imperfect, which makes the course material feel approachable.The graphic design. The slightly messy, hand-written, crumpled paper background design is perfect. Not pretentious, not overly boring. Just that little touch of individualism and authenticity we need. This is a great way to avoid alienating your students, to keep a connection. Philosophy of science, history of science, research designs, etc. Despite having studied for a BSc, an MSc, and a scientific postgrad, I had to find out about these concepts through on-line courses and podcasts. I was really happy to see these neatly presented to me in a structured way in one spot in the context of a formal Research methods course. When covering these sections, you also did a great job at sticking to the important stuff. I am extremely impressed. In the reality of research, we get sucked in by the nitty gritty and forget about the big picture. Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful framework behind the scientific method.You actually bothered spell-checking the transcript, particularly for proper names. I've had Courseras where the transcript seemed more like a onomatopeas than serious text. This is all I remember for now, all that's fresh off my mind, as am just up to week 2 right now, but I wanted to give you all a thumbs up for this great course you've wrapped up. I am seriously considering registering for the entire specialisation because of the quality of this course. | the entire specialisation because of the | Quality | of this course. | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Excellent course. Very tidy and high quality of the visual presentations. In addition, its objectives are pretty clear from the beginning and the evaluation tasks are closely related to the course's topics. | Excellent course. Very tidy and high | Quality | of the visual presentations. In addition, | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Excellent quality of videos and tasks. | Excellent | Quality | of videos and tasks. | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| ru6DZ3Q6EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Typical of UofA MOOC's, very high quality. Excellent content. Well paced. | Typical of UofA MOOC's, very high | Quality | Excellent content. Well paced. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| rwRs6Tn9EeWJaxK5AT4frw | If this entire specialization were a bag of potato chips, the Capstone would be that bland chip that didn't get any salt. The introduction to the Capstone promises that we'll "build applications" utilizing what we've learned so far with optional assignments for delving deeper. However, none of the required assignments involve even the most primitive of problem solving skills or code writing abilities. If you can download a file and take a screenshot then you've got what it takes to pass this class. The optional assignments are far too focused around a new piece of video sharing technology that the instructor and associates have developed. Unfortunately, the technology adds almost nothing beneficial to the class and is probably to blame for the sheer lack of quality in the rest of the class. In fact, the entire Capstone feels like it was so haphazardly put together that it can only be described as the most contrived beta-test I've ever been a part of. Such a disappointing ending to what was otherwise an enjoyable specialization. | blame for the sheer lack of | Quality | in the rest of the class. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| s0uHeCzMEeWPngoW78wA_Q | My overall experience with this Specialization, in general, and this 1st Course, in particular, is very positive. On the positive side, I really like the fact that the Courses are practice-oriented and provide not only theoretical frameworks, but also insights from experts, practical guidance, and evidence-based best practices. Also, the idea of applying Team-Based Learning (TBL), in the forms of Readiness Assurance Tests (RATs) and scenario-based RAT Application Exercises, for assessing participants' learning, is excellent! However, there are a couple of downsides, that's why I'm not giving a 5 star positive feedback. The first problem is that not all of the required readings are freely available via the Coursera platform, or elsewhere online. I appreciate the excellent quality of the chosen materials, but, if it becomes compulsory to spend more than US $100 for buying books, then the total cost of this Specialization elevates quite a lot, given that I had to pay €162 for it. On my opinion, there should be at least a note in the description of both the Specialization and the Courses about these requirements, in order to make an informed decision before enrolling. The second downside has to do with Course 1 and Course 2 overlapping materials. I'm referring to guest interview videos. That's mainly a problem of the 2nd Course, as there are almost no guest interviews in this Course, and the one interview provided is already available in Course 1. I understand that the topics discussed apply to the topics of both Courses, but, still, I find it an unnecessary repetition. The last problem is about the dates that the Courses are run. Course 1 runs during a given period, Course 2 is on demand, but it makes sense to attend it before Course 3, that also runs during a given period, which overlaps with the period of the 1st Course. Sorry, this makes it very difficult to attend everything and to seriously focus, as it's always about running for deadlines, especially when one has to produce three (3) Board Effectiveness Assessment Reflection (BEAR) papers :( . | elsewhere online. I appreciate the excellent | Quality | of the chosen materials, but, if | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| SAZf_ay2EeS5uiIACk-Zyg | So much current, usable, high quality education in this course. I will be watching future classes offered by these Professors. Thank you for your dedication to educate us in the subjects of your expertise! | So much current, usable, high | Quality | education in this course. I will | Positive | 0.91 | 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. | Course | Quality | went downhill, compared to previous course | Negative | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| sHs1AyWUEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The content and the assignment were of high quality and I really enjoyed the case I had to work on. So overal the course was very good, but negative was that the course was a bit too long, I understand Coursera needs to finance the course, so it is better to have a long one and earn a lot of subscription fees. Bu the extra review rounds felt redundant, and because the course was so long it was difficult to keep focussed on it. | and the assignment were of high | Quality | and I really enjoyed the case | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| sHs1AyWUEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The course as a whole is excellent (5 stars), however, the Capstone project part of the specialization consists of 3 submissions that are reviewed by other students. Consequently the quality of the reviewers are of the same level as the student itself - which obviously limits the learnings from feedback. | reviewed by other students. Consequently the | Quality | of the reviewers are of the | Negative | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| 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. | 3 to 4 have poor sound | Quality | but still understandable. | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| sK74dCWgEeW8-A6tkjXxWQ | Really good course, high quality! I can recommend this one to anyone wanting to have some more stuff on their bread :) | Really good course, high | Quality | I can recommend this one to | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| SN5tm_tBEeScRyIAC3-PxA | High quality course ! | High | Quality | course ! | Positive | 0.89 | 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. | Coursera " infrastructure" and with the | Quality | of the teaching from Daniel Egger | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| svzDI2FSEeW6DxKCi866Kw | I thought this course was top notch - the lectures were very well designed and course production quality was first rate. An excellent introduction to an important subject area. | very well designed and course production | Quality | was first rate. An excellent introduction | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| SxjkGailEeSy_SIAC49HnA | Exceptional experience. I enjoyed the entire course. This was my first real sojourn into the genre and now I'm hooked. Thank you, very much, for sharing this quality education. Be Well. | you, very much, for sharing this | Quality | education. Be Well. | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Concise, no fluff spreadsheet modeling fundamentals with quality instruction concerning the different functions, data analysis and solver add-ins needed to start building effective financial models. Thanks Professor Huesman. | no fluff spreadsheet modeling fundamentals with | Quality | instruction concerning the different functions, data | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| 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. | But courses with that kind of | Quality | but staggering price will destroy the | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| tCC8OzJzEeWLGgqjU3pHlw | Great course! Great teacher! Fun, engaging and very useful. I've been using the first four courses from CalArts Game Development Specialization to develop a game idea I've had jotted down some time ago and I've found them to be the best thing I could've done to get my game going on the Narrative and Visual fronts. I've been doing the first four courses in the five course specialization as an unpaid observer, but after taking these courses, I'm signing up for the full specialization. If the quality holds true, the project driven fifth course will be amazing and well worth the money. The teacher in this particular course (Same teacher as in the Introduction to Game design class) is funny and entertaining to watch. Definitely goes the extra mile, doing interviews with great character designers and exploring their unique processes. Highly recommended! | for the full specialization. If the | Quality | holds true, the project driven fifth | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| TCmaO25NEeWdfRLY06XVmw | An absolutely high quality class. The instruction is superb, the assignment is on par with top programs at Stanford, MIT, and CMU. Dr. Grossman's lecture is just so clear and energetic that makes learning this hard topic fun. | An absolutely high | Quality | class. The instruction is superb, the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| tEqImn2kEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Top quality. I have read many instructions manuals on Pro Tools, and too many poor YouTube videos. I have learned more in this course than in all of my other investigations and studies put together. Clear, concise, and understandable. It gets to the essence of understanding and being able to use Pro Tools. Avid should hire Chrissy Tignor-Fisher. Excellent instructor! Please consider an advanced course in the future! | Top | Quality | I have read many instructions manuals | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| tEqImn2kEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Berkelee's Pro Tools Basics is one of the best courses I've taken here. Chrissy Tignor-Fisher is a wonderful teacher. She is very knowledgable and explains everything clearly, with an encouraging and inspiring attitude. The lecture videos are top-notch, with excellent presentation quality and tons of relevant information. Course assignments provide plenty of creative learning opportunities. Last but definitely not least, the peers in this course are so supportive, kind, and talented. It's been a joy to be a part of this course. Highly recommended to everyone! ***** | videos are top-notch, with excellent presentation | Quality | and tons of relevant information. Course | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| tEqImn2kEeWb-BLhFdaGww | This class has been the best Pro Tools course I have studied .Chrissy Tignor-Fisher has put together an incredible progressive lesson plan . The video lessons are top notch . The quality of audio and visual are crystal clear . The information is presented and demonstrated with such clarity it keeps you wanting to learn more . Chrissy I,m at week 4 of your 5 week Basic Pro Tools course . I took the class so I can really start tapping into the power of Pro Tools and get my studying habits back up to par . Yes there are assignments and deadlines through out this course . Thanks to the Coursera and Berklee Team for providing this platform of education . I look forward to participating in more courses provided by Coursera. | lessons are top notch . The | Quality | of audio and visual are crystal | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| THaE_RqwEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I've been to college, so I'm not the target audience for this course, but I was curious to see what would be covered and to learn more about colleges today. I felt the course covered mostly simplistic, obvious stuff and left out a lot that many students wonder about. One topic that was covered was the different activities of professors. I wished I'd known more about this when I started college. Of course I knew they did research, but I thought they were primarily there to teach. This is true at some colleges, but at others, the amount and quality of research can determine whether a professor gets to continue working there and reach tenure. So teaching may not be the first priority for some professors. Students may find that chunks of courses are devoted to a professor's research interests, which could enrich or derail the course. This could have been covered in more depth. Other things that could have been covered: why some courses are so large and the function of recitation sections and graduate teaching fellows for those and smaller courses; what a seminar is; the existence of course reviews that can help with selecting classes and professors; how to deal with not getting into a course you really need to take (wait lists, professorial overrides, etc.); when pre-requisite courses are really necessary and when they're just recommended; dropping courses; GRADES (how the college grading system works, what happens when you fail a course, academic probation, earning honors); campus codes of conduct (greater freedom as with class attendance; smoking and drinking rules, harassment policies) and disciplinary actions (disciplinary probation, expulsion); good campus activities for shy students. | but at others, the amount and | Quality | of research can determine whether a | Positive | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | Helpful techniques on how to improve teaching is one of the keys to have quality education. Thank you Coursera for this opportunity. | one of the keys to have | Quality | education. Thank you Coursera for this | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I know that it would be near impossible to do this on a website like Coursera where thousands of people are probably enrolled in your course, but it would be great if there was some real evaluation (teachers or experienced alums to comment on the quality) of our essays/responses. | experienced alums to comment on the | Quality | of our essays/responses. | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I am so impressed with the quality of style and content that this course was presented. I could see careful forethought, planning and execution of an online course that was a joy for me to be a part of. I totally recommend this course! | I am so impressed with the | Quality | of style and content that this | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | The week one preview shows that this high quality course explains language teaching basics in an easy to understand and fun manner. | one preview shows that this high | Quality | course explains language teaching basics in | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | This course offers very material of a high quality, with complex matter summarised in a very effective and helpful way. You are likely to gain interest new perspectives irrespective of background. Cudos to the organizers for a job very well done! Nick Clark, CFA | offers very material of a high | Quality | with complex matter summarised in a | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | This course has high quality instruction a | This course has high | Quality | instruction a | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | We are really very fortunate to have the courses like this. A lot of thanks with a request that please continue to bring these very high quality courses in future also. | continue to bring these very high | Quality | courses in future also. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| TN2PygiBEeW4diIACwKO-g | Really enjoyed this part of the course. I am very grateful for the opportunity to learn online and I am impressed by the quality of this course. I like the format of the three units for Soul Beliefs as I think this works well with the amount of material. However, it can take some time to have assignments marked by peers. Patience. My heartfelt thanks to the Profs and everyone involved. | and I am impressed by the | Quality | of this course. I like the | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | A very nice experience! Good to review the majority of the lessons that I've learned a few years a go. Some (minor) issues with the quality of the videos but the overall rate of the course is very good! | go. Some (minor) issues with the | Quality | of the videos but the overall | Negative | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | An amazing course. The quality of the content and the information given was exceptionally detailed and cohesive. | An amazing course. The | Quality | of the content and the information | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | Very good introductory course that allowed me to understand key body system. High quality lectures understandable for beginners with desire to get better understanding how body functions. | to understand key body system. High | Quality | lectures understandable for beginners with desire | Positive | 0.98 | 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! | you very much for such high | Quality | educative course, it helped me a | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| trDN9vgGEeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | the peer review was a waste of time, some individuals submit whatever other review whatever; I found that the assessment criteria is not based on evaluating the quality of performed work, and therefore have not really learned much from the capstone project. I am taking another course which as well has peer review, I am rethinking if it's worth it.... do not see any value, there is no real feedback from instructor. If I need it a peer review, I could just ask my colleagues at work. | is not based on evaluating the | Quality | of performed work, and therefore have | Negative | 0.78 | 1.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | This is a great course and I recommend it to everyone interested in Cybersecurity. The reading material is of exceptional value and I was amazed at the quality of the links to study material. What was totally new to me was Operational Security or Opsec, a totally intriguing subject, more or less cyber-self-defense! Yes, the videos are short but the reading material is quite large. I have kept the books and websites and will be reading them again, especially the NIST book. To everyone who claims that the course is not useful, I would say that you were probably one of those people who never read the books and the study material. | and I was amazed at the | Quality | of the links to study material. | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | So far I've gone through the first week. Lots of business and technical info. The video quality is AMAZING!! | business and technical info. The video | Quality | is AMAZING! ! | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I wish they spent more time on the content of videos and less on the silly effects and 30-second intro and outro sequences. Practically every question of the final comes word-for-word from a book not assigned in the module readings and not available for free to students for them to study. I won't be taking any other courses from this school if this course was an indication of quality. | this course was an indication of | Quality | | Negative | 0.68 | 1.0 |
| 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. | music was extremely annoying and the | Quality | of the content in the videos | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| TYSbV73jEeW1WAr3aepXuw | Very good and interesting for a beginner like me, I hope others also find use of this freely available quality material. | find use of this freely available | Quality | material. | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Unbelievable quality and density of information. Even more so because it is free!! Incredible! Hats off to Jeffery D. Sachs and this revolutionary work for our world. | Unbelievable | Quality | and density of information. Even more | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Lots of quality conversational information on sustainable development, but I wish there were more interactive projects to apply the concepts. Without an application, much of the information remained abstract and hard to remember. | Lots of | Quality | conversational information on sustainable development, but | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Great production and course quality. Highly recommended | Great production and course | Quality | Highly recommended | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Spectacular course, very informing and inspiring. I've only completed the preview of the course from several months back, but the amount of information that Professor Sachs imparted in just those few chapters was impressive, and honestly has changed my worldview. I'd never been so aware of the influence the Industrial Revolution played on shaping the vast differences in quality of life around the world, and can see now the importance as well as the challenges of ensuring that we focus our efforts equally on economic wellbeing of *all* people in a socially just and inclusive way, and in ways that are environmentally sustainable. Highly recommend this course. | on shaping the vast differences in | Quality | of life around the world, and | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Learning chapter after chapter ! The videos are amazing and the quality of data and they way it is exposed is really good ! | The videos are amazing and the | Quality | of data and they way it | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Poor video and audio quality. Not worth the price. | Poor video and audio | Quality | Not worth the price. | Negative | 0.91 | 2.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | The content, although very basic, is interesting, and some of the teacher's insights do stimulate discussion, but the video quality is low, with non matching slides, etc. | do stimulate discussion, but the video | Quality | is low, with non matching slides, | Negative | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| u41Z-k3PEeWjfw5p9aPb_w | Thankful that a course like this exists, as most MOOCs are quite basic. And thanks to Coursera for running the courses even though attendance seems to be low (darn, that pesky calculus pre-requisite). Lecture quality is varied--some quite good (such as the lectures in Boot Camp I) and others seem like he hadn't looked at his notes for a long time. It's great to hear a stats professor talk about the strengths and weaknesses of many approaches. It complements a mathematical statistics book quite well. It would have been nice to have had some problems that were more challenging. Overall, while the Johns Hopkins Data Science MOOCs are pretty good, they are a bit more basic than what's available through MIT and Stanford. | (darn, that pesky calculus pre-requisite). Lecture | Quality | is varied--some quite good (such as | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | updated , easy to understand and great professor combination all of those quality make this course one of the best courses i ever take it | great professor combination all of those | Quality | make this course one of the | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Uq0cvh6TEeS2uyIACzGOcw | This course is so thorough and so concise. I am both impressed by the quality of this course, and incredibly grateful that I have taken it. This course is eye-opening and I think should be big MUST on everyone's list. This course is Q-U-A-L-I-T-Y! | I am both impressed by the | Quality | of this course, and incredibly grateful | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Uq0cvh6TEeS2uyIACzGOcw | This course is so thorough and so concise. I am both impressed by the quality of this course, and incredibly grateful that I have taken it. This course is eye-opening and I think should be big MUST on everyone's list. This course is Q-U-A-L-I-T-Y! | on everyone's list. This course is | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | I was pretty wary of this course from a past experience with this teacher in a previous course, but i must say he nailed it, he has manage to create great videos with concise information that will help you understand the topics at hand, and unlike his previous course they are not a chore to sit through ;), it really shows the quality was always there but some focus was missing, this really is a great course and a teacher i feel ashamed for judging so quickly. | through ;), it really shows the | Quality | was always there but some focus | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| URpKtPs6EeSnBSIACi-PoQ | Content is good and teaching material is of good quality. Some more examples of the application of the concepts discussed during the lectures could make this course even more interesting. | and teaching material is of good | Quality | Some more examples of the application | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | By far one of the best courses I have taken on Coursera. The amount of material is astounding and of great quality through and through. I highly recommend this course. Be prepared to work for your diploma, however. | material is astounding and of great | Quality | through and through. I highly recommend | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| UTmoThr5EeWqIgq-TOy4Xw | This course has a high quality, I highly recommend it to any public and especially to medical personal. | This course has a high | Quality | I highly recommend it to any | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| u_Rrw_tfEeSuiSIACwuNww | High quality learning with relevant industry expert instructor Kevin Hartman. Excellent lectures. Tremendous amount of supporting learning material was also available with the course. Specifically recommended book Web Analytics Demystified is a great source of learning in depth about web analytics. Overall I achieved in my learning more than I expected from this course. | High | Quality | learning with relevant industry expert instructor | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Absolutely tremendous course on negotiations. Unbelievable quality! | Absolutely tremendous course on negotiations. Unbelievable | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This was my first experience with Coursera online classroom and I was blown away by the outstanding quality, value, and professionalism of this course. Thank you for bringing such gems to the general public! | was blown away by the outstanding | Quality | value, and professionalism of this course. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | The professor is well-knowledged and able to provide very high quality course. I do lean a lot from his class. Though English is my second language, prof. George's explanation is very clear, easy to understand and on the point. The videos help a lot when i was learning. It's more efficient and memorable than reading the book (i also purchase the book and write notes during my learning). Generally, I's satisfied by the knowledge I learned so far. Due to device limitation, i, prof, and other students may not able have interaction which may influence our learning quality (Negotiation required a lot of practice and experiences). But I still can see our prof's effort on making this class memorable to us. At the end, Thank you Prof. George for providing meaningful education. | and able to provide very high | Quality | course. I do lean a lot | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | The professor is well-knowledged and able to provide very high quality course. I do lean a lot from his class. Though English is my second language, prof. George's explanation is very clear, easy to understand and on the point. The videos help a lot when i was learning. It's more efficient and memorable than reading the book (i also purchase the book and write notes during my learning). Generally, I's satisfied by the knowledge I learned so far. Due to device limitation, i, prof, and other students may not able have interaction which may influence our learning quality (Negotiation required a lot of practice and experiences). But I still can see our prof's effort on making this class memorable to us. At the end, Thank you Prof. George for providing meaningful education. | interaction which may influence our learning | Quality | (Negotiation required a lot of practice | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I think Mr. George Siedel is an excellent teacher and this course is quite good overall. Thanks to coursera for providing such high quality courses. | to coursera for providing such high | Quality | courses. | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Thank you so much for provding quality content. This is the best thing in coursera. Keep it up. | Thank you so much for provding | Quality | content. This is the best thing | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Amazing! Supreme quality! I have really learned skills for the rest of my life! | Amazing! Supreme | Quality | I have really learned skills for | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| V5SinKHsEeSqoSIACzsKQg | Learners who have no background in any health discipline can have little difficulty with this course. The videos cite real-life examples, use several illustrations and simplify concepts. Variation in scenery and dialogues with experts and field workers highly contribute to the overall quality of the material. Dr. Boyd is a great instructor. His manner of delivery is relaxed, despite the critical importance of Global Health. | workers highly contribute to the overall | Quality | of the material. Dr. Boyd is | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| V5SinKHsEeSqoSIACzsKQg | This course was a great course eye- opener. Packed with a lot of information for each week, one really must spend some quality time to learn everything that the course has to offer. A great course from Duke and Dr. David Boyd. Loved every bit of it. | week, one really must spend some | Quality | time to learn everything that the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 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. | to be improved. Despite the low | Quality | of the quizzes, the course is | Negative | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | This is an exceptional course. The quality of the lectures – course content, lecturing approach, and audiovisual production – is top-notch. Randy Picker provides a fascinating, engaging look at various devices and platforms, starting with their history and then integrating legal considerations, particularly under antitrust and copyright law. He presents the material in an easily comprehensible and digestible way, and explores subjects (and objects) that are very relevant in the modern, connected, digitized, and (borrowing a word from this class) mediated world. I learned a lot, enjoyed the lectures, and can see the application of what I learned outside the virtual classroom. Thank you! | This is an exceptional course. The | Quality | of the lectures – course content, | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Excellent presentation of material - high video and audio quality was greatly appreciated! | material - high video and audio | Quality | was greatly appreciated! | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Great course. A very solid and current approach to media. The content has high quality and is well balanced. Value added for sure. | to media. The content has high | Quality | and is well balanced. Value added | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | The course is very well designed and the instructor is very clear and engaging! Moreover, a lot of useful tools and techniques are shown during sessions. Case studies could be improved, starting from the quality of videos and contents. | could be improved, starting from the | Quality | of videos and contents. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Thanks for all the support, without their help, would not have been able to study at an institution of high quality. Thanks Coursera and U. Michigan | study at an institution of high | Quality | Thanks Coursera and U. Michigan | Positive | 0.98 | 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! | The | Quality | of teaching is outstanding and I | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Colleen van Lent is really great, the course is well put together, and the video quality was excellent (looking at other courses, I now see that this is not always the case). I went through the HTML5 and CSS3 course and found them to be well-structured and thorough. There was a lot of opportunity to put into practice the skills we were learning and lots of helpful resources to point students in the right direction for additional help. I didn't like peer reviewing at first, but it was actually a useful exercise. I realized that other people may come at a problem in a slightly different way, and looking at their code helped me gain some insight into that nuance. Thanks, Colleen! | well put together, and the video | Quality | was excellent (looking at other courses, | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | I can't believe I learnt that much!! Thank very much for offering so much quality in your courses and let everyone to be part of it, even if someone can't afford the certificate. Thank you! | very much for offering so much | Quality | in your courses and let everyone | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| vIC_m1i_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Arizona State University along with Coursera offer an excellent course for teaching English as a foreign language. It is accessible and easy to follow with well presented, quality and videos to watch which makes learning simple. The tutors in the videos are top of their game and are likable and funny. Assignments are peer to peer assessed until the capstone course which is both p2p and professionally graded. You are able to work at your own pace and if you find yourself getting behind you can easily switch sessions. The course is not expensive but for those who struggle with finances, support is available. There is always general support and advice available whenever you need it. I have thoroughly enjoyed everything this course series has to offer and highly recommend it to anyone looking to gain the certificate, but also for anyone starting out as a teacher, there is much to be learned here and in my opinion, it is well worth it. | easy to follow with well presented, | Quality | and videos to watch which makes | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| vIC_m1i_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Superb. This course, like its predecessors, is so well put together and is of the highest quality. I am impressed! | together and is of the highest | Quality | I am impressed! | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | Bad quality slides and presentation. not possible to use headphone since it was on mono not stereo. Interesting topic but not well executed to fit online learning | Bad | Quality | slides and presentation. not possible to | Negative | 0.76 | 1.0 |
| vU4CeqTaEeW2ORLv1OUyFQ | This course provides an excellent comprehensive overview of physical activity. All the educational material and erudite videos are very high quality and help motivate and change behaviour from a sedentary to active lifestyle. Hopefully after the MOOC finishes that the evaluation process will demonstrate a positive outcome to educate and change attitudes to physical activity on a global basis. Well done to team leader Danijela Gasevic and the Sit Less, Get Active MOOC team. | and erudite videos are very high | Quality | and help motivate and change behaviour | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| VuRXs3EiEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Very basic in terms of material covered. Would be nice as a free remedial class in prep for the main specialization. Homework assignments were confusing and did not appear to have been reviewed by the instructors before being sent to students (main problem, the free software students use was not the same version as that being used to develop the homework). Instructor support was not evident in the user forums. Below the quality of the free classes taken in the past. | in the user forums. Below the | Quality | of the free classes taken in | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| VxTqEC8iEeWUWxIOAnoaFQ | Challenging course offered balance of study and testing: 3 essays, 6 short tests and one final exam. The quality of interviews, study sources and presentation by professionals was second-to-none by Coursera standards. This course is demanding. If you take the course you need to have a background in tax or be prepared to study over 10 hours per week. If you follow the guidelines and substantial source documents and presentations you should be able to pass the course. More importantly, focusing on the issues, ways and means that global enterprises have benefited from weak tax treaties and domestic laws is an eye-opener. Every politician elected to public office should take this course. Very done! Leiden's Centre for International Tax Law is clearly a world leader in tax law study and assessment. | tests and one final exam. The | Quality | of interviews, study sources and presentation | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| VxTqEC8iEeWUWxIOAnoaFQ | Top quality course from top University in the area of taxation | Top | Quality | course from top University in the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| VxTqEC8iEeWUWxIOAnoaFQ | I am very satisfied with the quality of this course, its materials, the videos. | I am very satisfied with the | Quality | of this course, its materials, the | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| Wa2LIymGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Excellent quality of simulation files and homework assignments. This course denotes a tremendous effort and hard work. I feel proud to have completed it, this course is by far one of the most challenging I have taken at coursera, and now going for the capstone project to complete my specialization ! | Excellent | Quality | of simulation files and homework assignments. | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| WaKiiuSYEeSRgCIACxAE0Q | I guess this is the course that I have enjoyed the most in Coursera until now. This is an awesome tool with such excellent program, final project and teacher. I invite everyone to enroll in the program. Thanks for offering quality through this course! | in the program. Thanks for offering | Quality | through this course! | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| wD1C7I_eEeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | Some materials are useful but the teacher has no idea of teaching techniques and good presentation. Very bad choice for the University of Irvin, California to entrust such an interesting course to such an incompetent and feeble instructor. She is reading in a monotonous way and nothing more. Her presentations have no meaning. She does not appear in the video lectures. She can not introduce animated elements. The materials she selected are sometimes and only somehow relevant. The most of the materials have only percentages, and small details on history. A course of poor quality. | on history. A course of poor | Quality | | Negative | 0.97 | 1.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is help full to managers and is fair in teaching skills. The picture quality is good and the real time examples are nicely explained. The course and syllabus is framed in a correct format. The course is very good for up coming stars. | fair in teaching skills. The picture | Quality | is good and the real time | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | Very well presented and crafted together. The quality of this class is exceptional! | well presented and crafted together. The | Quality | of this class is exceptional! | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | I didn't finish the course yet, but I strongly recommend this course to anyone interested in these skills. Even if you cannot read the books proposed because you don't have time like me, it gives all the aspects you need to understand, and maybe learn that in the future. The quality of the videos and explanations are overwhelming, I don't know if you can see such level of patience and great speech in other courses and it's FREE. If you take this course please be aware that the method Savoir Relier takes you to a profound journey into your own life, you will revisited things inside yourself, how you are inside this world with another person, a group and the society. It follows introspection, relationships, reflection, experiences and senses, emotions. You need to be ready to open your mind and heart. | learn that in the future. The | Quality | of the videos and explanations are | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Very good audio quality and good pacing and presentation of content. | Very good audio | Quality | and good pacing and presentation of | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| WQMNShxYEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | THE AUDIO QUALITY IS NOT CLEAR BUT CONTENTS ARE VERY USEFUL. | THE AUDIO | Quality | IS NOT CLEAR BUT CONTENTS ARE | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| WQMNShxYEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I needed these introductory guides to help me assess my own intentions, strengths, weaknesses in a more structured way. I have enjoyed the whole series. Only one technical issue: sound quality could always be better. | series. Only one technical issue: sound | Quality | could always be better. | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | First and foremost thank you for providing us with all that material which is of high quality! The only improvement I can think of is a better sound quality and also having a person of your institution to review peers' assignment (or something of similar logic in order to improve the evaluation process of the assignments). Thank you for your time and may you continue your wonderful work! | that material which is of high | Quality | The only improvement I can think | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | First and foremost thank you for providing us with all that material which is of high quality! The only improvement I can think of is a better sound quality and also having a person of your institution to review peers' assignment (or something of similar logic in order to improve the evaluation process of the assignments). Thank you for your time and may you continue your wonderful work! | think of is a better sound | Quality | and also having a person of | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| wU9rptfZEeSQpiIAC2iNcA | Thanks very much Fred! I really liked the content of your course, it really made me aware of how important it is to be a leader in the Health Care Environment, and how important it is to build quality with all the participants, including the patient. | how important it is to build | Quality | with all the participants, including the | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| wU9rptfZEeSQpiIAC2iNcA | Lovely course. Although I was familiar with many of the discussed topics , it was an insightful course that presented comprehensive information in a professional yet an easy way to understand. Thanks for the university and the professor to provide such course with such quality . | to provide such course with such | Quality | . | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| wU9rptfZEeSQpiIAC2iNcA | Outstanding overview of health care quality improvement and safety. | Outstanding overview of health care | Quality | improvement and safety. | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Very short. Quality of the course is OK. | Very short. | Quality | of the course is OK. | Negative | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| 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. | presented. The videos are of great | Quality | The quizzes could be more challenging. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| X9NQX3HtEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | This was a fantastic course! The professor is the best I have had yet; he makes concepts very clear and easy to learn, and he is constantly encouraging you as a student. He seems to really care about the quality of this course and the teaching that students receive. | seems to really care about the | Quality | of this course and the teaching | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | cool course and good quality | cool course and good | Quality | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Great course. Everyone should participate to improve one's quality of life. Ernest | Everyone should participate to improve one's | Quality | of life. Ernest | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Good quality introductory course | Good | Quality | introductory course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Short, easy to watch videos fulled with high quality content and good ideias to incorporate healthy habbits in our daily life. | to watch videos fulled with high | Quality | content and good ideias to incorporate | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very practical and applicable information. Great quality in the videos. | Very practical and applicable information. Great | Quality | in the videos. | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | In the beginning it feels like a course, but from week three on it feels more like a conversation about food. It is more suitable for people with very little background n food science and nutrition, aiming to get some knowl on these fields. But the views are quite one sided and necessarily true when it comes to the understanding of the food chain. Of course, many of their opinions are valid, but I wouldn´t accept those views as solid rock statements because they are not. In any case, I recomend the course for people with obesity problems and those who are too lazy to think about the importance of home cooking. The quality of the videos is outstanding! Congratulations! | the importance of home cooking. The | Quality | of the videos is outstanding! Congratulations! | Positive | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Great quality course! Highly recommend for anyone interested in basic food and nutrition. I thought it would go into a little more depth than it did but the production quality was so amazing I didn't mind. | Great | Quality | course! Highly recommend for anyone interested | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Great quality course! Highly recommend for anyone interested in basic food and nutrition. I thought it would go into a little more depth than it did but the production quality was so amazing I didn't mind. | than it did but the production | Quality | was so amazing I didn't mind. | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | The course is essentially a self-help guide focusing on the idea that cooking real food promotes health. This is certainly a message that many people need to hear. Unfortunately, the advice concerning what to eat is less sound. Let me illustrate this with a historical counterexample. Around 75 years ago, a Canadian dentist visited my home country of Switzerland, where he examined the health and diet of a population in a secluded mountain valley. He found them to be of exceptional health. Their diet? breakfast: rye sourdough bread, butter and cheese lunch: rye sourdough bread, butter and cheese dinner: rye sourdough bread, butter, cheese and potatoes, along with some vegetables in the warmer half of the year, and small amounts of meat on Sundays Contrary to four fundamental recommendations in the course, these people ate a lot of saturated fat (butter) and animal protein (cheese), but few vegetables and had hardly any variation in their diet. They did prepare their own food, grown or pastured locally, in very mineral-rich soil, which imparted their butter and cheese with very high amounts of fat-soluble vitamins A, D and K2. Perhaps animal foods are not as unhealthy as the course suggests, and food (and soil) quality is paramount. Instead of taking this course, watch Maya Adam's TEDx talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-gyIkA-crM) and browse the recommendations of the Weston A. Price Foundation (http://www.westonaprice.org/) to learn what to cook, in particular their Healthy4Life dietary guidelines (http://www.westonaprice.org/wp-content/uploads/Healthy4LifeEnglish.pdf). If you still need a self-help guide to actually start cooking your own food then by all means, take this course. It'll only take you about an hour. | course suggests, and food (and soil) | Quality | is paramount. Instead of taking this | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Really very basic, anyone with an interest in the subject is likely to know most of this already. nicely presented though, good quality videos. | this already. nicely presented though, good | Quality | videos. | Positive | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Quality course with valuable content. Good experience! | | Quality | course with valuable content. Good experience! | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| xtpKLngcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Having completed all four CW modules, I feel this was a tad "inferior" to Character. High quality overall, as always. | tad " inferior" to Character. High | Quality | overall, as always. | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| XupniISSEeWcSw7mZ7gPOw | Very well-organized, high quality materials... Good job guys!!! | Very well-organized, high | Quality | materials. . . Good job guys! | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| XupniISSEeWcSw7mZ7gPOw | exceptional quality! | exceptional | Quality | | Positive | 0.81 | 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. | content is king - both in | Quality | and quantity. You have quality, but | Positive | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| 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. | in quality and quantity. You have | Quality | but are missing the quantity. Unfortunetly | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 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. | and was very impressed by the | Quality | and extensive set of videos in | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | There is | Quality | implicit in the approach taken, but | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | Excellent quality assignments. Really the best online writing course I've found. This is a teacher that knows what he's doing, and how to draw out the best of his students' unique ideas and talents. | Excellent | Quality | assignments. Really the best online writing | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | This isn't a CLASS it's a workshop. Thank goodness for fee waivers; I would have been so upset if I had spent my money on this course. As someone who has taken Coursera offerings in the past, I cannot cosign the quality of this course. This class seems to suffer from both a lack of structure and time. I believe if the course was longer (allowing for more space between unguided assignments) the class would be a little better. I understand that the Instructor is barred by time constraints (this is only a five week course, and an opt-in one at that), so I do relate to not wanting to inundate the class with reading assignment and lengthy lectures. That said, the guidance and lessons are lacking-- even if the class was longer, I would still only give it 2.5/5 stars. It appeared that the onus was on the Mentors to provide answers; for example, the professor mentioned that our scripts are meant to feature half hour pilots. This left many students writing dramas rather than comedies at a loss, since they were planning for hour long pilots. (This, again, is partially an issue of the class being so short; more time to review = the option to have longer pilots, rather than only accepting half hour pilots in order to allow students to review five different submissions within three days.) Since half hour dramas are unconventional, I asked one of our mentors, JZ (who is great) for examples. The responsibility should not be on the Mentors to find out-- information like that should be included in the prompt; if not discussed in depth, then at least as a link or list of examples to research on your own if you have the time + desire to do so. Especially since the assignment boils down to "break convention with no examples of successful scripts in this fashion." In a class presumably allowing beginningeres/greenhorns to participate, this is irresponsible and flawed teaching. The same goes of the "hints" that are periodically posted (though again, appreciated!) by mentors in the forums-- those definitions and explanations should be included in the meat of the class, not as supplemental elements. In all honesty, if I didn't have prior experience with writing, I oftentimes wouldn't have any idea what was being discussed by the professor. (And one trip through the forums will illustrate that I am not the only one.) The assignments and due dates are oddly crunched together (another time constraint issue, I understand), but the Instructor's videos seem to imply that we should be receiving feedback before proceeding each time? Maybe in a longer course that would work, but here, I didn't even receive written feedback initially, so it would have been a mistake to wait for some to revise by before forging ahead. If this class isn't going to provide a solid foundation to build on, then it should be made clear, upfront. There is nothing wrong with an experience based / motivation-focused class, but that aspect needs to be transparent. "We will not provide 101 teachings/readings." This isn't a class; it's a workshop. It's a makerspace at best. I expected insight and some level of instruction. In one of the lectures, the Instructor literally says: "I'm not a big fan of some of the classic story structures, defining in what must happen in each act. Or the problem, the twist, the resolution, rising action, denouement, fine action, etc." He does not define these terms, nor allude to them ever again. These are key benchmarks in screenwriting. Definitions would be helpful for someone just starting out, even if the Instructor doesn't strictly want us to abide by them. His students should leave the class more informed than when they came. Unless you're lucky and receive a response from a mentor or someone with visible background in script writing, the reviews don't amount to much, because very few enrollees seem to know what is going on enough to provide a meaty assessment. That is the fault of the course, I think, rather than my peers. Likewise, The grading system here is atrocious because of it; few people understand the foundation, and thusly don't know how to format or structure. So to then be graded on a purely pass or fail basis (that, looking through the forums, many students weren't even AWARE of until the first review grades rolled in) is ridiculous. And I am saying that as someone that scored 100% on both assignments that I did stay to complete, so this is not a case of sour grapes, but an observation of inefficiency. I understand that the class is based around "Active Learning", but for active learning to work and bear fruit, students should be able to engage with/analyze/synthesize/evaluate/build upon class content. Which necessitates actual, meaningful content. Content beyond my fellow confused peers, and 2 minute videos illustrating various ways of saying "Write Something Interesting and if it isn't Interesting, people won't care." Not exactly an astute observation that we couldn't glean anywhere but this course. Honestly, my 4th Edition copy of "The Screenwriters Bible" is five times more helpful than this course, and it is about six years out of date. | the past, I cannot cosign the | Quality | of this course. This class seems | Negative | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | I should suggest my fellow Coursera students not to waste their money and time for this course. You'll learn a lot more than this course has to offer if you consult some websites with screenwriting tutorial blogs, read books and write on your own. I am a PhD student of theoretical film studies and and a fan of Coursera courses. I was eager to learn screenwriting as an interesting hands-on course. Well, it's project-based alright, but where's the real guidance?? This is a lazily designed course with poor content and almost zero guidance. The videos are very short and feels like a layman is trying to motivate you to write something, that's all. No methods explained other than some terminologies like bible, acts, outline being thrown at you. No examples, no comparisons, no detailed approaches. Lastly, scriptwriting has a significant difference with other humanities course. Being peer-reviewed doesn't help here -- a total novice can not effectively judge another newbie's work nor give them quality feedback. | another newbie's work nor give them | Quality | feedback. | Negative | 0.63 | 1.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Quality of the video and sound are bad; a few minutes after starting a lesson, sound goes off or picture holds and moves no more... This made me stop the course. | | Quality | of the video and sound are | Negative | 0.69 | 1.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | The course is a good introduction to Organic Photovoltaics. The instructors have done a good job to present a rather complicated topic in a manner that is accessible to a common audience. However, there are a few areas of improvement that can be noted for future versions of this course: First, All material is given equal priority in the course. I think what the instructor can do is to summarize the important "take aways" at the end of each video lesson. This helps the learner grasp the concept better Second, The explanation can be a little clearer - especially the topic of polymerization. Someone without an organic chemistry background, can find it frustratingly hard. Third, the tests are sometimes not in line with the previous video lessons and the reading material. The tests should be much much sharper. Fourth, the reading material should be improved vastly in terms of English quality, structure and presentation of key points. Sometimes, the learner can find it hard to understand some topics (ex: stability and materials) because it is inadequately explained. These topics should be explained better. Overall, a great start - but can be better. Well done and Thank You! | improved vastly in terms of English | Quality | structure and presentation of key points. | Positive | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| y8mxj203EeWbyw5d8C-Blw | The content was VERY scarce, and it was obvously prepared in a hurry. This course just touches very superficially the subject to be studied. Not meeting minimum quality standards. | to be studied. Not meeting minimum | Quality | standards. | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The worst course I've ever taken. Bad sound quality, dead discussion forums, not possible to understand material without external (not mentioned in the course) sources. | course I've ever taken. Bad sound | Quality | dead discussion forums, not possible to | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| YfUyugThEeW0KyIACxqWIg | It is an excellent course with a solid introduction to Fluid power on the industry. It is a little biased toward hydraulics than pneumatics, but this don´t come in detriment of the high quality of the course. It is really a must if you want to grave a solid understanding of how to do things with valves and pistons. It gives a great experience for newcomers and experienced who wants to solidify their basic understanding alike. | come in detriment of the high | Quality | of the course. It is really | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| yFZxWd8aEeWDLBKS83bB7Q | It's a course of very good quality, but personally I wanted something more challenging. I believe that since there are advanced version of texts, there should also be advanced version of tests in order to make people like me work harder. I would also like to see more peer-reviewed assignments, these are very good. | It's a course of very good | Quality | but personally I wanted something more | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | We've got some extreme quality content here, as always when Philip J Curry is involved. The new student that presents most of the videos has great educational skills. | We've got some extreme | Quality | content here, as always when Philip | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| Yj9bIu-LEeWJRgpWnDLcCw | A lazy reviewer gave me the score of 0 and left me this comment: "I am not able to give any score, I tried very hard to understand the matter but it was difficult for me. I have to score it just for me to check the other student's work. Please don't consider my scoring here." I studied hard and received this poor evauation. I screamed for help many times but no one replied to my request. The quality of the course is superb and my experience is completely ruined by a shitty score which does not reflect my work. | one replied to my request. The | Quality | of the course is superb and | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| yO13mkySEeW_MgoxMAgbMQ | repeat of the same material and content in multiple videos, the videos were sourced from too many different places leading to 1) decrease of consistent quality and 2) non sequential / logical teaching (each video does not clearly lead to or build on the next one) | leading to 1) decrease of consistent | Quality | and 2) non sequential / logical | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | Accessibility, quality and clarity of instruction, good graphics, useful discussion from a variety of experts. All reasons for my high rating of this course | Accessibility, | Quality | and clarity of instruction, good graphics, | Neutral | 0.50 | 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. | ideas. Slides are well designed. Video | Quality | and sound quality is also great. | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | well designed. Video quality and sound | Quality | is also great. You will encounter | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | You will encounter lots of good | Quality | reading materials. Quizzes will help you | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Lots to learn and it's fun to learn from different teachers. Very heavy (and high quality) course if one wants to do proper justice to all the materials presented (especially hashing and trees... Week 3 onwards). A worthy investment . Enjoyed it immensely. | different teachers. Very heavy (and high | Quality | course if one wants to do | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Pros: Effort has been taken in putting up the assignments. Cons: Quality of teaching is very poor and too fast to follow through . Instructors have rushed to present course material . I would not recommend this course . Princeton and Stanford offer much higher quality and presentation on the same topics. | in putting up the assignments. Cons: | Quality | of teaching is very poor and | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Pros: Effort has been taken in putting up the assignments. Cons: Quality of teaching is very poor and too fast to follow through . Instructors have rushed to present course material . I would not recommend this course . Princeton and Stanford offer much higher quality and presentation on the same topics. | Princeton and Stanford offer much higher | Quality | and presentation on the same topics. | Positive | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| 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. | one is weaker and with lesser | Quality | Pros: the course contains some interesting | Positive | 0.85 | 3.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Recently the instructors updated the course and implemented a solution to all my past complains. In my opinion the team is really taking the quality serious. However I just want to mention, that there are regular session for each course so that everybody can avoid having two overlapping courses in this specialization at the same time. I did not know that and worked on two courses at the same time, until the instructor informed me about the short interval between sessions of a given course. | the team is really taking the | Quality | serious. However I just want to | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | The course itself and the content of it is great, the only suggestions would be: 1) It could be reviewed, how the evaluations of each submission are made. For example, 1st assignment - descriptive analysis was asked to evaluate based on if the 3 "most important" things - if they have been mentioned in the description. The thing is that in real you can not tell, which are the most important because people think differently and could focus more on other details. It was easy to add also those "important" points by resubmitting work, but the problem is that only with that the analysis of a student is not getting better, thus the evaluation is not precise. For tasks like that I would suggest at lease to make a list of 20 things to mention and then count how many are there - thus making the quality assessment more precise. 2) Some topics could have been explained more detailed in the videos, e.g., about guide tones and lines 3) The requirements for the submissions could have been more clear. I also got the impression that in if switching the sessions the requirements could be slightly different (As I got the case when somebody pointed out a particular thing that he thought was required and I have not done. I checked the page but nothing about that. Also other classmates mentioned nothing about that and thought all was perfectly fine). I hope this helps. Thank you so much, Regards, Ance | are there - thus making the | Quality | assessment more precise. 2) Some topics | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | Absolutley great to give everybody access to information of this quality and on this subject! Paul Kovacs | everybody access to information of this | Quality | and on this subject! Paul Kovacs | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | The course is a quality course for anyone wanting to learn algorithms(especially in Java). | The course is a | Quality | course for anyone wanting to learn | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | This course was full of issues related to the installation and use of Pentaho Pivot 4J and Data Integration. The professor's presence is resolving these issues was practically nonexistent. Coursera needs to do a much better job at insuring that their professors are offering a quality course and living up to the expectations of the students. In the case of this course and the professor, they failed miserably. In addition, it is practically impossible to get support from Coursera when an issue exists and in most cases when contact is made, the assistance is minimal. It is a shame as the platform is nicely designed and the course topics are very interesting. If you are considering taking this course, be forewarned that the majority of the support of problems/issues come from the community, not the Professor or Coursera. In addition, you are required to grade the assignments of your fellow students. This is not done by the professor. | that their professors are offering a | Quality | course and living up to the | Positive | 0.69 | 2.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Overall - great course giving possibility to learn working on tools such as Pivot4J and Pentaho Data Integration. While I am more interested in Business Analyst approach - it certainly gives meaningful background to data warehouse concepts and data quality. Biggest disadvantage is in my opinion module 5 with rather difficult and unclear assignment. I wish instructions were more precise and whole assignment more analogical to presented examples. | to data warehouse concepts and data | Quality | Biggest disadvantage is in my opinion | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| ywoUFzVxEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | All my projects, in terms of productivity and quality, have improved by simply applying various aspects of what I have learnt from this specialization. | projects, in terms of productivity and | Quality | have improved by simply applying various | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This "should be" a five star course. It is a great topic, with wonderful clips from movies and is well-written. Why only 3 stars then? For a class about film little was adopted from good storytelling and filming techniques. The Prof slumped in his chair and clasped his hands in front of his chest for most of the course and spoke in a wispy, pedantic voice that made me uncomfortable in my body to listen to. I kept on wanting to tell him to sit up and breath and speak naturally! On top of that, the sound quality was simply awful! If the Prof were to take some acting or presenting lessons and improvements to the sound quality were made (or a professional actor hired to present the material) it could be one of the best courses ever, but instead, it was hard to get through for me even though the material fascinates me as I'm learning neuroscience and love movies. The world of MOOCs are different than your old standard classroom style. Visual and auditory presentation really counts. | On top of that, the sound | Quality | was simply awful! If the Prof | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This "should be" a five star course. It is a great topic, with wonderful clips from movies and is well-written. Why only 3 stars then? For a class about film little was adopted from good storytelling and filming techniques. The Prof slumped in his chair and clasped his hands in front of his chest for most of the course and spoke in a wispy, pedantic voice that made me uncomfortable in my body to listen to. I kept on wanting to tell him to sit up and breath and speak naturally! On top of that, the sound quality was simply awful! If the Prof were to take some acting or presenting lessons and improvements to the sound quality were made (or a professional actor hired to present the material) it could be one of the best courses ever, but instead, it was hard to get through for me even though the material fascinates me as I'm learning neuroscience and love movies. The world of MOOCs are different than your old standard classroom style. Visual and auditory presentation really counts. | lessons and improvements to the sound | Quality | were made (or a professional actor | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great course. Fresh and competent view of classic sociology. Weekly content is well balanced and the readings are very insightful. This course offers valuable insights about the sociology foundations that are still important today for evaluating social interaction. Thumbs up for a quality MOOC! | social interaction. Thumbs up for a | Quality | MOOC! | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | High quality course for absolute beginners in stats. I highly recommend. | High | Quality | course for absolute beginners in stats. | Positive | 0.89 | 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. | treated and easy to follow. The | Quality | of the videos are top as | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Quality Qu | | Quality | Qu | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | The course is very well structured for a diverse range of learners. You could get a very deep knowledge and understanding through the readings (Greek tragedies, Herodotus, Thucydides etc) and the lectures, or a broad survey of the Ancient Greeks by just watching the videos. The professor also combines the narrative, the methods used to study those narratives and the limits to our knowledge in an erudite yet engaging manner. Definitely recommended as a top quality resource for anyone who wants to learn about Ancient Greece. | manner. Definitely recommended as a top | Quality | resource for anyone who wants to | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| zwqURwiiEeahpQ5cgS1w4w | A simple and useful course on logistics in the context of supply chain management that helps even learners who have no previous experience to learn these topics which are of great importance in the modern world. Assignments with a practical orientation, good quality of audio and video and a great instructor are other points worth mentioning. | Assignments with a practical orientation, good | Quality | of audio and video and a | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| _3l2SpONEeW2aQ7olstw0Q | I may not be able to compare as this has been my very first MOOC experience, however, I found topic, material and interaction presented of professional quality that made following truly a | material and interaction presented of professional | Quality | that made following truly a | Positive | 0.9 | 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. | ironic. Peer-reviewing really brings down the | Quality | of the feedback. Not everyone is | Positive | 0.85 | 2.0 |
| _ehbrDx9EeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | The course has a very high quality and helps really to understand the relation between all the historical incidences . A very well structured course, presented in a very professional manner. Thank you very much for your awesome work. Glückwunsch nach Kopenhagen!! | The course has a very high | Quality | and helps really to understand the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| _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. | onboarding special topic section, and the | Quality | was higher there. But the first | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | This is an amazingly eye-opening course. It is a challenging and informative course, which is a great thing. I am very grateful to have participated in such a high quality course and to have had the privilege of encountering this great professor a second time (Finance fof Non Finance....MBA Insights). Thank you. | have participated in such a high | Quality | course and to have had the | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | I am currently at the beginning, but what I have seen so far is lectures and material of exceptional quality! | is lectures and material of exceptional | Quality | | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| _x5PFcBuEeWySg4SKer18Q | Very informative regarding the quality management and patient safety. The faculty is well versed and makes you understand each and everything in a very easy way. Very useful course for hospital administration students who want to pursue jobs in quality department of a hospital. | Very informative regarding the | Quality | management and patient safety. The faculty | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| _x5PFcBuEeWySg4SKer18Q | Very informative regarding the quality management and patient safety. The faculty is well versed and makes you understand each and everything in a very easy way. Very useful course for hospital administration students who want to pursue jobs in quality department of a hospital. | who want to pursue jobs in | Quality | department of a hospital. | Negative | 0.68 | 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! | case studies would greatly enhance the | Quality | of the course. Still, it remains | Positive | 0.94 | 3.0 |